British politics today: Essentials

6th Edition

Bill Jones, Dennis Kavanagh

• Publisher: Manchester University Press
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781847794956
• Edition: 6
• Topic: Médias et arts de la scène
• Subtopic: Histoire et critique de la télévision

Short, yet comprehensive. Completely up to date. Great value for money textbook by two established scholars.

1
Defining politics, government and democracy

Defining politics

Before embarking on a politics course, it is as well to clarify what we mean by the world of ‘politics’. It’s a vague enough kind of word, ‘politics’, tainted by much negative association, so what precisely do we mean by it? To illustrate, let’s consider whether any of the following headline-type statements can be said to be ‘political’:

1 Prime Minister’s press secretary briefed against Chancellor.

2 Sons contest mother’s will leaving fortune to daughter.

3 Leader of Opposition suggests United Kingdom renegotiates membership of European Union.

4 Potato shortage hits poorest families.

5 Strikes close down benefit offices.

6 John pips Colin for chess team captaincy.

Virtually all of them can be said to have some political content: 1 and 3 are clearly political but even 2 and 6 contain something of politics with a small ‘p’. So what unites the big and small ‘p’ senses of the word?

The answer is the element of conflict and the need to resolve such conflict. So we talk of ‘family politics’, ‘work politics’, ‘boardroom politics’, even ‘chess club politics’, all with a small ‘p’, while ‘Politics’ with a big ‘P’ is concerned with how we – individuals and groups – relate to the state. In relation to the latter, a range of issues leap to mind. For example:

• How much can the state’s government tell us what to do?

• How much obligation do we owe to the state?

• How should the state be governed and what part should we play in such activities?

There are many definitions of political activity but the following one puts conflict at its centre:

Politics is essentially a process that seeks to manage or resolve conflicts between people, usually in a peaceful fashion. In its general sense it can describe the interactions of any group of people, but in its specific sense it refers to the many and complex relationships which exist between state institutions and the rest of society. (Jones et al., 2007, p. 9)

Conflict

What is such conflict about? This is not easy to answer but it often boils down to scarce resources: ‘who gets what, when, how’ in Harold Lasswell’s famous definition (Lasswell, 1936). But conflict can arise not just over material resources like money and property but also over things like status and authority. This, after all, is why Tony Blair and Gordon Brown fought throughout Blair’s ten years in power, each seeking to exercise dominance over the other. Voltaire wrote tellingly about the source of political conflict: ‘There has never been a perfect government, because men have passions; and if they did not have passions there would be no need for government’.

Conflict resolution

How are the conflicts resolved? It all depends on the political system involved. Autocratic governments seek to repress dissent and impose settlements, irrespective of the desires and interests of those involved. President Mugabe, of Zimbabwe, leader of a one-party dictatorship, for example tried in 2007 to stem runaway inflation by banning firms from making price increases, accusing them of collaborating with opposition elements to bring down his government. During 2008 he also used state-organised violence to determine the results of presidential and parliamentary elections. Democracies like Britain, however, use representative institutions to negotiate between competing interests through the medium of political parties contesting elections.

The ‘good government is like good parenting’ analogy

I tend to think that good government is a bit like good parenting, as suggested by liberal writers like L. T. Hobhouse in the nineteenth century, who argued that the state had a responsibility to nurture ‘good citizens’. Both parenting and government aim to encourage good behaviour and to achieve prosperity and happiness for their respective objects. More precisely:

• Children have inbuilt rebellious tendencies, as do voters. It follows that, like good parenting, government should avoid being overbearing if possible: persuasion is of the essence. An arrogant government alienates voters in no time at all.

• As with rules for children, government always works best when citizens have been properly prepared. The ban on smoking in indoor public places from 2007 is a good example of effective preparation, as it seems to have been accepted more or less without serious complaint. The introduction in 1989 of the poll tax (or community charge), on the other hand, generated riots in central London, which helped bring down the Thatcher government, which came up with the idea.

• It follows that rules should be reasonable and sensible. The two above examples also illustrate that when they are not, consent is not achieved. By the same token, any attempt to insist children go to bed at, say, 5.30 p.m. is likely to be met with furious refusals.

• Of course, rules must be applied consistently, without exception, favour or discrimination. Any deviation from this rule creates chaos in both families and political systems.

The parenting analogy, however, implies excessive intrusion. Perhaps the criterion here should be the prevention of harm to others: for example, children should be prevented from bullying their fellows just as adults should be. It is when harm to oneself is involved that problems arise. Parents naturally step in to prevent their children harming themselves – playing with sharp objects for example – but libertarians argue that adults – mature individuals – should be allowed to inflict harm on themselves should they so decide: through drugs, dangerous sports and the like. This is also when cost to taxpayers becomes a factor. Both drinking and smoking – self-destructive pleasures – cost us billions in medical care, so should they be discouraged? Gambling can also break up families and causes untold misery to growing children, so should it also be discouraged? To conclude, possibly the major reason for being wary of pushing my comparison is that it might encourage politicians to vie for the ‘parenting’ role. No one wants to see a version of George Orwell’s ‘Big Brother’ installed in Number 10.

