Useful notes on conservatism

Click here for access to useful revision on conservatism

Natinalism answer schemes

Model answers nationalism from mattbentley34

Units 1 & 2 - Marginal Seats

Click here to access a recent BBC article discussing the potential marginal seats in the 2017 General election.

Nationalism and racialism - Model Answers

Model answers nationalism & Racialism from mattbentley34

Unit 1: Essay on Pressure Groups

 Extended student essay with examples (some amendments)

Why Are Some Pressure Groups More Successful Than Others?

A Pressure Group is best defined as an organization which seeks to influence decision-makers in relation to an issue or policy. Unlike political parties, pressure groups do not usually stand for elected office. Note – Over half of the 61 ‘new’ political parties that registered with the Electoral Commission in 2006 were, in all but name, single-issue pressure groups e.g. Respect.                                                                                                      There are two types of pressure groups, an insider pressure group, or an outsider pressure group. An insider pressure group is one which has the backing of the government and is involved in parliament, for example Trade unions are favoured by the Labour party, along with education groups or pro Europe groups. An outsider pressure group is one completely outside the governmental ‘circle’, such as ALF (Animal Liberation Front). Whereas, when the Conservatives are in power business groups like the Institute of Directors (IOD) or the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) find favour.

Pressure groups set out to achieve their goals through a variety of tactics, for example, Fathers 4 Justice- a small PG- Fathers 4 Justice (or F4J) began as a fathers’ rights organization in the United Kingdom. It became prominent and frequently discussed in the media following a series of high-visibility stunts and protests often in costume. Fathers 4 Justice was founded in the UK by Matt O'Connor, a marketing consultant and father. Following separation from his wife in 2000, O'Connor became a prominent critic of UK family law after a court barred him from seeing his young sons outside of a contact centre.                                                                                                                                                                               F4J's stated aim is to champion the cause of equal parenting, family law reform and equal contact for divorced parents with children. It is well-known for its campaigning techniques of dramatic protest stunts, usually dressed as comic book superheroes and frequently scaling public buildings, bridges and monuments.                                                                Stunts have included supporters storming courts dressed in Father Christmas outfits, clapping the Government's ‘Children’s Minister’(Margaret Hodge) in handcuffs, and most notably group member Jason Hatch climbing onto Buckingham Palace dressed as Batman. On 19 May 2004, a major alert was caused when two members of the group threw purple flour bombs at Tony Blair during Prime Minister's Questions at the House of Commons. On 27 September 2005, protester Guy Harrison scaled The Houses of Parliament unveiling a banner stating "Does Blair care? For Fawkes sake change family law."                                                                                                                                                        Impact: Fathers 4 Justice's main impact remains upon media coverage and legal                                                                                                                                               treatment of fathers' rights issues in the UK. The use of high-profile and disruptive stunts has garnered significant UK media coverage. The political aims of the group are                                                                                                      as yet un-achieved, A significant, unintended result of the F4J campaign has been the exposure of flaws in security at high-profile British institutions, resulting in security enquiries or reviews at Buckingham Palace and the House of Commons.

It is often hard to measure the amount of success achieved by some pressure groups as the government claims credit for acts made from p.g’s.- for example, prior to the 1960’s none of the major parties had any policy on conservation or ‘green issues’ , yet when the Ecology Party(PG)  showed signs of public support for such matters all three parties developed such policies which are so prominent today.

The specific membership of each pressure group (size and status) plays a large part in how successful the group turns out to be. Organizations such as the AA and RAC have huge numbers of motorists (10 million voters +) to protect, so any issues involving road-building or petrol prices or the current HS2 dispute require extensive consultations of such bodies by the government. Whereas, some PGs with small membership, and with huge expertise such as 

IOD (Institute of Directors) will be consulted on many economic matters by various governments.

Government support for pressure groups is valuable, as each group may receive better treatment from a particular party such as rural groups like  the Countryside Alliance – an insider group for the Conservative party whilst  the Pensioner groups, such as Help the Aged, being consulted by the Labour party.

Some sectional groups may have special status, as the members could play a huge part in influencing decision-makers, for example, CBI (Confederation of British Industry) and the TUC (Trade Union Congress) have a large influence in a wide variety of areas because of who they represent, that is, employers and employees respectively. These groups command respect from governments because, on the whole, they act responsibly and have authority due to the fact that they are chosen democratically and elected by their own members to their positions. So they can legitimately reflect the views of their members whereas the vast majority of other PGs are criticized because it is usually the active members of the group who determine their actions and frequently do not reflect the body of opinion of their membership – this is what leads to internal friction in some PGs.

The resources that a PG has can play a large part in their success or otherwise, for example, the RSPB (Royal Society for the Protection of Birds) not only has more members than each of the three major political parties, but also it has:

The invaluable support of almost 18,000 volunteers.

