Wall Street crush-, it created a split inside the labor leadership so the task would be very difficult. The leader Ramsey MacDonald accepted to form coalition with the conservatives but many others did not accept & he seen as traitor & he was expelled from the party – the Great Betrayal-. The conservatives in 1931 took part in government. -Why would the British go to war after what they had lost in the WWW? – Britain was not in favor of going to another war; it found herself involved in the WI unwillingly.
The Germans had invaded Poland, so England was in war against Germany “the People’s War”. In 1940, Churchill became a national coalition government -all parties will Join & make a government-. They were fighting a war, all the effort of the country will be directed to winning it. – Why did labor socialists representatives of the working class Join the government? Preparing themselves for after the war. During war time, the NAG put into place a shared “head” by a liberal member of parliament.
The sociologist “William Henry Beverage” gave the government the “Beverage Report” of 1942, in order to offer solutions & look after what was wrong in the war with Britain. The report started to revive the ideas of the “Welfare State”, which came as an opposition to what Hitler was promising “Total Destruction”. Welfare through government intervention was what kept the high spirit of people. The pamphlet became a best seller-hope for a better future-. The report had identified 5 giant evils in the British society which had to be destroyed with the government help: 1- bad living conditions. – Diseases 3- ignorance, illiteracy. 4- Poverty 5- idleness, joblessness. These are the evils that a given society face, combated by the government intervention which explains why the liberate did not like the government o interfere in peoples’ lives. Labor socialists adopted this idea of welfare & in 1945 made it part their election program & because of this labor was elected & won the 1945 general election. Armistice was the the signed in the 5 of May 1945; the coalition government kept & waited until July 5 , waiting the soldiers to vote for them.
The labor had a very large majority of votes “landslide victory’. The hero that led Britain to victory & wins the Dark Hours was Churchill. 2- Re-entering peace time: In order to assess labor achievement we should see the context of time, how was Britain after the war? What was the social, lattice, economic reality of that time? There were deaths “sass’s”, widows & orphans as a negatives social consequence for the country. Britain had to payback huge depths due to the finance in the war, as the country borrowed money from the US, Canada & Australia.
Britain’s infrastructure was terribly damaged, factories, bridges, in this period she was facing reality. Politically: India, new powers were emerging like the US. 3- Laborer’s achievements: 1- Economic side: 1945, labor government began to nationalize, take into control. E. G. The Bank of England “the Central Bank”, also it nationalized the coal lines. In 1946, it nationalized the transport industry, civil aviations, ports, airways, energy sifter and gas.
Also, in 1948 the iron & steel industry with big difficulties. There was resistance from the owners because it was a highly profit making industry. But the coal owners were happy to sell their lines since they already were striving. Labor government nationalized about 20% of the economic sectors; the rest remained in private hands, why? – Labor implemented a social democracy, this 20
Keynesian T. M. Keynes: the Theory of the Demand Management. 2- Political side: there were two sides – domestic & foreign- : Domestic side: there were no major changes, as the monarchy was not abolished, & the House of Lord which was not elected but mainly hereditary. But labor reduced its power in 1949; it could no longer stop a law in the House of Commit, it also lost its power to Veto. Foreign side: Labor Joined NATO: the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which had a big financial cost.
At this time, the labor Government embarked on a nuclear program “Atomic Bomb” as many other countries, despite the opposition of the US to to do so; this cost a lot for the country which is not a productive program in the short term & this was while Britain was in need for money, but it has a long term benefits as developing technology; from the military side, it’s a kind of a buy product, the government accepted to withdraw India – the beginning of the end of the British Empires- Social side: the British labor party was a pioneer in introducing the Welfare State.
Squirrel had to be fought by offering housing & town planning; it was done through encouraging private & local authorities building new towns, but there as a shortage of raw materials & skill owners. As the need was important, tour blocks or high rise flats. British housing changed because of the urgent need built by the local authorities & rented for the people. Result: Labor made the class the division more visible separating the classes which was what they were aviate.
Moon 14 December 2009 Social: through legislation, labor defeated the housing problems as well as the other evils, that was in giving employment offers, child allowance for families; education or illiteracy was defeated through the Buckler Act 1944 which is an education act that add secondary education free & compulsory from child age 6 to 1 5 for each English child. There also existed private schools -Public- & Seven state schools. The evil of unemployment tried to be defeated through nationalization.
