Giddens is a sociologist who was key in the development of the ‘third way’ political approach. Giddens’ ‘third way’ takes both the strengths of the neoliberal free market and social democratic political beliefs.
The ‘third way’
Giddens wrote ‘The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy’ (1998) in which he outlined the ‘third way’ political approach.
This ‘third way’ had an influence on the policy of PM Tony Blair’s New Labour (1997-2010) government and the Bill Clinton administration in the US (1993-2001).
Rejection of state intervention
Giddens’ ‘third way’ approach rejects state intervention in the economy and instead accepts the free market as it is the most efficient, emphasising equal opportunities for people over equality and placing importance on responsibility and community over class conflict.
Role of the state
The ‘third way’ approach outlined that the state’s role should be to invest in infrastructure and education rather than directly intervene in the economy.
Social democracy
Giddens believed that social democracy should be modernised because of the key developments in society by the end of the 20th century including globalisation and the rise of the knowledge economy.
He argued for social investment by the state where the state invests in infrastructure to provide employment opportunities, and in return, people had a responsibility to take the jobs made available rather than to live on welfare benefits.
One-nation conservatism emerged in the UK as a result of capitalism and the industrial revolution.
The Conservative Party changed to make sure they remained in power by appealing to working-class voters across the UK, rather than only appealing to and taking care of the interests of the landed, wealthy elite.
One-nation conservatism is centred around the idea of noblesse oblige, change to conserve and supporting the working classes.
Noblesse oblige
Noblesse oblige is a French term which is taken to mean ‘the obligation of the rice, well-off and high-status people in society have to those less fortunate than themselves’.
It is an idea clearly associated with one-nation conservatism, and in the present day with ‘compassionate conservatism’. It is the idea that people of high positions should use the power that they have from these positions to help others.
Conservatives believe in hierarchy and natural inequality – and so there will always be people of a higher status and people of a lower status. People of high status have an obligation to help others. Noblesse oblige reinforces the idea that there should be a ruling elite.
Example: David Cameron promised to scrap taxes for people earning the minimum wage in 2014. This is an example of a privileged person (who has leadership in Parliament) using their power to help the poorest in society.
The 1998 Human Rights Act (HRA) incorporated the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into UK law.
The freedoms included in the HRA include the freedom to life, to a fair trial, to express yourself freely and from discrimination, among many others. The ECHR requires states to hold free and fair elections, abolish the death penalty, preserve family life and give foreigners the same rights as all citizens in a state.
The HRA means that any public body cannot act in a way which breaks the convention and that the judiciary must make rulings which are compatible with it. The Supreme Court can strike down secondary legislation that is incompatible with the HRA, but for primary legislation they can only issue a ‘doctrine of incompatibility’ urging parliament to change the statue; this is due to the principle of parliamentary sovereignty.
The fundamental rights of all British citizens are very clearly laid out in a single document which is easily accessible. There was an 8x increase in the number of human rights cases bought to the Supreme Court after the act was passed.
Some Conservatives resent the European link that the HRA has and want to replace the act with a British Bill of Rights that defines certain rights more narrowly. Despite the HRA, it is still possible for the government to restrict the rights of some individuals:
In 2005, the government introduced control orders, allowing the authorities to restrict the movement of suspected terrorists. In order to do this, they had to declare an exemption from Article 5 of the HRA for those who fall under suspicion.
2005 Constitutional Reform Act
The 2005 Constitutional Reform Act created a separate Supreme Court as the highest court of appeal in the UK. Before this, the UK’s senior judges sat in the House of Lords (known as the Law Lords).
This had three major effects:
Separated the government and the judiciary
Formed a Supreme Court
Reformed the judicial appointment process
The Supreme Court was formed to replace the Law Lords as the UK’s highest court of appeal. This reform separated parliament from the judiciary.
Prior to the changes, senior judicial appointments were made by the Prime Minister and Lord Chancellor, who are political figures. The Act established a Judicial Appointments Committee (JAC) to appoint candidates based solely on their legal qualifications and ability. The government makes the final decision on appointments but they must then be approved by the JAC.
Reforms were successful
– There is now a clear separation of the 3 branches of government which prevents abuse of power – The judiciary is physically and constitutionally separate from the executive and legislature allowing for greater judicial independence and strengthening rule of law
Reforms were not enough
– The Supreme Court is much weaker than its counterparts in most other liberal democracies. It cannot strike down legislation as that would weaken parliamentary sovereignty – The composition of the Supreme Court is not very diverse, however, neither is the group of well-qualified, experienced judges from which they have to choose from and is a problem in the judiciary as a whole
Electoral Reform
Electoral reform has remained an important issue in UK politics for many years including around voting age and the electoral system.