Resources available for charitable purposes in 2010 was £94.7 million. 

200 nature reserves covering almost 130,000 hectares, home to 80% of our rarest or most threatened bird species.

A UK headquarters, three national offices and nine regional offices.

A local network of 175 local groups and more than 110 youth groups.     

 and most importantly, immense public support.

The availability of funds, however, does not always guarantee success, for example, both Shell and BP (hugely successful oil corporations) could not avoid adverse media and public anger when a number of oil pollution accidents (Niger delta, Nigeria (Shell)- ‘world capital

of pollution’/BP Gulf of Mexico) occurred despite spending enormous amounts of money on PR. Likewise, trade unions have huge financial resources (member subscriptions), but often suffer poor public and press coverage e.g. NUM (National Union of Miners)

The internal organization of pressure groups is sometimes the driving-force behind the actions undertaken to help their cause. Many PGs are internally undemocratic- in many PGs officers are appointed, not elected, so there is a lack of accountability to members. In many PGs key decisions are not taken by the members, but by a central committee or board which in itself is unelected.-Neil McNaughton suggests that the BMA and the AA are poor in consulting their members over policy and actions. Thus the organization of many PGs reflects ELITISM rather than PLURALISM. Wyn Grant reinforces this opinion with his suggestions about the organization of Greenpeace.

Greenpeace is a hierarchical organisation that allows little democratic control over the direction of campaigns.                                                                                                                           -- It has a strictly bureaucratic internal structure.                                                                                  – a small group of people has  control over the organisation at the national and international level.                                                                                                                                     – Local action groups are totally dependent on the central body.                                                            – the rank and file is excluded

 

 A more recent series of populist movements – called Social Movements or Protest Movements – have come to prominence over the last thirty years. Social movements

are a far looser structure than PGs in organization.

Social movements are any broad social alliances of people who are connected through their shared interest in blocking or affecting social change. Social movements do not have to be formally organized.Modern social movements became possible through the wider dissemination of literature and increased mobility of labor due to the industrialization of societies ( Technological Age)                         Social movements based upon two characteristics: (1) who is the movement attempting to change and (2) how much change is being advocated. Social movements can be aimed at change on an individual level (e.g. Alcoholics Anonymous) or change on a broader, group or even societal level (e.g., anti-globalization). Social movements can also advocate for minor changes (e.g., tougher restrictions on drunk driving; MADD (Mothers   Against Drunk Driving) or radical changes (e.g., prohibition).                                                                                                                                                                A distinction is drawn between social movements and social movement organizations (SMOs). A social movement organization is a formally organized component of a social movement. But an SMO may only make up a part of a particular social movement. For instance, PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) advocates for vegan lifestyles along with its other aims. But PETA is not the only group to advocate for vegan diets and lifestyles; there are numerous other groups actively engaged toward this end  Thus, the social movement may be a push toward veganism (an effort with numerous motivations) and PETA is an SMO working within the broader social movement.

 

                                                                                                                                      Examples of Social Movements

·         civil rights movement in the United States

• environmental movement
• green movement       
• gay rights movement
• labour movement
• anti-globalization movement
• vegetarian movement
• feminist movement
• pro-life movement                                                

 The Countryside Alliance in 1998 organized a massive demonstration in London, proving their preparedness, and amount of organizational skills. The Fuel Lobby in 2000 is a fine example of logistical organization. The internet provided a great ally, as through it the group organized a huge protest in a very short space of time. Organization is important as it can influence a huge number of people, and can help with a protest or demonstration as it puts the word out about the cause.

The countryside alliance in the 1990s declared a massive demonstration on March 1^st 1998, 300,000 protesters gathered in London, however, fox- hunting was still banned, however the cause raised a significant amount of awareness for their campaign. The fuel tax protest movement in 2000, blockaded petrol refineries to create widespread panic, this did not seem to affect the policy, and had less of an effect than the ‘countryside alliance’.

However, pressure groups can face opposition from the government or any other group of some sort. Examples of conflicting groups include the animal rights campaigners vs. the fur trade. Also, Transport 2000 vs. the motor -car industry.

In conclusion, the question ,’Why are some pressure groups more successful than others’ is in fact very hard to judge and answer. This is because the media is a big influence on the coverage of an issue, rather than the pressure group itself. Also, if many pressure groups campaign on a singular issue, where does the credit go to, therefore it is hard to measure a pressure groups success. The membership of each pressure group consists of the size, the social class of members and the strategic importance of the membership. Membership is important as it shows the public what type of people are getting affected by the cause at hand, it could familiarize the public with the issue. Pressure groups resources consist of finance, organization and its tactics. This means that the pressure groups long term future is secured, which could be seen as success, as the group has survived for some time. The external environment consists of government support, public opinion and opposition.

