DOCSLIB.ORG

The Shifting Sands of the World Order

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Shifting Sands of the World Order Scowcroft Paper No. 18 The Shifting Sands of the World Order By the Right Honorable Sir John Major KG CH For more information: bush.tamu.edu/Scowcroft/ The Shifting Sands of the World Order By the Right Honorable Sir John Major KG CH Foreword This Scowcroft Paper was written as a presentation, and read by Sir John Major on Friday No- vember 22, 2019, at the Bush School of Government and Public Service on behalf of the Scowcroft Institute of International Affairs. Sir John Major served as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1990 through 1997. Prior to that, he served as Chancellor of the Exchequer and Foreign Secretary. He was the Member of Parliament for Huntingdonshire from 1979 until his retirement from politics in 2001. He is currently one of the Presidents of Chatham House, and serves as chairman for a number of Advisory Boards. It’s always a pleasure for me to come to built on the agreement of the UN Charter at America. My father was brought up in Phila- the San Francisco Opera House in the mid- delphia in the 1880s, when my grandfather 1940s. The overall purpose was to establish was helping to build the Carnegie Steel rules-based organisations to monitor and Works. It’s an especial pleasure to be here at channel international behaviour after the Texas A&M, and I’m most grateful to the chaos of a World War. It was led by Amer- University, the Bush School of Government, ica, and was visionary. But many of those and the Scowcroft Institute, for their kind in- organisations have now lost – or are losing – vitation. the authority that once they had. They are seen as out of date, and in need of reform. It was easy to accept, for George and Bar- Some are also facing attack from populism bara Bush – so much a part of this Univer- and growing nationalism. sity in life and beyond – were much treas- ured friends of mine for the last 30 years of Certainly, the United Nations is out of date. their lives: and so, still, is General It has five Permanent Members of the Secu- Scowcroft. And, of all the politicians I rity Council, each of which has a Single Na- know, George – with his innate decency and tion State veto on policy. These Members – civility – was the leader who looked into the America, Russia, China, France and Britain future with the shrewdest eye, and the great- – may have been the dominant nations of the est concern for those who would follow him. world in 1945 but – 74 years on – it is unre- George Bush was an internationalist – a true alistic to argue that is still so. Nations such citizen of the world – but he would, I be- as Japan, Germany and India are growing lieve, be concerned at what he would see to- powers that believe they should also be Per- day. As am I. manent Members. And they have a strong case. And where – as our world evolves – is And so, in homage to George, here in his fi- the representation of Africa or the Middle nal place of rest, I’d like to set out those East? So far, that too is missing. concerns – before inviting your questions. For years, our life has been bound by our Yet, if the UN is to perform its function – liberal-based international order, which was 1 The Shifting Sands of the World Order and, in particular, “to save succeeding gen- close down an internationally agreed dispute erations from the scourge of war” (and one resolution system. But that is the Alice-in- look at Syria or Yemen shows how vital this Wonderland world in which we are currently is) – then it needs the authority to act, which living. cannot be ensured without a legitimate struc- We are right to worry about trade. If trade is ture in place that is acceptable to all mem- disrupted, no-one wins. The US National bers. A welcome advance would be to en- Bureau of Economic Research warns the large the number of Permanent Members, risk of protectionism is greater now than at and abolish the Single Nation veto that can any time since 1945. They estimate that, last so often make the UN seem irrelevant. Rus- year alone, new tariffs cost the American sia, for example, creates mischief in Eastern consumer and firms a simply astounding Europe and the Middle East, yet can veto $688 billion. Moreover, the fact that the US any UN policy designed to rein her in. That – the world’s predominant economic Nation is in no-one’s interest but Russia’s. Sadly, State – now has higher tariffs than any other none of the Permanent Five is arguing for a competitor, raises the risk of other countries reform that would limit its own influence turning to protectionism. Where America and, unless such reform is demanded by, goes, others follow. China and America are ideally, America – or another Member of the in dispute and – as global supply chains are Permanent Five – I cannot see it happening. disrupted – Japan, Singapore and Hong But, for the sake of good world order, it Kong all suffer from falls in exports. Eu- should be. rope, too, is affected – notably Germany, The World Trade Organisation was only es- with her export-oriented economy, and her tablished in 1995, yet already faces impo- motor manufacturing outlets in the United tence as a number of Member States under- States. mine it – including America and China. China is complicit, too. When China joined America was always wary of the concept of the WTO, it was expected she would con- a trade body. In the 1940s, attempts to form form to international rules: thus far, she has an international trade organisation failed, be- not. She is widely believed to appropriate ing beaten back by