Between 1830 and 1886, Liberals dominated British politics. Focusing on the strategies of successive Liberal leaders, this study gives an overview of that dominance and argues that liberalism was a much more coherent force than has generally been recognized by historians.

We take liberalism to be a set of ideas committed to political rights and self-determination, yet it also served to justify an empire built on political domination. Uday Mehta argues that imperialism, far from contradicting liberal tenets, in fact stemmed from liberal assumptions about reason and historical progress. Confronted with unfamiliar cultures such as India, British liberals could only see them as backward or infantile. In this, liberals manifested a narrow conception of human experience and ways of being in the world. Ironically, it is in the conservative Edmund Burke—a severe critic of Britain's arrogant, paternalistic colonial expansion—that Mehta finds an alternative and more capacious liberal vision. Shedding light on a fundamental tension in liberal theory, Liberalism and Empire reaches beyond post-colonial studies to revise our conception of the grand liberal tradition and the conception of experience with which it is associated.

This book focuses on the chaos that overtook England on the eve of the First World War. Dangerfield weaves together the three wild strands of the Irish Rebellion (the rebellion in Ulster), the Suffragette Movement and the Labour Movement to produce a vital picture of the state of mind and the most pressing social problems in England at the time. The country was preparing even then for its entrance into the twentieth century and total war.Dangerfield argues that between the death of Edward VII and the First World War there was a considerable hiatus in English history. He states that 1910 was a landmark year in English history. In 1910 the English spirit flared up, so that by the end of 1913 Liberal England was reduced to ashes. From these ashes, a new England emerged in which the true prewar Liberalism was supported by free trade, a majority in Parliament, the Ten Commandments, but the illusion of progress vanished. That extravagant behavior of the postwar decade, Dangerfield notes, had begun before the war. The war hastened everything - in politics, in economics, in behavior - but it started nothing.George Dangerfield's wonderfully written 1935 book has been extraordinarily influential. Scarcely any important analyst of modern Britain has failed to cite it and to make use of the understanding Dangerfield provides. This edition is timely, since the year 2010 has seen a definitive resurrection of Liberal power. Subsequent to the General Election of July 2010 the government of the United Kingdom has been in the hands of a Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition. The Deputy Prime Minister is the leader of the Liberal Democratic Party - the direct successor of the old Liberal Party examined by Dangerfield. Five Liberal Democrat members of Parliament were appointed to the Cabinet and there are Liberal Democrat ministers in all governmental departments. After decades of absence from government power, Liberalism seems to be back with a vengeance.

This title, first published in 1982, explores the new Liberalism - the great change in Liberalism as an ideology and a political practice that characterised the years before the First World War - and examines the idea that the new Liberals successfully overcame the need they saw in the 1890’s to make Liberalism more socially reformist. This title will be of interest to students of social and political history.

An insightful account of British Liberal leaders.

The late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries are commonly characterised as an age of ‘neoliberalism’ in which individualism, competition, free markets and privatisation came to dominate Britain’s politics, economy and society. This historical framing has proven highly controversial, within both academia and contemporary political and public debate. Standard accounts of neoliberalism generally focus on the influence of political ideas in reshaping British politics; according to this narrative, neoliberalism was a right-wing ideology, peddled by political economists, think-tanks and politicians from the 1930s onwards, which finally triumphed in the 1970s and 1980s. The Neoliberal Age? suggests this narrative is too simplistic. Where the standard story sees neoliberalism as right-wing, this book points to some left-wing origins, too; where the standard story emphasises the agency of think-tanks and politicians, this book shows that other actors from the business world were also highly significant. Where the standard story can suggest that neoliberalism transformed subjectivities and social lives, this book illuminates other forces which helped make Britain more individualistic in the late twentieth century. The analysis thus takes neoliberalism seriously but also shows that it cannot be the only explanatory framework for understanding contemporary Britain. The book showcases cutting-edge research, making it useful to researchers and students, as well as to those interested in understanding the forces that have shaped our recent past.

A robust and timely investigation into the political and moral fault-lines that divide Brexit Britain and Trump's America -- and how a new settlement may be achieved. Several decades of greater economic and cultural openness in the West have not benefited all our citizens. Among those who have been left behind, a populist politics of culture and identity has successfully challenged the traditional politics of Left and Right, creating a new division: between the mobile "achieved" identity of the people from Anywhere, and the marginalized, roots-based identity of the people from Somewhere. This schism accounts for the Brexit vote, the election of Donald Trump, the decline of the center-left, and the rise of populism across Europe. David Goodhart's compelling investigation of the new global politics reveals how the Somewhere backlash is a democratic response to the dominance of Anywhere interests, in everything from mass higher education to mass immigration.

"Reaction and the Avant-Garde" illuminates a vital facet of right-wing thought in the first decades of the century, which had a powerful hold on Europe's intellectual elite. Prominent literary figures, such as Ezra Pound, Hilaire Belloc and the Chestertons, led a revolt against liberal parliamentary democracy in Britain. This group despised parliaments as representing and embodying a 'nation'. Villis examines the literary works, private papers, correspondence and memoirs of the leaders of this anti-Semitic, anti-modern, anti-women's rights movement that formed the intellectual underpinning of European fascism.

In the mid-Victorian era, liberalism was a practical politics: it had a party, it informed legislation, and it had adherents who identified with and expressed it as opinion. It was also the first British political movement to depend more on people than property, and on opinion rather than interest. But how would these subjects of liberal politics actually live liberalism? To answer this question, Elaine Hadley focuses on the key concept of individuation—how it is embodied in politics and daily life and how it is expressed through opinion, discussion and sincerity. These are concerns that have been absent from commentary on the liberal subject. Living Liberalism argues that the properties of liberalism—citizenship, the vote, the candidate, and reform, among others—were developed in response to a chaotic and antagonistic world. In exploring how political liberalism imagined its impact on Victorian society, Hadley reveals an entirely new and unexpected prehistory of our modern liberal politics. A major revisionist account that alters our sense of the trajectory of liberalism, Living Liberalism revises our understanding of the presumption of the liberal subject.