Critically Assess the Postwar Consensus Thesis - Essay Example

POST WAR CONSENSUS From the historical perspective, the time that succeeded the end of Second World War is referred to as the post war period. The term ‘post war consensus’ is used tactfully to refer to the agreements arrived at by the collaboration of the Labor party and the conservative party to structure policies and frameworks to champion the direction in internal as well as foreign policy dimensions. After the conservative party government took over the government from the Labor party in 1951, it did not dismantle the policy frameworks that had previously been used by the government to create a welfare state. This therefore reveals that the political as well as the public elite within the country accepted and acknowledged the policies that were in operation during the post war period. There was however, some conflicts noted between the parties concerning the postwar consensus. The parties had consent to similar principles as well as aims but had differences in styles and emphasis (Bogdanor, 2011, para 1-9). This paper therefore has the focus of analyzing the concept of post war consensus with attention on the policies inside this concept as well as understanding the collapse of the concept as reviewed through scholarly works. Much of the evolution in the concept is attributed to in differences postulated by partisan political parties as well as the administration over the period. The concept of welfare state comprehensive in Great Britain dates back to mid Second World War as was developed in the reposts of William Biveridge in 1942. This is therefore the postulated foundation upon which the concept of postwar consensus is claimed to be built. Therefore, the policy formulations that resulted from the government of the labor party formed a basis on which the consensus was formed on. The government undertook and implemented various policies which were distinct to the leadership history of the country. The conservative party had great influence in the industrial charter, which followed the successful formation of the previous government by the labor party. Moreover, the acknowledgement of the various policy frameworks by the party as they were designed and implemented by the party in power made the conservative party to reserve many of the policies during the 1947 industrial charter (Anon, nd, p. 217-222). The Great Britain categorizes the historical perspective into two phases, which span through the consensus period as well as the period after the consensus was broken and the period runs to today. The consensus period spun the years 1945 to 1979 after which the post consensus period set in and has been up to the current period (Matthijs, 2008, p. ii). After the end of the Second World War, the consensus that settled in and had a guiding commitment to full employment, industries were nationalized, government undertook to control the economic demand through application of the Keynesian techniques. Moreover, the government adopted the social welfare in a system of self-sponsored technique. The period after the election in 1945 saw the labor party form the government and adapted reformation policies and not revolutionary policies (McCulloch, 1985, p. 465). Economist and other analysts interpreted the system of government adopted by the labor party government as reformists as against revolutionalists. Nonrevolutionary alliances of trade unions as well democratic socialists were the foundations, which formed the Labour party. The governance structure that succeeded the election of the Labour party to office mainly comprised of the political class of persons who had gotten into politics in the early 20th century. This period, which span across the years 1945 to 1951, was a characteristic period in the history of the country as it is credited to be the period in which many of the legislations in Britain were formulated. The government also placed policies, which oversaw many industries nationalized until the 1980s. The welfare state as was a characteristic feature to the post-war consensus and the government adopted policies to bring about full employment and institute a comprehensive system of efficient and affordable social services to all. Unlike the perception of many analysts of the period, this move by the government had not the revolution perspective to the social status of the people but the move had the sole responsibility of ensuring that the government places into position frameworks. That the citizens had equality in opportunities besides having a minimum living standard level established and maintained. These goals were developed during the consensus period, which had the best place after the World War 2. The adoption of Keynes’s ideas (Toye, 2005, p. 1) into the policy-making system was necessitated by the government intention to maintain full employment. The government therefore undertook deliberate measures to maintain the interest rates at low levels while at the same time encouraging investments. Nevertheless, as a policy framework adopted under consensus, the conservative government, which took over the government after