Political Values and Ideas for Activists
Tutor notes
Why political values?
The individual and collective values by which we run our lives and which underpin our daily
activities are essential components of our politics. In other words, what we ‘believe in’ forms
the basis of the development of our political activity right throughout our lives. Over time, this
can change: our values don’t remain the same throughout the whole of our lives and neither
do our politics.
The important point here though is that our individual and group values provide a foundation
for the political beliefs that we develop and practice. So, values are very important indeed.
And political values may be underpinned by moral, religious or social values. Some of these
may be learned in the family, in school, amongst peer groups, in universities or with
politically like-minded colleagues. However they are learned, they are some of the most
important, and some would say the most important element(s), of our politics.
So, a course on political values for activists provides us with an opportunity to explore in
some depth the foundations or underpinning of the reasons why people become politically
active. These are many and varied and an understanding of them can lead on to a greater
awareness of other people’s political choices.
The course runs for 10 weeks and each week explores a different aspect of political values
and ideas. Week 1 begins with a look at what individual and collective values are and the
relationship between individual and political and social values. Week 2 brings us right up to
date and looks at the values of the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition government. Their
‘headline’ values of ‘Freedom, Fairness and Responsibility’ are then used in Week 3 to
explore how each of the main political ideologies – Liberalism, Conservatism and Socialism
– interpret them. This session also looks at the differences between the ideologies and how
they have been practiced. Week 4 introduces a research activity for the learners to
undertake – this involves them interviewing a political activist, councillor or MP or someone
else of their choosing about their political values and motivations. Week 5 gets the learners
to reflect upon the main influential events that have shaped their political lives – from the
micro to the macro. Week 6 examines the important role that the media plays in influencing
our political choices. Weeks 7 and 8 explore the ‘bigger picture as regards such things as
looking at the importance of the post-Second Word War settlement in shaping the political
landscape and our individual or collective role within it. Learners will feedback on the
interviews they have undertaken in week 9 and Week 10 will summarise the course, provide
opportunities to evaluate it and think about ‘what next?’
WEA North West – Feb 2011
1
The course
Week 1 – Values and Politics
What are ‘values’ and why are they important in politics?
Individual and group values.
Social and political values.
What does ‘values’ mean to you? What are your values?
Learners, divided into small groups, will be given a very wide variety of images to
look at and discuss what values might be being represented or presented in them.
Ask them to think about the relationship between individual values and political and social
values.
Use images from Appendix 1 or tutor to use some of their own images.
Tutors should NOT supply the titles of the photographs. Images can be presented singly or
in pairs and groups. With the latter two, encourage students to think about the relationship
between the images.
What ideas about values come up for learners when they look at these images? There
are no right or wrong answers.
Individual values are the bedrock or foundation for political values - Some examples –
speeches from Obama, Harold Wilson, Clem Attlee, Margaret Thatcher, Adolf Hitler, Tony
Benn’s diaries
What are your values? Have they changed over time? How do your individual values relate
to your politics?
WEA North West – Feb 2011
2
Week 2 – The values of the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition government
We are in a new and quite unique political situation in Britain, with a coalition government
between the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats. We may have all sorts of
thoughts and feeling about this, particularly as Nick Clegg is a Sheffield MP!
We are going to look at the Coalition Our programme for government website
http://programmeforgovernment.hmg.gov.uk/ - essentially the pact made between the two
parties. We will do what is often called a discourse analysis: this is looking at a text and
trying to understand its underlying message – seeing ‘beyond’ the words and attempting to
reveal what the text is actually saying.
We will examine the text of some aspects of the coalition agreement to look at how it
introduces political values and what it says about them.
The website begins with:
“This website is the online version of The Coalition: our programme for government. It sets
out a programme for partnership government over the next five years. These plans are
inspired by the values of freedom, fairness and responsibility, and a shared desire to work in
the national interest.
We believe the programme can deliver radical, reforming government, a stronger society, a
smaller state and power and responsibility in the hands of every citizen.”
Is the latter empowering or does it represent a shrinking of the state and reduced
space for democracy?
Divide the group into smaller groups and ask them to discuss this text – focusing upon the
key words as regards values. Ask them to try to look beyond the rhetoric and think about
what might be being said here.
In the feedback, focus upon the words partnership, freedom, fairness and responsibility.
What does the coalition mean by these things? How does the second paragraph of the text –
“We believe the programme can deliver radical, reforming government, a stronger society, a
smaller state and power and responsibility in the hands of every citizen.” – build upon and
expand the values mentioned in the first part?
Does the text overall tell us anything about the intentions of the new government?
