Victorian politics, which is the judgement of one political scientist who claims that 'Thatcherism can be explained as a reassertion of nineteenth-century liberalism'3. By taking the party further to the right, the Victorian attitudes of laissez-faire and the distinction between deserving and undeserving poor were perhaps inevitably going to be reinstated, which is clear by the way that the idea that the state should provide from cradle to the grave was so readily rejected by Thatcher. This was a huge ideological change, arguably the greatest, to conservative principles in post-war politics as it heralded a reduced commitment to the welfare state and individualism was once again a major aspect of Tory ideals.
Good conclusions usually refer back to the question or title and address it directly - for example by using key words from the title.
How well do you think these conclusions address the title or question? Answering these questions should help you find out.
Do they use key words from the title or question?
Do they answer the question directly?
Can you work out the question or title just by reading the conclusion?
"In conclusion it seems that Somerset is to blame for mishandling the situation in 1549, but it seems that Somerset can not be totally blamed for the rebellions. Somerset's responsibility has been widely exaggerated by historians like John Guy (source E) but in fact his role is far lesser than had been believed. The main responsibility falls upon the New Religion and The Gentry's lack of ability to suppress the rebellions before it required the Government and Kings (and Lord Protector's) intervention. All the sources apart from D imply that Somerset was not responsible of 1549, as pointed out by Guy (source E) there were too many other problems, "agrarian, fiscal, religious and social grievances fused" causing the rebellion. The over view of the sources and my personal belief is that Somerset is to blame for mishandling the rebellions of 1549, as is implied by Guy (Source E) that Somerset was to bothered waging war in Scotland and by Paget (Source D) criticises Somerset motives and procedures."
"In conclusion it can be seen that the UK and US share many characteristics, which can be seen as being both pluralist and elitist. However the US is essentially more pluralist with dispersed points of access with fragmented state power. The government has sub-ordinates and sub-governments, which are very different to the UK where power is more concentrated with one person, the Prime Minister. There are many differences between the two theories; however, some similarities can be seen, linking the two. Dahl argued that most people are not interested in participating much in politics, thus only a small group of individuals is involved who have to compete to win elections by appealing for popular support. Schumpter and Dahl renamed the theory as pluralist elitism, in which politics in countries like the UK and US is polyarchy, rule by many elites (a plurality of elites)."
"The conclusion of this paper is that bearing in mind, the significance of an ideological origin to the process, there is strong evidence that the hollowing out of the state has and is continuing to take place. However it is doing so in conjunction with the restructuring of parliamentary structure and continuous adjustment of the actors and responses within the policy network. Only in this fuller sense can the hollowing out of the state be applied to the evolution of the policy process in Britain.
What has remained constant or grown in strength throughout this process are the executors of power in the core of government. Although lines of accountability remain, the likelihood of recrimination for wrongdoing has become more unlikely and this is a cause for concern for the future. Both the hollowing out of the state and the strengthening of the core executive remain a matter of ongoing process."
Marked by a teacher
This document has been marked by one of our great teachers. You can read
the full teachers notes when you download the document.
This document has been reviewed by one of our specialist student essay
reviewing squad. Read the full review on the document page.
This document has been reviewed by one of our specialist student document
reviewing squad. Read the full review under the document preview on this page.