Box 1.1 What does government do?

In his book The Third Way, Anthony Giddens describes what he thinks the purposes of government are:

• to provide means for the representation of diverse interests;

• to offer a forum for reconciling the competing claims of those interests;

• to create and protect an open public sphere in which unconstrained debate about policy issues can be carried on;

• to provide a diversity of public goods, including forms of collective security and welfare;

• to regulate markets in the public interest and foster market competition where monopoly threatens;

• to foster social peace through the provision of policing;

• to promote the development of human capital through the education system;

• to sustain an effective system of law;

• to have a directly economic role, as a prime employer, in macro and micro intervention, and in the provision of infrastructure;

• more controversially, to have a civilising aim – government reflects the widely held norms and values, but can also help shape them, in the educational system and elsewhere;

• to foster regional and transnational alliances and pursue global goals.

Source: Giddens (1998), pp. 47–8.

Representative democracy and its requirements

Britain is, arguably, the oldest democracy in the world – though it took many centuries for it to evolve into its current ‘representative’ form. The conditions necessary for such a system of government need to be identified:

Box 1.2 The nature of democracy

Journalist Gary Younge gave the following clear-sighted analysis of the essence of democracy (Guardian, 18 February 2008):

In December, the president of Uzbekistan, Islam Karimov, stood for reelection. Karimov, a one-time ally in the ‘war on terror’ who in 2002 had one opposition leader boiled alive, has long faced criticism from human rights groups and the United Nations. Having already served two terms, he was not even eligible to stand. A minor detail for a man like Karimov. His three opponents all endorsed him and did not ask Uzbeks to vote for them. Those who would not endorse him were disqualified and imprisoned. Karimov won the day with 88.1% of the vote.

There is a profound difference between holding an election and having a democracy. Elections are the best means that we have come up with so far for giving people a voice in the running of their affairs. Democracy is the system which ensures that voices are heard by empowering them with the ability to change those who run our affairs.

Elections, in and of themselves, are a purely technical matter. The authorities name the day, tell the voters, provide the booths and the equipment. The voters make their choice. The authorities then tally the results. But, as we know from countless incidences, from Kenya to Florida, the technical elides effortlessly into the political. Which day? Which voters? Where are the booths? How does the equipment work? Who’s counting? Whose votes count? All this has a bearing on the result. That’s why democracy, if it is working, gives us the right to kick out the authorities.

• full adult franchise – everyone must have the vote;

• secret ballot – to ensure voters are not coerced or influenced, as used to be commonplace in Britain in earlier times;

• a choice of candidates – so that voters can choose to vote for the candidate or party they prefer;

• regular elections – to ensure no government becomes entrenched and so that voters are able to eject a government they have come to dislike and to elect another in its place;

• elections that are fought on equal terms (e.g. in relation to finance) for all parties and candidates;

• access to the media for all parties and candidates – to allow free expression of their views.

References

Giddens, A. (1998) The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy, Polity.

Jones, B., et al. (2007) Politics UK (6th edition), Pearson.

Lasswell, H. (1936) Politics: Who Gets What, When, How?, McGraw-Hill.

Further reading

All the major textbooks provide some discussion of politics and democracy in their opening chapters:

Jones, B., et al. (2007) Politics UK (6th edition), Pearson.

Kavanagh, D., et al. (2006) British Politics (5th edition), Oxford University Press.

Kingdom, J. (2003) Government and Politics in Britain: An Introduction (3rd edition), Polity.

Leach, R., et al. (2006) British Politics, Palgrave.

Moran, M. (2005) Politics and Governance in the UK, Palgrave.

Other texts

Axford, B., et al. (1997) Politics: An Introduction, Routledge.

Crick, B. (2000) In Defence of Politics (5th revised edition), Continuum.

Duverger, M. (1966) The Idea of Politics, Methuen.

Heywood, A. (1997) Politics, Macmillan.

Paxman, J. (2002) The Political Animal, Michael Joseph.

Riddell, P. (1993) Honest Opportunism, Hamish Hamilton.

Websites

International Political Scien...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Contents
• Figures, tables and boxes
• Preface
• Map
• 1 Defining politics, government and democracy
• 2 An overview of the British political system
• 3 The historical development of British government
• 4 The social and economic context of British government
• 5 Political culture in Britain
• 6 The changing constitution
• 7 Political ideas
• 8 The role of pressure groups
• 9 Political parties
• 10 Legislature I: monarchy and the House of Lords
• 11 Legislature II: the House of Commons
• 12 Devolution
• 13 The executive I: Cabinet, Prime Minister and the ‘core executive’
• 14 The executive II: ministers and the civil service
• 15 The media in British politics I: the ‘mainstream’ media
• 16 The media in British politics II: influence, bias and the new media
• 17 Voting behaviour in Britain
• 18 Local government I: provenance and decline
• 19 Local government II: revival?
• 20 The judiciary and politics
• 21 The European Union and British politics
• 22 Policy-making in British government
• 23 British and US government and politics compared
• 24 Britain and the world
• Index