Moving on, in another section on the first page of the website called We’ll keep listening,
there is reference to 9,500 comments and responses to the programme being published on
the site. Oliver Letwin writes:
‘At last, government has realised that there are 60 million citizens who really do have ideas.
Through processes like this, we can give real power to the people and make things open.’
Again, what is behind Letwin’s rhetoric? Discuss in groups.
WEA North West – Feb 2011
3
Interestingly, Letwin uses a phrase that was associated with the left,
‘power to the people’ and suggests that this time it is ‘real’.
He also suggests that up until now the (Labour) government have not
realized that people have ideas and that this government can ‘make
things open’.
Using this rhetoric, he is stealing the clothes of empowerment and
transparency – things that are not usually associated with
Conservative governments.
His statement also open us questions about individual versus
collective empowerment.
The programme itself goes into quite detailed policy statements about a very wide range of
issues. So, instead of looking at the programme, we will examine its Foreword by David
Cameron and Nick Clegg for more clues about the coalition’s values.
Tutor to select some key sections (not just words in this case) and ideas from the foreword
and invite groups of learners to think about and discuss what they actually mean within the
context of their knowledge and experience of Conservatism and Liberalism and the coalition
between the two parties.
WEA North West – Feb 2011
4
FOREWORD
By David Cameron and Nick Clegg
This is an historic document in British politics: the first time in over half a century two parties
have come together to put forward a programme for partnership government.
As our parties have worked together it has become increasingly clear to us that, although
there are differences, there is also common ground. We share a conviction that the days of
big government are over; that centralisation and top-down control have proved a failure. We
believe that the time has come to disperse power more widely in Britain today; to recognise
that we will only make progress if we help people to come together to make life better. In
short, it is our ambition to distribute power and opportunity to people rather than hoarding
authority within government. That way, we can build the free, fair and responsible society we
want to see.
We are agreed that the first duty of government is to safeguard our national security and
support our troops in Afghanistan and elsewhere – and we will fulfil that duty. We are also
agreed that the most urgent task facing this coalition is to tackle our record debts, because
without sound finances, none of our ambitions will be deliverable. Difficult decisions will have
to be taken in the months and years ahead, but we will ensure that fairness is at the heart of
those decisions so that all those most in need are protected. Working together, we are
confident that we can take the country through difficult times to better days ahead.
Tackling the deficit is essential, but it is not what we came into politics to achieve. We stood
for Parliament – and for the leadership of our parties – with visions of a Britain better in every
way. And we have found in this coalition that our visions are not compromised by working
together; they are strengthened and enhanced. That is why this coalition has the potential for
era-changing, convention-challenging, radical reform.
For example, we both want to build a new economy from the rubble of the old. We will
support sustainable growth and enterprise, balanced across all regions and all industries,
and promote the green industries that are so essential for our future. This document shows
how, with radical plans to reform our broken banking system and new incentives for green
growth.
We both want a Britain where social mobility is unlocked; where everyone, regardless of
background, has the chance to rise as high as their talents and ambition allow them. To
pave the way, we have both agreed to sweeping reform of welfare, taxes and, most of all,
our schools – with a breaking open of the state monopoly and extra money following the
poorest pupils so that they, at last, get to go to the best schools, not the worst.
We both want a Britain where our political system is looked at with admiration, not anger. We
have a shared ambition to clean up Westminster and a determination to oversee a radical
redistribution of power away from Westminster and Whitehall to councils, communities and
homes across the nation. Wherever possible, we want people to call the shots over the
decisions that affect their lives.
And we are both committed to turning old thinking on its head and developing new
approaches to government. For years, politicians could argue that because they held all the
information, they needed more power. But today, technological innovation has – with
astonishing speed – developed the opportunity to spread information and decentralise power
in a way we have never seen before. So we will extend transparency to every area of public
life. Similarly, there has been the assumption that central government can only change
people’s behaviour through rules and regulations. Our government will be a much smarter
one, shunning the bureaucratic levers of the past and finding intelligent ways to encourage,
support and enable people to make better choices for themselves.
WEA North West – Feb 2011
5
In every part of this agreement, we have gone further than simply adopting those policies
where we previously overlapped. We have found that a combination of our parties’ best
ideas and attitudes has produced a programme for government that is more radical and
comprehensive than our individual manifestos.
For example, when you take Conservative plans to strengthen families and encourage social
responsibility, and add to them the Liberal Democrat passion for protecting our civil liberties
and stopping the relentless incursion of the state into the lives of individuals, you create a
Big Society matched by big citizens. This offers the potential to completely recast the
relationship between people and the state: citizens empowered; individual opportunity
extended; communities coming together to make lives better. We believe that the
combination of our ideas will help us to create a much stronger society: one where those
who can, do; and those who cannot, we always help.