the labor party, adopted and progressed the policies. However, critically analysis of the economic performance in Britain in the 1940s reveals that the employment rates were highest despite the adoption of these policies. There was a notable increase for consumer goods, which resulted to an acute shortage of labor force, which is attributed to the high rates of employment in the country over the years. This therefore formed a great challenge to the government and policies had to be instituted to address the challenge in the shortage of labor while at the same time addressing the employment issues. The social legislations as policy guidelines adopted by the government were instituted to guide the government in providing equal opportunities to all its citizens while at the same time ensuring equitable and efficient distribution of social services across the nation. Basic social services that were of critical importance to the British government were those that addressed social issues such as education, illness as well as old age among others. The government had the sole responsibility therefore of ensuring that the government provided social services were as good as those offered through privates systems which were equally allowed in the country. Through this, the government ensured that money never commanded superior social security. Critiques argue that despite the great efforts that the government deployed towards the realization of these goals in the post war consensus, failure was noted though at relatively low magnitudes. Owing to the determination by the government to provide the social welfare, policies were developed and instituted to develop public education, health services, housing construction supported by the government as well as comprehensive social insurance. This necessitated that all persons within the country had access to basic livelihoods. However, literature reveals that these efforts failed to realize the intentions of keeping the cost of living. Despite the support to the national health services by the other parties, the conservative party, which was to take over from the labour party, had reservations about the policies as revealed through literature. The need to provide state housing programs was pushed by the need by the government to have all people access basic living standards. However, the construction of these houses faced the challenges of enough finances, which necessitated the materialization of the programs in faces. There was a notable increase in population, which outran the pace at which the government ran the housing program. Due to this shortage, the efforts by the government through the labor party and the subsequent conservative government failed to realize fully the set objectives. There was therefore the need for the government to design other mechanisms to source for the funds to actualize the programs or equally put into place measures that would facilitate the planning of the entire populations. In the British political history, postwar consensus span over the period, which was between the official terminations of the world war to the period when Thatcher Margaret was elected into the office of prime minister in 1979. The postwar consensus revolved wide public policy agreements, which spun through different dimensions such as in support to mixed economy, collectivism as well as welfare state. Nevertheless, there is the point of contention between scholars where some argue that the concept was widely accepted within the circles of scholars while others would hold it that the concept was universally accepted by scholars. Moreover, the concept faces critical debates in that; due to the abstract nature of defining ‘consensus’, them the concept is viewed as a myth. Contrast is developed more on the concept where some scholars who were against the concept reason that major policy frameworks persisted even during and after the period covering 1945 and the 1970sin matters relating to foreign affairs, economy, trade unions, employment as well as welfare. The election of Margaret into office was dictated by the campaign strategy and theme that the conservative party adopted. The party was particularly interested in lowering the high and unmanageable tax regime that the economy faced. The public felt that the government that was failed to address the issue of the rising taxes as well as the too large public sector to who the government failed to be accountable. Privatization and the sale of public houses was the best policy infrastructure that the incumbent government adopted to cut down the overall level of fiscal extraction that was the characteristic of the prevailing government (Daunton 2002, p. 1). The post war concept faced increasing pressure because of increased inflation pressure as well as the industrial unrest, which resulted to the Sterling crisis. The high government spending as well as reduced taxation, which characterized Keynesian economics as, applied failed to generate the necessary effect sought to stabilize the economy over the crisis. Some reactions to the crises blame the postwar consensus as largely to blame for the country’s decline in