Suchergebnisse

This article sets the scene for those that follow. It picks out the main themes of each, arguing that the Liberal Democrats could benefit from considering the issues around policy and the nature of political power that arise from the articles. It also argues that debates over relations with other parties are likely to be central to Liberal Democrat politics in the foreseeable future.

Liberal Democrat policy has been labelled as social democratic, yet the party has been reluctant to so describe itself. Taking Crosland's The Future of Socialism as a reference point, there appears to be much shared ground between social democracy and Liberal Democrat policy. Meanwhile, the party's tax policy adopted in 2006 takes the Croslandite approach of taxing wealth rather than income. Despite this, the article argues that the party is a social liberal rather than a social democratic one. These two political philosophies have so much in common that it is understandable that some commentators see the influence of social democracy where they might instead perceive social liberalism. Yet the two differ in their attitudes to the state. Both see a positive role for the state in furthering social goods. However, social liberalism shares classical liberal concerns about the dangers of an over‐mighty state. This approach underpins Liberal Democrat policy.

A review essay on books by (1) Mark Garnett & Philip Lynch (Eds), The Conservatives in Crisis: The Tories after 1997 (Manchester, UK: Manchester U Press, 2003); (2) E. H. H. Green, Ideologies of Conservatism: Conservative Political Ideas in the Twentieth Century (Oxford, UK: Oxford U Press, 2002); (3) Ted Honderich, Conservatism: Burke, Nozick, Bush, Blair? (London: Pluto, 2005); & (4) Bruce Pilbeam, Conservatism in Crisis? Anglo-American Conservative Ideology after the Cold War (London: Palgrave, 2003).

Abstract not provided by publisher. References.