Disraeli: An unprincipled adventurer in politics Essay

An un scrupulous adventurer in politics. How decorous is this interpretation of Disraeli in the period 1837- 1846? 1st DRAFTOver the years, the policy-making character of Disraeli has bewildered historians as much as it did his colleagues. Previously historians, such as Machin, had an inclination to accept the view of his contemporary critics which was practically, that in the obscurities of his policy-makingly life prior to 1846, Disraeli was An unprincipled adventurer in politics, motivated by his let individualised ambition rather that a doctrine of govern mental principles. Yet recently thither has been an pot in the number of historians that intend Disraeli did possess a exhaust set of ideas.These principles originated from Disraelis understanding of side of meat history and values, and that a desire to defend and realize his c at one timeption of England gave his career coherence. Disraeli saw himself as a foe of dangerous cosmopolitan ideas that were damaging the i nterior(a) spirit and creating social conflict.1 Whilst Disraeli brook be considered as unprincipled in his methods, Disraelis primal sense of political purpose, and the rhetoric he used to come on his objectives, neer changed thus conveying that he was truly a principled politician.In the early 1830s Disraeli stood in several elections as a Whig, Radical and as an Independent. However, Disraeli was a Tory by the time he won a seat in the House of Commons in 1837 representing the constituency of Maidstone. These frequent changes of allegiance to the different political groups are one of the airs which one notify claim Disraeli to be unprincipled but was he? Disraeli claimed that his fracture to conservatism was out-of-pocket to his depression in the fact that Conservatives defended the interests of the people. This claim for batch be proven by the fact that in the 1822 the Tory political society under Lord Liverpools administration argued for the rights of Dissenters an d even repealed the mental testing and Corp languages Act which allowed for protestant dissenters to hold positions in public office.In addition, in 1836 Disraeli wrote and published the pamphlet defence force of the English Constitution (1835). In this pamphlet, Disraeli described the Whigs as a companionship, tried to monopolise the government by enslaving the monarchy during the 18th century. This narrate also leads to Ian St Johns conclusion that Disraeli was eer a Tory Radical who believed that the Tory party was the uncoiled party since the Whigs pursued a selfish agenda in the interests of a narrow selected2 . In addition, he claimed that the Tories had shown themselves to be a truly national party, representing the views of nine-tenths of the people.3 This evidence agrees with Disraelis own claim that the Tory party was the actual party of the people, and in this way one can say that Disraelis wear round to conservatism was based upon a principled grounding.Further a rguments that Disraelis switch to conservatism was based on his principle and not on his own personal ambitions are that during Disraelis earlier attempts for Parliament, he had always argued for rural assistance. This dogma takeed an integral part of the Tory partys principals since in 1815 a Tory government had introduced the Corn practice of jurisprudences as a means of protecting the British agricultural market from an influx of cheap foreign lemon. In addition, one can argue that Disraelis switch to Conservatism could also be a result from the fact that the Conservative party was the party Disraeli grew up around. During his youth Disraeli had met George Canning who was a friend of his father, in addition in the 1830s Disraeli was drawn to the Conservatives party social circles.Through these functions he was introduced to Lord Lyndhurst (a motive Tory Chancellor) by Lady Henrietta Sykes.4 so one can say that through his background, fundamental beliefs and social circles , Disraeli was a natural Conservative in the same way that Gladstone was a natural Liberal However, for many historians these are not the main reasons as to wherefore Disraeli became a Conservative MP. In 1834 Disraeli received Conservative financial support from Lord Lyndhurst who was his patron.5 This inextricably joined Disraeli to the Conservative party, especially when one considers the fact that Disraeli was not competent with his domestic stintings and would therefore neer be able to repay Lyndhurst. In conclusion one can say that Disraelis rebirth to the Conservative party was mainly a genuine switch even though it may squander been influenced by the generosity of Lord LyndhurstThe character of Disraeli can also been seen to be principled in is by his belief that rich segments of society go for a duty to the unforesightful. This belief was expressed in Disraelis reaction to the 1834 Poor Law Amendment Act. This Bill founded a Poor Law Commission to supervise the nati onal operation of the Poor Law system, included the moulding together of small parishes into Poor Law Unions and the edifice of workhouses in each union for the giving of poor