opposition from Con- other countries’ intellectual property; their gress. Today, President Trump refuses to ap- technology transfer; as well as favouring and prove the appointment of Judges to serve on subsidising her own – often State-run – in- the Dispute Resolution Panel as their prede- dustries. Her defence – that she behaves cessors become statute barred, and yet that properly – is unconvincing, and hard to Appellate Body is the cornerstone of the dis- credit. But her behaviour does illustrate the pute resolution system. By December, only importance of the example America sets, be- one Judge will remain in post and, unless cause China excuses her own actions by America's policy changes, the adjudication pointing out that – over the last 30 years – of disputes will cease altogether. At a time America has imposed three times as many when America and China are engaged in a non-tariff protectionist measures as China. trade dispute that is adversely affecting many third countries, it is disappointing to In the spirit of “America First” and “China 2 The Shifting Sands of the World Order First”, both countries tend to oppose multi- it is not surprising that the majority of peo- lateral trade deals because – being so eco- ple feel Government has failed them – even nomically powerful – they are able to domi- though it was the action taken by Govern- nate the terms of bilateral deals. Despite ments and Central Banks that prevented a that, elsewhere, multilateral deals still being systemic collapse in our financial systems – made. The 28 Member State EU has reached and ruin for many. This perceived failure trade deals with Japan, Brazil, and the MER- runs alongside – and has probably done COSUR ** countries of Latin America. much to fuel – the growth in populism, and And, in Africa, a Continentwide free trade the acceptance of populist governments of- area has been agreed to bring together 1.3 ten led by so-called “strong men”. billion people in a $3.4 trillion economic I have little regard for populism. Typically, zone. This could, say the IMF, “be an eco- the populist: nomic game-changer for Africa”. But, as yet – in our world of relentlessly negative news • makes promises that cannot be met sensation – this remarkable and positive de- • thrives on creating division velopment has gone largely unnoticed. • magnifies discontent The international order also faces chal- • undermines the judiciary and the rule lenges to the authority of governments, and of law the concept of democracy itself. Many peo- • attacks the structure of Government; ple thought the advance of democracy – that • condones violent opinions; is, Western-style democracy – was unstop- • penalises minorities pable. They were wrong. Democracy has • condemns unpopular views been in mild retreat for some years. The • by-passes long-established and legit- United Nations has reported that 89 coun- imate authority. tries have seen a reduction in democracy and human rights, while only one-third of that Populism is popular only until it fails – as it number had seen positive improvements. always does – because it is founded on dis- There is a more widespread antipathy to honesty and self-interest, and fuelled by ex- ploiting grievance, exercising malice, and Government today than I have ever known. encouraging dissent. But a time of disillu- The 2008 financial crash led to a disregard sion is fertile soil for populist leaders, be- for conventional Western democracy, as the growth in living standards faltered after dec- cause they promise to deliver “hope” – the ades in which – year on year – they had im- most potent of battle cries. This promise is never kept, of course. But that only becomes proved. Figures from my own country – the clear when they have been elected to govern United Kingdom – illustrate the point.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Thatcher's Legacy from 1979 Into the 21St Century: Work Sheet
    Thatcher’s Legacy from 1979 into the 21st Century: Work Sheet 1. Introduction This worksheet supports discussion of the film ‘Society Politics and Change: Exploring the Legacy of Thatcherism’. Reading is not essential, but it may aid understanding of the issues raised. Who was Margaret Thatcher? Margaret Thatcher came into power in 1979 as the first female Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. By the 1980s an ‘ism’ became attached to her name - ‘Thatcherism’. This represented a new branch of Conservative ideology which encompassed the role of competition and a free market, limited government involvement in industry, low taxes and individual responsibility. This framework of economic and social arrangements continued after Thatcher left office in 1991 and was pursued by following Prime Ministers, such as John Major (Conservative) and also Tony Blair (New Labour). Who made this film? A group of academics and a film-maker made this film together. It is based on a long-term study of Thatcherism – and the detailed findings of this research are available to read in online. The academics are Professor Stephen Farrall and Dr. Emily Gray. 2. The economy The graph below depicts unemployment from 1970 to 2010. It had been rising throughout the 1970s as companies began modernising their working practices, but it rose dramatically after the Conservatives took power in 1979, rising to over three million out of work in 1983. Unemployment hit Northern Ireland, along with the industrial areas of northern and central England as well as parts of Scotland. It impacted the working classes first, before a further rise in unemployment in the 1990s, which affected the middle classes and the housing market.