And in the crucial area of public service reform, we have found that Liberal Democrat and
Conservative ideas are stronger combined. For example, in the NHS, take Conservative
thinking on markets, choice and competition and add to it the Liberal Democrat belief in
advancing democracy at a much more local level, and you have a united vision for the NHS
that is truly radical: GPs with authority over commissioning; patients with much more control;
elections for your local NHS health board. Together, our ideas will bring an emphatic end to
the bureaucracy, top-down control and centralisation that has so diminished our NHS.
Three weeks ago we could never have predicted the publication of this document. After the
election, of course, there was the option of minority government – but we were uninspired by
it. Instead, there was the option of a coalition in the national interest – and we seized it.
When we set off on this journey we were two parties with some policies in common and a
shared desire to work in the national interest. We arrive at this programme for government a
strong, progressive coalition inspired by the values of freedom, fairness and responsibility.
This programme is for five years of partnership government driven by those values. We
believe that it can deliver radical, reforming government, a stronger society, a smaller state,
and power and responsibility in the hands of every citizen. Great change and real progress
lie ahead.
David Cameron
Prime Minister
Nick Clegg
Deputy Prime Minister
WEA North West – Feb 2011
6
The sections selected to analyse could be from the following:
‘an historic document in British politics’
‘We share a conviction that the days of big government are
over; that centralisation and top-down control have proved a
failure.’
‘…it is our ambition to distribute power and opportunity to
people rather than hoarding authority within government. That
way, we can build the free, fair and responsible society we want
to see.’
‘Difficult decisions will have to be taken in the months and years
ahead, but we will ensure that fairness is at the heart of those
decisions so that all those most in need are protected. Working
together, we are confident that we can take the country through
difficult times to better days ahead.’
‘And we have found in this coalition that our visions are not
compromised by working together; they are strengthened and
enhanced.’
‘We both want a Britain where social mobility is unlocked;
where everyone, regardless of background, has the chance to
rise as high as their talents and ambition allow them.’
‘We have a shared ambition to clean up Westminster and a
determination to oversee a radical redistribution of power away
from Westminster and Whitehall to councils, communities and
homes across the nation. Wherever possible, we want people to
call the shots over the decisions that affect their lives.’
WEA North West – Feb 2011
7
‘And we are both committed to turning old thinking on its
head and developing new approaches to government. For
years, politicians could argue that because they held all the
information, they needed more power. But today,
technological innovation has – with astonishing speed –
developed the opportunity to spread information and
decentralise power in a way we have never seen before.’
‘Our government will be a much smarter one, shunning the
bureaucratic levers of the past and finding intelligent ways
to encourage, support and enable people to make better
choices for themselves.’
‘…when you take Conservative plans to strengthen families
and encourage social responsibility, and add to them the
Liberal Democrat passion for protecting our civil liberties
and stopping the relentless incursion of the state into the
lives of individuals, you create a Big Society matched by big
citizens. This offers the potential to completely recast the
relationship between people and the state: citizens
empowered; individual opportunity extended; communities
coming together to make lives better.’
‘…in the NHS, take Conservative thinking on markets,
choice and competition and add to it the Liberal Democrat
belief in advancing democracy at a much more local level,
and you have a united vision for the NHS that is truly
radical: GPs with authority over commissioning; patients
with much more control; elections for your local NHS health
board.’
WEA North West – Feb 2011
8
Some ideas about one way how to approach this exercise
The days of big government are over… a smaller state
One feature of current political language is the use of slick and easy
phrases which function as a sort of shorthand, compressed and coded
statements that might mean different things to different readers.
We have one such example in the Coalition programme when the following
is used: a smaller state. It sounds quite insignificant but it really masks a
very crucial body of political belief for the Conservatives and, for the rest of
the readers to understand its importance, it needs to be unpacked or
deconstructed.
The role of the state is one of the major debates in current politics. You
might ask yourself what you think the state should be doing for us in our
democracy. Many would say it should protect the citizen from attack – a
security role. Many would say it should ensure equality of opportunity,
fairness in society and safety of the individual. Some would say that the
state should protect the citizen from exploitation by more powerful forces:
big business, exploitation and fraud. Others would like the state to work
towards continually improving services, benefits and the standard of life for
all.
But can a smaller state do this sort of thing? The idea of the smaller state
has crossed the Atlantic from the right wing of American politics. It is seen
as better that we have a smaller state that does less for the citizenship.