Revision Material

Political ideologies from mattbentley34

Political participation from mattbentley34

Political representation and democracy from mattbentley34

Voting systems in elections from mattbentley34

Communitarianism - 5 minute explanation

Multiculturalism - Introduction

Two useful clips which help explain and understand multiculturalism. There is a 15 mark question for you to attempt below. On what Grounds have multiculturalists defended diversity? (15 marks)

Unit 4: 45 Mark questions on ecologism

Ecologism 45 Markers

‘The goals of ecologism can only be achieved through radical social change.’ Discuss. Jan 11

‘Deep ecology lies at the heart of all ecological thinking.’ Discuss. Jan 12

‘Ecologism is fundamentally at odds with capitalism and its values.’ Discuss. Jan 13

To what extent is ecologism a single doctrine? Jun 10

‘Ecologism begins where anthropocentrism ends.’ Discuss. Jun 11

‘Ecologists reject the idea that human needs and interests are of overriding

importance.’ Discuss. Jun 13

To what extent do Ecologists go beyond conventional moral thinking? Jun 14

To what extent is ecologism a single doctrine? Jun 15

Unit 4: Deep Ecology Vs Shallow Ecology

What is Political Ecology

Ecologism - Core themes

Radical Vs Liberal Feminism

Unit 4: Liberal Feminism

Unit 4: Feminism 15 mark questions

15 Markers on Feminism

What is patriarchy, and why is it important in feminist analysis? (Jan 10)

How and why have feminists emphasised the difference between sex and gender? (Jan 11)

In what sense have radical feminists sought to redefine the nature of politics? (Jan 12)

Explain the link between feminism and liberalism. (Jan 12)

Define patriarchy, and explain its importance to feminist analysis. (Jan 13)

Explain the key ideas of eco-feminism. (Jan 13)

How and why have feminists been critical of the ‘public/private’ divide? (Jun 10)

Why have some feminists criticised the idea of gender equality? (Jun 11)

Explain the key features of socialist feminism? (Jun 12)

Why is the distinction between sex and gender crucial to feminist analysis? (Jun 13)

On what grounds have radical feminists claimed that the ‘Personal is the political’? (Jun 14)

What is patriarchy and why is it important in feminist analysis? (Jun 15)

On what grounds has feminism been criticised? (Jun 16)

Unit 4: Feminism - more presentations

Feminism from Kostyk Elf

Feminism from Ezzah

Feminism Theory from Great Baddow High School Media

Unit 4: Feminism

Feminism from Malik Faisal

Unit 4: Nationalism - Long Answer Essays

Nationalism Essays (45 Markers)

‘Nationalism looks to the past, not the future.’ Discuss. (Jan 10)

To what extent is nationalism a backward-looking ideology? (Jan 11)

‘Nationalism is inherently expansionist and aggressive.’ Discuss. (Jan 12)

To what extent is nationalism a forward-looking doctrine? (Jan 13)

‘Nationalism is a recipe for peace and international order.’ Discuss. (Jun 10)

To what extent is Nationalism a single doctrine? (Jun 12)

Nationalism inevitable breeds conflict and war. Discuss (Jun 14)

‘Nationalism is essentially a progressive doctrine.’ Discuss. (Jun 16)

Unit 4: Nationalism - What is it?

Nationalism powerpoint 2010 from Estacada Social Studies

Unit 1 & 2: Devolution - Nortehrn Ireland Assembly in disaray

Click here to access article on Northern Ireland Assembly. Seems they are close to collapse....again!

Unit 4: The Rise of Fascism

Useful introductory video

Unit 4: Nationalism, the UK and BREXIT

Click here at access an article discussing the UK as a nation state.

Unit 4: Nationalism - Another 15 Mark scheme

On what grounds have nationislts defended the nation states? (15 Marks - Jun 10)

The nation-state is a form of political organisation and a political ideal. As a political
organisation it is characterised by the overlapping bonds of citizenship and nationality,
meaning that the borders of the state coincide with the boundaries of the nation. Every
nation should therefore have a state, and one state should embrace the entire nation. As
a political ideal, the nation-state embodies the principle of national self-determination.

Nationalists believe that the nation-state has two main advantages. In the first place, it
offers the prospect of both cultural cohesion and political unity, making the nation-state
a uniquely stable political entity. Nationalists thus tend to view the nation-state as the
only viable unit of political rule. The virtues of stability and unity are particularly
stressed by conservative nationalists who are particularly concerned about the promise of
social cohesion and political order that is embodied in the sentiment of national
patriotism.

Second, the nation-state extends political freedom. It does this because
national statehood ensures self-government and democratic rule. Nation-states are
therefore independent entities, in which citizens can decide their own destiny regardless
of external factors and interference from beyond their borders. Nationalists have tended
to argue that the nation is the highest level at which meaningful democracy can operate,
suggesting that supranationalism must always be a threat to democracy and self government.