https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=WiggyConservapedia - User contributions [en]2026-09-24T15:33:38ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.35.14https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Gun_control&diff=969513Gun control2012-03-22T05:44:00Z<p>Wiggy: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''Gun control''' laws restrict the purchase or ownership of guns, even though guns are typically acquired for defensive and/or sporting purposes. <br />
<br />
<br />
Within the US gun control is still a hot political topic, providing sharply different views across the nation and affecting electoral results. In many other development countries, particularly in Europe, the issue is much more settled and a broad consensus either for or against has been formed.<br />
<br />
<br />
==United Kingdom==<br />
In the [[United Kingdom]], which already has the strictest gun control in Europe, [[leftists]] demand control over 120,000 ''deactivated'' guns, even though their activation and use constitute only 0.04% of all gun offenses there; fewer guns means greater dependency on government.<ref>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3168607.ece</ref> <br />
<br />
==Arguments against gun control in the US==<br />
Gun control is a denial or limitation by [[government]]s of the right to armed [[self-defense]],<ref name="Washington University Law Quarterly"> "In contrast to most other weaponry, firearms are preeminently defensive in effect." [http://www.constitution.org/2ll/2ndschol/76holo.htm Washington University Law Quarterly]</ref> as promised by the [[Second Amendment]] of the Constitution of the [[United States of America]]. Genocide has occurred only after gun control first disarmed the citizenry.<ref name="Washington University Law Quarterly"/><br />
<br />
Proponents use the discredited - but superficially appealing - claim that fewer lawfully-owned guns somehow leads to less crime, even though guns are primarily defensive weapons.<ref>People who support gun control claim or pretend that gun control laws significantly reduce violent crime. [http://home.sprynet.com/~owl1/irrationality.htm Why People Are Irrational about Politics]</ref><ref>Gun control primarily restricts the lawful acquisition and use of guns. Over 99% of the guns restricted by most gun control regulation are used in a lawful manner.</ref> <br />
<br />
In the United States the three primary [[federal]] gun control laws are:<br />
* [[National Firearms Act]] (1934)<br />
* [[Gun Control Act]] (1968)<br />
* [[Brady Bill]] (1993)<br />
<br />
These laws have further been amended by other laws such as the [[Firearms Owners Protection Act]] (1986) and the [[Omnibus Crime Bill]] (1994).<br />
<br />
Fed up with federal gun control, in 2009 States began considering (Utah) or passing (Montana) laws "making guns that are made and kept within state boundaries exempt from federal regulations" including "background checks, licensing and registration."<ref>http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=6367553</ref><br />
<br />
== The Fallacy and Motivation for Gun Control ==<br />
[[Image:No Weapons Allowed.gif|right]]<br />
Gun control potentially causes an increase in crime by restricting its main deterrent: [[self-defense]]. A study by Professor Gary Kleck, a liberal critic of gun control changed his mind on gun control when the studies showed that crime was ''prevented'' when people could carry guns in the book Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America. <ref>http://www.largo.org/effects.html</ref> In the United States, law-abiding uses of guns outnumber criminal uses by about a factor of 1000 to 1,<ref>http://www.americanselfdefense.com/gunfacts3.0.pdf (p. 60)</ref> and the removal of guns from everyone eliminates the lawful use of self-defense and its deterrent effect. "[[Americans]] use firearms to defend themselves from criminals at least 764,000 times a year."<ref name="Gallup_LAT">"This figure is the lowest among a group of 9 nationwide surveys done by organizations including Gallup and the Los Angeles Times." (Just Facts - [http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp Gun Control])</ref> Specific examples of guns being used successfully in [[self-defense]] are easy to find.<ref>Two 70-ish store owners stopped armed robberies of their stores by shooting at the bandits. "The person came in and pointed the gun at him and my father shot him. I'm proud of him." [http://www.buffalonews.com/cityregion/buffaloerie/story/253849.html Buffalo News]</ref> "In 1982, a survey of imprisoned criminals found that 34% of them had been "scared off, shot at, wounded or captured by an armed victim."<ref name="Gallup_LAT"/> When [[Florida]] began allowing its citizens to carry a concealed weapon, [[Florida]]'s firearm homicide rate fell by 37% while the national average ''increased'' by 15%.<ref name="Gallup_LAT"/> As explained below, the political effect of gun control is to cause voters to become more dependent emotionally on government and more supportive of bigger government.<br />
<br />
Studies by [[John Lott]] and others indicate that gun control causes higher crime rates.<ref>[http://www.johnrlott.com/ John Lott's Website]</ref> [[Washington, D.C.]] has one of the highest crime rates in [[America]] even though it completely bans private handguns.<ref>[http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/dccrime.htm District of Columbia Crime Rates 1960 - 2006]</ref> "Switzerland, Israel, Denmark and Finland, all of whom have a higher gun ownership rate than America, all have lower crime rates than America, in fact, their crime rates are among the lowest in the Western World."<ref>Slashdoc - [http://www.slashdoc.com/documents/71244 gun control]</ref> Lott demonstrates that in [[Britain]], [[Australia]] and [[Canada]], increased gun control in the late 1990s led to increased crime, the exact opposite of what the proponents of the gun control promised.<ref>John R. Lott Jr. and Eli Lehrer - [http://johnrlott.tripod.com/op-eds/IBDGunConFailure.html Add Gun Control To Litany Of Misbegotten Gov't Plans]</ref> States in the [[U.S.]] that have enacted concealed-carry laws enjoy lower crime rates.<ref>[http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=4706 Cato report]</ref><br />
<br />
[[image:Robbery victims per 100K.png|300px|thumb|<small>Source data: Australian Bureau of Statistics</small>]]<br />
[[image:Robbery victims.png|300px|thumb|<small>Source data: Australian Bureau of Statistics</small>]]<br />
<br />
In [[Australia]], where gun ownership was less widespread and the gun control measures were less strict, there was an immediate increase in robbery and armed robbery after the gun control went into effect in 1996 (see chart at right).<ref><br />
<br />
Gun control passed in Australia because "public was immediately whipped into a gun control frenzy by the press" after the "Port Arthur massacre" in Tasmania on April 28, 1996, in which 32 were shot dead and 19 injured. "Although polls done prior to the massacre indicated that the public was satisfied with the amount of 'gun control' they already had, a major newspaper did a poll just a few days after the massacre (while all minds were "clear") and, not surprisingly, found high levels of support for extreme gun control measures. This poll would be used forever by the commonwealth government and other gun controllers to claim that Australians supported the new gun laws to come." - [http://www.gunsandcrime.org/aussiegc.html Gun Control in Australia] (by gunsandcrime.org)</ref> <br />
<br />
There is no clear evidence supporting a decrease in crime from gun control.<ref name="Results">[http://www.gunsandcrime.org/auresult.html Results of the Australian Gun "Buyback" & New Gun Laws], October 2001</ref><ref>[http://bjc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/azl084v1 Study showing lack of promised benefits from gun control]</ref> Although from 1979 to 1996, 11,110 Australians died by gunshot representing an annual average of 617. In the seven years after new gun laws were announced (1997 to 2003), the yearly average almost halved, to 331. In the decade up to and including Port Arthur There have been 11 mass shootings where 100 people were shot dead and another 52 wounded, while in In the 10 years since 1996 and the new gun laws, not one mass shooting (more than five victims) has occurred in Australia (although in 2002 a gunman killed two and wounded four at Monash University) <ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04/27/1145861484114.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1</ref> <br />
<br />
Subsequent to gun control in England:<ref>http://www.reason.com/news/show/28582.html</ref><br />
<br />
:"from 1997 to 2001, the rate of violent crime more than doubled. Your chances of being mugged in London are now [as of 2002] six times greater than in New York. England's rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America's, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police. In a United Nations study of crime in 18 developed nations published in July, England and Wales led the Western world's crime league, with nearly 55 crimes per 100 people."<ref>However this increase in recorded violent crime between 1997 and 2001 is explained by the Home Office as a result of changes in the definition of violent crime and new counting rules introduced in 1998. [http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs04/rdsolr1804.pdf Violent Crime in England and Wales] According to the British Crime Survey, which is considered a more reliable guide to trends in crime[http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs06/crime-statistics-independent-review-06.pdf], violent crime fell 24% between 1997 and 2001/02, and burglary fell 40% over the same period.[http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs05/hosb1105tab201.xls Trends in BCS incidents of crime]</ref> <br />
<br />
Gun control in [[Britain]] and [[Australia]] has been followed by a predictable shift to the left politically by voters as they lost their instrument of self-defense and became more emotionally dependent on government. Contrast that with the [[United States]], where an effort to push gun control after the [[Columbine massacre]] failed in 2000 and the government has remained as [[conservative]] -- if not more so -- ever since.<br />
<br />
The emasculation of the citizenry by gun control also arguably reduces the resistance of a society to intimidation, and exacerbates fear of consequences from causing offense. Subsequent to the passage of strict gun control in [[England]] some teachers have avoided teaching controversial subjects such as the [[Holocaust]], the Arab-Israeli conflict and the [[Crusades]] during history classes.<ref>http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RW100.pdf</ref><br />
Teaching Emotive and Controversial History 3-19] (p.15) The anti-self-defense attitude of British authorities has also turned criminals into "victims" and victims who fight back into "criminals." One particularly egregious case involved a farmer being sentenced to life imprisonment for defending himself in his home after the home was repeatedly burglarized <ref>http://www.theinternetparty.org/commentary/c_s.php?td=200107200000&section_type=com</ref><br />
<br />
== Trends ==<br />
After decades of increasing gun control laws, the current trend in the [[United States]] is in the direction of more gun rights. The 1994 Omnibus Crime Bill included a ban on certain new rifles labeled assault rifles solely because of features of their appearance, and on new high-capacity magazines. This law recently expired and was not renewed by [[Congress]]. Also, Washington D.C.'s gun ban was struck down as unconstitutional by the U.S. Court of Appeals on March 9, 2007.<ref>The New York Times - [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/09/washington/09cnd-gun.html?hp Appeals Court Says Gun Ban Violates 2nd Amendment]</ref><ref>The Washington Post - [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/09/AR2007030902416.html D.C.'s Ban On Handguns In Homes Is Thrown Out]</ref><br />
<br />
By removing the deterrent effect of guns, gun control causes dramatic increases in crimes committed with other weapons:<ref name="bbc">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2656875.stm</ref><br />
<br />
:You are now six times more likely to be mugged in [[London]] than [[New York]]. Why? Because as common law appreciated, not only does an armed individual have the ability to protect himself or herself but criminals are less likely to attack them. They help keep the peace. A study found American burglars fear armed home-owners more than the police. As a result burglaries are much rarer and only 13% occur when people are at home, in contrast to 53% in England.<br />
<br />
Supporters of gun control argue that homicide with guns is much less in [[England]] than in the [[United States]],<ref>In 2005/06, the total number of victims of homicide by shooting (including crossbows) in England and Wales was 50 and there were 212 victims of homicide by sharp instruments. [Home Office Statistical Bulletin - [http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs07/hosb0207.pdf Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2005/2006][http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/hosb0104.pdf] The data for gun deaths in the United States include guns used in self-defense, as in fending off an assault, robbery or rape, and there were a total of 11,350 gun deaths (including deaths of criminals) in 2005.[US Department of Justice, FBI - [http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_01.html Crime in the United States by Volume and Rate per 100,000 Inhabitants, 1986 - 2005]</ref> but that was true even before gun control and is likely due to cultural reasons. "A study comparing New York and London over 200 years found the New York homicide rate consistently five times the London rate, although for most of that period residents of both cities had unrestricted access to firearms. When guns were available in England they were seldom used in crime. A government study for 1890-1892 found an average of one handgun homicide a year in a population of 30 million."<ref name="bbc" /><br />
<br />
Gun control laws are often seen to conflict with the [[Second Amendment]] to the [[United States Constitution]], which recognizes the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment reads: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."<br />
<br />
The "right to keep and bear arms" is a right guaranteed to the American citizen by the Bill of Rights through the virtue of a selective reading of said Bill. The phrase "a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state" precedes the statement, and most federal Courts of Appeals have held that this phrase requires that the "right to bear arms" relates to the collective rights of state militias, as opposed to the individual's rights to have any weapon desired. Just recently, the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit went against nine other circuits in holding that the Second Amendment constitutes an individual right.<ref>The New York Times - [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/10/washington/10gun.html?_r=1&oref=slogin Court Rejects Strict Gun Law as Unconstitutional]</ref><ref>FOX News - [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258067,00.html Appeals Court Strikes Down Washington, D.C. Handgun Ban]</ref> However, according to the judge writing for the majority in this case, its decision does still allow for "reasonable restrictions" on gun ownership and use, such as carrying of guns by intoxicated individuals, or in churches.<br />
<br />
Only six cities in the [[United States]] ban handguns: [[Washington, D.C.]], [[Chicago]], and four of its suburbs.<ref>David Kopel, "The Democrats and Gun Control," Wall St.J., Page A19, April 17, 2008 [http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB120839466717921537-lMyQjAxMDI4MDE4NzMxOTc0Wj.html]</ref><br />
<br />
==Overview==<br />
"Gun control" can include:<br />
<br />
* Restricting which persons can own firearms. <br />
* Restrictions on the number of firearms a person may own, or purchase during a given time period<br />
* Requirements that privately owned firearms be registered with the government. <br />
* Bans on certain types of firearms; for example, "handguns" or assault rifles<br />
* Restrictions on where firearms may be carried, for example into restaurants or post offices<br />
* Requiring a "background check" and/or a "waiting period" to purchase a firearm<br />
* Restricting when and where firearms may be bought and sold, for example banning their sale through the mail<br />
* Requiring licenses or some other form of permission from the government to buy and/or sell a firearm<br />
* Requiring some form of permission from the government to carry a firearm in public, either concealed or openly<br />