One supporting argument is that citizens should do more for themselves,
that a ‘nannny state’ is a bad thing. Underlying this ideology are two key
platforms:


a smaller state means less taxation
a smaller state means services will be provided by private
enterprises
Our experience since the 1970s shows us what this means in reality and
everyone will take up a position on whether they think it is a good or bad
thing.
WEA North West – Feb 2011
9
It does, however, remain a political option for governments to adopt or
reject. There is a different model, sometimes referred to as the European
Social Model, which is in direct opposition to the free market model that
we increasing deploy in our country. This model is the successor to the
idea of welfare state and typifies the governments of the Scandinavian or
Nordic countries. Here you see high taxes, good services and generally
less unequal societies.
There are others things to think about also, such as the health of
democracy in a country. Generally speaking, the countries with healthy
democracies in Europe are the Nordic countries. Here high numbers of
people feel a direct interest in the government and they vote in high
numbers. In the UK it is different. We, like the US, have a falling interest
and participation in the practice of democracy; fewer and fewer people are
registered to vote and the percentage turn out in elections is declining all
the time. Is there a link between the strong state and democracy? Well,
you will need to make up your own mind about this.
A Big Society matched by big citizens…
The other tiny phrase that is planted in the coalition statement is a
commitment to the Big Society. It is, of course, directly related to this
debate about the size and function of the state, and although, no-one has
yet been able to explain what is meant in any detail it does seem to have
taken on a life of its own. Another example of political short hand (perhaps
born in the PR industry?)
If the state is going be reduced who then will take on its functions?
Obviously the citizen will be encouraged to do more, but there will be no
resources to support this. If some of the services are taken over by
volunteers, and if these involve statutory duties, then new businesses will
be created to take on this role. Perhaps some of the existing large private
industries that have been taking on privatised or outsourced public
functions, Capita or Serco, for example will step in and ‘help’ volunteers to
help these services run (at a profit, of course).
There is more to come on both these debates and it will be useful to follow
the Big Society development as it unfolds through the internet.
Anyhow, here are two examples of political shorthand:
WEA North West – Feb 2011
10
Left, right and the centre (Week 3)
In the course we talk about Labour, Conservative and Liberal parties, and
values we associate with them. We do need to acknowledge, though, that
the old vocabulary of class, left and right wing, have now consciously been
rejected. New Labour jettisoned the left wing concept when it removed
Clause Four from its constitution. Now all there is in British politics is the
battle for the centre ground. The Tories have tried to leave behind their
right wing ideologies and declare themselves the party of the centre.
Similarly the Liberal Democrats claimed to be left of centre and the Labour
party somewhere close by.
What does this mean in our political lives? For the majority of the population
it has no real meaning, they find it bland and dull, and instead of ideas
being central to debate in politics, it has come down to mere personalities.
The old tribal feelings have gone. The less well off feel they are not
represented any longer and the right hope for the best with some vestiges
of their ideology cropping up in a new form in the centre right. By moving
politics into a ‘centre ground’ it seems likely that coalition’s politics will
become a feature of future governance. Whether this is contributing to the
growing decline of interest in politics is part of the ongoing debate.
These texts from the coalition agreement raise a lot of issues in relation to political values.
The coalition claim that their main overarching or underpinning ones are:
Freedom
Fairness
Responsibility
These words are appearing regularly in their speeches and written documents. As political
values they are to be found in many different approaches to ideology and the next session
will look at how each of the three main ideologies – Liberalism, Conservatism and Socialism
have used and interpreted these ideas of ‘freedom’, ‘fairness’ and ‘responsibility’.
WEA North West – Feb 2011
11
Week 3 – Values and different political ideologies.
Return to the values of Freedom, Fairness and Responsibility – the watchwords of the
coalition government. Different political ideologies have interpreted these three values
differently. We will look at how they have done this.
Freedom
Liberalism – for Liberals, freedom has always meant and still means individual freedom.
Individual liberty is the key political value and everything else within liberalism is built upon
this principle. John Stuart Mill’s writings in the 19th century are central to Liberal thinking. He
was strongly opposed to collectivism.
This liberal idea of the central importance of the freedom of the individual has come to
dominate the ideology of the Western world and has found its way into other ideologies and
political practices.
Conservatism
Traditionally Conservatives have emphasized duties and responsibilities but the New Right,
which began to appear in the 1970’s, also stresses the importance of ‘the free market’. For
New Right Conservatives, the market must left to its own devices. The operation of the free,
unregulated market, it is claimed, provides the greatest possible freedom to society and its
citizens. Hayek and Friedman are new right economists.
