One of Disraeli’s greatest achievements within his career was the second reform bill. However, being that it wasn’t an original idea and merely a failed Liberal bill. The controversy of whether Disraeli genuinely wanted reform is not relevant. Despite perhaps the want of reform Disraeli again grabs opportunity with both hands and put through the reform bill in order to benefit his career. So Disraeli’s great achievement within his career was merely achieved through opportunism, which is a valid interpretation of this achievement and many others that the conservatives passed. For example the 1867 education act and the 1874 factory act. All these bills he passed within his career, were simply opportunist achievements, which helped to further his career and help him to become well known as genuine social reformer. But the question is raised if his bills are not genuinely his is he really a genuine reformer? This supports John Walton’s interpretation of Disraeli’s career and his achievements.
Another example of Disraeli’s opportunism can be seen within the 1874 intoxicating liquors act. This achievement within in his career was an act of opportunism to benefit himself and his campaign. Disraeli extended the opening hours of pubs by 30 minutes. In exchange for this bill Disraeli received increased extra funding for his campaign. This is yet another achievement within Disraeli’s career that had an opportunist motive behind it.
When looking at the source from John Walton it must be acknowledge with some respect. He is an academic historian who clearly has a thorough understanding of Disraeli and his political career. The extract is taken from a text book about Disraeli so it is not a general sweeping statement. John Walton obviously knows a lot aboput Disraeli, well at least enough to write a book. The book was published in 1990, which tells us that this historian had a lot of time for reflection and worked with probably primary and secondary sources. This infers that his interpretation of Disraeli is not only reliable but also accurate.
Another argument that supports the idea Disraeli was an opprtunist is that he passed acts to benefit the poor simply to obtain their votes as we know that Disraeli was in fact obsessed with aristocracy and his so called great reforms for helping the poor were again opportunist
However there are underlying arguments that go against John Walton’s interpretation. Disraeli has achieved a lot within his political career, which were not down to opportunism. For example the 1875 sale of food and drinks act, the 1876 merchant shipping act and the 1876 river pollution act and many more. These acts were put through genuinely to improve life and were not opportunist acts to benefit himself. They were acts to benefit all his party and the people he was representing.
Disraeli made the conservative party ellectable again after years in opposition as a result of the 1846 split. He helped to improve its administration, setting up central office, He gave it some of its core beliefs in the crown, the church and the empire as well as making it the party that had an appeal to all classes and therefore expressed national unity. Disraeli genuinely believed in his ideas and did not have opportunist intention. A lot of his ideas and beliefs were not based on opportunism and the things he did like passing the many reform acts between the years 1874-1878 cannot be described as opportunism.
In conclusion I believe that John Walton’s interpretation of Disraeli’s career and achievements was extremely valid and accurate. There is a lot of evidence that supports John Walton’s idea. Also the fact that John Walton is an academic Historian who has studied Disraeli further strengthens the argument that his interpretation is valid.