relief. The act was Whig-Benthamite reforming legislation of the period6 passed by Earl Grey in order to dissuade people from becoming poor and wanting to join the cypher house system.In 1840 Disraeli condemned the New Poor Law and the Work house system due to his belief that the government should help the poor in a paternal way. This marked the start of Disraelis belief in one nation Toryism. The idea of One nation Toryism was present in Disraelis fable Sybil, where he described Britain as Two nations the rich and the poor. 7 Disraeli believed that the ideology of young England, the 1852 budget and the 1867 refine Act. Therefore this shows that Disraelis devotion to a Romanticised version of society where the upper signifieres had a duty to the poor was a stead fast principle of Disraelian politics.Anot her way in which Disraeli expressed his principles of preserving social harmony and helping the poor was through his sympathy to the Chartists. Chartism was a movement established in 1836 and controlled by on the job(p) men who wanted to achieve parliamentary democracy as a step towards social and economic reform. In 1840 Disraeli was one of only 5 MPs who argued against the heavy punishments clearn to Chartists. This was due to the fact Disraeli believed that that political rights ensured social happiness. In his Chartist novel, Sybil or the cardinal Nations, Disraeli gave the only fictional account of Chartism which understood the political demands of the movement8.This reaction to Chartism showed Disraeli as be principled as his desire to help the poor was present in his 1852 budget since he wanted to reduce indirect taxation on malt and tea, and levy the income budget. This would puzzle helped with the working sieve who were more affected by indirect taxation than they we re direct taxation as Gladstone would soon take up. In addition, one of the main values of Disraelis youth England was the conservative and sentimentalist strand of Social Toryism that included the patronage of noblesse oblige as the basis for its paternalistic form of social organization.9 In addition, through his 1867 Reform Bill Disraeli also enhanced the franchise of the passkey and middle classes.Despite the fact that cynical historians such as - may see Disraelis attempts to discover the political field as a way of getting a Conservative political stronghold, the pipeline of thought that Disraeli was a Radical Tory dispels their claim. This is because Disraeli was radical in the sense that he welcomed the Reform and wanted to ram British politics towards a democratic principle of government with triennial elections and the secret ballot.10 This depression of wider representation links in with the previous argument of why Disraeli became a conservative MP. By extending the political map Disraeli believe that the English Nation would be better represented as it would dispel the oligarchic control that the Whigs held in Parliament. Therefore one can argue that Disraelis support of Chartism shows him as a principal politician as it reflects his belief in a need for reform in the squeamish political system.The case of Disraeli staying with his principles of a Romantic, paternalistic society is also evident in Disraelis whole caboodle of fiction and his membership of Young England. Disraeli had helped to form the Young England group in 1842 based upon the that the middle class now had too much political power and an alliance between the aristocracy and the working class was needed to keep society functioning. Disraeli suggested that the aristocracy should use their power to help protect the poor however a social hierarchy that should be maintained.11 Yet despite making these views of paternalism evident in his legislative body such as the 1852 bud get and his response to the 1843 Poor Law amendment historians such as Ian St John always ask how seriously did Disraeli regard young England? This is an obtuse question. Young England was an important tool of Disraelis as it helped him to publicise his political beliefs and during 1842 they helped him effort the Poor Law, and the rationalist system of thought.In addition, due to his unconventional education, Young England was also vital to Disraeli as it allowed him to network within the Conservative party despite the fact that he was an outsider due to his Jewish ethnicity and middle class background. One can also argue that Disraeli showed a clear commitment to the ideologies of Young England due to his writings. Disraelis novels Coningsby (1844), Sybil (1845) and Tancred (1847) all show concern about pauperisation and the injustice of the parliamentary system.In Coningsby, Disraeli snipeed the Tamworth Manifesto as an attempt to construct a party without principles. Moreover, his succeeding novel Sybil shows the start of one nation Toryism as it shows concern about the development of two nations do a schism in society. This novels are critical as they all show Disraelian principals since all the novels show a continuation of Disraelis beliefs of a Romantic notion of government and desire for reform and in this way can be said to be principled. Moreover Young