Socialism
Generally, socialists have understood freedom to be achieving fulfilment through free,
creative activity and co-operative social interaction. Marx famously wrote: “In communist
society… each can hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening,
criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman,
herdsman or critic.”
Fairness
While fairness is a political value, it has usually been described in different ways in political
ideologies, usually as ‘justice’ and ‘equality’.
Justice is about measuring fairness as regards wealth and rewards while equality is about
equal worth and treatment.
Liberalism
Liberals have tended to emphasize the importance of individual equality, particularly equality
of opportunity. For them, this leads to a meritocracy where any social inequalities reflect the
merit and skills of the individual.
WEA North West – Feb 2011
12
Conservatism
Traditionally, Conservatives have viewed society as naturally hierarchical and have therefore
dismissed equality as unachievable and undesirable. New Right thinkers though emphasize
equality of opportunity within the framework of the free market.
Socialism
Equality and social justice are fundamental values of socialism. Equality is seen as essential
for ensuring social stability, justice and expanding freedom.
Responsibility
Like fairness, ‘responsibility’ is usually expressed in different terminology within political
ideology. Responsibilities of the individual are usually discussed within the context of ideas
about authority and the role of the state.
Liberalism
Taking individual responsibility is important to Liberals and they are traditionally opposed to
‘top-down’ authority. They believe in the importance of the consent of the governed and
public accountability.
Conservatism
While they also believe in the importance of taking individual responsibility, they also
emphasize the natural and necessary hierarchy of authority. Modern conservatives do not
believe that this authority should be vested in the state.
Socialism
The responsibilities and the authority of the collective are seen as central to socialism. This
will limit individualism and greed.
So, the main values currently being espoused by the coalition government are certainly not
new despite their rhetoric which stresses the novelty of their approach.
WEA North West – Feb 2011
13
After introducing these three political values and the different way that they have been
treated within each of the main ideologies, divide the group into small groups and invite them
to discuss how these ideas have actually been practiced by the three main political parties
within the UK. How do they match, or not, with what Conservative, Labour and now Liberals
have done once in government?
Then introduce the idea of a political spectrum:
Political spectrum
Socialism---Social Democracy---Liberalism---Conservatism---Fascism
This is the broad spectrum of political ideologies, from left to right. Ask learners to situate the
three main political parties and perhaps other minority parties along this spectrum.
Discuss in small groups.
The three main political parties in the UK are all converging on the ‘centre-ground’ of
politics. Perhaps they are all becoming versions of liberal parties?
Week 4 - Research activity
Tutor to introduce the independent study to the learners.
Think about what first got you involved in politics. What inspired you? What
were/are you passionate about?
We would like you to interview someone – a political activist, a councillor or MP
or even a family member based upon the above – what inspires you etc. It could
be someone who inspired you, someone whose values you share or even
someone you disagree with.
It would be a good idea to interview your chosen person in an environment that is conducive:
somewhere relatively quiet, warm and free from interruptions.
Try to make your interviewee as comfortable as possible and attempt to make the interview
at a time when she/he does not have to rush off to another appointment.
Focus the interview by starting with the reasons why you want to interview them. This will
then provide a positive (hopefully) context for the rest of the interview. Your chosen
WEA North West – Feb 2011
14
interviewee is much more likely to trust and ‘open up’ to you if they know and understand the
reasons for the interview and know how the information they give you will be used.
Ask learners to think about who they would like to interview. Ask them also to think about the
reasons why they have chosen that person.
Then ask them to collectively devise a generic schedule of appropriate questions for the
interviews. Once devised, each learner can use this as a starting-point for their interview but
also should be flexible about it. E.g. if the interviewee makes an interesting comment, then
follow up on this rather than rigidly sticking to the schedule. Also, not all of the questions
may be relevant to all interviews.
The tutor could suggest some from the list below or use this as a template or starting-point
for group discussion.
WEA North West – Feb 2011
15
Some potential interview questions
1. What got you first involved in politics?
2. What was your first/early involvement?
3. How did it develop from there?
4. Are you driven by passion?
5. What do you personally get out of being involved?
6. Do you ever get disillusioned?
7. What keeps you motivated?
8. Is there anything else that you would like to add?
WEA North West – Feb 2011
16
Week 5 – Influential events
First, tutor to quickly re-cap on the research activity – check that the learners understand the
nature of the task.
This week will focus upon the political events or actions that have had the most important
formative influences for the learners. What has shaped them politically? The miners’ strikes,
Thatcher coming to power, the Socialist Republic of South Yorkshire, Sheffield City Council
going liberal, the election of Obama, the rise of green politics and climate change or NONE
of these things?