New Labour introduced various forms of proportional representation for elections to the European Parliament, Scottish Parliament, Welsh and Northern Irish Assemblies. The Additional Member System (AMS) was introduced for the Welsh Assembly and Scottish Parliament elections. Single Transferable Vote (STV) was used for the Northern Irish Assembly Elections.
In 2011, a referendum was held on introducing an Alternative Vote (AV) system for general elections to Parliament at Westminster. The referendum rejected the proposals and therefore the First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) system remained.
The voting age for UK citizens is 18 for general elections. In the 2014 Scottish independence referendum, the voting age was lowered to 16 for the first time. Many have since called for the voting age to be lowered nationally to 16.
Internationalism is the idea that the world should unite across boundaries to advance their common interests in society.
Core ideas:
The ties that bind people within a nation are superseded by those of common humanity.
Typical markers associated with nationalism, like citizenship, culture and race, have little credence in the internationalist world.
This form of nationalism stresses that national interests can be better achieved through international cooperation and/or integration.
This is typified by supranational organisations like the European Union.
Internationalism takes two forms:
Supranationalism: Power and sovereignty is given to an international organisation to use as it sees fit. For example, the EU.
Intergovernmental relations: Individual governments work together to achieve common objectives. No power is given and unanimity is usually required. For example, the UN.
Some nation states may agree to cede sovereignty to international institutions. For example, the member states of the EU have pooled sovereignty in order to achieve common interests at the supranational level. Nations may make policy agreements at the international level, for example the Paris Climate Agreement.
Internationalism has been periodically challenged as international crises trigger national responses. The European migrant crisis, for example, led to tension in the EU as certain countries refused the quota system and others imposed national borders.
For a very small group of nationalists, belonging to the nation is determined by racial ties. The belief is that humans can be segregated into distinct groups who have unique genetic characteristics.
They believe that the policies of the nation should be designed to protect and advance the interests of the majority race. The majority race may advocate segregation or policies which assert racial supremacy.
Racial nationalism presents a more sinister side of nationalism as evidenced by Nazi Germany. A racial form of nationalism was implemented as it sought to build the Aryan master race.
In Britain, the British National Party have come closest to advocating a form of racialism. Its hostility towards races that were not white was well documented yet yielded some electoral success in the ’00s. It is also clear that America has a deeply rooted history of racialism as white Europeans were seen as superior to blacks.
Please note that this is a difficult subject to share a ‘non-biased’, educational perspective on. We absolutely do not condone racialism and if you think this article could be improved in any way, please let us know. Thank you
Direct elections would elect the president by a direct popular vote with the winning candidate having the largest percentage of the vote. This would resolve the issues of candidates such as George W. Bush and Donald Trump winning the presidency without winning the popular vote (Hillary Clinton got 3m more votes than Trump in the 2016 election).
Critics argue this would mean that the president will likely not get 50% of the vote and therefore not have a mandate as they do not have majority support.
Proportional System
A proportional system would give Electoral College votes to candidates based on the proportion of the popular vote won in each state. This would be fairer as it would more equally distribute Electoral College votes and be fairer to third parties who gain support.
However, candidates are less likely to win an absolute majority of Electoral College votes as candidates from smaller parties would be able to compete and win votes. This could result in a situation where no candidate wins a majority.
Congressional District System
The congressional district system awards candidates an Electoral College vote for every congressional district won and two votes for each state won.
Nebraska and Maine are currently the only states using the congressional district system in elections. In 2016, Maine’s four Electoral College votes were split between Hillary who won three and Trump who won one.
There are some disadvantages:
Using a congressional district system would have only caused small changes to previous elections and not affected the overall result.
The congressional district system can cause less proportionate results, particularly if the winning candidate wins fewer districts by big margins.
In 2016, a congressional district system would’ve still allowed Trump to win, and in 2000 the system would’ve allowed George W. Bush to win the presidency despite Al Gore winning the popular vote.
Congress is given its powers by the Constitution. There are concurrent powers which are powers given to both the House and the Senate and exclusive powers given to each chamber.
Concurrent powers
These are powers given to both chambers
Congress is given all legislative powers by Article I of the Constitution
Article II gives them the power to overturn a presidential veto with 2/3 votes in both chambers
They are also given power to amend the Constitution (Article V) – a power which is shared with the states – and the power to declare war (Article I)
Both houses are given the power to determine their own rules, punish their members and expel a member with 2/3 votes (Article I)
Exclusive powers of the House
The House has the exclusive power to impeach; this means to bring charges against a politician or public official who they believe has committed ‘high crimes and misdemeanours’, not to remove someone from office.
The House has the power of the purse: they begin all money bills.
