Another reflection that continually re-occurs to me as I read is how the general liberal view, in particular through history, has been the more optimistic one. On big questions like universal suffrage, Catholic emancipation, Home rule for the Irish, opening borders, liberalising trade, being more humane in the justice system, there seems to be a tug between fear and hope. Perhaps when people were making the case against hanging burglars or forgers, or for giving votes to women, there were dissenting voices arguing how this 'progress' was all well and good, but collapse of the social fabric/revolution/takeover by Foreigners would inevitably follow. Brave politicians may have lost their careers or damaged their parties taking the other view.
This is not a straight anti-Tory point; Margaret Thatcher is perhaps the clearest example of similar bravery but against traditional Leftish institutions. Neither can one conclude that change has always been right and stasis wrong. It is easy in hindsight to applaud the correct steps towards modernity, jeer at the traditionalists, and forget entirely the context and the lives crushed or disordered in the transition. I suppose the most I can say is that the status quo has an inbuilt advantage - people hurt by change form special interests, like the angry Tory farmers of the 1840's, and their political power is more concentrated than the beneficiaries, like the millions enjoying cheaper bread. Hence political courage is needed more on the side of progress and reform.
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
Reflections on Peel
I greatly enjoyed Robert Peel by Douglas Hurd, and in fact found it extremely instructive, not least the Acknowledgments, which provide a solid example of what one has to do in order to write such a book. It also made it clear how important Peel was to the development of British politics in general, and the British state itself, through his key reforms. The economic historian in me latches onto the repeal of the Corn Laws and the powerful thrust he gave to Free Trade itself, in the teeth of opposition from his traditional Protectionist Tory supporters, who had often campaigned on precisely the opposite platform. But other major contrasts with the present era are more interesting.
The first that comes to mind is the typical attitude shown by British statesmen towards being in power. In brief, one finds more reluctance than naked ambition at this time - examples of politicians energetically shrugging off the opportunity to form a Ministry in the face of overwhelming organisational difficulties, and the general impossibility of forming permanent coalitions. Through the whole of the 1830's Peel worked on a long-term strategy, refusing the idea of holding the Premiership if it did not come with a genuine working majority in Parliament, and a cohesive team in the Cabinet. During his time, and epitomized by his publication of the Tamworth Manifesto, one sees the embryonic formation of the modern British Party Political system - although, with crushing irony, his own attempt at making a cohesive Conservative Party immediately floundered on his stance on Free Trade, where he effectively chose what was right for the Country over what was right for the Party, and split it in passing the repeal of the Corn Laws. But for him it would have seemed deeply dishonourable to hold onto power when both the Country and the Party were against him. Hence, upon reading the final chapters, one cannot help reflecting how Hurd's last boss, John Major, was utterly different -spinning out a deeply unpopular ministry to its very bitter end in 1997, in a manner that probably suited neither the country nor the conservatives. Very different times.
The other reflection that springs to mind is the basic integrity that imbues a man who nevertheless changes his mind on enormous matters - the non-Ultra conservative, who realises that change is inevitable, manages it, rather than screeching hysterically about the End of the World that change represents. On Catholic Emancipation, Reform and Free Trade he recognised ultimately that his earlier view were wrong, and that his instincts to conserve what is best in Britain would nevertheless be best served by a managed programme of change. At some point in the next century, Sterling will be abandoned. I wonder if it will be a similarly bloodied, stubborn and strong Conservative that manages it?
The first that comes to mind is the typical attitude shown by British statesmen towards being in power. In brief, one finds more reluctance than naked ambition at this time - examples of politicians energetically shrugging off the opportunity to form a Ministry in the face of overwhelming organisational difficulties, and the general impossibility of forming permanent coalitions. Through the whole of the 1830's Peel worked on a long-term strategy, refusing the idea of holding the Premiership if it did not come with a genuine working majority in Parliament, and a cohesive team in the Cabinet. During his time, and epitomized by his publication of the Tamworth Manifesto, one sees the embryonic formation of the modern British Party Political system - although, with crushing irony, his own attempt at making a cohesive Conservative Party immediately floundered on his stance on Free Trade, where he effectively chose what was right for the Country over what was right for the Party, and split it in passing the repeal of the Corn Laws. But for him it would have seemed deeply dishonourable to hold onto power when both the Country and the Party were against him. Hence, upon reading the final chapters, one cannot help reflecting how Hurd's last boss, John Major, was utterly different -spinning out a deeply unpopular ministry to its very bitter end in 1997, in a manner that probably suited neither the country nor the conservatives. Very different times.
The other reflection that springs to mind is the basic integrity that imbues a man who nevertheless changes his mind on enormous matters - the non-Ultra conservative, who realises that change is inevitable, manages it, rather than screeching hysterically about the End of the World that change represents. On Catholic Emancipation, Reform and Free Trade he recognised ultimately that his earlier view were wrong, and that his instincts to conserve what is best in Britain would nevertheless be best served by a managed programme of change. At some point in the next century, Sterling will be abandoned. I wonder if it will be a similarly bloodied, stubborn and strong Conservative that manages it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)