* Laws granting special gun rights for some people, for example retired law enforcement officers, which are denied the rest of the public, which was used in several southern states. <br />
* Outright bans on carrying firearms in public<br />
* Outright bans on private possession of firearms, though this has never occurred in the United States<br />
<br />
==Constitutional Debate==<br />
The [[Second Amendment]] reads:<br />
<br />
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."<br />
<br />
Most constitutional scholars agree that since the amendment refers to "the right of the People" instead of the right of the militia, it protects an individual right to own guns. The reason for this was the fact that the supplying of guns for the military and militas was already provided for in Article I Section 8 as a power of Congress. The extent of that right was something hotly debated for decades, until the Supreme Court ruling of 26 June, 2008, Heller v District of Columbia.<br />
<br />
The majority opinion, written by Justice [[Antonin Scalia]], held for the first time that the Constitution provides an individual right to bear arms, such as for self-defense, rather than a right that applies only to a state militia.<br />
<br />
The decision upheld an appellate court ruling striking down Washington, D.C.'s 1976 handgun ban. The case marked the first time in more than 70 years that the Supreme Court had addressed the Second Amendment ''and the first time it spoke directly about the implication of an individual right''. The court struck down two of the District of Columbia's gun control laws: its handgun ban and its requirement that other firearms kept at home have a trigger lock or be disassembled. <br />
<br />
Relying on the broader historical record, Justice Scalia wrote: <br />
{{cquote|'''putting all of these textual elements together, we find that they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.'''}}<br />
<br />
Scalia noted that the ruling should not be interpreted to "cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings." <ref>[http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/07-2901.pdf Supreme Court Opinion, District of Columbia v Heller]</ref><br />
<br />
==Racism of gun control==<br />
In the [[United States of America]], gun control has a strong racist origin and reasoning. Before the Civil War ended, State "Slave Codes" prohibited slaves from owning guns. After President [[Abraham Lincoln]] issued the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, and after the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution abolishing slavery was adopted and the Civil War ended in 1865, States persisted in prohibiting blacks, now freemen, from owning guns under laws renamed "Black Codes." They did so on the basis that blacks were not citizens, and thus did not have the same rights, including the right to keep and bear arms protected in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as whites. This view was specifically articulated by the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] in its infamous 1857 decision in ''[[Dred Scott v. Sandford]]'' to uphold slavery.<br />
<br />
The United States Congress overrode most portions of the Black Codes by passing the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The legislative histories of both the Civil Rights Act and the Fourteenth Amendment, as well as The Special Report of the Anti-Slavery Conference of 1867, are replete with denunciations of those particular statutes that denied blacks equal access to firearms. [Kates, "Handgun Prohibition and the Original Meaning of the Second Amendment," 82 Mich. L. Rev. 204, 256 (1983)] However, facially neutral disarming through economic means laws remain in effect.<br />
<br />
After the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1878, most States turned to "facially neutral" business or transaction taxes on handgun purchases. However, the intention of these laws was not neutral. An article in Virginia's official university law review called for a "prohibitive tax...on the privilege" of selling handguns as a way of disarming "the son of Ham," whose "cowardly practice of 'toting' guns has been one of the most fruitful sources of crime.... Let a negro board a railroad train with a quart of mean whiskey and a pistol in his grip and the chances are that there will be a murder, or at least a row, before he alights."<ref>Comment, Carrying Concealed Weapons, 15 Va L. Reg. 391, 391-92 (1909); George Mason University Civil Rights Law Journal (GMU CR LJ), Vol. 2, No. 1, "Gun Control and Racism," Stefan Tahmassebi, 1991, p. 75.</ref> Thus, many Southern States imposed high taxes or banned inexpensive guns so as to price blacks and poor whites out of the gun market.<br />
<br />
Today, "gun control" laws continue to be enacted so as to have a racist effect if not intent:<br />
<br />
* Police-issued license and permit laws, unless drafted to require issuance to those not prohibited by law from owning guns, are routinely used to prevent lawful gun ownership among "unpopular" populations.<br />
* Public housing residents, approximately 3 million Americans, are singled out for gun bans.<br />
* "Gun sweeps" by police in "high crime neighborhoods" whereby vehicles and "pedestrians who meet a specific profile that might indicate they are carrying a weapon" are searched are becoming popular, and are being studied by the [[U.S. Department of Justice]] as "Operation Ceasefire."<br />
* Some U.S. cities with high minority populations, such as Washington, D.C., are singled out for gun bans.<br />
* "Project Exile" began in the U.S. city of Richmond, Virginia and mandated that people arrested for technical firearms violations (note: not for violent crimes committed with a firearm, but for technical violations of the law) be tried in federal court where they would be subject to lengthy mandatory minimum sentences rather than in state court under the more lenient Virginia laws. As with many other restrictions this was aimed primarily at the city's Black residents. It has since been copied in many other cities.<br />
<br />
== Sexism of gun control ==<br />
<br />
Firearms, especially lower recoiling ones such as many handguns, allow any person to wield enough power to stop another person from attacking them.<ref name="genderDiscrimination1">http://www.learnaboutguns.com/2008/03/19/firearms-rights-are-a-gender-equality-issue-too/ </ref> Many women (quite reasonably) fear the threat of attack by a physically stronger man, and a firearm could prevent many of these attacks, but gun bans leave these women vulnerable. Take the case of the “North Side Rapist” in Chicago, a city where hand guns are banned, as an example: The rapist broke in to the womens homes, and at least one of the women heard him break in and then climb the stairs. Had this woman had a handgun, she almost certainly could have stopped the rapist before it was too late. This would have prevented her from enduring such a horrific crime, as well as preventing the rapist’s future victims from experiencing the same thing. Instead, Chicago law prevented her from being able to defend herself, and gave the advantage to the rapist/home-invader. This is not an isolated incident, and similar events happen every day across the county.<br />
<br />
== Elitism of gun control ==<br />
<br />
Many of the most ardent American anti-gun politicians, such as Chicago’s Mayor Daley, are protected by taxpayer-sponsored armed body guards, but deny law abiding citizens the right to defend themselves with a gun. <ref name="classDiscrimination1">http://www.learnaboutguns.com/2008/04/16/a-double-standard-anti-gun-politicians-and-their-gun-toting-bodyguards/ </ref> These politicians seemingly believe themselves to be part of an elite group who deserve to be protected against violent criminals, while ordinary law-abiding citizens are left with less-effective means to defend themselves, and must instead rely on the police arriving in time.<br />
<br />
== Gun control outside the USA ==<br />
<br />
Gun control advocates cite foreign countries to argue that gun control can reduce crime, but such comparison can be difficult due to the presence of other factors. For example, they cite [[Singapore]] as having gun control and a lower crime rate than the [[United States]], but Singapore has less than 5 million persons and one of the highest literacy and average wealth in the world. It lacks many of the freedoms found in the [[United States]] and strictly imposes harsh physical punishment, such as caning and the [[death penalty]], for crimes that are not punished so harshly in the [[United States]]. The real issue of the security in Singapore is its tight criminal control, not the gun control itself.<br />
<br />
Gun control supporters also cite [[Gun Control in Japan|Japan's gun control laws]], which severely restrict gun ownership and crime rates are relatively low. But [[Japan]] also lacks many freedoms and diversity which exist in the [[United States]], and [[Japan]] has strong cultural deterrents to crime. Ironically, [[Japan]] is home to [[Tokyo Marui]], the world's largest [[airsoft]] gun manufacturer, which designs airsoft guns that are made to the same scale and with the same materials as the real counterpart and which have been mistaken by police for real guns.<br />
<br />
In the [[European Union]], gun control is more strict than in the United States, but gun ownership differs widely between member states, from 36 per 100 people in [[Cyprus]] to one per 100 in [[Poland]]." In [[Switzerland]], on the other hand, gun ownership is quite widespread, which no doubt contributes to its reputation as a peaceful and neutral country.<ref>[http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/09/27/switzerland.shooting Gun control in Switzerland]</ref> In November 2007, the [[European Parliament]] passed legislation to tighten and harmonize gun control across the EU, and oblige each member state to set up a computerized database of firearms, as it "hoped to prevent Europe from becoming a gun-friendly culture like the United States". Parliament wanted to limit cross-border trade from states with less control to those with tougher laws, such as from [[Lithuania]], where replica guns can cost as little as [[Euro|€]]100 (US$150), to the [[United Kingdom]], where most replicas are outlawed.<br />
<br />
In Australia, gun violence has always been significantly lower than other types of violence.<ref>http://www.gunsandcrime.org/aussiegc.html</ref>. Australia has not experienced considerable violence problems with legally purchased guns. It has always had a much lower homicide rate than the more violent culture in the [[United States]].<ref>In Australia the gun related homicide rate is 0.44 per 100,000 of population. In the US it is about 8 times as high at 3.72 per 100,000 of population.</ref> From 1979 to 1996, 11,110 Australians died by gunshot representing an annual average of 617. In the seven years after new gun laws were announced (1997 to 2003), the yearly average almost halved, to 331. In the decade up to and including Port Arthur There have been 11 mass shootings where 100 people were shot dead and another 52 wounded, while in In the 10 years since 1996 and the new gun laws, not one mass shooting (more than five victims) has occurred in Australia (although in 2002 a gunman killed two and wounded four at Monash University).<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04/27/1145861484114.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1</ref> <br />
<br />
Gun control began in Australia in response to fears that guns would be used by home-grown Communist Revolutionaries.<ref>http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1083528 This study discusses the parallel policies of early-mid 20th century Britain and Australia.</ref> The most restrictive reforms were made in 1996 and 2002, following highly publicized shootings.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04/27/1145861484114.html</ref><br />
<br />
Both sets of reforms (1996 and 2002) were lead by Prime Minister [[John Howard]] of the Coalition(Australia’s conservative government). Howard was well known as an anti-gun advocate.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/anger-lingers-among-those-who-lost-their-firearms/2006/04/27/1145861489398.html</ref> The move offended gun supporters, many of whom had traditionally supported the Coalition.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/anger-lingers-among-those-who-lost-their-firearms/2006/04/27/1145861489398.html</ref> Despite the loss of this voting group, Howard won elections following both reforms (in 1998 and 2004).<br />
<br />
There is controversy over the success of Australia’s gun restrictions. Studies suggest overall gun violence has decreased since the 1996 and 2002 bans.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04/27/1145861484114.html</ref> However, Australia’s bike and drug gangs, the main perpetrators of gun violence, still easily access illegal firearms.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/in-depth/a-disarming-cause/2006/04/27/1145861489519.html</ref> Further, the overall homicide rate remains constant.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04<br />
/27/1145861484114.html?page=2</ref><br />
<br />
== Gun Control and Genocide ==<br />
<br />
Gun control "contributes to the probability of its government engaging" in [[genocide]] It has been responsible for: including: :<ref>"[A] society's weapons policy might be one of the institutional arrangements that contributes to the probability of its government engaging in some of the more extreme varieties of outrage. ... [I]t is [] an arresting reality that not one of the principal genocides of the twentieth century, and there have been dozens, has been inflicted on a population that was armed." [http://ls.wustl.edu/WULQ/75-3/753-4.html Washington University Law Quarterly]</ref><br />
<br />
*(1915-18) The [[Ottoman Empire]] imposed gun control in 1911, and then, from 1915 to 1918, killed 2.75 million out of 5.5 million Ottoman Christians, including 1.5 million out of 2 million Armenians, 750,000 out of 1 million Assyrian Christians, and 500,000 out of 2.5 million Pontic Greeks. <br />
<br />
*(1917-1953) The [[Soviet Union]] under [[Lenin]] and [[Stalin]] killed 61 million of its own citizens, with 10 million going to Vladimir Lenin, who conducted his murders from 1917 to 1924, and 51 million going to Iosif Stalin, including 8 million out of 24 million Ukrainians that perished in the 1932-33 [[Holodomor]].<br />
<br />
*(1942-45) Europe under the control of [[Nazi Germany]] led by [[Adolf Hitler]], which imposed gun control in 1938, killed 21 million people, including 8 million Soviet citizens, and killing in the concentration camps 6 million out of 9 million European Jews, 2 million out of 34 million Poles, 3 million Soviet POW’s plus 1 million other groups including Gypsies. <ref>[http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/rkba-12.html The True Face of Gun Control], Dean Speir, The Gun Zone RKBA, Accessed December 26, 2007</ref><br />
<br />
*(1949-75) [[Mao Zedong]] of [[China]], who said that “Political power comes from the barrel of a gun”, killed 73 million of his own people.<br />
<br />
*(1975-79) [[Pol Pot]] killed 3 million out of 9 million fellow Cambodians.<br />
<br />
*(1994) The Rwandan genocide killed 1 million out of 2 million Tutsis.<br />
<br />
"The Nazis made only two important changes to the Weapons Law that was in place when they came to power. First, they forbade Jews from owning guns or any other weapon. Second, they exempted members of the Sturmabteilung (SA) and many Nazi party officials from the law's strictures."<ref name="Washington University Law Quarterly"/> The German Firearms Act of 1937 stated "No civilian is to have a firearm without a permit and permits shall not be issued to persons suspected of acting against the state. ''For Jews, this permission will not be granted.'' Those people who do not require permission to carry weapons include the whole of the SS, and the SA - including the Deaths Head group, and the officers of the Hitler youth." <ref name="Volokh">[http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a38d04d5c7c40.htm The Journalist's Guide to Gun Policy Scholars and Second Amendment Scholars], Professor Eugene Volokh, FreeRepublic.com, March 15, 2000</ref><br />
<br />
Adolf Hitler said, "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so." <ref name="Volokh" /><br />
<br />
[[Josef Stalin]], former dictator of the [[USSR]] and murderer of over 20 million people, infamously supported Gun control in the fear that his evil regime might be torn down and so only soldiers could have firearms.<br />
<br />
== Gun Control and young mass murderers ==<br />
<br />
''Main article: [[Young mass murderers]]''<br />
<br />