    [Show full text]
  • Mrs. Thatcher's Return to Victorian Values
    proceedings of the British Academy, 78, 9-29 Mrs. Thatcher’s Return to Victorian Values RAPHAEL SAMUEL University of Oxford I ‘VICTORIAN’was still being used as a routine term of opprobrium when, in the run-up to the 1983 election, Mrs. Thatcher annexed ‘Victorian values’ to her Party’s platform and turned them into a talisman for lost stabilities. It is still commonly used today as a byword for the repressive just as (a strange neologism of the 1940s) ‘Dickensian’ is used as a short-hand expression to describe conditions of squalor and want. In Mrs. Thatcher’s lexicon, ‘Victorian’ seems to have been an interchangeable term for the traditional and the old-fashioned, though when the occasion demanded she was not averse to using it in a perjorative sense. Marxism, she liked to say, was a Victorian, (or mid-Victorian) ideo1ogy;l and she criticised ninetenth-century paternalism as propounded by Disraeli as anachronistic.2 Read 12 December 1990. 0 The British Academy 1992. Thanks are due to Jonathan Clark and Christopher Smout for a critical reading of the first draft of this piece; to Fran Bennett of Child Poverty Action for advice on the ‘Scroungermania’ scare of 1975-6; and to the historians taking part in the ‘History Workshop’ symposium on ‘Victorian Values’ in 1983: Gareth Stedman Jones; Michael Ignatieff; Leonore Davidoff and Catherine Hall. Margaret Thatcher, Address to the Bow Group, 6 May 1978, reprinted in Bow Group, The Right Angle, London, 1979. ‘The Healthy State’, address to a Social Services Conference at Liverpool, 3 December 1976, in Margaret Thatcher, Let Our Children Grow Tall, London, 1977, p.
    [Show full text]
  • In Churchill's Footsteps: How Blair Bombed Out
    BRITISH POLITICAL LEADERSHIP FROM CHURCHILL TO BLAIR: In Churchill's Footsteps: How Blair Bombed Out MICHAEL DOBBS There is an old-fashioned view that a debate should attempt to have a beginning, a middle, and an end-and preferably in that order. I find that view both appealing and relevant since I have a strong suspicion that, no matter how hard we try to avoid it, the final resting place of our discussion today is preor- dained. That place is Iraq. But before we disappear into the mists and mirages of the deserts around Baghdad, let us begin by bending our knee to the formal sub- ject of this debate, which is the quality of leadership. First, we need a definition. What is political leadership? It's not the same as simply being a leader, a matter of occupying office. Ten men and one woman have sat in that famous chair before the fireplace in 10 Downing Street since the time of Churchill, yet today the majority of them lie buried in unmarked graves. Their greatest political success often is their arrival at Downing Street; most of them have left with heads low and sometimes in tears, their reputations either greatly diminished or in tatters. Furthermore, the quality of leadership should not be confused with the ability to win elections or to cling to office. Harold Wilson won three elections during this period, but was not great, while John Major sur- vived for seven years, leaving most people to wonder how. So let me offer a starting point for the discussion by suggesting that polit- ical leadership is about change and movement.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Why Tories Won: Accounting for Conservative Party Electoral
    'Why Tories Won: Accounting for Conservative Party Electoral Success from Baldwin to Cameron' Dr Richard Carr, Churchill College, Cambridge - 15 November 2012 [email protected] Thank you Allen for that kind introduction. Thank you too, of course, to Jamie Balfour and the Winston Churchill Memorial Trust for the support that enabled the research that I will lay out in part today. The research grant was extremely valuable for an early career academic – providing the means to support archival research that still informs my work some two years later, which has borne fruit in three of the articles that will be referred to at the bottom of the slides behind me, and in three monographs on twentieth century British politics I am due to publish in 2013. 6 publications and counting therefore owe part of their genesis to this grant, not withstanding the good work of my two sometime co-authors throughout this period, Dr Bradley Hart (a former PhD student here at Churchill College and current lecturer at California State University Fresno), and Rachel Reeves MP.1 By final way of preamble I must also thank the staff here at the Churchill Archives Centre, and indeed the Master, for various kindnesses over the years – not least in relation to a conference Bradley and I played a small role in coordinating in November 2010, during my By-Fellowship.2 So, today’s lecture is entitled ‘Why Tories Won: Accounting for Conservative Party Electoral Success from Baldwin to Cameron.’ Now, given Stanley Baldwin became Conservative Party leader in 1923, and David Cameron – Boris and the electorate permitting – seems likely to serve until at least 2015, that is quite an expanse of time to cover in 40 minutes, and broad brush strokes – not to say, missed policy areas - are inevitable.