The House has the power to elect the president if no candidate receives more than 50% of the electoral college votes (this happened in 1800 and 1824).
Exclusive powers of the Senate
The Senate has exclusive power to try an impeachment case: with a 2/3 vote, they can remove someone from office (Article I, Section III)
The Senate has the power to elect the Vice President if nobody has more than 50% of electoral college votes.
The Senate has the power to confirm executive appointments (such as cabinet members and federal judges), given by Article II of the Constitution.
The Senate has the power to ratify treaties with a 2/3 vote.
The Filibuster
The Senate has the power to filibuster a bill, which is not a power specified in the constitution. This is when Senators keep talking to make a bill run out of time and stop a vote from happening. The rules of the Senate allows a senator to speak for as long as they want on any topic as long as 3/5 senators vote to end the filibuster.
Edmund Burke is a founder of modern conservatism. Burke wrote ‘Reflections on the Revolution in France’ (1790) in which he developed conservative arguments of gradual change, tradition and empiricism.
Burke rejected enlightenment liberalism and disagreed with the view that humans are rational creatures. He also believed in human imperfection. As a result, he disagreed with building a society around human rationality, as enlightenment liberalism believed. His rejection of liberal rationality was influenced by witnessing the French Revolution. He disagreed with the idea that people could destruct society and create a brand new, fairer system. Systems in society should be preserved instead.
Edmund Burke is associated with the traditional conservative view of ‘change to conserve’. Burke urged British Tories to accept change in order to conserve society after seeing the French Revolution. He saw threats to conservatism as Enlightenment Liberalism (despite being a Liberal originally himself) and Socialism. Burke also believed in gradual change, rather than revolutionary change. Changes should also consider the impact on the past, present and future, but also listen to the mistakes and lessons of the past.
Burke believed we should follow traditional practices that had been passed on through generations. His idea of the social contract involves paying close attention to ‘the dead’ – learning lessons from history rather than choosing radical untested ideas. He believed that people in the present shouldn’t just trust themselves to do what’s best – to do so would be arrogant. Instead, we should listen to tradition and history. He believed we should have a social contract between “those who are living, those who are dead, and those who are to be born”.
Thomas Hobbes was a thinker who wrote about the state of nature. He had some influence on later social contract theories. His most famous work is “Leviathan”.
Hobbes wrote extensively on the limitations of human nature in his book “Leviathan”, written in 1671. In the book, Hobbes argued that the state of nature itself made life “nasty, brutish and short” and so a ‘leviathan’ (dominant state) is needed to keep order in society. The Leviathan is imposed on people from above, which follows conservative ideas about hierarchy and authority, although Hobbes also agreed with liberal ideas that authority is supported with consent from the people. Hobbes argued that sacrificing liberty for social order is desirable.
Hobbes had a pessimistic view of human nature. He believed that if humans were left in the state of nature (without structures and institutions of society) they would be violent towards each other and not respect private property. Instead, Hobbes believed that order must be imposed on a society to stop the dangers of human imperfection.
Feminist ideas began in the Enlightenment period. The first key feminist text was by Mary Wollstonecraft, A Vindication of the Rights of Women in 1792.
First wave liberal feminists demanded equal rights on the enlightenment principle that they were human beings and it was not rational for them to be denied this. The emphasis was on individualism as the basis for gender equality.
Mary Wollstonecraft argued for an equal right to a good education and a professional career, later reinforced by Charlotte Gilman, who attacked the “slavery” of housework. John Stuart Mill advocated the same foundational rights for everyone, which should not be based on ‘accidents of birth’.
The suffragists and later the suffragettes campaigned for and won the right to vote. This emphasised the dominance of liberal feminism in the first wave.
Second Wave Feminism
‘Second wave’ liberal feminists in the 1960s believed the first wave had not gone far enough and that the position of women had hardly changed.
The second wave arose in the 1960s, as evidenced by the Women’s Liberation Movement. In spite of legal and political reforms, these feminists argued discrimination against women continued. It moved feminists’ demands for change into the social and personal sphere.
In The Feminine Mystique, Betty Friedman talked of an unspoken sadness of women not reaching their potential. She founded NOW (National Organisation for Women) in the USA in 1966. This was the largest women’s organisation in the world, with huge influence and impact.
Second-wave liberal feminists achieved Equal Pay Acts, changed abortion laws and continue to push for equality in all spheres. Today’s focus for reform if often more on women achieving higher positions in politics, business and other professions. Evidence of a continuing pay gap and unequal representation of women in these professions still dominates feminist movements.
/Thomas_Hobbes-05beb6a35a05410da0e9ae31c3d4e4d6.jpg)
A Level Politics 