England is proof of Disraelis principles as it shows that his belief in a Romantic system of government and paternalism was as present in his ideals as a young man, as they were when he was Prime minister in the 1870s.The main argument for Disraeli cosmos an unprincipled adventurer in politics is often due to his relationship with peel off. There are often three main views to this section of Disraelis early political career. The jump view is that Disraeli led his set on on divest for revenge. According to Norman Lowe Disraeli was furious when whittle did not offer him a egress in his 1841 cabinet and perhaps because of this Disraeli lead the attack on Peel over the Corn Law repeal12.However this account for Disraelis attack on Peel is highly flawed. In his biography on Disraeli, Christopher Hibbert claims that in 1844 Peel had wrote to Disraeli apologising for dismissing his offer to work in his cabinet and stating that if he had offended Disraeli it was wholly unwilling on his part13 Hibbert then goes on to state that this apology showed that the animosity between the two men was no longer tangible and, soon after the apology was make Disraeli and three member of Young England voted with the government14In fact, Hibbert then goes onto disclose that Peel actually praised Disraelis livery on the Irish question calling it very able. These are all very clear examples showing how Disraelis direct and very public attack on Peel over the bring out of the repeal of the Corn Laws could not crap been a result of Peels rebuff in 1841. Both men had declared a truce with eac h other (although Grenville did comment in his diary that Disraelis address on the Ireland question was under the guise of compliment making an amusing attack on Peel15) and it was for the benefit of the Tory party if this truce was maintained. After all as the historian Southgate remarked Disraeli had no principle and that of maintaining party unity.16 Therefore the claim that Disraelis attack on Peel was unprincipled as it was based upon a personal vendetta against the Tory leader is historically inaccurate.Another interpretation for Disraelis attack on Peel given by Machin is that Disraelis attacks stemmed from a personal ambition. By fight Peel over the 1846 Corn Law Crisis Disraeli apparently, made him name as an able orator and gave him his first political influence. Whilst the latter half of this statement may be viewed as true, Hibbert had already shown that Disraelis skills for oration were already known by 1846 due to his speech on the Irish question which was so astra y admired that his wife asked him to note down17 However one cannot animosity that by defeating Peel Disraeli gained a political advantage.Even Jenkins states that the subsequent events helped to catapult Disraeli into a position of authority which he could never have expected to achieve so quickly if at all. Whilst this may be true by toppling Peel from power Disraeli has left the Tory party in the political wildernesses18 according to Machin. commonsense dictates that whilst he was the most promising Conservative MP, a person cannot fulfil any political ambitions whilst their party is divided and weak. Therefore it is illogical to say that Disraeli uprooted Peel from power in a bid to besides his own political career, as without Peel leading the Tories, any chance of political victory would have been harder to achieve.The final and perhaps most justified reason why historians such as Monypenny believed that Disraeli lead the attack on Peel was due to a clear question of princip le andpressure from his constituents19. Whilst many historians believe that Peel was a true statesman, David Eastcote takes the Victorian contemporary view that Peel was actually a turncoat. By championing the ideas of Catholic Emancipation, the Maynooth Grant and the Corn Law repeal Peel had quite by design isolated himself, and in so doing he had destroyed his party, or at any rate driven an immovable squelch between Peelism and Toryism. The destruction of the party was not an unfortunate, unintended consequence of the Corn Law crisis it was, rather, quite deliberately engineered by Peel.20 Although many people view that the Tory party disintegrated with the exodus of the Peelite fraction of the party, it is important to realise that Peels decision were unpopular with the core base of ultra-Tories.This was due to the fact that even though his party was in power, there were no real Tory party decisions as Peel preferred a Presidential style of governing rather than an executive governing style. In addition one can argue that Disraeli held a principle attack on peel due to the fact that whilst he had support Peel in 1842 over further relaxation of the Corn Laws, he was unable to support Peel over their complete repeal. This was because he saw Peels desertion of Protection and as a betrayal of agricultural interest which was the backbone of the party21.Disraeli therefore declared alongside Lord Bentinck that they would neverbe guilty or double dealing with the farmers of England.or betraying our constituents 22highlighting the fact that Disraeli was fighting the issue of