    [Show full text]
  • Parliamentary Private Secretaries to Prime Ministers Since 1906 Prime Minister Parliamentary Private Secretary Notes
    BRIEFING PAPER Number 06579, 11 March 2020 Parliamentary Private Compiled by Secretaries to Prime Sarah Priddy Ministers since 1906 This List notes Parliamentary Private Secretaries to successive Prime Ministers since 1906. Alex Burghart was appointed PPS to Boris Johnson in July 2019 and Trudy Harrison appointed PPS in January 2020. Parliamentary Private Secretaries (PPSs) are not members of the Government although they do have responsibilities and restrictions as defined by the Ministerial Code available on the Cabinet Office website. A list of PPSs to Cabinet Ministers as at June 2019 is published on the Government’s transparency webpages. It is usual for the Leader of the Opposition to have a PPS; Tan Dhesi was appointed as Jeremy Corbyn’s PPS in January 2020. Further information The Commons Library briefing on Parliamentary Private Secretaries provides a history of the development of the position of Parliamentary Private Secretary in general and looks at the role and functions of the post and the limitations placed upon its holders. The Institute for Government’s explainer: parliamentary private secretaries (Nov 2019) considers the numbers of PPSs over time. www.parliament.uk/commons-library | intranet.parliament.uk/commons-library | [email protected] | @commonslibrary Parliamentary Private Secretaries to Prime Ministers since 1906 Prime Minister Parliamentary Private Secretary Notes Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman (1905-08) Herbert Carr-Gomm 1906-08 Assistant Private Secretary Herbert Asquith (1908-16) 1908-09 Vice-Chamberlain of
    [Show full text]
  • Shuffling the Pack
    SHUFFLING THE PACK A brief guide to government reshuffles Shuffling the Pack 1 Akash Paun Shuffling the Pack Introduction The reshuffle is one of the most potent weapons in the prime ministerial armoury – albeit one that can occasionally explode in the face of the person using it. Enacting legislation, implementing public service reform, or rooting out government waste can take months or years, with no guarantee of success. But on reshuffle day a prime minister, in principle, wields unlimited power. In practice, things can feel rather different, as prime ministers are confronted by a range of constraints. Even when a PM does formulate a bold plan to remould the cabinet, there is much that can and often does go wrong. Reshuffles also carry political risks for prime ministers, given the inevitable creation of enemies and disappointed allies on the backbenches. From a personal point of view, the reshuffle can be draining too: past leaders have described having to break the bad news as “a ghastly business” (Tony Blair),1 “the most distasteful...of all the tasks which fall to the lot of a prime minister” (Clement Attlee), and “something you have to grit your teeth to do” (Margaret Thatcher).2 Yet, perhaps surprisingly, most recent prime ministers have carried out reshuffles on a near annual basis, calculating that the political benefits can outweigh the risks and the sheer unpleasantness of the experience. Typically, reshuffles are interpreted through a narrow political lens. But a broader test that should be applied is whether reshuffles have any impact on the effectiveness, the performance or the policy direction of the government.