For diseases or illnesses there was the implementation of a INS National Health Services 1948 made to provide medical care for all; it was free at the beginning but after one or two years people started to pay. Generated by Fixity PDF Creator O Fixity Software Result: There was a sort of broken promises which created a lot of discontent within he labor leadership party & the public felt that it was a betrayal. The labor http:// www. Fox-trotted. Com For evaluation only. Deed money that they have taken it from other sources, since the country invested in the nuclear program & built many houses, labor was very proud that it has implemented “the Welfare State” “State help from Cradle to Grave”, also it meant to be a safety net. These were more significant achievements of the welfare program. Why did it lose in 1951? Labor was obliged to run new elections, there was some infighting inside. There was an internal division between the left, centre & right.
The labor party was never homogeneous, also the problem of inflation because the Pound Sterling in 1947 was devaluation which created inflation, the cost of ling was very expensive so the public was unhappy. Another reason which created devaluation especially within the middle class was that labor created Rosining!!!! In order to create a sense of equality but it created dissatisfaction among the middle class which usually follows a black market. Wartime: what was promised during the war, in-between the interwar years?
Before coming to power – 45- , what was the situation of the country? What the labor did or failed to do? What was the promise? What was the social, political & economic reality? Labor party achievement could be asserted through time, what did it achieve? The nuclear program which is debatable made Britain a powerful country, many people were afraid of this program & there was going to be a Cold War. Economic side: nationalization, taking into state country.
The point is that the British didn’t have the experience of state sectors, now the government was going to manage these sectors, which objectives would be to create Jobs with no competition since state impasses are monopolies, It was no change for workers these state companies are going to be over manning, having more workers than needed, these state companies are going to be lose making, black holes, the alternative would be to give it subsidies SF State Financial Help to rescue them. The state would get the money from taxes causing the big managers to emigrate.
So, nationalization was an issue for the future years. The welfare state was created through social policies which interact with the economy which is a political decision. Labor accepted to intervene in people’s life wrought political decision. How is it going to be financed? How do we pay for these services? From tax payers, we have two kinds: direct & indirect 1- The working people -income taxes that goes to the & Indirect VAT Value Direct Tax TVA, as alcohol & tobacco. Sometimes on imports. There are two main ways, of course another source which is the N. I. C National Insurance Contribution.
All this will be part of what would be called the Budget that will be given to different ministries each responsible of a sector. Giving this situation, the Welfare State, when you look & assess it through mime, you see that what characterizes it is that the middle class would make the most profit of it. Therefore, people from the left & right would criticize it. The social policy should be looked from 3 parts: short, long & medium term: since it might solve problems TODAY but what about LATER? E. G. Housing has more or less solved problems but later people will have more children who will be unemployed.
As far as the health services, we get into problems of term, e. G. Population after the war was in bad shape, but after it started to increase meaning more demand for health care nice medicine is developing as a result, the cost is increasing. Population becomes older so they needed social services e. G. Home for Olds. Therefore, we get into spiral; someone needs to pay for this. Also, concerning education & extending school life which is another cost for the country. All of these social costs became known as The Bottomless Sectors. There was always room for improvement. Becoming more & more expensive, how was it going to be financed?
Should health be only for the people who can pay for it or everybody? Healthy country is more productive as well as education hat creates a wealthy society, but the key is who’s going to finance? A Welfare State will be costly but is it necessary? The private sectors might be performing better because they are paying, but the state sectors are underfeed. It is up to the society to decide what kind of Welfare they want for the country. The Nanny or Milky Cow will be taken advantage from by some people. Dependency culture, scroungers = the 4 January 2010: people living in the back of others.
The Welfare States’ help sustain capitalist society. Marxist, believed in Class Struggle. Social policy, it interacts with economy as it has a elation with politics but at the call of it, it’s a social policy because some governors liked it others not because of how it was financed “taxation”. How much people are going to accept to pay? A social policy can be on a long, short or big or term, the rewards might come later (housing 45/ 54) inhabited by the working class, they had solved a short term problem but later on it created problems, people will pay more & more taxes.
Marxist believed in the class struggle that without the welfare state the working class would revolve, life as a class struggle that without the Welfare state the t working would revolt; he also criticized the welfare state because the middle class would be the 1 t profit from it. The capitalists, people who believed in the laissez- fairer, self-help, it was for them a question of paying “the richer you are the more you pay’ because they have their own private sets, they have means to have access to better benefits since they pay.
