Liberals Weren't Popular Back Then Either!

[CotswoldRed]

In the most forwward thinking, 'can-do' period in this great country's history, even our sovereign leader thought the liberals just held things up. Little changes eh?

Quote from Wikipedia which sums it up for me.

"Queen Victoria ........ became a Conservative in reaction to Gladstone's moralising Liberalism".

[BCFC_Dan]

Yes. It's a good job they didn't introduce some of the most forward-thinking social reforms this country's ever seen, increasing personal liberty and the standard of living for middle and working class people whilst reducing the power of the church and monarchy.

In fact, if it weren't for the Liberals we'd probably be French by now anyway.

[CotswoldRed]

Yes. It's a good job they didn't introduce some of the most forward-thinking social reforms this country's ever seen, increasing personal liberty and the standard of living for middle and working class people whilst reducing the power of the church and monarchy.

In fact, if it weren't for the Liberals we'd probably be French by now anyway.

My comments are tongue-in-cheek, not a catch-all for Liberal history. It does, however, highlight a important element of their thinking.

There is no doubt that modern liberalism (in this country) achieves very little and is associated with small-time projects that deliver little more than another stripe to their environmental badge.

Please do tell me how many people in recent years can thank Liberal councils for improving their lot?

[BCFC_Dan]

I don't think it does. The Liberal Party were the most forward-thinking, dynamic and beneficial party in Britain right up until the First World War. Queen Victoria may not have liked them but they were never the party of the Monarchy, they were the party of the people. Originally the term Liberal referred to economic liberalism, which would have been in favour of the stadium because it would allow Sainsburys, Bristol City and Steve Lansdown to make money. Later it came to mean social liberalism, which was about making things better for the people and would have been at worst indifferent to the development.

Today's Liberal Democrats have little or nothing in common with them.

[CotswoldRed]

I don't think it does. The Liberal Party were the most forward-thinking, dynamic and beneficial party in Britain right up until the First World War. Queen Victoria may not have liked them but they were never the party of the Monarchy, they were the party of the people. Originally the term Liberal referred to economic liberalism, which would have been in favour of the stadium because it would allow Sainsburys, Bristol City and Steve Lansdown to make money. Later it came to mean social liberalism, which was about making things better for the people and would have been at worst indifferent to the development.

Today's Liberal Democrats have little or nothing in common with them.

Fair comments.

Still, they like to peddle the notion that the positives from history have something to do with them.

That would be a bit like Bradley Orr trying to take some credit for Tinnion's goal at Anfield in 1993 by some tenuous association.

[BCFC_Dan]

They do, but it is, as you say, nonsense.

Everybody I've spoken to with any involvement in local politics has said that Liberal Democrats tend to be amongst the most unpleasant people around. They've been left as a party largely without principles and consequently many of their representatives are people who are in politics for the good of their own egos rather than for anything they believe in.