Strict gun control failed and still fails to prevent mass murderers from starting killing sprees while the victims are unable to defend themselves.<br />
<br />
Compare the cases of Pekka-Eric Auvinen ([[Finland]]) and Robert Steinhäuser ([[Germany]]) with the case of Matthew Murray. The latter was stopped by an armed citizen before he could harm more victims; Auvinen killed 8 people and Steinhäuser killed 16. Both Finland and Germany have gun control laws.<br />
<br />
==Other terms==<br />
Other terms sometimes used by those who are opposed to gun control include:<br />
* Rights restriction<br />
* Victim disarmament<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[Gun control quotes]]<br />
*[[Essay:US Armed Citizens and Crime Control]]<br />
*[[John Lott]]<br />
*[[Second Amendment]]<br />
*[[Gun Control in Nazi Germany]]<br />
<br />
==External Links==<br />
<br />
=== Opposed to gun control ===<br />
*[http://www.2asisters.org/ Second Amendment Sisters]<br />
*[http://www.nra.org/ The National Rifle Association]<br />
*[http://www.nrapublications.org/AC/index.asp Armed citizens defending themselves.]<br />
*[http://www.a-human-right.com/ A Human Right] Discussion of the human right to self defense with a firearm.<br />
*[http://www.learnaboutguns.com/ Learn About Guns] Firearm information and politics.<br />
*[http://www.gunowners.org/ Gun Owners of America] A no-compromise pro-gun lobby in Washington, D.C.<br />
*[http://www.aim.org/wls/category/gun-control/ What Liberals Say - Category: Gun Control]<br />
*[http://www.guncite.com/ GunCite: Gun Control and Second Amendment Issues]<br />
=== In favor of gun control ===<br />
*[http://www.guninformation.org/ Gun Control and the Second Amendment]<br />
*[http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-switzerland.htm Myth: Switzerland proves that high gun-ownership doesn't increase murder]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
[[category:Second Amendment]]<br />
[[Category:Oppression]]<br />
[[Category:gun control]]<br />
{{liberalism}}</div>Wiggyhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Gun_control&diff=969512Gun control2012-03-22T05:42:37Z<p>Wiggy: Deleted unreferenced paragraph and made some titles to clarify flow.</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Gun control''' laws restrict the purchase or ownership of guns, even though guns are typically acquired for defensive and/or sporting purposes. <br />
<br />
<br />
Within the US gun control is still a hot politcal topic, providing sharply different views across the nation. In many other development countries, particularly in Europe the issue is much more settled and a broad consensus has been formed.<br />
<br />
<br />
==United Kingdom==<br />
In the [[United Kingdom]], which already has the strictest gun control in Europe, [[leftists]] demand control over 120,000 ''deactivated'' guns, even though their activation and use constitute only 0.04% of all gun offenses there; fewer guns means greater dependency on government.<ref>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3168607.ece</ref> <br />
<br />
==Arguments against gun control in the US==<br />
Gun control is a denial or limitation by [[government]]s of the right to armed [[self-defense]],<ref name="Washington University Law Quarterly"> "In contrast to most other weaponry, firearms are preeminently defensive in effect." [http://www.constitution.org/2ll/2ndschol/76holo.htm Washington University Law Quarterly]</ref> as promised by the [[Second Amendment]] of the Constitution of the [[United States of America]]. Genocide has occurred only after gun control first disarmed the citizenry.<ref name="Washington University Law Quarterly"/><br />
<br />
Proponents use the discredited - but superficially appealing - claim that fewer lawfully-owned guns somehow leads to less crime, even though guns are primarily defensive weapons.<ref>People who support gun control claim or pretend that gun control laws significantly reduce violent crime. [http://home.sprynet.com/~owl1/irrationality.htm Why People Are Irrational about Politics]</ref><ref>Gun control primarily restricts the lawful acquisition and use of guns. Over 99% of the guns restricted by most gun control regulation are used in a lawful manner.</ref> <br />
<br />
In the United States the three primary [[federal]] gun control laws are:<br />
* [[National Firearms Act]] (1934)<br />
* [[Gun Control Act]] (1968)<br />
* [[Brady Bill]] (1993)<br />
<br />
These laws have further been amended by other laws such as the [[Firearms Owners Protection Act]] (1986) and the [[Omnibus Crime Bill]] (1994).<br />
<br />
Fed up with federal gun control, in 2009 States began considering (Utah) or passing (Montana) laws "making guns that are made and kept within state boundaries exempt from federal regulations" including "background checks, licensing and registration."<ref>http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=6367553</ref><br />
<br />
== The Fallacy and Motivation for Gun Control ==<br />
[[Image:No Weapons Allowed.gif|right]]<br />
Gun control potentially causes an increase in crime by restricting its main deterrent: [[self-defense]]. A study by Professor Gary Kleck, a liberal critic of gun control changed his mind on gun control when the studies showed that crime was ''prevented'' when people could carry guns in the book Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America. <ref>http://www.largo.org/effects.html</ref> In the United States, law-abiding uses of guns outnumber criminal uses by about a factor of 1000 to 1,<ref>http://www.americanselfdefense.com/gunfacts3.0.pdf (p. 60)</ref> and the removal of guns from everyone eliminates the lawful use of self-defense and its deterrent effect. "[[Americans]] use firearms to defend themselves from criminals at least 764,000 times a year."<ref name="Gallup_LAT">"This figure is the lowest among a group of 9 nationwide surveys done by organizations including Gallup and the Los Angeles Times." (Just Facts - [http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp Gun Control])</ref> Specific examples of guns being used successfully in [[self-defense]] are easy to find.<ref>Two 70-ish store owners stopped armed robberies of their stores by shooting at the bandits. "The person came in and pointed the gun at him and my father shot him. I'm proud of him." [http://www.buffalonews.com/cityregion/buffaloerie/story/253849.html Buffalo News]</ref> "In 1982, a survey of imprisoned criminals found that 34% of them had been "scared off, shot at, wounded or captured by an armed victim."<ref name="Gallup_LAT"/> When [[Florida]] began allowing its citizens to carry a concealed weapon, [[Florida]]'s firearm homicide rate fell by 37% while the national average ''increased'' by 15%.<ref name="Gallup_LAT"/> As explained below, the political effect of gun control is to cause voters to become more dependent emotionally on government and more supportive of bigger government.<br />
<br />
Studies by [[John Lott]] and others indicate that gun control causes higher crime rates.<ref>[http://www.johnrlott.com/ John Lott's Website]</ref> [[Washington, D.C.]] has one of the highest crime rates in [[America]] even though it completely bans private handguns.<ref>[http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/dccrime.htm District of Columbia Crime Rates 1960 - 2006]</ref> "Switzerland, Israel, Denmark and Finland, all of whom have a higher gun ownership rate than America, all have lower crime rates than America, in fact, their crime rates are among the lowest in the Western World."<ref>Slashdoc - [http://www.slashdoc.com/documents/71244 gun control]</ref> Lott demonstrates that in [[Britain]], [[Australia]] and [[Canada]], increased gun control in the late 1990s led to increased crime, the exact opposite of what the proponents of the gun control promised.<ref>John R. Lott Jr. and Eli Lehrer - [http://johnrlott.tripod.com/op-eds/IBDGunConFailure.html Add Gun Control To Litany Of Misbegotten Gov't Plans]</ref> States in the [[U.S.]] that have enacted concealed-carry laws enjoy lower crime rates.<ref>[http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=4706 Cato report]</ref><br />
<br />
[[image:Robbery victims per 100K.png|300px|thumb|<small>Source data: Australian Bureau of Statistics</small>]]<br />
[[image:Robbery victims.png|300px|thumb|<small>Source data: Australian Bureau of Statistics</small>]]<br />
<br />
In [[Australia]], where gun ownership was less widespread and the gun control measures were less strict, there was an immediate increase in robbery and armed robbery after the gun control went into effect in 1996 (see chart at right).<ref><br />
<br />
Gun control passed in Australia because "public was immediately whipped into a gun control frenzy by the press" after the "Port Arthur massacre" in Tasmania on April 28, 1996, in which 32 were shot dead and 19 injured. "Although polls done prior to the massacre indicated that the public was satisfied with the amount of 'gun control' they already had, a major newspaper did a poll just a few days after the massacre (while all minds were "clear") and, not surprisingly, found high levels of support for extreme gun control measures. This poll would be used forever by the commonwealth government and other gun controllers to claim that Australians supported the new gun laws to come." - [http://www.gunsandcrime.org/aussiegc.html Gun Control in Australia] (by gunsandcrime.org)</ref> <br />
<br />
There is no clear evidence supporting a decrease in crime from gun control.<ref name="Results">[http://www.gunsandcrime.org/auresult.html Results of the Australian Gun "Buyback" & New Gun Laws], October 2001</ref><ref>[http://bjc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/azl084v1 Study showing lack of promised benefits from gun control]</ref> Although from 1979 to 1996, 11,110 Australians died by gunshot representing an annual average of 617. In the seven years after new gun laws were announced (1997 to 2003), the yearly average almost halved, to 331. In the decade up to and including Port Arthur There have been 11 mass shootings where 100 people were shot dead and another 52 wounded, while in In the 10 years since 1996 and the new gun laws, not one mass shooting (more than five victims) has occurred in Australia (although in 2002 a gunman killed two and wounded four at Monash University) <ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04/27/1145861484114.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1</ref> <br />
<br />
Subsequent to gun control in England:<ref>http://www.reason.com/news/show/28582.html</ref><br />
<br />
:"from 1997 to 2001, the rate of violent crime more than doubled. Your chances of being mugged in London are now [as of 2002] six times greater than in New York. England's rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America's, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police. In a United Nations study of crime in 18 developed nations published in July, England and Wales led the Western world's crime league, with nearly 55 crimes per 100 people."<ref>However this increase in recorded violent crime between 1997 and 2001 is explained by the Home Office as a result of changes in the definition of violent crime and new counting rules introduced in 1998. [http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs04/rdsolr1804.pdf Violent Crime in England and Wales] According to the British Crime Survey, which is considered a more reliable guide to trends in crime[http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs06/crime-statistics-independent-review-06.pdf], violent crime fell 24% between 1997 and 2001/02, and burglary fell 40% over the same period.[http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs05/hosb1105tab201.xls Trends in BCS incidents of crime]</ref> <br />
<br />
Gun control in [[Britain]] and [[Australia]] has been followed by a predictable shift to the left politically by voters as they lost their instrument of self-defense and became more emotionally dependent on government. Contrast that with the [[United States]], where an effort to push gun control after the [[Columbine massacre]] failed in 2000 and the government has remained as [[conservative]] -- if not more so -- ever since.<br />
<br />
The emasculation of the citizenry by gun control also arguably reduces the resistance of a society to intimidation, and exacerbates fear of consequences from causing offense. Subsequent to the passage of strict gun control in [[England]] some teachers have avoided teaching controversial subjects such as the [[Holocaust]], the Arab-Israeli conflict and the [[Crusades]] during history classes.<ref>http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RW100.pdf</ref><br />
Teaching Emotive and Controversial History 3-19] (p.15) The anti-self-defense attitude of British authorities has also turned criminals into "victims" and victims who fight back into "criminals." One particularly egregious case involved a farmer being sentenced to life imprisonment for defending himself in his home after the home was repeatedly burglarized <ref>http://www.theinternetparty.org/commentary/c_s.php?td=200107200000&section_type=com</ref><br />
<br />
== Trends ==<br />
After decades of increasing gun control laws, the current trend in the [[United States]] is in the direction of more gun rights. The 1994 Omnibus Crime Bill included a ban on certain new rifles labeled assault rifles solely because of features of their appearance, and on new high-capacity magazines. This law recently expired and was not renewed by [[Congress]]. Also, Washington D.C.'s gun ban was struck down as unconstitutional by the U.S. Court of Appeals on March 9, 2007.<ref>The New York Times - [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/09/washington/09cnd-gun.html?hp Appeals Court Says Gun Ban Violates 2nd Amendment]</ref><ref>The Washington Post - [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/09/AR2007030902416.html D.C.'s Ban On Handguns In Homes Is Thrown Out]</ref><br />
<br />
By removing the deterrent effect of guns, gun control causes dramatic increases in crimes committed with other weapons:<ref name="bbc">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2656875.stm</ref><br />
<br />
:You are now six times more likely to be mugged in [[London]] than [[New York]]. Why? Because as common law appreciated, not only does an armed individual have the ability to protect himself or herself but criminals are less likely to attack them. They help keep the peace. A study found American burglars fear armed home-owners more than the police. As a result burglaries are much rarer and only 13% occur when people are at home, in contrast to 53% in England.<br />
<br />
Supporters of gun control argue that homicide with guns is much less in [[England]] than in the [[United States]],<ref>In 2005/06, the total number of victims of homicide by shooting (including crossbows) in England and Wales was 50 and there were 212 victims of homicide by sharp instruments. [Home Office Statistical Bulletin - [http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs07/hosb0207.pdf Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2005/2006][http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/hosb0104.pdf] The data for gun deaths in the United States include guns used in self-defense, as in fending off an assault, robbery or rape, and there were a total of 11,350 gun deaths (including deaths of criminals) in 2005.[US Department of Justice, FBI - [http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_01.html Crime in the United States by Volume and Rate per 100,000 Inhabitants, 1986 - 2005]</ref> but that was true even before gun control and is likely due to cultural reasons. "A study comparing New York and London over 200 years found the New York homicide rate consistently five times the London rate, although for most of that period residents of both cities had unrestricted access to firearms. When guns were available in England they were seldom used in crime. A government study for 1890-1892 found an average of one handgun homicide a year in a population of 30 million."<ref name="bbc" /><br />
<br />
Gun control laws are often seen to conflict with the [[Second Amendment]] to the [[United States Constitution]], which recognizes the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment reads: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."<br />
<br />