Perhaps a local campaign or activity? Perhaps being involved in a local community centre or
school? Perhaps their parent(s) and family life played a central role in the development of
their political values?
Divide the group into smaller groups and invite them to discuss what has had the most
important political impact upon their lives. There are no right or wrong answers and learners
should definitely not be encouraged to choose from the above list.
Develop some ideas based on the feedback from this exercise. What do learners value?
What is important to them? How do these values translate into political values and ideas?
What is ‘politics’ for them and why it is important? What do they want to see happen as
regards society and political change?
This can then lead into a discussion about the relationship between personal values and
public actions. Or between personal values and political beliefs.
In smaller groups, invite learners to discuss their personal values.
Learners could be asked to produce a timeline of the events that have shaped their politics.
In the feedback, emphasize that public and political values, ideas and actions come out of
personal experiences and values. Human beings are not robots and our politics are made by
our experiences just as much as our personalities are. It is this that gives ‘the political’ its
strength and conviction.
Ask learners to watch a particular TV programme that is scheduled for the week
between Week 5 and Week 6. It could be Dispatches or Newsnight or another
investigative programme. Ask all the learners to watch it and be prepared to discuss it
in Week 6.
WEA North West – Feb 2011
17
Week 6 – The role of the media.
Discuss the TV programme – what came up for learners? Was the presentation of the
issues ‘neutral’? What was the message of the programme? What point(s) was it trying to
get across? Did you agree with it?
This week will focus upon the role of the media within the UK.
The media, in both its ‘old’ forms of newspapers, TV and radio and new form of the Internet,
obviously has huge effects and influence upon how politics plays out in government and
society. This is a very big debate and it should be led by the learners.
Divide the group into smaller groups and invite them to discuss the following questions.
Questions could be allotted to specific groups or they could all be asked to discuss them all.
What role do you think the media (old and new) plays in the political life of the country? Is it
mainly a positive one or a negative one or somewhere in between?
We are said to have a ‘free media’ in this country. What does this mean and is it true?
Have you got any thoughts about how the media could be changed for the better?
Are the different elements of the media – newspapers, radio, TV, Internet all the
same? If they are different, how?
This discussion could also include the use of some images or text from newspapers and the
internet. These could focus upon how a particular current event is being treated by different
newspapers and websites.
In the feedback, ask if the learners can provide some examples which illustrate the points
that they make.
Develop these thoughts into a discussion about how the media influences politics. Should
the media have such a big effect on political decisions? Should the power of the media be
curtailed? Is it important that we have a strong and ‘free’ media to keep governments in
check?
Is the media ‘free’?
What about ownership of the media? The situation is not as straightforward as it was in the
1980’s with large chunks of the mass media being owned by one or two people, Rupert
WEA North West – Feb 2011
18
Murdoch being the most prominent. Media is now globalized and the emergence of the
internet has changed things forever. See http://media.gn.apc.org/owners/ for detailed
information on who owns the media. Also, see the three documents in Appendix 2 - British
media join forces against Murdoch takeover of BskyB, Turning the heat on Rupert Murdoch,
Rupert Murdoch and BSkyB: how powerful would a takeover make him?
The internet is the opposite to concentration of media ownership: it disperses ‘ownership’
amongst potentially all internet users and thereby challenges the large media corporations.
However, if we look at the picture as regards ownership of the so-called ‘old media’ –
newspapers, TV, radio and magazines, it is still very limited to a few large companies:
“In Britain and Ireland, Rupert Murdoch owns best-selling tabloids News of the World, The
Sun as well as the broadsheet The Times and Sunday Times, and satellite broadcasting
network BSkyB. Daily Mail and General Trust (DMGT) own The Daily Mail and The Mail on
Sunday, The Evening Standard, Ireland on Sunday, and free London daily Metro, and
control a large proportion of regional media, including through subsidiary Northcliffe Media,
in addition to large shares in ITN and GCap Media.
Richard Desmond owns OK! magazine, Channel Five, the Daily Express and the Daily Star.”
(Wikipedia, Concentration of media ownership, accessed 28.10.10)
Conclude by discussing the above points with the group.
An alternative/ additional set of activities could begin by inviting a speaker from an
independent media source such as the Sheffield Live radio station. It would be useful to
have someone who set up the station or is now leading it. They could speak on how the
station came to be set up, its aims and the role of the independent media generally.
This could stimulate a debate on the nature of the media and the role that an independent,
local outlet can play.
WEA North West – Feb 2011
19
Week 7 – The bigger picture.
