Self and other in ethnicity and bureaucracy

Tambiah, S. J., Ethnic Fratricide and the Dismantling of Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1986. xi + 198 pp. including chapter references and Index. $17.95 cloth.

Raby, Namika, Kachcheri Bureaucracy in Sri Lanka. Foreign and Comparative Studies/South Asia Series. No. 10. Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs. Syracuse University 1985. 188 pp. excluding chapter references and index. $12.00 paper.     

Enoch Powell,Parliament and Europe

In recent years, there has been substantial academic reappraisal of Enoch Powell alongside a growing public realisation, increased by the debate over Brexit, that his interests were wider than immigration and notably included opposition to British membership of the European Community – a topic that this article probes further. It begins by examining Powell's understanding of the British nation as a unitary state, centred on parliament, that underpinned his interpretation of both Conservatism and Unionism. Then, covering the period up to the 1975 referendum, the article analyses exactly how Powell argued that membership of the European Community threatened parliamentary sovereignty. It situates Powell's thinking in the context of arguments made by others and explores the connections made by Powell between the threat from Europe and the history of parliament itself, particularly the formation of the unions with Scotland and Ireland. The article shows that while Powell's arguments were marginalised in the later 1970s and for much of the 1980s, they were revived from the early 1990s – albeit in a changed constitutional context.     

William Stubbs,Parliament and the Medieval English Constitution

The name of William Stubbs will forever be associated with the birth of modern scholarship on the late medieval English parliament. At the core of his Constitutional History, a three‐volume work published in the 1870s, is a brilliant synthesis of the development of the early parliament. Since its publication, however, Stubbs's work has generated varied reactions, as scholars have positioned themselves at different points on a sliding scale of praise through to criticism; that is, between praising the Constitutional History for its depth of scholarship and pioneering methodologies, on the one hand, to criticising the work for its present‐minded approach and whiggish agenda, on the other. The aim of this discussion is to strike a balance between these two extremes. While it acknowledges the undoubted flaws of Stubbs's narrative, it also argues for a more nuanced and holistic approach to his work. It suggests that the taint of whiggism has for too long acted as a barrier to a true appreciation of the scholarly merit of the work, merit that extends beyond simply acknowledging its ambition, originality and legacy. The discussion considers some key areas of parliamentary development between c.1290 and c.1406 and notes the continued synergies that exist between what Stubbs wrote 140 years ago and current interpretations and understandings.     

Parliament,the Tories and Frederick,Prince of Wales*

The alliance between the tories and Frederick, Prince of Wales has usually appeared at best a passing interlude of opportunism in eighteenth‐century politics, dismissed alike by scholars upholding ‘jacobite’ or ‘Hanoverian’ constructions of the party's identity. This article offers a re‐examination of the relationship, assessing tory actions at Westminster against the larger hinterland of party literature and journalism. It argues that, especially after 1747, the association fronted a much more serious enterprise than is conventionally assumed, highlighting the continued political and ideological independence of the party into the 1750s and shaping the subsequent evolution of its identity. Intellectually, Frederick's image as a ‘Patriot King’ was driven by radical manifestos originating within the jacobite diaspora in Paris. Inside Westminster, his patronage changed the balance of power, bringing the tories to a point of primacy hitherto unmatched over the larger opposition. For four years, the promise of the prince of Wales provided the glue to hold the tory party together; his death threatened to unleash a process of fragmentation. The long‐term legacy of the alliance informed the direction of those who remained tories into the following decade, determining the section of the party that would gain the ascendancy within the reign of George III. By showing how a member of the ruling dynasty could be recast in a favourable and highly partisan political complexion, the pact with Frederick represented a decisive stage in the reinvention of English toryism, and its movement from mid‐century opposition towards rebirth as the loyalist champions of the house of Hanover.     

Parliament and the People in Medieval England

This article traces the relationship between parliament and the ordinary people of medieval England, mainly peasants but including townsmen, between about 1270 and 1450. In charting the early history of representation prior to 1270, it outlines the transition from representation of the people by the country's magnates, to the socially broader system of representation through the election of shire knights and town burgesses. Two themes emerge: the growth of the electorate, from the probable presence of freeholders among the electors in the county court under Edward I, to the enfranchisement of the 40s. freeholders by the famous statute of 1430; and the changing nature of petitions to parliament, from the complaints of individuals to those presented by the Commons on behalf of the nation. In the history of both these themes, the Black Death and subsequent plagues marked a turning point. In drastically reducing the population, the plagues brought prosperity to many of the peasant survivors – men who sought a place among the electorate in the early 15th century. And in threatening the income of the gentry through higher labour costs, the plagues fundamentally changed the attitude of the Commons in parliament towards the people. Until about 1350, the Commons had spoken up for their interests, in the face of Edward III's oppressive wartime demands; but from that time onwards, the Commons set their collective face against the rising claims of a potentially more prosperous people. The article pays special attention to the position of the villeins, whose relationship with parliament differed considerably from that of the freeholders.     

Marxism and bureaucracy: A paradox resolved

This article describes one apparently paradoxical course of development of the concept of bureaucracy within Marxism. The paradox has to do with the striking difference between the role attributed to bureaucrats by Marx and by a number of prominent members of the heretics from the Marxist tradition. In Marx's own analysis of contemporary societies, bureaucracies were rarely given a central and never a primary role. In his portrayal of the future society, bureaucrats were swept from the stage altogether. In the writings of Trotsky and theorists of a new bureaucratic class, bureaucrats have come to play a central and ultimately the central role. The argument of the article is that both elements of the paradox stem from precisely the same set of theoretical commitments, in particular the same combination of claims as to what the fundamental activities and actors in societies are, what are the dynamic forces in societies and what is the destination of modern societies. Notwithstanding serious and much‐debated differences between them, what these theories have in common lies deeper than anything on which they disagree. The article concludes by arguing that neither of these approaches is likely to lead to successful analyses of the place of bureaucrats in modern societies.