economic performance as observed within the period. The postwar consensus was brought to an end by the application of the New Right ideas (Toye, 2013, para 1) which focused at rectifying the economic crises after the conservative party took over the governance from the liberal party in 1979. In conclusion, the major notable characteristics of the post war consensus as postulated included the creation of Britain as a modern welfare state, Keynesian economics (Ebeling, 2004, para 1); major industries were nationalized as well as adoption of a mixed economy. Moreover, the National Health Service was established which formed a basic component of the policies that characterized post war consensus concept. It is worth noting that the policy frameworks as characterized the concept were jointly instituted by the labor and conservative parties, which formed the government. However, arguments go that anticompetitive practices that were observed through the post war period became main hindrance for the efficient working of the economy. This meant that resources were not efficiently distributed to their rightful as well as profitable uses. Keynesian economics were relevant until in the 1970s when such factors as the oil crises destabilized many economies; including the Britain economy. Keynesian economics failed to bring about policies that would counter the effects of the crises to the economy and hence the reason of reviewing the concept. Much is acknowledged concerning the post war consensus that was observed during the period that followed the end of Second World War. Among the many highly appreciated effects of the post war consensus was the co-working by the different political majorly the labor party as well as the conservative party. Together, the parties formulated and instituted various policy frameworks whose effects are felt even to the current Britain (Morris, nd, p. 1). However, there were still notable disparities, which were notable through the shift of the governance from the labor party to the conservative party especially at the rule of Margaret Thatcher. The paper has revealed the basic characteristic that shaped the consensus period after the world war and pointed out the possible cause of death to the consensus. The failure of the government to meet all the policy guidelines and objectives postulated through the consensus led to the death of the consensus for instance, the conservative party took the lead in the 1979 elections due to the challenges that the government faced in addressing the issues of taxation and uncontrolled public expenditure by the preceding government. However, many of the policies that had been developed during the consensus period after war continued to be esteemed even after there was a change of government from the labor party to the conservative party. Bibliography Anonymous nd. Chapter 11 Welfare, Affluence, and Consensus, 1945–1970. Available at: http://lyceumbooks.com/pdf/PeoplesBritishIslesIII_Chapter_11.pdf [Accessed on 10 July 2013]. Bogdanor V. 2011. Britian in the 20th Century: The Conservative Reaction, 1951 – 1965. (Online) Available at: http://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and-events/britain-in-the-20th-century-the-conservative-reaction-1951-1965 [Accessed on 10 July 2013]. Daunton M. 2002. Just Taxes. Cambridge: Cambridge university press. Ebeling R. 2004. Henry Hazlitt and the Failure of Keynesian Economics. (Online) Available at: http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/henry-hazlitt-and-the-failure-of-keynesian-economics#axzz2YeFskl42 [Accessed on 10 July 2013]. Matthijs M. 2008.The political economy of crisis making: The united kingdom from Attlee to Blair(1945-2005) Available at: http://gradworks.umi.com/3309811.pdf [Accessed on 10 July 2013]. McCulloch G. 1985. Labour, the left, and the British general election of 1945. (Online) Available at: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/175476?uid=2&uid=4&sid=21102522241197 [Accessed on 10 July 2013]. Morris S. nd. Paper 14: The social structure of modern Britain. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/175476?uid=2&uid=4&sid=21102522241197 [Accessed on 10 July 2013]. Toye R. 2013. From ‘Consensus’ to ‘Common Ground’: The Rhetoric of the Postwar Settlement and its Collapse. (Online) Available at: http://gradworks.umi.com/3309811.pdf [Accessed on 10 July 2013]. Toye, 2005. Keynes and Development Economics: a Sixty-Year Perspective. Available at: http://search.mywebsearch.com/mywebsearch/GGmain.jhtml?st=sb&ptb=7D6132DF-BF5C-4DE2-BF46-D8281F5A12D4&n=77fc7109&ind=2013032713&p2=^Z7^xdm189^YY^ke&si=jenya&searchfor=Keynes+and+Development+Economics%3A+a+Sixty-Year+Perspective++John+Toye%2C+University+of+Oxford*++Abstract+John+Maynard+Keynes+exercised+considerable+influence+on+the+formative+years+of+development+economics%2C+through+his+disciples.++Key+issues+were+the+relevance+of+disguised+unemployment+to+developing+countries+and+the+supply+side+policies+that+would+have+to+complement+Keynesian+demand+management.++Although+Michal+Kalecki+made+a+greater+contribution+to+structuralist+economics%2C+Keynesian+ [Accessed on 10 July 2013]. Read More