The "right to keep and bear arms" is a right guaranteed to the American citizen by the Bill of Rights through the virtue of a selective reading of said Bill. The phrase "a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state" precedes the statement, and most federal Courts of Appeals have held that this phrase requires that the "right to bear arms" relates to the collective rights of state militias, as opposed to the individual's rights to have any weapon desired. Just recently, the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit went against nine other circuits in holding that the Second Amendment constitutes an individual right.<ref>The New York Times - [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/10/washington/10gun.html?_r=1&oref=slogin Court Rejects Strict Gun Law as Unconstitutional]</ref><ref>FOX News - [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258067,00.html Appeals Court Strikes Down Washington, D.C. Handgun Ban]</ref> However, according to the judge writing for the majority in this case, its decision does still allow for "reasonable restrictions" on gun ownership and use, such as carrying of guns by intoxicated individuals, or in churches.<br />
<br />
Only six cities in the [[United States]] ban handguns: [[Washington, D.C.]], [[Chicago]], and four of its suburbs.<ref>David Kopel, "The Democrats and Gun Control," Wall St.J., Page A19, April 17, 2008 [http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB120839466717921537-lMyQjAxMDI4MDE4NzMxOTc0Wj.html]</ref><br />
<br />
==Overview==<br />
"Gun control" can include:<br />
<br />
* Restricting which persons can own firearms. <br />
* Restrictions on the number of firearms a person may own, or purchase during a given time period<br />
* Requirements that privately owned firearms be registered with the government. <br />
* Bans on certain types of firearms; for example, "handguns" or assault rifles<br />
* Restrictions on where firearms may be carried, for example into restaurants or post offices<br />
* Requiring a "background check" and/or a "waiting period" to purchase a firearm<br />
* Restricting when and where firearms may be bought and sold, for example banning their sale through the mail<br />
* Requiring licenses or some other form of permission from the government to buy and/or sell a firearm<br />
* Requiring some form of permission from the government to carry a firearm in public, either concealed or openly<br />
* Laws granting special gun rights for some people, for example retired law enforcement officers, which are denied the rest of the public, which was used in several southern states. <br />
* Outright bans on carrying firearms in public<br />
* Outright bans on private possession of firearms, though this has never occurred in the United States<br />
<br />
==Constitutional Debate==<br />
The [[Second Amendment]] reads:<br />
<br />
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."<br />
<br />
Most constitutional scholars agree that since the amendment refers to "the right of the People" instead of the right of the militia, it protects an individual right to own guns. The reason for this was the fact that the supplying of guns for the military and militas was already provided for in Article I Section 8 as a power of Congress. The extent of that right was something hotly debated for decades, until the Supreme Court ruling of 26 June, 2008, Heller v District of Columbia.<br />
<br />
The majority opinion, written by Justice [[Antonin Scalia]], held for the first time that the Constitution provides an individual right to bear arms, such as for self-defense, rather than a right that applies only to a state militia.<br />
<br />
The decision upheld an appellate court ruling striking down Washington, D.C.'s 1976 handgun ban. The case marked the first time in more than 70 years that the Supreme Court had addressed the Second Amendment ''and the first time it spoke directly about the implication of an individual right''. The court struck down two of the District of Columbia's gun control laws: its handgun ban and its requirement that other firearms kept at home have a trigger lock or be disassembled. <br />
<br />
Relying on the broader historical record, Justice Scalia wrote: <br />
{{cquote|'''putting all of these textual elements together, we find that they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.'''}}<br />
<br />
Scalia noted that the ruling should not be interpreted to "cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings." <ref>[http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/07-2901.pdf Supreme Court Opinion, District of Columbia v Heller]</ref><br />
<br />
==Racism of gun control==<br />
In the [[United States of America]], gun control has a strong racist origin and reasoning. Before the Civil War ended, State "Slave Codes" prohibited slaves from owning guns. After President [[Abraham Lincoln]] issued the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, and after the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution abolishing slavery was adopted and the Civil War ended in 1865, States persisted in prohibiting blacks, now freemen, from owning guns under laws renamed "Black Codes." They did so on the basis that blacks were not citizens, and thus did not have the same rights, including the right to keep and bear arms protected in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as whites. This view was specifically articulated by the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] in its infamous 1857 decision in ''[[Dred Scott v. Sandford]]'' to uphold slavery.<br />
<br />
The United States Congress overrode most portions of the Black Codes by passing the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The legislative histories of both the Civil Rights Act and the Fourteenth Amendment, as well as The Special Report of the Anti-Slavery Conference of 1867, are replete with denunciations of those particular statutes that denied blacks equal access to firearms. [Kates, "Handgun Prohibition and the Original Meaning of the Second Amendment," 82 Mich. L. Rev. 204, 256 (1983)] However, facially neutral disarming through economic means laws remain in effect.<br />
<br />
After the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1878, most States turned to "facially neutral" business or transaction taxes on handgun purchases. However, the intention of these laws was not neutral. An article in Virginia's official university law review called for a "prohibitive tax...on the privilege" of selling handguns as a way of disarming "the son of Ham," whose "cowardly practice of 'toting' guns has been one of the most fruitful sources of crime.... Let a negro board a railroad train with a quart of mean whiskey and a pistol in his grip and the chances are that there will be a murder, or at least a row, before he alights."<ref>Comment, Carrying Concealed Weapons, 15 Va L. Reg. 391, 391-92 (1909); George Mason University Civil Rights Law Journal (GMU CR LJ), Vol. 2, No. 1, "Gun Control and Racism," Stefan Tahmassebi, 1991, p. 75.</ref> Thus, many Southern States imposed high taxes or banned inexpensive guns so as to price blacks and poor whites out of the gun market.<br />
<br />
Today, "gun control" laws continue to be enacted so as to have a racist effect if not intent:<br />
<br />
* Police-issued license and permit laws, unless drafted to require issuance to those not prohibited by law from owning guns, are routinely used to prevent lawful gun ownership among "unpopular" populations.<br />
* Public housing residents, approximately 3 million Americans, are singled out for gun bans.<br />
* "Gun sweeps" by police in "high crime neighborhoods" whereby vehicles and "pedestrians who meet a specific profile that might indicate they are carrying a weapon" are searched are becoming popular, and are being studied by the [[U.S. Department of Justice]] as "Operation Ceasefire."<br />
* Some U.S. cities with high minority populations, such as Washington, D.C., are singled out for gun bans.<br />
* "Project Exile" began in the U.S. city of Richmond, Virginia and mandated that people arrested for technical firearms violations (note: not for violent crimes committed with a firearm, but for technical violations of the law) be tried in federal court where they would be subject to lengthy mandatory minimum sentences rather than in state court under the more lenient Virginia laws. As with many other restrictions this was aimed primarily at the city's Black residents. It has since been copied in many other cities.<br />
<br />
== Sexism of gun control ==<br />
<br />
Firearms, especially lower recoiling ones such as many handguns, allow any person to wield enough power to stop another person from attacking them.<ref name="genderDiscrimination1">http://www.learnaboutguns.com/2008/03/19/firearms-rights-are-a-gender-equality-issue-too/ </ref> Many women (quite reasonably) fear the threat of attack by a physically stronger man, and a firearm could prevent many of these attacks, but gun bans leave these women vulnerable. Take the case of the “North Side Rapist” in Chicago, a city where hand guns are banned, as an example: The rapist broke in to the womens homes, and at least one of the women heard him break in and then climb the stairs. Had this woman had a handgun, she almost certainly could have stopped the rapist before it was too late. This would have prevented her from enduring such a horrific crime, as well as preventing the rapist’s future victims from experiencing the same thing. Instead, Chicago law prevented her from being able to defend herself, and gave the advantage to the rapist/home-invader. This is not an isolated incident, and similar events happen every day across the county.<br />
<br />
== Elitism of gun control ==<br />
<br />
Many of the most ardent American anti-gun politicians, such as Chicago’s Mayor Daley, are protected by taxpayer-sponsored armed body guards, but deny law abiding citizens the right to defend themselves with a gun. <ref name="classDiscrimination1">http://www.learnaboutguns.com/2008/04/16/a-double-standard-anti-gun-politicians-and-their-gun-toting-bodyguards/ </ref> These politicians seemingly believe themselves to be part of an elite group who deserve to be protected against violent criminals, while ordinary law-abiding citizens are left with less-effective means to defend themselves, and must instead rely on the police arriving in time.<br />
<br />
== Gun control outside the USA ==<br />
<br />
Gun control advocates cite foreign countries to argue that gun control can reduce crime, but such comparison can be difficult due to the presence of other factors. For example, they cite [[Singapore]] as having gun control and a lower crime rate than the [[United States]], but Singapore has less than 5 million persons and one of the highest literacy and average wealth in the world. It lacks many of the freedoms found in the [[United States]] and strictly imposes harsh physical punishment, such as caning and the [[death penalty]], for crimes that are not punished so harshly in the [[United States]]. The real issue of the security in Singapore is its tight criminal control, not the gun control itself.<br />
<br />
Gun control supporters also cite [[Gun Control in Japan|Japan's gun control laws]], which severely restrict gun ownership and crime rates are relatively low. But [[Japan]] also lacks many freedoms and diversity which exist in the [[United States]], and [[Japan]] has strong cultural deterrents to crime. Ironically, [[Japan]] is home to [[Tokyo Marui]], the world's largest [[airsoft]] gun manufacturer, which designs airsoft guns that are made to the same scale and with the same materials as the real counterpart and which have been mistaken by police for real guns.<br />
<br />
In the [[European Union]], gun control is more strict than in the United States, but gun ownership differs widely between member states, from 36 per 100 people in [[Cyprus]] to one per 100 in [[Poland]]." In [[Switzerland]], on the other hand, gun ownership is quite widespread, which no doubt contributes to its reputation as a peaceful and neutral country.<ref>[http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/09/27/switzerland.shooting Gun control in Switzerland]</ref> In November 2007, the [[European Parliament]] passed legislation to tighten and harmonize gun control across the EU, and oblige each member state to set up a computerized database of firearms, as it "hoped to prevent Europe from becoming a gun-friendly culture like the United States". Parliament wanted to limit cross-border trade from states with less control to those with tougher laws, such as from [[Lithuania]], where replica guns can cost as little as [[Euro|€]]100 (US$150), to the [[United Kingdom]], where most replicas are outlawed.<br />
<br />
In Australia, gun violence has always been significantly lower than other types of violence.<ref>http://www.gunsandcrime.org/aussiegc.html</ref>. Australia has not experienced considerable violence problems with legally purchased guns. It has always had a much lower homicide rate than the more violent culture in the [[United States]].<ref>In Australia the gun related homicide rate is 0.44 per 100,000 of population. In the US it is about 8 times as high at 3.72 per 100,000 of population.</ref> From 1979 to 1996, 11,110 Australians died by gunshot representing an annual average of 617. In the seven years after new gun laws were announced (1997 to 2003), the yearly average almost halved, to 331. In the decade up to and including Port Arthur There have been 11 mass shootings where 100 people were shot dead and another 52 wounded, while in In the 10 years since 1996 and the new gun laws, not one mass shooting (more than five victims) has occurred in Australia (although in 2002 a gunman killed two and wounded four at Monash University).<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04/27/1145861484114.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1</ref> <br />
<br />
Gun control began in Australia in response to fears that guns would be used by home-grown Communist Revolutionaries.<ref>http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1083528 This study discusses the parallel policies of early-mid 20th century Britain and Australia.</ref> The most restrictive reforms were made in 1996 and 2002, following highly publicized shootings.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04/27/1145861484114.html</ref><br />
<br />
Both sets of reforms (1996 and 2002) were lead by Prime Minister [[John Howard]] of the Coalition(Australia’s conservative government). Howard was well known as an anti-gun advocate.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/anger-lingers-among-those-who-lost-their-firearms/2006/04/27/1145861489398.html</ref> The move offended gun supporters, many of whom had traditionally supported the Coalition.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/anger-lingers-among-those-who-lost-their-firearms/2006/04/27/1145861489398.html</ref> Despite the loss of this voting group, Howard won elections following both reforms (in 1998 and 2004).<br />
<br />
There is controversy over the success of Australia’s gun restrictions. Studies suggest overall gun violence has decreased since the 1996 and 2002 bans.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04/27/1145861484114.html</ref> However, Australia’s bike and drug gangs, the main perpetrators of gun violence, still easily access illegal firearms.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/in-depth/a-disarming-cause/2006/04/27/1145861489519.html</ref> Further, the overall homicide rate remains constant.<ref>http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-safer-place-after-howards-gun-buyback/2006/04<br />
/27/1145861484114.html?page=2</ref><br />
<br />
== Gun Control and Genocide ==<br />
<br />
Gun control "contributes to the probability of its government engaging" in [[genocide]] It has been responsible for: including: :<ref>"[A] society's weapons policy might be one of the institutional arrangements that contributes to the probability of its government engaging in some of the more extreme varieties of outrage. ... [I]t is [] an arresting reality that not one of the principal genocides of the twentieth century, and there have been dozens, has been inflicted on a population that was armed." [http://ls.wustl.edu/WULQ/75-3/753-4.html Washington University Law Quarterly]</ref><br />
<br />
*(1915-18) The [[Ottoman Empire]] imposed gun control in 1911, and then, from 1915 to 1918, killed 2.75 million out of 5.5 million Ottoman Christians, including 1.5 million out of 2 million Armenians, 750,000 out of 1 million Assyrian Christians, and 500,000 out of 2.5 million Pontic Greeks. <br />
<br />
*(1917-1953) The [[Soviet Union]] under [[Lenin]] and [[Stalin]] killed 61 million of its own citizens, with 10 million going to Vladimir Lenin, who conducted his murders from 1917 to 1924, and 51 million going to Iosif Stalin, including 8 million out of 24 million Ukrainians that perished in the 1932-33 [[Holodomor]].<br />
<br />
*(1942-45) Europe under the control of [[Nazi Germany]] led by [[Adolf Hitler]], which imposed gun control in 1938, killed 21 million people, including 8 million Soviet citizens, and killing in the concentration camps 6 million out of 9 million European Jews, 2 million out of 34 million Poles, 3 million Soviet POW’s plus 1 million other groups including Gypsies. <ref>[http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/rkba-12.html The True Face of Gun Control], Dean Speir, The Gun Zone RKBA, Accessed December 26, 2007</ref><br />