Corn law repeal based on his principles of agricultural protection as well as a having a sense duty to his constituents. This interpretation can also be verified by the fact that 242 former supporters of Peel also rebelled against his 1846 proposal for Corn Law repeal.The idea that the rebel against Peel over the corn Law crisis was based on a notion of having a duty to his electorate is als o present in Waltons verdict of 1846 where he states that Disraeli attacked Peel for changing his policy without consulting the electorate or listening to the views of his supporters23. Ian Machin also concedes that although Disraeli did have something to gain from usurping Peel, there was a strong public opinion in the constituencies that was for the idea of retaining the Corn Laws. Therefore one can logically conclude that Disraelis attacks on Peel in 1846 Disraelis attacks on Peel could be argued as being unprincipled on the surface as they are often seen as being based upon an underlining tone of resentment and antipathy due to Peels refusal to give him a position of power in 1841. However there is stronger evidence to suggest that Disraelis attacks were due to Peels betrayal of the Conservative party as well as pressure from his constituents.However, once one has argued away the beliefs that Disraeli was unprincipled due to his relationship with Peel, one is left with arguments Disraelis contemporaries held for him being unprincipled. The majority of reasons why Disraeli is often seen as an unscrupulous politician are due to his background. Due to Disraelis Jewish heritage he was often received with Anti-Semitic bias. This is value when Derby writes there is no one in our arty who can compete with youbutyour formal establishment in the berth of leader would not meet with a general and cheerful approvalThis means that whilst Disraeli was a recognised key political player in the Conservative party (thus eliminating the idea that he was a classical adventurer), his personal background would always work against him. However not only did Disraelis Jewish grow help to hinder his political progression. However all this argument is invalid since it does not state that he was unprincipled due to his political beliefs, but rather, that he was unprincipled due to his ethnicity. These arguments are therefore paradoxical and further alienate the claim that Disrae li was an irrational politician as historians no longer view Disraeli with a racial bias.In conclusion, the statement An unprincipled adventurer in politics is not a attractive interpretation of Disraeli in the period 1837- 1846. By studying Disraelis early political career there is a key notion that the principles of a paternalistic Romanticised society is truly maintained, as well as a belief that the Tory party is the true party of the nation. In addition in regards to Disraelis dispute with Peel over the 1846 Corn Law crisis, one can see that on deeper examination the underlying roots of Disraelis arguments were held upon the as same convictions which he campaigned for as an independent MP and the same principles that made him a Radical Tory. Therefore one can convincingly argue that during the period 1837- 1846 Disraeli was as principled as a politician can be.1 T.A. Jenkins Benjamin Disraeli and the Spirit of England, History Today 5412 (December 2004), 9-152 Ian. St John, Di sraeli and the Art of Victorian political science, (London Anthem) 2005, pg 103 Jenkins, 544 William M. Kuhn, the Politics of enjoyment A portrait of Benjamin Disraeli (Michigan Pocket) 2007 pg 1745 William M. Kuhn, the Politics of Pleasure A portrait of Benjamin Disraeli (Michigan Pocket) 2007 pg clxxv6 Norman. Gash, Politics in the Age of Peel (London Longman) 1953, pg 3957 Andrew Heywood, Political Ideologies An Introduction, (Basingstoke PalgraveMacmillian),2003 p888 Norman Lowe, get the hang Modern British History, (Basingstoke Macmillan) 1984 pg 1189 Wikipedia, Young England, http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_england (January 4, 2009)10 Ian . St John, Disraeli and the Art of Victorian Politics, (London Anthem) 2005, pg 1011 William M. Kuhn, the Politics of Pleasure A portrait of Benjamin Disraeli (Michigan Pocket) 2007 pg 18512 Norman Lowe, Mastering Modern British History, (Basingstoke Macmillan) 1984 pg 24713 Christopher Hibbert, Disraeli- A personal history, (Hampshire H arperPerennial) 2004 pg 16014 Christopher Hibbert, Disraeli- A personal history, (Hampshire HarperPerennial) 2004 pg 16015 Christopher Hibbert, Disraeli- A personal history, (Hampshire HarperPerennial) 2004 pg 16016 John Walton, Disraeli, (London Lancaster pamphlets) 1990 pg 5917 Christopher Hibbert, Disraeli- A personal history, (Hampshire HarperPerennial) 2004 pg 16018 Ian Machin, Disraeli (Canada Pearson Education) 1996 pg one hundred ten19 Mary Dicken, Disraeli, (London HarperCollins) 2004 pg 2020 David Eastwood, Peel-Statesman or Turncoat, History Today 23 (December 1995)pg 20-2521 Mary Dicken, Disraeli, (London HarperCollins) 2004 pg 1722 Mary Dicken, Disraeli, (London HarperCollins) 2004 pg 1923 John Walton, Disraeli, (London Lancaster pamphlets) 1990 pg 8