| The first half of the 20 th century is a blossoming era for various ideas in the UK. Liberalism, conservatism and socialism developed in varying degrees. But in the background of the decline of the UK, universal suffrage and the uprising of socialism, the ideas above had to adapt themselves, for the increasingly dominant idea of collectivism had a big impact on them all.As for liberalism, the thought of social organism which values the inter-connection of different parts and individuals was widely broadcast and accepted. People no longer explained personal plight in terms of moral degeneration, which, by then, was attributed to social environment and diseases. Therefore, the call for social reform was heard and laissez-faire became unacceptable. Propelled by this, the liberal government of 1906 adapted its usual principles and took advantage of state interference, striving hard to carry out reforms in social welfare and economy, which won it the name of a reforming government. Hobson stressed the importance of state interference in economy and social life, while Hobhouse emphasized the importance of social, political and economic reforms if everyone is to enjoy his or her political freedom.On the other hand, conservatism, with its pragmatism, attributed particular attention to collectivism. Faced with the fact that Britain was overtaken by its competitors, tariff reformers advocated the rise of tariff to protect the British commerce and industry. Joseph Chamberlain, one radical of it, even suggested a powerful central government. In 1938, Harold Macmillan published The Middle Way, in which he gave much importance to nationalization and planned economy as ways to counter economic recession These proposals became the main ones for the Conservative Party between the two world wars and the years after World War II. They also exhibited that the Conservative Party had accepted collectivism.Socialism enjoys a long history in Britain and came to the foreground in the early of the 20 th century. In 1918, a new party constitution for the Labour Party was introduced, Clause V of which stated that “To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service.” Therefore the ideas of socialism were set up as its guidance. In June, a new party program drafted by the Webbs was proved, which demanded that the Labour Party should “bury” private ownership, and reconstruct the British society per se, and build up “a new social regime” through the democratic management of all social activities. These regulations all bore distinct collective colour and demanded the national interference if to be enforced.The analyses above show that all of the three main political thoughts turned to collectivism and national interference in the early 20 th century. Political thoughts becoming increasingly similar, government policies would inevitably show some homogeneity. Despite of this, the Adley Lobour Government coming to power in 1945 was criticized violently from almost every aspects and sides.Feeling his long-cherished collectivism being threatened, Oakeshott joined the battle against the Adley government. He didn’t limit his criticism only to the scope of concrete policies, but went further and conducted a theoretical attack against rationalism in politics. The rationalism he was against is in fact rational supremacy. Oakeshott held that on the condition of rational supremacy, people would cast aside tradition and experience and abstract some theories and formulas from them. In terms of epistemology, those theories and formulas are inconsistent with practice, making them incompetent in guiding politics. However, they are taken as golden criteria and are believed to be almighty in solving any political problem. Factually, it is doomed to fail because of its impracticability. Oakeshott named it rational politics.The best way to cope with the shortcomings of rational politics would be introducing tradition into politics. For Oakeshott, traditional politics is prudent and stitching-like. It deals with political crises solely by means of tradition and practical experience. Therefore there won’t be any resultant catastrophe. This shows the true target of Oakeshott is the collective policies of the Adley government, especially national interference, planned economy and so on. Based on this, he further advocated that the true aim of politics is to keep the political vessel from sinking and any attempt to set a particular destination is improper. By advocating traditional politics, Oakeshott truly wants a renunciation of collective policies and an abandoning of national interference from the Adley government, which can be proved by his calling Adley a despot.The fame of Oakeshott lies in his criticism, but we cannot say it’s free from mistakes and shortcomings. Despite his overwhelming emphasis on tradition, he failed to define tradition unambiguously. He even neglected some trends in English history that wouldn’t go with his theory. Moreover, he made error of universalism when he applied too much generalization in his criticism against rationalism and rational politics. Most importantly, what Oakeshott tried to offer us isn’t some political tips but a warning, so it contains little practicability. Anyway, it’s always wise to have some skepticism while carrying out political and economical plans. |
PDF Full Text Request