<br />
*(1949-75) [[Mao Zedong]] of [[China]], who said that “Political power comes from the barrel of a gun”, killed 73 million of his own people.<br />
<br />
*(1975-79) [[Pol Pot]] killed 3 million out of 9 million fellow Cambodians.<br />
<br />
*(1994) The Rwandan genocide killed 1 million out of 2 million Tutsis.<br />
<br />
"The Nazis made only two important changes to the Weapons Law that was in place when they came to power. First, they forbade Jews from owning guns or any other weapon. Second, they exempted members of the Sturmabteilung (SA) and many Nazi party officials from the law's strictures."<ref name="Washington University Law Quarterly"/> The German Firearms Act of 1937 stated "No civilian is to have a firearm without a permit and permits shall not be issued to persons suspected of acting against the state. ''For Jews, this permission will not be granted.'' Those people who do not require permission to carry weapons include the whole of the SS, and the SA - including the Deaths Head group, and the officers of the Hitler youth." <ref name="Volokh">[http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a38d04d5c7c40.htm The Journalist's Guide to Gun Policy Scholars and Second Amendment Scholars], Professor Eugene Volokh, FreeRepublic.com, March 15, 2000</ref><br />
<br />
Adolf Hitler said, "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so." <ref name="Volokh" /><br />
<br />
[[Josef Stalin]], former dictator of the [[USSR]] and murderer of over 20 million people, infamously supported Gun control in the fear that his evil regime might be torn down and so only soldiers could have firearms.<br />
<br />
== Gun Control and young mass murderers ==<br />
<br />
''Main article: [[Young mass murderers]]''<br />
<br />
Strict gun control failed and still fails to prevent mass murderers from starting killing sprees while the victims are unable to defend themselves.<br />
<br />
Compare the cases of Pekka-Eric Auvinen ([[Finland]]) and Robert Steinhäuser ([[Germany]]) with the case of Matthew Murray. The latter was stopped by an armed citizen before he could harm more victims; Auvinen killed 8 people and Steinhäuser killed 16. Both Finland and Germany have gun control laws.<br />
<br />
==Other terms==<br />
Other terms sometimes used by those who are opposed to gun control include:<br />
* Rights restriction<br />
* Victim disarmament<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[Gun control quotes]]<br />
*[[Essay:US Armed Citizens and Crime Control]]<br />
*[[John Lott]]<br />
*[[Second Amendment]]<br />
*[[Gun Control in Nazi Germany]]<br />
<br />
==External Links==<br />
<br />
=== Opposed to gun control ===<br />
*[http://www.2asisters.org/ Second Amendment Sisters]<br />
*[http://www.nra.org/ The National Rifle Association]<br />
*[http://www.nrapublications.org/AC/index.asp Armed citizens defending themselves.]<br />
*[http://www.a-human-right.com/ A Human Right] Discussion of the human right to self defense with a firearm.<br />
*[http://www.learnaboutguns.com/ Learn About Guns] Firearm information and politics.<br />
*[http://www.gunowners.org/ Gun Owners of America] A no-compromise pro-gun lobby in Washington, D.C.<br />
*[http://www.aim.org/wls/category/gun-control/ What Liberals Say - Category: Gun Control]<br />
*[http://www.guncite.com/ GunCite: Gun Control and Second Amendment Issues]<br />
=== In favor of gun control ===<br />
*[http://www.guninformation.org/ Gun Control and the Second Amendment]<br />
*[http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-switzerland.htm Myth: Switzerland proves that high gun-ownership doesn't increase murder]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
[[category:Second Amendment]]<br />
[[Category:Oppression]]<br />
[[Category:gun control]]<br />
{{liberalism}}</div>Wiggyhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Labour_Party_(UK)&diff=969511Talk:Labour Party (UK)2012-03-22T05:35:58Z<p>Wiggy: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Labour Party, socialists or not?==<br />
<br />
Yes. Their party website decribes them as being a socialist party.<br />
<br />
No. Fidel Castro describes Cuba as being a democracy - what the leader says doesn't make it so! Labour has pursued Third Way social-democratic policies since 1997, and during their time in power they have significantly shifted to the right. --[[User:Rafa|Rafa]] 18:04, 13 March 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Anyway, where does it describe them as socialist on their website?[[User:Sitedrm|Sitedrm]] 14:37, 21 March 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
*I think it is more accurate to call the Labour Party a social democrat party rather than a democratic socialist party. While there are still elements with the party that could still be described as socialist, very few of the party's objectives match the definition. They are recognised as being centre-left much like other parties in Europe and social democrat is the label that is typically applied to this part of the political spectrum. They would be closest to the Democrats if an American comparison had to be made. I will make this minor change if nobody objects. [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 13:16, 9 October 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::Ajkgordon, although I agree with the essence of what you are saying, I think it is also worth noting that the Labour party does use the term "democratic socialist" to describe itself - see [http://www.labour.org.uk/how_we_work]. Many Labour party members would be proud to emphasise that term, so I don't personally think it's misleading. [[User:OurMike|OurMike]] 13:37, 9 October 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::Goodness, so it does! Well, I'll leave it then. Thanks. [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 13:39, 9 October 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
The acutal socialists from the Labour party left ages ago with Arthur Scargill who aligned himself alongside Greenpeace and the Green Party trying to get the British coal mines reopened. That is why the Labour party advertises itself as "New Labour". They are anything but socialist. --[[User:EllisUSA|EllisUSA]] 18:15, 16 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Title ==<br />
<br />
Shouldn't this be located at a more appropriate title given the numerous parties around the world with the name? I know how fond Conservapedians are of Wikipedia, but just [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party as a comparison]... Thought I'd throw that out there. I doubt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party_%28Netherlands%29 the one whose page I was looking for] would merit much interest here anyway. :) [[User:Punuma|Punuma]] 19:03, 6 October 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: The leading "Labour Party" is in England. We're not going to elevate political correctness over the obvious here by linking to obscure parties in other countries copying the same name.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:07, 7 October 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::Yes, most other leading Labo(u)r parties tend to have a nationality descriptor, such as the New Zealand Labour Party. The only exception I can think of is the [http://www.labour.ie Labour Party in Ireland], which is one of the top three or four political parties there. [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 20:02, 10 October 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Needs revamping==<br />
This article is massively outdated - Labour have been out of government for half a year now (thank God) and this needs to be recognised. However, I can't edit the article. Can someone please change this/unlock the article. Many thanks, [[User:ChelseaR|ChelseaR]] 13:26, 1 November 2010 (EDT)</div>Wiggyhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Labour_Party_(UK)&diff=969510Labour Party (UK)2012-03-22T05:35:24Z<p>Wiggy: </p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Labour Party''' is a [[United Kingdom|British]] [[Socialism|democratic socialist]]<ref>http://www.labour.org.uk/labour_policies</ref> political party. The party still pays lip service to many typical [[left-wing]] values and, along with all the main political parties in the UK, is [[Pro-choice]], pro-gay rights and pro-[[gun control]]. Typically the Labour Party is in favour of greater investment in public services via higher taxation relative to its main political rivals.<br />
<br />
<br />
The Labour Party was founded in 1900, and currently forms the [[Leader of the Opposition|Her Majesty's Opposition]], being the largest party in the UK not in currently in government. The current leader of the Labour Party is [[Ed Miliband]], who was elected by Labour party members on September 25th 2010, after a crushing defeat four months earlier in the UK's [[general election]]. [[Image:Labour logo.jpg|right|thumb|170px|The Labour Party's logo]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==History==<br />
===Origins===<br />
The Labour Party was formed out of an alliance of several prominent left-wing and socialist movements that existed in Britain at the turn of the century. Chief amongst them the were the [[Trades Union Congress]], the [[Fabian Society]], and the [[Independent Labour Party]]. The group took the name [[Labour Representation Committee]], later adopting the name [[Labour Party]] after achieving seats in the [[House of Commons]] at the 1906 election. Much of the intellectual energy came from the [[Fabian Socialism|Fabians, an informal group of intellectual socialists.]]<br />
<br />
The rise of Marxist socialism in the late 19th century in the Social Democratic Federation (SDF) (1881-1911) did not create a militantly atheistic and anti-religious force. From its beginnings, circa 1881, the SDF contained Christians, non-Christians, and anti-Christians. These groups generally coexisted in a state of compromise. The membership of the SDF was generally secularist and freethinking but religion was not a central issue. For all parties in the SDF, the central issue was commitment to socialism. <br />
<br />
[[File:Labour1910.jpg|thumb|290px|Labour called for abolition of the [[House of Lords]] in 1910; when elected, they kept it and appointed their own favourites to peerages. Later posters dropped the violent imagery and called for peaceful change.]]<br />
<br />
===Interwar period===<br />
In its early years the Labour Party benefited from an alliance with the other main left-wing party in Britain, the [[Liberal Party]]; from a growth in working class consciousness; and from dissatisfaction with both the Liberal and [[Conservative Party|Conservative]] parties in the wake of what were perceived to be their mistakes in the handling of the [[First World War]]. Winning growing numbers of seats at each election, the Labour Party was finally able to form a government in 1924 under the leadership of [[Ramsay MacDonald]]. However this was short-lived. The party did not have an outright majority, and in fact only had about one third of the total seats within the House. After just nine months the Party lost an important vote, and the government resigned. Four days before the election the ''[[Daily Mail]]'' published the "[[Zinoviev Letter]]", a forgery that seemed to indicate that the Communist Party of Great Britain was planning subversion or even a violent revolution in cooperation with Labour. The letter was leaked by the Foreign Ministry. The Labour Party was badly defeated in the 1924 general election, even though its vote increased by one million. The Conservative vote was up by two million as the Liberal party was rapidly collapsing. Historians agree the Zinoviev Letter was a forgery but their consensus is that it made little difference in the election. What is more important, after the election Labour leaders used it as an excuse for their failure; it became a roadblock to needed internal reforms in the Labour party.<br />
<br />
[[File:Labour1929.jpg|thumb|300px|Despite the deliberate appeal to middle class voters in this 1929 poster, most Labour voters were working class blokes who did not wear white collars and ties.]]<br />
The Labour Party briefly formed a government again in 1929, but this did not survive the effects of the [[Great Depression]]. In a dispute over the best way to handle the economic consequences of the global financial crash, the Party leadership fractured. A new "National Government" drawn from all parties was formed, with [[Ramsay MacDonald]] still as Prime Minister. However this was dominated by the other parties, particularly the Conservatives, who went on to dominate the British political scene for the rest of the interwar period.<br />
<br />
===Victory in 1945===<br />
The [[Second World War]] saw a major shift in political attitudes within Britain, and led to a landslide victory for [[Clement Attlee]] in 1945. The modest, unassuming intellectual Attlee named a cabinet that included all elements of the party. Of 37 ministers, eight were former coal miners, and eleven had been active trade unionists. <br />
<br />
This government introduced sweeping reforms of industry and the creation of the [[welfare state]]. Attlee's government nationalised major industries, founded the [[National Health Service]], and developed the idea of welfare from cradle to grave paid for out of taxation and available to everyone free of charge. Much of the welfare state is still in force today.<br />
<br />
The Labour government was fiercely anti-Communist, but the economy was so weak it had to relinquish a leadership role to the United States. Atlee pushed President [[Harry Truman]] to take over Britain's historic roles, especially in Greece, and indeed helped push the U.S. into the [[Cold War]] against the [[Soviet Union]].<br />
<br />
After losing in 1951, the Labour Party spent the next 13 years out of office and achieved little during the governments of Wilson (1964-1970 and 1974-1976) and his successor James Callaghan (1976-79). Their failures set the stage for the renewal of British energy and leadership under [[Margaret Thatcher]], beginning in 1979.<br />
<br />
===Socialism===<br />
Despite its historic commitment to socialism, the British Labour Party has been flexible and reformist in its doctrine ever since it was founded in 1900. After the crisis of 1931, the party adopted a broadly social democratic program in which socialism was linked with the idea of economic planning and social welfare. The Attlee government of 1945-51 was very moderate in its commitment to socialism. The years of opposition saw violent arguments in the party between left-wing Bevanites and the center-right supporters of [[Hugh Gaitskell]]. But the main differences concerned foreign and defense policy. On domestic issues, the party was now broadly revisionist, committed to the mixed economy and social equality.<br />
[[File:Atlee45.jpg|thumb|370px|Atlee defeats Churchill in 1945, and becomes bowler for the British cricket team; he faces difficult issues like housing and finance which are coming to bat.]]<br />
<br />
==New Left==<br />
Wilson, on becoming prime minister in 1964, tried to bypass old doctrinal arguments by harnessing nationalized industry to ideas of scientific modernization. But his government was a great failure, not least in its relations with the trade unions, the linchpin of the party since its founding. Wilson represented the older traditions of the Labour Party and never understood the emerging "New Left" with new social roots, new ideas and new styles of political behaviour in the late 1970s. Following the disillusion and demoralization of traditional Labour Party activists with Wilson's government, a more radical and well-educated local Labour leadership appeared at the local level. This bred much disillusionment and launched a new left-wing socialism in the 1970s. The Labour government of 1974-79 added to this division. The left-wing pressure reached its climax in the early 1980s when Thatcher was in power but resulted only in heavy defeats for Labour in 1983 and 1987. The general impression in 1989 is of a loss of political and intellectual confidence, with British socialism trapped between a cherished past and an uncertain future.<ref> Kenneth O. Morgan, ''Britain since 1945: The People's Peace'' (2001)</ref><br />
<br />
===Social issues===<br />
The Labour Party has also been a strong proponent of social reform. Under [[Harold Wilson]] in the late 60s, abortion and homosexuality were decriminalizes, the death penalty abolished and divorce was made easier. Unease from a perceived large number of immigrants from Commonwealth countries also led to four Race Relations Acts, all of which were passed under Labour governments.<br />
<br />
===Industrial Strife===<br />
see [[Winter of Discontent]]<br />
<br />