    [Show full text]
  • Sir John Major KG, CH
    CASE NO. UKSC 2019/0192 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION, ADMINISTRATIVE COURT) BETWEEN: GINA MILLER Appellant and THE PRIME MINISTER Respondent and THE RT HON SIR JOHN MAJOR KG CH Proposed Intervener SUPPLEMENTAL WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RT HON SIR JOHN MAJOR KG CH 1. Further to the written submissions and evidence filed in the Divisional Court, The Rt Hon Sir John Major KG CH wishes to file short additional submissions addressing matters which have arisen since those documents were prepared. 2. These submissions address: 2.1 the Divisional Court’s decision and reasons; and, 2.2 further developments relating to the reasons for the Prime Minister’s decision. The Divisional Court’s decision 3. The Divisional Court concluded that the exercise of the power of prorogation is “not a matter for the courts” (§1), such that it was unnecessary to “explore the facts” (§41). 11/57926026_1 1 4. If that conclusion were correct, the consequence would be that there is nothing in law to prevent a Prime Minister from proroguing Parliament in any circumstances or for any reason. 5. In the context of constitutional settlement in which Parliament is acknowledged to be sovereign, that would be a remarkable position for the courts to endorse. It would follow that the courts would not intervene even if, for example: 5.1 Parliament wished to abolish the power of prorogation, and a Bill to that effect passed both Houses, but before it could receive Royal Assent the Prime Minister
    [Show full text]
  • The Ghost of Neville Chamberlain’ Guilty Men and the 1945 Election
    The journal of the Conservative History Group | Autumn 2005 | £7.50 Conservative History Journal HARSHAN KUMARASINGHAM “HOME SWEET HOME”: THE PROBLEMATIC LEADERSHIP OF ALEC DOUGLASHOME SCOTT KELLY ‘THE GHOST OF NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN’ GUILTY MEN AND THE 1945 ELECTION IAN PENDLINGHAM “PUT UP OR SHUT UP”: THE 1995 LEADERSHIP CONTEST SIR EDWARD HEATH 1916–2005 John Barnes, Ronald Porter and Helen Szamuely examine the legacy of a controversial Conservative leader Plus: Nicholas Hillman reviews The Welfare State We’re In; Mark Garnett reviews Giles Radice’s Diaries 1980–2001; Ronald Porter reviews Reggie: The Life of Reginald Maudling Contents Conservative History Journal The Conservative History Journal is published twice Contents yearly by the Conservative History Group ISSN 14798026 Editorial 1 Helen Szamuely Advertisements To advertise in the next issue A Conservative historian speaks: John Charmley 2 call Helen Szamuely on 07733 018999 Helen Szamuely Editorial/Correspondence So what are we to make of Edward Heath? 7 Contributions to the Journal – letters, articles and Helen Szamuely book reviews are invited. The Journal is a refereed publication; all articles submitted will be reviewed Heath should have got a life and never hung around the green room 9 and publication is not guaranteed. Contributions Ronald Porter should be emailed or posted to the addresses below. All articles remain copyright © their authors Edward Heath: a personal recollection and appraisal 11 John Barnes Subscriptions/Membership An annual subscription to the Conservative History “Home Sweet Home”: the problematic leadership of Alec Douglas Home 13 Group costs £15. Copies of the Journal are included Harshan Kumarasingham in the membership fee.
    [Show full text]
  • Durham Research Online
    Durham Research Online Deposited in DRO: 19 June 2013 Version of attached le: Published Version Peer-review status of attached le: Peer-reviewed Citation for published item: Williamson, Philip (1999) 'Stanley Baldwin : conservative leadership and national values.', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Further information on publisher's website: http://www.cambridge.org/gb/knowledge/isbn/item1143340/?sitelocale = enGB Publisher's copyright statement: Additional information: Sample chapter deposited. 'Introduction', pp. 1-20. Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. Durham University Library, Stockton Road, Durham DH1 3LY, United Kingdom Tel : +44 (0)191 334 3042 | Fax : +44 (0)191 334 2971 https://dro.dur.ac.uk Introduction: the historical problem Few British political leaders have been so successful and sig- nificarnt as Stanley Baldwin. Yet few have suffered so much belittlement and abuse in retirement, and later biographers and historians have had considerable difficulty in producing plausible explanations for his ascendancy. More nonsense has been written has about him than about any other modern prime minister. This had consequences for wider understandings of twentieth-century Britain, as interpretations of his politics are integral to several major debates: on the Conservative party's long-term electoral dominance, on constitutional issues, on `national culture', and on Britain's industrial, imperial, and international decline.
