More handpicked essays just for you.
Margaret thatcher prime minister essay
Margaret thatcher prime minister essay
Margaret thatcher analysis notes
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Thatcher is considered to be one of the most controversial figures in modern British politics and remains the only 20th century Prime Minister to give her name to an ideology. There has never been a clear consensus on the meaning of Thatcherism and it has been used to describe a vast array of ideas. Nigel Lawson, who claims to have invented the term, describes it as ‘a mixture of free markets, financial discipline, firm control over public expenditure, tax cuts, nationalism, ‘Victorian values’…, privatisation and a dash of populism’. Broadly, it can be argued that the main feature of Thatcherism was its opposition to the policies of the ‘post-war consensus’. Both supporters and opponents of Thatcher have created a pattern from disconnected
policies and events which do not necessarily reflect the true aims of Thatcherism. The ambiguous meaning and legacy of Thatcherism has inspired a diverse range of interpretations. This essay will examine Andrew Gamble’s The Free Economy and the Strong State: The Politics of Thatcherism which interprets Thatcherism using a Gramscian approach and looks at Thatcherism as a political project which was a respond to the breakdown of the hegemony of social democracy. It argues that Thatcher attempted to create a new hegemonic project based on ‘authoritarian populism’. In contrast, Ian Gilmour’s Dancing with Dogma: Britain under Thatcherism looks at Thatcherism from the One Nation Conservative perspective and concludes that Thatcher’s approach to welfare and inequality should be avoided in the future of Conservative party politics. Additionally he criticises Thatcher’s dogmatic approach to politics and argues for pragmatism. These historians approach the topic of Thatcherism from very different perspectives. Gamble fits into the wider socialist approach which argues that Thatcherism is a response to the ‘crisis of capitalism’ which resulted from the prolonged social-democratic consensus which concealed problems associated with modern capitalism. More specifically, Gamble follows the teachings of Antonio Gramsci and his concept of hegemony. Hegemony is the ideological predominance of the ruling class’ norms, values and ideas over the dominated classes. The dominant class uses a mixture of coercion and persuasion in order to exercise its power over the subordinate classes. Gamble applies this theory to the study of Thatcherism by arguing that the breakdown of the previous hegemony of social democracy at both a national and international level in the 1970s created the opportunity and necessity for the exploration of new hegemonic projects such as Thatcherism. On the other hand, Gilmour writes from the perspective of a One Nation Conservative. This is based on Disraeli’s ideas that personal privilege and power has social obligations such as a responsibility for the poor. Improving conditions for the poor helped to maintain the established order as there was less incentive to challenge those in power when living standards were adequate. Gilmour stated in 1978 that ‘the wise conservative travels light’ which reflects the One Nation Conservative belief in pragmatism over ideology. One Nation Conservatives believe that Conservative values can only be safe if developed in relation to current circumstances and practical experiences. These beliefs contrasted to the New Right which believed in a mixture of economic libertarianism and state authoritarianism. There is some evidence which could suggest Thatcher was trying to build a One Nation state using patriotism as a unifying force instead of paternalism which was the basis of traditional One Nation thought. Both Gamble and Gilmour were critical of Thatcher and her actions but they approached their analysis from different theological backgrounds which meant that they both produce differing criticisms and explanations for the rise and nature of Thatcherism.
The conservative party has been in existence since the 1670s and was first called the ‘Tories’, a term used by the Scottish and Irish to describe a robber. This party is a right- wing party which believed in conserving the tradition and the king, as the name entails. David Cameron, the current party leader became the leader in 2005. He is also the present prime minister of Great Britain and he has made a lot of changes since he became the leader of the party. In this essay, I will talk about the history of the party, looking into detail at their gradual changes or transition in ideology and the various changes that David Cameron has made to the party’s image and beliefs.
This essay will address whether New Labour contained policies with which it wished to pursue, or was solely developed in order to win elections. It is important to realise whether a political party that held office for approximately 13 years only possessed the goal of winning elections, or promoted policies which it wished to pursue. If a party that held no substance was governing for 13 years, it would be unfair to the people. New Labour was designed to win elections, but still contained policies which it wished to pursue. To adequately defend this thesis, one must look at the re-branding steps taken by New Labour and the new policies the party was going to pursue. Through analysis, it will be shown that New Labour promoted policies in regards
Conservative Dominance in British Politics There are many different factors which contributed to the Conservative dominance of the period between 1885 and 1905. For one, the electoral reform of Gladstone's second ministry had a large effect on the Conservatives period in office as did the skill of Salisbury as a leader. The role that the government took in terms of its policies and foreign policy, and the nature of support for the party also played important roles in the conservative dominance. This is because the Conservatives lost working class support during its ministry, yet still managed to dominate politics for nearly twenty years.