The Labour Party always prided itself on strong links with [[Labor union|trade unions]], but by the late 1960s there was growing industrial unrest. Inflation was becoming a growing problem and unemployment began to rise. Harold Wilson was elected for a third time in February 1974, taking over from Conservative [[Edward Heath]] whose government was brought to its knees by oil shortages and a crippling coal miners' strike in 1973. Throughout the late 1970s strikes were commonplace, tight controls on pay rises, known as incomes policy, was struggling to curb inflation which reached a high of 28%. A series of devastating strikes in the winter of 1978/79 which became known as the [[Winter of Discontent]] led to the government of [[James Callaghan]] being defeated in a vote of no confidence and a general election which was won by the Conservative Party led by [[Margaret Thatcher]].<br />
<br />
===A swing to the left===<br />
[[Michael Foot]] became leader of the Labour Party in 1980 and took the party in a far left direction. The 1983 manifesto pledged to reverse all Thatcher's economic reforms; renationalise all privatised businesses, return taxes on the rich to the punitive level of the 1970s (98% in some cases), restore trade union powers, leave the European Economic Community, unilaterally surrender Britain's nuclear weapons and campaign for a united Ireland as a solution to the paramilitarism and terrorism that had beset the province of Northern Ireland throughout the 70s. The manifesto became known as the "longest suicide note in history" and was defeated by Thatcher's Conservatives in a landslide. Pro-EEC Labour Party members who formed their own party, the SDP, nearly polled more votes than the Labour Party. If not for the SDP's poorly thought-out electoral strategy (which gained plenty of votes, but almost no seats in the Commons), Labour could have been reduced to third party status in this election.<br />
<br />
Foot was succeeded by [[Neil Kinnock]], who ditched much (but not all) of the far-left baggage from 1983. Under Kinnock, Labour was again defeated in a landslide in 1987 but, crucially, Labour came well ahead of the SDP (now in alliance with the Liberal Party).<br />
<br />
===Tony Blair and "New Labour"===<br />
The term New Labour didn't come into being until [[Tony Blair]] became leader in 1994, but the reform of the Labour Party took place long before then. By 1992, it was clear that Thatcher's reforms had struck a chord with voters and the Labour party were no longer promising to renationalise industries or restore trade union powers. Only the top rate of income tax would be raised from 40 to 50%. Opinion polls during the election campaign predicted a very close result, but the Conservative party won a narrow victory of 23 seats after an unusually high turnout.<br />
<br />
John Smith became leader in 1992, but his sudden death in 1994 led to Tony Blair to become leader and the term "New Labour" was born. Blair started by reforming Clause IV. Clause IV dealt with the purpose of the Party and referred direct to its erstwhile desire for public ownership of the means of production; the current version instead calls for 'a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few'.<br />
The revised version mentions "socialism" as a sop to the old timers:<br />
:The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few.’<br />
<br />
Blair promised no increases in income tax and pledged to run a stable economy. He scored landslide victories in 1997, and again in 2001.<br />
<br />
One of Blair's most controversial decisions was to [[Iraq War|invade Iraq]] in 2003 alongside the Americans and other allies. Britain became the second largest contributor of armed forces to [[George W. Bush]]'s "Coalition of the Willing", and Blair staunchly defended the position, and won supporting votes in parliament. Partly due to the war's unpopularity, and partly to a perception that the Government had raised taxes on business and individuals to unacceptable levels, the Labour party won a much smaller majority in 2005 and has seen key bills defeated by backbench revolts such as the plan to hold terrorist suspects for up to 90 days without charge.<br />
<br />
Blair had lost his momentum, so he retired in mid-2007 and was replaced per prior arrangement by his long-time Chancellor, [[Gordon Brown]]. The worldwide [[Recession of 2008]], continuing into 2009, hit Britain hard and has yet to bottom out. Labour took much of the blame, and its polling rates dropped to levels not seen since the early 1980s. Labour's popularity continued to decline in 2009, as the party made its worst electoral showing in a hundred years in the EU elections in June 2009. Brown, however, beat back his disunited critics, reorganized his cabinet, and stumbled onward. The Conservatives maintain a large lead for the next general election, which must be held by spring 2010.<br />
<br />
<br />
==PR and spin==<br />
<br />
With the formation of New Labour under the leadership of [[Tony Blair]] and along with the support of spin doctors such as [[Peter Mandelson]], the modern Labour Party has been accused of being an extremely deceptive PR machine; being highly dishonest in its dealings with the public and media. <br />
<br />
==Sharia Infiltration==<br />
A 2010 newspaper report repeated a claim by [[Jim Fitzpatrick]], the MP for [[Poplar and Canning Town]] that the Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) had effectively created a party within the party in east London. The IFE seeks to make Britain and [[Europe]] an Islamic state. In covert investigations by the media it was determined that the IFE were expressing opposition to democracy, support for sharia law or mocking black people and organized meetings with extremists, including [[Taliban]] allies. <ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/labour/7333420/Islamic-radicals-infiltrate-the-Labour-Party.html Islamic radicals 'infiltrate' the Labour Party, TelegraphUK, February 27, 2010]</ref><br />
<br />
{{cquote| [They are] placing people within the political parties, recruiting members to those political parties, trying to get individuals selected and elected so they can exercise political influence and power, whether it's at local government level or national level.}}<br />
<br />
==Prime Ministers==<br />
<br />
* [[Ramsay MacDonald]] (1924 and 1929-1935) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page136.asp]<br />
<br />
[[File:Labour45.jpg|thumb|270px|Labour won an unexpected landslide in 1945]]<br />
* [[Clement Attlee]] (1945-1951) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page133.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[Harold Wilson]] (1964-1970 and 1974-1976) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page129.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[James Callaghan]] (1976-1979) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page127.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[Tony Blair]] (1997-2007) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page4.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[Gordon Brown]] (2007-2010)<br />
[[File:Labour45b.jpg|thumb|275px|left|Iconic 1945 election poster]]<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Fabian Society]]<br />
* [[Industrial Democracy]]<br />
<br />
==Further reading==<br />
<br />
* Davies, Andrew. ''To Build a New Jerusalem: The British Labour Party from Keir Hardie to Tony Blair'' (1996)<br />
* Favretto, Ilaria."'Wilsonism' Reconsidered: Labour Party Revisionism, 1952-64." ''Contemporary British History'' 2000 14(4): 54-80 in [[EBSCO]]]]<br />
* Morgan, Austen. ''Harold Wilson'' (1992), 625pp; negative appraisal<br />
* Morgan, Kenneth O. ''Britain since 1945: The People's Peace'' (2001)<br />
* Pimlott, Ben. ''Harold Wilson'' (1992). Pimlott tries to rehabilitate Wilson’s political reputation, revealing that he was the prisoner rather than the master of various domestic and international dilemmas. <br />
* Swift, John. ''Labour in Crisis: Clement Attlee and the Labour Party in Opposition, 1931-1940'' (2001)<br />
* Worley, Matthew. ''Labour inside the Gate: A History of the British Labour Party between the Wars'' (2005),<br />
<br />
==External links==<br />
*[http://www.labour.org.uk/home Official site]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
[[category:British Political Parties]]<br />
[[Category:British History]]<br />
[[Category:British Politics]]<br />
[[Category:Labor Unions]]<br />
[[Category:Socialism]]<br />
[[category:New Left]]<br />
[[category:1960s]]</div>Wiggyhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Labour_Party_(UK)&diff=969509Labour Party (UK)2012-03-22T05:34:07Z<p>Wiggy: </p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Labour Party''' is a [[United Kingdom|British]] [[Socialism|democratic socialist]]<ref>http://www.labour.org.uk/labour_policies</ref> political party. The party still pays lip service to many typical [[left-wing]] values and, along with all the main political parties in the UK, is [[Pro-choice]], pro-gay and pro-[[gun control]]. Typically the Labour Party is in favour of greater investment in public services via higher taxation relative to its main political rivals.<br />
<br />
<br />
The Labour Party was founded in 1900, and currently forms the [[Leader of the Opposition|Her Majesty's Opposition]], being the largest party in the UK not in currently in government. The current leader of the Labour Party is [[Ed Miliband]], who was elected by Labour party members on September 25th 2010, after a crushing defeat four months earlier in the UK's [[general election]]. [[Image:Labour logo.jpg|right|thumb|170px|The Labour Party's logo]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==History==<br />
===Origins===<br />
The Labour Party was formed out of an alliance of several prominent left-wing and socialist movements that existed in Britain at the turn of the century. Chief amongst them the were the [[Trades Union Congress]], the [[Fabian Society]], and the [[Independent Labour Party]]. The group took the name [[Labour Representation Committee]], later adopting the name [[Labour Party]] after achieving seats in the [[House of Commons]] at the 1906 election. Much of the intellectual energy came from the [[Fabian Socialism|Fabians, an informal group of intellectual socialists.]]<br />
<br />
The rise of Marxist socialism in the late 19th century in the Social Democratic Federation (SDF) (1881-1911) did not create a militantly atheistic and anti-religious force. From its beginnings, circa 1881, the SDF contained Christians, non-Christians, and anti-Christians. These groups generally coexisted in a state of compromise. The membership of the SDF was generally secularist and freethinking but religion was not a central issue. For all parties in the SDF, the central issue was commitment to socialism. <br />
<br />
[[File:Labour1910.jpg|thumb|290px|Labour called for abolition of the [[House of Lords]] in 1910; when elected, they kept it and appointed their own favourites to peerages. Later posters dropped the violent imagery and called for peaceful change.]]<br />
<br />
===Interwar period===<br />
In its early years the Labour Party benefited from an alliance with the other main left-wing party in Britain, the [[Liberal Party]]; from a growth in working class consciousness; and from dissatisfaction with both the Liberal and [[Conservative Party|Conservative]] parties in the wake of what were perceived to be their mistakes in the handling of the [[First World War]]. Winning growing numbers of seats at each election, the Labour Party was finally able to form a government in 1924 under the leadership of [[Ramsay MacDonald]]. However this was short-lived. The party did not have an outright majority, and in fact only had about one third of the total seats within the House. After just nine months the Party lost an important vote, and the government resigned. Four days before the election the ''[[Daily Mail]]'' published the "[[Zinoviev Letter]]", a forgery that seemed to indicate that the Communist Party of Great Britain was planning subversion or even a violent revolution in cooperation with Labour. The letter was leaked by the Foreign Ministry. The Labour Party was badly defeated in the 1924 general election, even though its vote increased by one million. The Conservative vote was up by two million as the Liberal party was rapidly collapsing. Historians agree the Zinoviev Letter was a forgery but their consensus is that it made little difference in the election. What is more important, after the election Labour leaders used it as an excuse for their failure; it became a roadblock to needed internal reforms in the Labour party.<br />
<br />
[[File:Labour1929.jpg|thumb|300px|Despite the deliberate appeal to middle class voters in this 1929 poster, most Labour voters were working class blokes who did not wear white collars and ties.]]<br />
The Labour Party briefly formed a government again in 1929, but this did not survive the effects of the [[Great Depression]]. In a dispute over the best way to handle the economic consequences of the global financial crash, the Party leadership fractured. A new "National Government" drawn from all parties was formed, with [[Ramsay MacDonald]] still as Prime Minister. However this was dominated by the other parties, particularly the Conservatives, who went on to dominate the British political scene for the rest of the interwar period.<br />
<br />
===Victory in 1945===<br />
The [[Second World War]] saw a major shift in political attitudes within Britain, and led to a landslide victory for [[Clement Attlee]] in 1945. The modest, unassuming intellectual Attlee named a cabinet that included all elements of the party. Of 37 ministers, eight were former coal miners, and eleven had been active trade unionists. <br />
<br />
This government introduced sweeping reforms of industry and the creation of the [[welfare state]]. Attlee's government nationalised major industries, founded the [[National Health Service]], and developed the idea of welfare from cradle to grave paid for out of taxation and available to everyone free of charge. Much of the welfare state is still in force today.<br />
<br />
The Labour government was fiercely anti-Communist, but the economy was so weak it had to relinquish a leadership role to the United States. Atlee pushed President [[Harry Truman]] to take over Britain's historic roles, especially in Greece, and indeed helped push the U.S. into the [[Cold War]] against the [[Soviet Union]].<br />
<br />
After losing in 1951, the Labour Party spent the next 13 years out of office and achieved little during the governments of Wilson (1964-1970 and 1974-1976) and his successor James Callaghan (1976-79). Their failures set the stage for the renewal of British energy and leadership under [[Margaret Thatcher]], beginning in 1979.<br />
<br />
===Socialism===<br />
Despite its historic commitment to socialism, the British Labour Party has been flexible and reformist in its doctrine ever since it was founded in 1900. After the crisis of 1931, the party adopted a broadly social democratic program in which socialism was linked with the idea of economic planning and social welfare. The Attlee government of 1945-51 was very moderate in its commitment to socialism. The years of opposition saw violent arguments in the party between left-wing Bevanites and the center-right supporters of [[Hugh Gaitskell]]. But the main differences concerned foreign and defense policy. On domestic issues, the party was now broadly revisionist, committed to the mixed economy and social equality.<br />
[[File:Atlee45.jpg|thumb|370px|Atlee defeats Churchill in 1945, and becomes bowler for the British cricket team; he faces difficult issues like housing and finance which are coming to bat.]]<br />
<br />
==New Left==<br />
Wilson, on becoming prime minister in 1964, tried to bypass old doctrinal arguments by harnessing nationalized industry to ideas of scientific modernization. But his government was a great failure, not least in its relations with the trade unions, the linchpin of the party since its founding. Wilson represented the older traditions of the Labour Party and never understood the emerging "New Left" with new social roots, new ideas and new styles of political behaviour in the late 1970s. Following the disillusion and demoralization of traditional Labour Party activists with Wilson's government, a more radical and well-educated local Labour leadership appeared at the local level. This bred much disillusionment and launched a new left-wing socialism in the 1970s. The Labour government of 1974-79 added to this division. The left-wing pressure reached its climax in the early 1980s when Thatcher was in power but resulted only in heavy defeats for Labour in 1983 and 1987. The general impression in 1989 is of a loss of political and intellectual confidence, with British socialism trapped between a cherished past and an uncertain future.<ref> Kenneth O. Morgan, ''Britain since 1945: The People's Peace'' (2001)</ref><br />
