Andrew Lipson

Conclusion

            The times were changing rapidly when England began to change their views concerning government intervention.  Industrialization was changing the social dynamic of the nation. There existed an extreme exploitation between the growing middle class and the poor, and the rapid growth of the bourgeoisie led to a reactionary movement from the aristocracy.  The poor and extremely wealthy both disliked the bourgeoisie, and allied themselves to proceed with an interventionist era of legislation.  The rich benefited by curbing the rise of middle-class, while the poor were given the protection they needed from the industrialists which were exploiting their need for money.  Intermingled in the national shift in mentality, are the ideologies of Herbert Spencer and Jeremy Benthem.  Representing an elitist yet liberal view, Spencer condemned interventionists , and sought the destruction and demoralization of the poor.  His beliefs fueled the nations mentality until the aristocracy began to turn against uninhibited capitalism.  Benthem envisioned a society that desired the most people as possible to be happy and comfortable.  His values were seen towards the second half of the nineteeth century when Parliament began providing protection for the exploited lower classes  Benjamin Disraeli, emerged during this time and used the conflicting views of the middle and upper classes to his own personal advantage.  He sought a better life for the ailing poor, and though his idealistic goals were thwarted somewhat by the elitist culture of the upper class, he succeeded in making a nation responsible for it’s people.

Main Menu

• Benthem vs. Spencer
• Positive Liberty vs. Negative Liberty
• Reform Act
• Links
• Conclusion