(Tutors should treat weeks 7 and 8 as continuous and therefore their elements as being
interchangeable as appropriate)
This week will focus upon recent political history – from 1945 right up to the present day.
Tutor to emphasize the importance of the post-war settlement in influencing social and
political lives across the whole world. We can’t look at this whole history on this course so
we have selected three specific and key events below.
The Second World War wreaked destruction and havoc on most of Europe.
Alongside this, the USSR was expanding and gaining power. As a result, in 1947 the US
government and European governments negotiated a plan for recovery. The Marshall Plan
was a huge reconstruction programme, also known as the European Recovery Programme.
$13 billion were lent by the USA and repayments were made at fixed interest rates.
Germany made its last repayment in 1971 and the UK made its last repayment in 2007!
There are comparisons to be made with today and how the current government are insisting
upon a speedy cutting of the budget deficit. If it took us 60 years to repay the Marshall Plan
debt, why is it so important to ‘balance the books’ in just 5 years now?
The post-war reconstruction of Europe, as it has become known, was hugely important in
shaping the political and social landscape of the whole world from 1945/47 onwards. We will
look at just three key events that have had enormous impact. A good place to begin this
story is the conference at Yalta in 1945. Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin all met essentially to
re-draw the map of Eastern and Central Europe. Russia needed to be ‘repaid’ for the role
they had played in defeating Hitler. What emerges was an enlarged Russia with soviet
satellites, the start of the ‘Cold War’ and the development of a `united Europe’ (now the EU).
The EU built on the initial economic and social alliance between France and Germany to
create a new mutual community and avoid further wars. It has worked and is now a major
block of states and population providing a counter to the other major world powers.
In 1948, the new state of Israel was created in Palestinian territory. The British government
was heavily involved in this act. Pressure for the creation of an Israeli state initially came
from Zionists but its actual creation came about when post war Europe was faced with the
great task of dealing with 1.5 million people, displaced persons, many of whom were Jewish
people. Britain, as part of its imperial past was responsible for Palestine and able to carve
out a new state. So, in 1948, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were displaced, the US
strongly supported the state of Israel, the Israeli state expanded into Arab lands and
continue to breach UN resolutions on expansion. Battles to control oil supplies have played a
key part. Israel has also developed a nuclear capability. All of this continues to be of the
utmost importance in Middle East politics, over 60 years after the creation of Israel.
In 1947 India was granted independence from the British Empire. This followed years of
campaigning and agitation by a very wide range of political organisations and movements,
both non-violent and militant, to end British colonial rule. These began in the very earliest
years of the 20th century and culminated in the creation of the Dominion of India and the
Dominion of Pakistan in 1947.
WEA North West – Feb 2011
20
If any event reflects the end of the British Empire, it is the granting of independence to India.
However, this did not pass without bloodshed. Once again the map was redrawn and the
lands were divided up into religious states Muslim Pakistan and Hindu India. Again people
were displaced and had to make new home in different areas. Many died in religious wars.
With the end of empire came the beginnings of post-colonial immigration in to Britain and
this continues to be a feature of our current politics, coupled with political refugees seeking
asylum and many more seeking an escape from poverty, civil wars and natural disasters in
different countries and continents.
Tutor to divide the group into smaller groups and discuss how these three key events, the
Yalta Conference, the creation of the state of Israel and Indian independence affect us
today. What role do they play in contemporary politics?
In the feedback, the tutor could use some of the following ideas:
1. We are a warlike state
The dominance of American foreign policy was complete in the post war period. Major
wars against the spread of communism and for the advancement of free enterprise and
democracy were waged in Korea and in Vietnam. At the same time the cold war against
communism was waged in Europe and in Cuba. Later the focus became oil in Iraq (twice)
and now a war against terror after the Twin Towers were destroyed in 9/11. Besides these
the US felt it was entitled to intervene in democratic struggles in South American states,
when the politics threatened to move towards socialist or popular regimes.
We have fallen in with later phases of the American wars, especially in the Middle and Far
East and now we are a target for terrorist attacks from Islamic fundamentalists who see us
as aggressors against Muslims.
The expansion of Israel and its attacks on Arab neighbours has turned attention on to the
states that support and arm Israel and we are one of them.
Although we are no longer an imperial country with many colonies, we still act as though
we are a world power, involving ourselves in wars and spending a great deal of money in
the process.
2. We are a diverse society
We are a member of the EU and a signatory of the key treaties, especially ones which
guarantee the free movement of capital and labour. With our free market approach we
have opened our labour market to EU migration and those who come here to work are
often exploited (paid below the minimum wage and badly housed). All these contribute to
economic and social tensions in our communities and threaten the wage levels and
working conditions of local workers. Managing diversity is a current concern.