<br />
===Social issues===<br />
The Labour Party has also been a strong proponent of social reform. Under [[Harold Wilson]] in the late 60s, abortion and homosexuality were decriminalizes, the death penalty abolished and divorce was made easier. Unease from a perceived large number of immigrants from Commonwealth countries also led to four Race Relations Acts, all of which were passed under Labour governments.<br />
<br />
===Industrial Strife===<br />
see [[Winter of Discontent]]<br />
<br />
The Labour Party always prided itself on strong links with [[Labor union|trade unions]], but by the late 1960s there was growing industrial unrest. Inflation was becoming a growing problem and unemployment began to rise. Harold Wilson was elected for a third time in February 1974, taking over from Conservative [[Edward Heath]] whose government was brought to its knees by oil shortages and a crippling coal miners' strike in 1973. Throughout the late 1970s strikes were commonplace, tight controls on pay rises, known as incomes policy, was struggling to curb inflation which reached a high of 28%. A series of devastating strikes in the winter of 1978/79 which became known as the [[Winter of Discontent]] led to the government of [[James Callaghan]] being defeated in a vote of no confidence and a general election which was won by the Conservative Party led by [[Margaret Thatcher]].<br />
<br />
===A swing to the left===<br />
[[Michael Foot]] became leader of the Labour Party in 1980 and took the party in a far left direction. The 1983 manifesto pledged to reverse all Thatcher's economic reforms; renationalise all privatised businesses, return taxes on the rich to the punitive level of the 1970s (98% in some cases), restore trade union powers, leave the European Economic Community, unilaterally surrender Britain's nuclear weapons and campaign for a united Ireland as a solution to the paramilitarism and terrorism that had beset the province of Northern Ireland throughout the 70s. The manifesto became known as the "longest suicide note in history" and was defeated by Thatcher's Conservatives in a landslide. Pro-EEC Labour Party members who formed their own party, the SDP, nearly polled more votes than the Labour Party. If not for the SDP's poorly thought-out electoral strategy (which gained plenty of votes, but almost no seats in the Commons), Labour could have been reduced to third party status in this election.<br />
<br />
Foot was succeeded by [[Neil Kinnock]], who ditched much (but not all) of the far-left baggage from 1983. Under Kinnock, Labour was again defeated in a landslide in 1987 but, crucially, Labour came well ahead of the SDP (now in alliance with the Liberal Party).<br />
<br />
===Tony Blair and "New Labour"===<br />
The term New Labour didn't come into being until [[Tony Blair]] became leader in 1994, but the reform of the Labour Party took place long before then. By 1992, it was clear that Thatcher's reforms had struck a chord with voters and the Labour party were no longer promising to renationalise industries or restore trade union powers. Only the top rate of income tax would be raised from 40 to 50%. Opinion polls during the election campaign predicted a very close result, but the Conservative party won a narrow victory of 23 seats after an unusually high turnout.<br />
<br />
John Smith became leader in 1992, but his sudden death in 1994 led to Tony Blair to become leader and the term "New Labour" was born. Blair started by reforming Clause IV. Clause IV dealt with the purpose of the Party and referred direct to its erstwhile desire for public ownership of the means of production; the current version instead calls for 'a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few'.<br />
The revised version mentions "socialism" as a sop to the old timers:<br />
:The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few.’<br />
<br />
Blair promised no increases in income tax and pledged to run a stable economy. He scored landslide victories in 1997, and again in 2001.<br />
<br />
One of Blair's most controversial decisions was to [[Iraq War|invade Iraq]] in 2003 alongside the Americans and other allies. Britain became the second largest contributor of armed forces to [[George W. Bush]]'s "Coalition of the Willing", and Blair staunchly defended the position, and won supporting votes in parliament. Partly due to the war's unpopularity, and partly to a perception that the Government had raised taxes on business and individuals to unacceptable levels, the Labour party won a much smaller majority in 2005 and has seen key bills defeated by backbench revolts such as the plan to hold terrorist suspects for up to 90 days without charge.<br />
<br />
Blair had lost his momentum, so he retired in mid-2007 and was replaced per prior arrangement by his long-time Chancellor, [[Gordon Brown]]. The worldwide [[Recession of 2008]], continuing into 2009, hit Britain hard and has yet to bottom out. Labour took much of the blame, and its polling rates dropped to levels not seen since the early 1980s. Labour's popularity continued to decline in 2009, as the party made its worst electoral showing in a hundred years in the EU elections in June 2009. Brown, however, beat back his disunited critics, reorganized his cabinet, and stumbled onward. The Conservatives maintain a large lead for the next general election, which must be held by spring 2010.<br />
<br />
<br />
==PR and spin==<br />
<br />
With the formation of New Labour under the leadership of [[Tony Blair]] and along with the support of spin doctors such as [[Peter Mandelson]], the modern Labour Party has been accused of being an extremely deceptive PR machine; being highly dishonest in its dealings with the public and media. <br />
<br />
==Sharia Infiltration==<br />
A 2010 newspaper report repeated a claim by [[Jim Fitzpatrick]], the MP for [[Poplar and Canning Town]] that the Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) had effectively created a party within the party in east London. The IFE seeks to make Britain and [[Europe]] an Islamic state. In covert investigations by the media it was determined that the IFE were expressing opposition to democracy, support for sharia law or mocking black people and organized meetings with extremists, including [[Taliban]] allies. <ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/labour/7333420/Islamic-radicals-infiltrate-the-Labour-Party.html Islamic radicals 'infiltrate' the Labour Party, TelegraphUK, February 27, 2010]</ref><br />
<br />
{{cquote| [They are] placing people within the political parties, recruiting members to those political parties, trying to get individuals selected and elected so they can exercise political influence and power, whether it's at local government level or national level.}}<br />
<br />
==Prime Ministers==<br />
<br />
* [[Ramsay MacDonald]] (1924 and 1929-1935) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page136.asp]<br />
<br />
[[File:Labour45.jpg|thumb|270px|Labour won an unexpected landslide in 1945]]<br />
* [[Clement Attlee]] (1945-1951) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page133.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[Harold Wilson]] (1964-1970 and 1974-1976) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page129.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[James Callaghan]] (1976-1979) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page127.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[Tony Blair]] (1997-2007) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page4.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[Gordon Brown]] (2007-2010)<br />
[[File:Labour45b.jpg|thumb|275px|left|Iconic 1945 election poster]]<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Fabian Society]]<br />
* [[Industrial Democracy]]<br />
<br />
==Further reading==<br />
<br />
* Davies, Andrew. ''To Build a New Jerusalem: The British Labour Party from Keir Hardie to Tony Blair'' (1996)<br />
* Favretto, Ilaria."'Wilsonism' Reconsidered: Labour Party Revisionism, 1952-64." ''Contemporary British History'' 2000 14(4): 54-80 in [[EBSCO]]]]<br />
* Morgan, Austen. ''Harold Wilson'' (1992), 625pp; negative appraisal<br />
* Morgan, Kenneth O. ''Britain since 1945: The People's Peace'' (2001)<br />
* Pimlott, Ben. ''Harold Wilson'' (1992). Pimlott tries to rehabilitate Wilson’s political reputation, revealing that he was the prisoner rather than the master of various domestic and international dilemmas. <br />
* Swift, John. ''Labour in Crisis: Clement Attlee and the Labour Party in Opposition, 1931-1940'' (2001)<br />
* Worley, Matthew. ''Labour inside the Gate: A History of the British Labour Party between the Wars'' (2005),<br />
<br />
==External links==<br />
*[http://www.labour.org.uk/home Official site]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
[[category:British Political Parties]]<br />
[[Category:British History]]<br />
[[Category:British Politics]]<br />
[[Category:Labor Unions]]<br />
[[Category:Socialism]]<br />
[[category:New Left]]<br />
[[category:1960s]]</div>Wiggyhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Labour_Party_(UK)&diff=969508Talk:Labour Party (UK)2012-03-22T05:28:37Z<p>Wiggy: /* Opening paragraph */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Opening paragraph==<br />
<br />
It seems odd that the opening paragraph talks about an accusation of being a slick PR machine under Tony Blair. First this is old news now and Tony Blair has gone and second, which political party isn't accused of using PR to deceive?<br />
<br />
==Labour Party, socialists or not?==<br />
<br />
Yes. Their party website decribes them as being a socialist party.<br />
<br />
No. Fidel Castro describes Cuba as being a democracy - what the leader says doesn't make it so! Labour has pursued Third Way social-democratic policies since 1997, and during their time in power they have significantly shifted to the right. --[[User:Rafa|Rafa]] 18:04, 13 March 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Anyway, where does it describe them as socialist on their website?[[User:Sitedrm|Sitedrm]] 14:37, 21 March 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
*I think it is more accurate to call the Labour Party a social democrat party rather than a democratic socialist party. While there are still elements with the party that could still be described as socialist, very few of the party's objectives match the definition. They are recognised as being centre-left much like other parties in Europe and social democrat is the label that is typically applied to this part of the political spectrum. They would be closest to the Democrats if an American comparison had to be made. I will make this minor change if nobody objects. [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 13:16, 9 October 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::Ajkgordon, although I agree with the essence of what you are saying, I think it is also worth noting that the Labour party does use the term "democratic socialist" to describe itself - see [http://www.labour.org.uk/how_we_work]. Many Labour party members would be proud to emphasise that term, so I don't personally think it's misleading. [[User:OurMike|OurMike]] 13:37, 9 October 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::Goodness, so it does! Well, I'll leave it then. Thanks. [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 13:39, 9 October 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
The acutal socialists from the Labour party left ages ago with Arthur Scargill who aligned himself alongside Greenpeace and the Green Party trying to get the British coal mines reopened. That is why the Labour party advertises itself as "New Labour". They are anything but socialist. --[[User:EllisUSA|EllisUSA]] 18:15, 16 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Title ==<br />
<br />
Shouldn't this be located at a more appropriate title given the numerous parties around the world with the name? I know how fond Conservapedians are of Wikipedia, but just [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party as a comparison]... Thought I'd throw that out there. I doubt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party_%28Netherlands%29 the one whose page I was looking for] would merit much interest here anyway. :) [[User:Punuma|Punuma]] 19:03, 6 October 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: The leading "Labour Party" is in England. We're not going to elevate political correctness over the obvious here by linking to obscure parties in other countries copying the same name.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:07, 7 October 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::Yes, most other leading Labo(u)r parties tend to have a nationality descriptor, such as the New Zealand Labour Party. The only exception I can think of is the [http://www.labour.ie Labour Party in Ireland], which is one of the top three or four political parties there. [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 20:02, 10 October 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Needs revamping==<br />
This article is massively outdated - Labour have been out of government for half a year now (thank God) and this needs to be recognised. However, I can't edit the article. Can someone please change this/unlock the article. Many thanks, [[User:ChelseaR|ChelseaR]] 13:26, 1 November 2010 (EDT)</div>Wiggyhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Labour_Party_(UK)&diff=969507Talk:Labour Party (UK)2012-03-22T05:26:49Z<p>Wiggy: /* Labour Party, socialists or not? */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Opening paragraph==<br />
<br />
It seems odd that the opening paragraph talks about accusation of being a slick PR machine under Tony Blair. First this is old news now and Tony Blair has gone and second, which political party isn't accused of using PR to deceive?<br />
<br />
==Labour Party, socialists or not?==<br />
<br />
Yes. Their party website decribes them as being a socialist party.<br />
<br />
No. Fidel Castro describes Cuba as being a democracy - what the leader says doesn't make it so! Labour has pursued Third Way social-democratic policies since 1997, and during their time in power they have significantly shifted to the right. --[[User:Rafa|Rafa]] 18:04, 13 March 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Anyway, where does it describe them as socialist on their website?[[User:Sitedrm|Sitedrm]] 14:37, 21 March 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
*I think it is more accurate to call the Labour Party a social democrat party rather than a democratic socialist party. While there are still elements with the party that could still be described as socialist, very few of the party's objectives match the definition. They are recognised as being centre-left much like other parties in Europe and social democrat is the label that is typically applied to this part of the political spectrum. They would be closest to the Democrats if an American comparison had to be made. I will make this minor change if nobody objects. [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 13:16, 9 October 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::Ajkgordon, although I agree with the essence of what you are saying, I think it is also worth noting that the Labour party does use the term "democratic socialist" to describe itself - see [http://www.labour.org.uk/how_we_work]. Many Labour party members would be proud to emphasise that term, so I don't personally think it's misleading. [[User:OurMike|OurMike]] 13:37, 9 October 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::Goodness, so it does! Well, I'll leave it then. Thanks. [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 13:39, 9 October 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
The acutal socialists from the Labour party left ages ago with Arthur Scargill who aligned himself alongside Greenpeace and the Green Party trying to get the British coal mines reopened. That is why the Labour party advertises itself as "New Labour". They are anything but socialist. --[[User:EllisUSA|EllisUSA]] 18:15, 16 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Title ==<br />
<br />