To apply this rhetorical strategy, she incorporates several crucial phrases and words to which one can appertain. One example of Thatcher’s use of diction occurs in line twenty-three of her eulogy when she refers to Reagan as “Ronnie.” While to the reader, this name is but a sobriquet Thatcher uses for Reagan, one must identify her use of diction to understand her intention for using this name. After analyzing the word’s connotation instead of its denotation, the reader can discover that she incorporates this word into her eulogy to give the reader a thorough comprehension of the friendship they shared. For the reader, this diction permits him or her to identify Thatcher’s credibility, and for Thatcher, she strengthens her claim by validating her relation with Reagan. Thatcher, however, goes beyond reinforcing her claim through credibility; upon analysis of her eulogy, one can recognize her use of diction to depict historical occurrences surrounding Reagan’s presidency. The reader can identify an example of this tactic when Thatcher states in lines five and six, “[Reagan] sought to mend America’s wounded spirit” (Thatcher). On a superficial level, this
A Fierce Discontent by Michael McGerr delves into the revolution of values from the victorian era to the progressive within the late nineteen century to the early twentieth century. McGerr’s major argument is the contrast between this set of values. The gilded age which McGerr focuses is the period where progressive values begin to take form and societal change ensues. The victorian values are values which epitomizes the British culture as just the name of the era is derived from queen Victoria. Alternatively the progressive era was a political reform focusing on anti corruption, women suffrage, and fixing the social problems plaguing society. McGerr argues that the victorian era and progressive era strikes few similarities within the
According to feminist Victoria L. Bromley, if feminism is about combating all forms of inequalities, including oppression, towards all social groups, then feminists must study how masculinity oppresses both men and women. Patriarchy, men’s powers and dominance, hegemonic masculinity, the idea that the “dominant group” in society is most powerful, and hyper masculinity, the exaggeration of the emphasis on male characteristics, all lead to oppression through multiple forms: privileges and unearned privileges, hierarchies of power and exclusion. Bromley argues that the feminist approach towards eliminating oppression, is to use an intersectional analysis, a theoretical tool used for understanding how multiple identities are connected and how systems
that the state should play a smaller role in the day to day lives of
1. She is regarded as the “Grandmother of British Feminism” whose ideals helped shape the
As insinuated through her poem’s title, “A Double Standard,” Frances Harper examines a double standard imposed by societal norms during the 19th and 20th centuries, as well as the different effects this standard foisted upon those of different genders. Harper’s poem is narrated by a woman who has been derided by society for her involvement in a sexual scandal, all while her male counterpart experiences no repercussions. By describing how her situation involving the scandal advances, delineating the backlash she receives for her participation, and reflecting on the ludicrously hypocritical nature of the situation, the speaker discloses the lack of control women had over their lives, and allows for the reader to ponder the inequity of female oppression at the turn of the 19th century.
The desertion by the British government of the laissez-faire approach was instigated by a magnitude of rationales that induced this transformation of attitude. Laissez-faire translates from French to denote ‘let do’ or in English terminology to ‘leave alone’. In practice, this perspective meant that the government did not interfere positively or negatively in people’s lives. The belief was that if a person was impoverished they were accountable for it and it was due to their personal misguidance, for example gambling, alcoholism, idleness or solely due of their lack of ability in dealing with their finances. If the main wage earner within a family perished then it would cause the family extreme poverty. This was seen as an inevitable yet unfortunate part of society by the upper classes. In the late 20th century the government (under the Liberals) were seen to play two roles, to maintain law and order and to prevent invasion of Britain. No family allowances, pensions or unemployment benefits were available which meant that once in poverty, it was the responsibility of the individual to remove themselves from the situation without government help. This did however change, through reforms by the Liberal government who were heavily influenced by the surveys done by Charles Booth and Seebohm Rowntree, the Boer War and the shocking insight into the health of the working class it gave, attitudes of ‘new’ Liberals, ‘national efficiency’, the German model and the rise of the labour party.
The Thatcherism ideology was part of the establishment of privatisation, cutting off the taxes and reducing public expenditure in health and care services in order to improve Britain’s economy, as a consequence more than 50 identities were privatised by
George Orwell displays a tendency to disregard women in his novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, showing none of his female characters to ever be equal to a male character, whether physically or intellectually. Orwell's portrayal of women shows them in a very unflattering light. Firstly, the female characters base the relationships they form solely on sex and are unwilling to form any other type of relationship. Furthermore, the women are all two dimensional characters, lacking the brains and personalities the male characters all posses. Finally, women are presented as having no interest in world issues and no differences of opinion with the Party on anything that truly matters. These presentation of women as inferior to men is obvious at all times; accordingly, the female characters in Nineteen Eighty-Four reveal an anti feminist bias on the part of the author.
We can explore the political and cultural background of Thatcherism to understand the events in the film. Margaret Thatcher was the first and only woman Prime Minister of the UK. During her three mandates there were many radical changes in every field of English economy, society and politics. Her era is called Thatcherism. Her policy contained privatisation; reduction of the power of the local governments, reduce the role of Trade Union, and reconstruction of the Welfare State. With these arrangements she and her colleagues created a very sharp North-South divide in England. The unemployment rate was higher in the North than the other parts of the country. Thatcher’s one thought was the coal mines were not economical so it would be a project to close the miners and the factories which were related to the coal mining. The miners did not really agree this theory and in 1984/5 the miners were on the strike.
...could push these political ideologies and issues to the stage; especially after the censorship was removed. Churchill, like the other politically fuelled writers, obviously had a sour taste in her mouth about Thatcher and the way she and the Conservative Party ran Britain. She even went on to write Top Girls that was a double sided view on Margaret Thatcher’s rise to power.
Her polices were that of Neo Liberal economic ideas, latterly to be known as Thatcherism. Her three successive terms in power have proved to be a pivotal moment in political and economic history of Britain, shifting the political spectrum to be focused around a new Neo-Liberal centre. With the creation of New Labour evolving out of this period in reaction, Thatcher herself stated this was her greatest achievement, as it proved that the political spectrum in the United Kingdom had indeed shifted. With regards to housing, this