The state sector is under stuffed not highly efficient; it’s never enough this is the dilemma of the welfare states. People of the right criticized the welfare states because it created a dependency culture, it is called the ilk cow and there were many scroungers. The Welfare State is rewarding for society because it can offer a better educated society, after 1945 education was for all, health after that bettered – they lived longer- but with it there is a cost “Taxes”. Rewarding is costing & necessary because without a minimum welfare state, a revolt might happen.
As we shall see, the classes were divided but with time there will be an underclass of those who were excluded & merged from society; the British have accepted the idea of providing some help. The Welfare State -Milky Cow- can provide milk as long as there is green grass in the entry, I. E. A healthy economy, when you have it, you don’t have a lot of unemployment, the problem is when there are a lot of people out of work, the government will pay for them which will be costly.
The problem of taxes is a political decision, are you willing to redistribute the wealth “make the rich richer or less rich” as we shall see, it’s the wealth of people who has a say. The party’s program says “promises to spend more”; it’s up to people to decide. The welfare state is a problematic issue. SST Economically: Nationalization, another issue which was 1 implanted by the labor overspent of 45-51 , state took control of some strategic sectors 25% was going to be managed by the state, coal, iron, transport… Through Act Legislation.
These sectors were employing large numbers of people e. G. 5 million people in the Coal industry; these large numbers would be represented by the trade union who had a good power. The bosses’ objective was not only to make profit, priority was to provide Jobs because after 1945 it was the time of reconstruction and it needed a full employment. Also, not to forget, the British industries in the mid of 21st Century was coming old as the coal & iron equipments needed to be renewed “invest more money on these equipments”.
Moreover, with the pressures of the Trade Union, wages increased & the British companies started to become over-manning “more workers than necessary’, as a result, the return of the Law of Diminution & later on -ass’s- inflation -Prices increase-will begin. Http:// www. Fox-trotted. Com For evaluation only. They would get By this loss making, they could reduce workers “private”, or subsidies, more taxation “State Financial Help” they would create discontent, closing a state company would be seen as a political suicide.
There were monopolies because there was no competition, the quality was not great & the prices were low. As a result, The British people would buy foreign products since they are cheaper, there would be more imports & a little export, no balance “the country is going to be in red, it could reduce the value of the currency in order to export” another alternative was to increase taxation or to print money -monkey money instead of Sound money = solid- .
This is how the nationalize Sector was going to find itself because it was monopolistic & uncompetitive; Britain industry became now as the Lame Duck Industries. Post War Consensus: it is a general agreement, compromise between different members of society, it is not written and is not a law, gathered by different components of society as a result of history (Britain was lucky because it has one dominant language, one religion and has only white people I. E. No ethic groups), Britain’s’ history had played a big role in shaping herself; it became a nation state earning…
Monarchy has been there, so there is an agreement on an institutional Monarchy & religion is set. Post war was about how to rebuild the country; a house is lilt with Pillars -it was an agreement on pillars-: we are interested in the 4 pillars that England united in wartime on which post-war Britain was going to be reconstructed: 1- The Welfare State, it is the 1942 Beverage Report, well-being of citizens -social side. 2- Government intervention in economy, mixed economy, it is Keynesian through the acceptance of John Keynes theory. – Belonging to NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Western Allies. 4- Trade Unions’ reconciliation with the government; now they are partners & they have some power, a 3 parasite: Government, Trade Union and Representatives + Bosses. The post war consensus had gone through different stages; it was introduced and established during war time by the four elements mentioned above. 1945- 1951 the labor maintained the consensus The Thirteen Wasted Years, 1951-1964: Three concussive conservative prime ministers in government; Winston Churchill.
Anthony Eden Harold Macmillan; they did not undo anything & they kept the Welfare State because it is a symbol of socialism & kept negotiating with the Trade Union. These years were good for Britain; it was the age of affluence- plenty of things- the age of prosperity & full employment, he age consumerism, cars, fashion & music. The age of cinema, movies, sports & leisure; it is the beginning of a permissive society. It is wasted years because labor who planted & concoctive who fruit from it. People wanted what was available or provided.