    [Show full text]
  • 2006 PSA Awards Ceremony Poll Ratings of Post-War Chancellors
    2006 PSA Awards Ceremony Poll Ratings of post-war Chancellors Q For each of the following Chancellors of the Exchequer, please indicate how successful or unsuccessful you think each were overall while in office? Mean rating Gordon Brown 7.9 Stafford Cripps 6.1 Kenneth Clarke 6.1 Roy Jenkins 6.0 Hugh Dalton 5.7 Rab Butler 5.7 Harold Macmillan 5.4 Hugh Gaitskell 5.4 Denis Healey 5.0 Nigel Lawson 4.9 Base: 283 PSA members (13 Sept – 31 Oct 2006) Source: Ipsos MORI 2 Ratings of post-war Chancellors Q For each of the following Chancellors of the Exchequer, please indicate how successful or unsuccessful you think each were overall while in office? Mean rating Geoffrey Howe 4.5 James Callaghan 4.5 Peter Thorneycroft 4.0 Reginald Maudling 3.9 Ian Macleod 3.9 Derek Heathcoat-Amory 3.8 John Major 3.7 John Selwyn-Lloyd 3.6 Anthony Barber 2.9 Norman Lamont 2.3 Base: 283 PSA members (13 Sept – 31 Oct 2006) Source: Ipsos MORI 3 Providing economic stability Q Which of the two following Chancellors do you think were most successful at providing the country with economic stability? Top answers Gordon Brown 80% Kenneth Clarke 32% Rab Butler 14% Stafford Cripps 10% Hugh Dalton 9% Roy Jenkins 9% Nigel Lawson 9% Geoffrey Howe 6% Harold Macmillan 3% Denis Healey 3% Base: 283 PSA members (13 Sept – 31 Oct 2006) Source: Ipsos MORI 4 Leaving a lasting legacy Q Which of the two following Chancellors do you think were most successful at leaving a lasting legacy on Britain’s economy? Top answers Gordon Brown 42% Nigel Lawson 27% Geoffrey Howe 20% Kenneth Clarke 17%
    [Show full text]
  • Survey Report
    YouGov / The Sun Survey Results Sample Size: 1923 GB Adults Fieldwork: 31st August - 1st September 2010 Voting intention Gender Age Social grade Region Lib Rest of Midlands Total Con Lab Male Female 18-24 25-39 40-59 60+ ABC1 C2DE London North Scotland Dem South / Wales Weighted Sample 1923 635 557 179 938 985 232 491 661 539 1079 814 247 625 414 470 167 Unweighted Sample 1923 622 545 194 916 1007 124 505 779 515 1244 649 239 661 370 422 231 % %%% % % %%%%% % % % % % % 10 - 11 31 Aug - May 1 Sept 2007 2010 Former Prime Minister Tony Blair is due to publish his memoirs Thinking back to his time in office, do you think Tony Blair...? Was a very good Prime Minister and achieved many 11 10 4 22 7 11 8 5 11 11 8 9 11 12 8 11 9 10 successes Was a fairly good Prime Minister - his successes 38 37 23 58 42 40 35 38 43 39 29 38 35 35 32 41 43 32 outnumbered his failures Was a fairlyyp poor Prime Minister - his failures outnumbered 28 21 28 11 27 22 20 21 21 19 22 23 19 17 25 18 18 24 his successes Was a very poor Prime Minister and can be blamed for many 18 25 42 7 22 23 27 14 15 26 39 25 26 28 27 23 24 26 failures Don't know 5 7 3 2 3 4 10 21 10 4 2 5 10 9 8 6 6 8 Since the second world war, six Prime Ministers have served for five years or longer.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Political Ideas and Movements: a Guide for A2 Politics Students Harrison, Kevin; Boyd, Tony
    www.ssoar.info Understanding political ideas and movements: a guide for A2 politics students Harrison, Kevin; Boyd, Tony Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Monographie / monograph Zur Verfügung gestellt in Kooperation mit / provided in cooperation with: OAPEN (Open Access Publishing in European Networks) Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Harrison, K., & Boyd, T. (2003). Understanding political ideas and movements: a guide for A2 politics students. (Understanding Politics). Manchester: Manchester Univ. Press. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168- ssoar-270962 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer CC BY-NC-ND Lizenz This document is made available under a CC BY-NC-ND Licence (Namensnennung-Nicht-kommerziell-Keine Bearbeitung) zur (Attribution-Non Comercial-NoDerivatives). For more Information Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu den CC-Lizenzen finden see: Sie hier: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.de harri+b.cov 27/5/03 4:15 pm Page 1 UNDERSTANDINGPOLITICS Understanding RITTEN with the A2 component of the GCE WGovernment and Politics A level in mind, this book is a comprehensive introduction to the political ideas and movements that created the modern world. Underpinned by the work of major thinkers such as Hobbes, Locke, Marx, Mill, Weber and others, the first half of the book looks at core political concepts including the British and European political issues state and sovereignty, the nation, democracy, representation and legitimacy, freedom, equality and rights, obligation and citizenship. The role of ideology in modern politics and society is also discussed. The second half of the book addresses established ideologies such as Conservatism, Liberalism, Socialism, Marxism and Nationalism, before moving on to more recent movements such as Environmentalism and Ecologism, Fascism, and Feminism.
    [Show full text]