WEA North West – Feb 2011
21
Week 8 – The post-war settlement, economic recession and you.
Learners, in small groups, to look at a wide variety of images – provided in Appendix 2. The
images have been selected for their importance as regards the post-war settlement and to
remind learners of the last session.
There are also some other events marked by the images – ones that were not referred to in
the last session: the founding of the United Nations and NATO.
Discuss issues that arise for learners when looking at these images.
Then, tutor to facilitate small group discussion on the histories and travels of the learners’
own families. Locate them within post-war history. This exercise is, then, introducing a
history of the individual learners’ family, post Second World War. Learners, in groups, to
trace the histories and movements of their own family members from 1945 onwards (or
before).
Tutor to speak. Make a comparison between the economic and social situations post-1945
and the current situation. After the Second World War, the economic and social fabric of
many European nations was near to collapse. It wasn’t just the physical infrastructure but
also the political, social, cultural and psychological orders that had been destroyed. It
seemed that the only way to begin to address these huge problems was to start anew and
build a Europe based upon mutual co-operation and benefit. To do this effectively, amongst
other things a huge amount of money was needed. As we saw in Week 7, the Marshall Plan
did exactly this with $13 billion of loans. Again as already stated, Germany made its last
repayment in 1971 and the UK made its last repayment in 2007.
So, the reconstruction of Europe was financed by a huge loan from the U.S.A. with fixed
interest rates for repayments and long repayment periods.
How does this compare with the economic crisis of 2007-10 and the ways in which
governments, particularly the UK coalition government, are responding to it? The crisis
began in the U.S.A. with reckless and irresponsible lending by financial institutions which
initiated a global recession. Exacerbated by huge increases in oil and food prices, share and
house prices plummeted. Many banks and other financial institutions experiences huge
losses and some faced bankruptcy. The governments of the U.S.A., the UK and others
decided that the banking crisis could only be solved and the global banking system saved by
huge injections of public money. On the 8th October 2008, the then Labour government
announced a £500 billion rescue plan for banks. Some commentators have suggested that
this represented a revival of Keynesian economics which had really developed in the period
after the Second World War.
It is the repayment of this massive debt that is now at the centre of the coalition government
policies and actions on making huge cuts to public spending. It wishes to repay the debt by
2015!
WEA North West – Feb 2011
22
So, the Conservative -Lib Dem coalition government response to economic and political
crisis is to shrink the public sector and hope that the private sector will grow enough to
provide the jobs lost in this process of shrinkage.
Divide the group into smaller groups and ask them to compare and contrast the two
situations – the post-war reconstruction of Europe and the current government’s response to
economic crisis and recession.
What role can/does government spending play at times of economic crisis?
Can a comparison be made between post-war economic reconstruction (The Marshall Plan)
and the ‘bailing out’ of the banks?
Reckless lending by bankers got us into this mess and now we are all having to pay for it. Is
this fair?
What approach is being taken by the coalition government? Can it be described as a
monetarist or neo-liberal one?
Conclude the session by inviting learners, in small groups, to come up with their own
programme/ ‘mini manifesto’ on what they would do if in power right now! Provide them with
the latest government spending plans and ask them to discuss and prioritize based upon
their economic and political approaches to the current economic situation.
Groups to feedback to the larger group on their programmes.
WEA North West – Feb 2011
23
Week 9
Learners to present the research findings from their interviews. Tutor to be very flexible here
– there is no compulsion on the learner to present. If they do, 10-15 minutes each including
answering questions will suffice.
Tutor to give some overall feedback to learners on the presentations.
One of the aims of this session could be to develop the learners’ presentation skills and this
could be built into the research activity from the beginning.
Week 10 – Summary, Evaluation and Moving On
Tutor to summarize the whole course and answer questions on it.
Then, evaluate the course using a variety of methods. E.g. paper evaluation forms, individual
and group interviews recorded on video.
Conclude the course with group discussions on ‘What Next?’ for learners.
Ask them to think about what they would like to do next and input with some specific
suggestions if appropriate.
References
Bianca Jackson & Jonathan Morton (eds.) The Defining Moments in History, Cassell –
Photographs.
Cameron’s speech in Liverpool on The Big Society
http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/speeches-and-transcripts/2010/07/big-society-speech53572
Useful NUJ site on who owns the media http://media.gn.apc.org/owners/
Wikipedia on media ownership
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentration_of_media_ownership
World History Atlas (2008) Dorling Kindersley.
WEA North West – Feb 2011
24