The British politicians were divided on the issue of the Suez Canal, in the 1959 general elections the labor party did not use the 1956 humiliation -the war between Britain, France and Israel- because it was for all Britain not only one party but a defeat for Britain. In this stage, the conservatives did not change a lot, their only changed was the prevarication of iron and steel industry because, as we said, during the ass’s and early ass’s there was prosperity and full employment as the youth started to enjoy their life.
It was easy to keep consensus, but 1964-1970 is the return of labor, people for some reason were fed up of the conservatives. We can say that consensus is sustain, keep it with some difficulty, the beginning of troubles, Britain started declining & the British from different parts started to accept this idea of decline. 1964 labor came to modernize Britain, now there is inflation. Some people ill begin losing Jobs workers want more wages… 1964- 1970: labor party under Harold Wilson, consensus was sustained, difficulties and the British started to speak of crisis and decline.
The British economy was prosperous but not as her competitors, Britain began to lose some trade as a result unemployment problems appeared. Britain lived on exports and her competitors were making better and cheaper products. Thus, it lost exporting which led to unemployment later to inflation. Therefore, trade union asked for higher wages leading to strikes in the middle of the ass’s, consequently, trade unions’ reconciliation was no more valid. It had acquired power in favor; this power has become a problem for government, so the Labor Party started to think of reducing T Vs. power, I. . , putting commission led by Baroness to stop the T. V power, the L P at that time wanted more planning of the economy to modernize Britain, it had a control on the economy of Britain. People of money were afraid of the L P government; they became more socialist and started to invest outside what led to a shortage of money. In 1967 labor devalued, I. E. , lost its value in the next election because they lost the support of trade union and some people. Remark: because of the economic problems, the labor government forced to go to the I. M.
F -international Monastery Fund- for a loan to ease then through their financial troubles, what meant the adoption of more liberal economic program by the Labor Party. British Decline: Britain after the WI was in reconstruction; it reconstructed itself by providing employment, in the late ass’s and ass’s entered in a period of affluence; people had money in their pocket, Jobs were available, it is an age of affluent society, the age of love and peace, television and music as well as automobiles which became accessible to use. However, in the Middle of the ass’s, people started to speak about the sick man of Europe.
They discovered that their economy did not grow as its competitors, Japan, Germany, USA and France who were doing better. Also this sick man was characterized by the rise of SST inflation, of course, we are dealing with the 1 industrial nation and we compare it when Britain was a vast Empire, where Britain was the workshop of the world described by the bygone age. The acknowledgment of this loss was in the middle of the ass’s because many British refused to accept this new position and they believed hat there was still an empire after the WI, but the loss of the Jewel of the Crown – India- was the best illustration of this loss.
The British decline has to be understood as a loss of power, spread of crisis, troubles and disorder. The most unarguable fact is that the seeds of Britain’s decline are seen mostly in all fields and in particular political and economic ones that eventually led to the deterioration of its position. Causes and consequences of the British Decline: As far as the causes are concerned, we have two perceptions, we have the LEFT POINT OF VIEW that supported the State interference and socialist communism planning, and we have the RIGHT POINT that had its own argument.
Concerning the left point, they thought that the decline had roots in the Victorian Britain where we find society of contrast paradoxes; there were also political, economic and social causes. Beginning with the political causes, in fact one of the most disappointing causes that Britain endured is the effects of two world wars which diminished its role as a world power. Though Britain’s decline during the troubled years was arrested; it constructed her economy rapidly often the
WI and it remained in late sass’s an extremely rich country but the heavy costs of the war and the millions causalities weakened her capacity to maintain the vast empire. Another feature to this decline in world power was the loss of some territories e. G. India (with the rise of colonial nationalism) which was one of the most important components of the British empire since it was its largest source of revenue. Thus the loss of India meant the beginning of the end of the British Empire. N.B.: the end of the British rule in Ireland had also been a negative effect on Britain rower.
Moreover, the Empire did not really benefit Britain; in fact, it was made by industrialists and traders who exclusively benefited from it. Also, in case of a problem the beneficiaries were the few and the expanses of the problem come from tax payers, the best example is the Ireland problem, also because they had two party systems: the liberals and the conservatives. Nevertheless, the most striking point was when the left stressed its criticism on the Laissez-fairer ideology which had a sense of paradoxes; it was advocated in Britain and in its colonies people were not free.