'To What Extent Is the Labour Party Still Committed to Its Traditional Principles?\r'

'The labor party fellowship was founded on the principles of social democracy, which is a traditionally centre left over(p) ideology. It has been Britain’s major democratic socialist party since the 20th century and since then has been committed on basing its ideologies on advancement for the work syndicate. Until the 1980’s, apprehend had unploughed its principles consistent, but with the development of Michael Foot’s ‘ crazy left’ movement which was based largely almost the irrational minority issues and racial problems.It was Tony Blair in 1994 that came finished with a revised ‘new-labour’ ideology that helped dominate the alternative polls yet again and stay exulting until 2010. But, did new-labour still resemble old-labour in terms of its principles? This is what i aim to evaluate. Old-Labour has al styluss been seen as the party for operative classes. This was demonstrated through the development of the welfare offer w here economic wealth is redistributed in the forms of appraise bene rack ups, job seekers allowance etc. to help race unable to work. But, when ‘new-labour’ was created infra Tony Blair in 1994, Labour became more than than than of a catch-all party.This meant that benefits were cut, in order to make position and upper classes feel less discriminated against. Now, the focus is on ‘economic well-being’ and less on the redoubted effects of poverty. Clause 4 was created to exhibit Labour’s affiliation with people from a operative background. It stated things like â€Å"To secure for all the workers by hand or by brain the lavish fruits of their industry” and â€Å"equitable distribution” which shows its strong ties with the working(a) man. In 1997 it was reformed, it changed from a predominantly ‘working class’ themed ideology to a more catch all. that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve al cardinal” This is a revised expiration from the post Tony Blair clause 4. You can tell that it no longer is concentrated on one circumstantial class, it is now generalising to everyone and saying that we are all in it togther. Which is obviously not solely concerned with one group of people. The Labour party belived in the supply of universal benefits to citizens who had no other means of income and/or supporting a familiy. Unfortunately over the noncurrent decade, the economy has taken a turn for the worsened and Tony Blair identified this.That is why he came to the decision of reserving benefits more and focusing on ecnomic growth. Old-labour were far more concerned with the pr hithertotion of poverty but, new-labour seem to be more concerned with stability of the economy. Some may even say their fairly capitalist characteristics may line up them more with their opponents, the Conservative party. It is now apparent that the Labour party are far less scruti nious towards who they need to aid in society and are presentation a certain prgamatism towards their ideologies in order to fit in more effectively with todays society.The Third counsel which takes old-labour, thatcherism and liberal democrarcy is definately more pro-active than wiping out just under half of the voting population with your political views. Ed Milliband’s take on the third way is even said to be moving slightly right, which proves that Labour no longer prioritise with the working class and they are aligning themselves more amply with all classes and situatuions in the U. K. This is good enough for democrarcy, not good for the preservation of Labours traditional socialist values.\r\n'