Shouldn't this be located at a more appropriate title given the numerous parties around the world with the name? I know how fond Conservapedians are of Wikipedia, but just [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party as a comparison]... Thought I'd throw that out there. I doubt [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party_%28Netherlands%29 the one whose page I was looking for] would merit much interest here anyway. :) [[User:Punuma|Punuma]] 19:03, 6 October 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: The leading "Labour Party" is in England. We're not going to elevate political correctness over the obvious here by linking to obscure parties in other countries copying the same name.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:07, 7 October 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::Yes, most other leading Labo(u)r parties tend to have a nationality descriptor, such as the New Zealand Labour Party. The only exception I can think of is the [http://www.labour.ie Labour Party in Ireland], which is one of the top three or four political parties there. [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 20:02, 10 October 2007 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Needs revamping==<br />
This article is massively outdated - Labour have been out of government for half a year now (thank God) and this needs to be recognised. However, I can't edit the article. Can someone please change this/unlock the article. Many thanks, [[User:ChelseaR|ChelseaR]] 13:26, 1 November 2010 (EDT)</div>Wiggyhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Labour_Party_(UK)&diff=969506Labour Party (UK)2012-03-22T05:19:51Z<p>Wiggy: Undo revision 968910 by AmerICan (talk) New version was repetitive and less accurate.</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Labour Party''' is a [[United Kingdom|British]] [[Socialism|democratic socialist]]<ref>http://www.labour.org.uk/labour_policies</ref> political party. The party still pays lip service to many typical [[left-wing]] values and, along with all the main political parties in the UK, is [[Pro-choice]], pro-gay and pro-[[gun control]]. Under the leadership of [[Tony Blair]] and through the usage of talented spin doctors such as [[Peter Mandelson]], the modern Labour Party has been accused of being an extremely deceptive PR machine; being highly dishonest in its dealings with the public and media. <br />
<br />
The Labour Party was founded in 1900, and currently forms the [[Leader of the Opposition|Her Majesty's Opposition]], being the largest party in the UK not in currently in government. The current leader of the Labour Party is [[Ed Miliband]], who was elected by Labour party members on September 25th 2010, after their crushing defeat four months earlier in the UK's [[general election]]. [[Image:Labour logo.jpg|right|thumb|170px|The Labour Party's logo]]<br />
<br />
==History==<br />
===Origins===<br />
The Labour Party was formed out of an alliance of several prominent left-wing and socialist movements that existed in Britain at the turn of the century. Chief amongst them the were the [[Trades Union Congress]], the [[Fabian Society]], and the [[Independent Labour Party]]. The group took the name [[Labour Representation Committee]], later adopting the name [[Labour Party]] after achieving seats in the [[House of Commons]] at the 1906 election. Much of the intellectual energy came from the [[Fabian Socialism|Fabians, an informal group of intellectual socialists.]]<br />
<br />
The rise of Marxist socialism in the late 19th century in the Social Democratic Federation (SDF) (1881-1911) did not create a militantly atheistic and anti-religious force. From its beginnings, circa 1881, the SDF contained Christians, non-Christians, and anti-Christians. These groups generally coexisted in a state of compromise. The membership of the SDF was generally secularist and freethinking but religion was not a central issue. For all parties in the SDF, the central issue was commitment to socialism. <br />
<br />
[[File:Labour1910.jpg|thumb|290px|Labour called for abolition of the [[House of Lords]] in 1910; when elected, they kept it and appointed their own favourites to peerages. Later posters dropped the violent imagery and called for peaceful change.]]<br />
<br />
===Interwar period===<br />
In its early years the Labour Party benefited from an alliance with the other main left-wing party in Britain, the [[Liberal Party]]; from a growth in working class consciousness; and from dissatisfaction with both the Liberal and [[Conservative Party|Conservative]] parties in the wake of what were perceived to be their mistakes in the handling of the [[First World War]]. Winning growing numbers of seats at each election, the Labour Party was finally able to form a government in 1924 under the leadership of [[Ramsay MacDonald]]. However this was short-lived. The party did not have an outright majority, and in fact only had about one third of the total seats within the House. After just nine months the Party lost an important vote, and the government resigned. Four days before the election the ''[[Daily Mail]]'' published the "[[Zinoviev Letter]]", a forgery that seemed to indicate that the Communist Party of Great Britain was planning subversion or even a violent revolution in cooperation with Labour. The letter was leaked by the Foreign Ministry. The Labour Party was badly defeated in the 1924 general election, even though its vote increased by one million. The Conservative vote was up by two million as the Liberal party was rapidly collapsing. Historians agree the Zinoviev Letter was a forgery but their consensus is that it made little difference in the election. What is more important, after the election Labour leaders used it as an excuse for their failure; it became a roadblock to needed internal reforms in the Labour party.<br />
<br />
[[File:Labour1929.jpg|thumb|300px|Despite the deliberate appeal to middle class voters in this 1929 poster, most Labour voters were working class blokes who did not wear white collars and ties.]]<br />
The Labour Party briefly formed a government again in 1929, but this did not survive the effects of the [[Great Depression]]. In a dispute over the best way to handle the economic consequences of the global financial crash, the Party leadership fractured. A new "National Government" drawn from all parties was formed, with [[Ramsay MacDonald]] still as Prime Minister. However this was dominated by the other parties, particularly the Conservatives, who went on to dominate the British political scene for the rest of the interwar period.<br />
<br />
===Victory in 1945===<br />
The [[Second World War]] saw a major shift in political attitudes within Britain, and led to a landslide victory for [[Clement Attlee]] in 1945. The modest, unassuming intellectual Attlee named a cabinet that included all elements of the party. Of 37 ministers, eight were former coal miners, and eleven had been active trade unionists. <br />
<br />
This government introduced sweeping reforms of industry and the creation of the [[welfare state]]. Attlee's government nationalised major industries, founded the [[National Health Service]], and developed the idea of welfare from cradle to grave paid for out of taxation and available to everyone free of charge. Much of the welfare state is still in force today.<br />
<br />
The Labour government was fiercely anti-Communist, but the economy was so weak it had to relinquish a leadership role to the United States. Atlee pushed President [[Harry Truman]] to take over Britain's historic roles, especially in Greece, and indeed helped push the U.S. into the [[Cold War]] against the [[Soviet Union]].<br />
<br />
After losing in 1951, the Labour Party spent the next 13 years out of office and achieved little during the governments of Wilson (1964-1970 and 1974-1976) and his successor James Callaghan (1976-79). Their failures set the stage for the renewal of British energy and leadership under [[Margaret Thatcher]], beginning in 1979.<br />
<br />
===Socialism===<br />
Despite its historic commitment to socialism, the British Labour Party has been flexible and reformist in its doctrine ever since it was founded in 1900. After the crisis of 1931, the party adopted a broadly social democratic program in which socialism was linked with the idea of economic planning and social welfare. The Attlee government of 1945-51 was very moderate in its commitment to socialism. The years of opposition saw violent arguments in the party between left-wing Bevanites and the center-right supporters of [[Hugh Gaitskell]]. But the main differences concerned foreign and defense policy. On domestic issues, the party was now broadly revisionist, committed to the mixed economy and social equality.<br />
[[File:Atlee45.jpg|thumb|370px|Atlee defeats Churchill in 1945, and becomes bowler for the British cricket team; he faces difficult issues like housing and finance which are coming to bat.]]<br />
<br />
==New Left==<br />
Wilson, on becoming prime minister in 1964, tried to bypass old doctrinal arguments by harnessing nationalized industry to ideas of scientific modernization. But his government was a great failure, not least in its relations with the trade unions, the linchpin of the party since its founding. Wilson represented the older traditions of the Labour Party and never understood the emerging "New Left" with new social roots, new ideas and new styles of political behaviour in the late 1970s. Following the disillusion and demoralization of traditional Labour Party activists with Wilson's government, a more radical and well-educated local Labour leadership appeared at the local level. This bred much disillusionment and launched a new left-wing socialism in the 1970s. The Labour government of 1974-79 added to this division. The left-wing pressure reached its climax in the early 1980s when Thatcher was in power but resulted only in heavy defeats for Labour in 1983 and 1987. The general impression in 1989 is of a loss of political and intellectual confidence, with British socialism trapped between a cherished past and an uncertain future.<ref> Kenneth O. Morgan, ''Britain since 1945: The People's Peace'' (2001)</ref><br />
<br />
===Social issues===<br />
The Labour Party has also been a strong proponent of social reform. Under [[Harold Wilson]] in the late 60s, abortion and homosexuality were decriminalizes, the death penalty abolished and divorce was made easier. Unease from a perceived large number of immigrants from Commonwealth countries also led to four Race Relations Acts, all of which were passed under Labour governments.<br />
<br />
===Industrial Strife===<br />
see [[Winter of Discontent]]<br />
<br />
The Labour Party always prided itself on strong links with [[Labor union|trade unions]], but by the late 1960s there was growing industrial unrest. Inflation was becoming a growing problem and unemployment began to rise. Harold Wilson was elected for a third time in February 1974, taking over from Conservative [[Edward Heath]] whose government was brought to its knees by oil shortages and a crippling coal miners' strike in 1973. Throughout the late 1970s strikes were commonplace, tight controls on pay rises, known as incomes policy, was struggling to curb inflation which reached a high of 28%. A series of devastating strikes in the winter of 1978/79 which became known as the [[Winter of Discontent]] led to the government of [[James Callaghan]] being defeated in a vote of no confidence and a general election which was won by the Conservative Party led by [[Margaret Thatcher]].<br />
<br />
===A swing to the left===<br />
[[Michael Foot]] became leader of the Labour Party in 1980 and took the party in a far left direction. The 1983 manifesto pledged to reverse all Thatcher's economic reforms; renationalise all privatised businesses, return taxes on the rich to the punitive level of the 1970s (98% in some cases), restore trade union powers, leave the European Economic Community, unilaterally surrender Britain's nuclear weapons and campaign for a united Ireland as a solution to the paramilitarism and terrorism that had beset the province of Northern Ireland throughout the 70s. The manifesto became known as the "longest suicide note in history" and was defeated by Thatcher's Conservatives in a landslide. Pro-EEC Labour Party members who formed their own party, the SDP, nearly polled more votes than the Labour Party. If not for the SDP's poorly thought-out electoral strategy (which gained plenty of votes, but almost no seats in the Commons), Labour could have been reduced to third party status in this election.<br />
<br />
Foot was succeeded by [[Neil Kinnock]], who ditched much (but not all) of the far-left baggage from 1983. Under Kinnock, Labour was again defeated in a landslide in 1987 but, crucially, Labour came well ahead of the SDP (now in alliance with the Liberal Party).<br />
<br />
===Tony Blair and "New Labour"===<br />
The term New Labour didn't come into being until [[Tony Blair]] became leader in 1994, but the reform of the Labour Party took place long before then. By 1992, it was clear that Thatcher's reforms had struck a chord with voters and the Labour party were no longer promising to renationalise industries or restore trade union powers. Only the top rate of income tax would be raised from 40 to 50%. Opinion polls during the election campaign predicted a very close result, but the Conservative party won a narrow victory of 23 seats after an unusually high turnout.<br />
<br />
John Smith became leader in 1992, but his sudden death in 1994 led to Tony Blair to become leader and the term "New Labour" was born. Blair started by reforming Clause IV. Clause IV dealt with the purpose of the Party and referred direct to its erstwhile desire for public ownership of the means of production; the current version instead calls for 'a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few'.<br />
The revised version mentions "socialism" as a sop to the old timers:<br />
:The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few.’<br />
<br />
Blair promised no increases in income tax and pledged to run a stable economy. He scored landslide victories in 1997, and again in 2001.<br />
<br />
One of Blair's most controversial decisions was to [[Iraq War|invade Iraq]] in 2003 alongside the Americans and other allies. Britain became the second largest contributor of armed forces to [[George W. Bush]]'s "Coalition of the Willing", and Blair staunchly defended the position, and won supporting votes in parliament. Partly due to the war's unpopularity, and partly to a perception that the Government had raised taxes on business and individuals to unacceptable levels, the Labour party won a much smaller majority in 2005 and has seen key bills defeated by backbench revolts such as the plan to hold terrorist suspects for up to 90 days without charge.<br />
<br />
Blair had lost his momentum, so he retired in mid-2007 and was replaced per prior arrangement by his long-time Chancellor, [[Gordon Brown]]. The worldwide [[Recession of 2008]], continuing into 2009, hit Britain hard and has yet to bottom out. Labour took much of the blame, and its polling rates dropped to levels not seen since the early 1980s. Labour's popularity continued to decline in 2009, as the party made its worst electoral showing in a hundred years in the EU elections in June 2009. Brown, however, beat back his disunited critics, reorganized his cabinet, and stumbled onward. The Conservatives maintain a large lead for the next general election, which must be held by spring 2010.<br />
<br />
<br />
==Sharia Infiltration==<br />
A 2010 newspaper report repeated a claim by [[Jim Fitzpatrick]], the MP for [[Poplar and Canning Town]] that the Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) had effectively created a party within the party in east London. The IFE seeks to make Britain and [[Europe]] an Islamic state. In covert investigations by the media it was determined that the IFE were expressing opposition to democracy, support for sharia law or mocking black people and organized meetings with extremists, including [[Taliban]] allies. <ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/labour/7333420/Islamic-radicals-infiltrate-the-Labour-Party.html Islamic radicals 'infiltrate' the Labour Party, TelegraphUK, February 27, 2010]</ref><br />
<br />
{{cquote| [They are] placing people within the political parties, recruiting members to those political parties, trying to get individuals selected and elected so they can exercise political influence and power, whether it's at local government level or national level.}}<br />
<br />
==Prime Ministers==<br />
<br />
* [[Ramsay MacDonald]] (1924 and 1929-1935) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page136.asp]<br />
<br />
[[File:Labour45.jpg|thumb|270px|Labour won an unexpected landslide in 1945]]<br />
* [[Clement Attlee]] (1945-1951) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page133.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[Harold Wilson]] (1964-1970 and 1974-1976) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page129.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[James Callaghan]] (1976-1979) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page127.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[Tony Blair]] (1997-2007) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page4.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[Gordon Brown]] (2007-2010)<br />
[[File:Labour45b.jpg|thumb|275px|left|Iconic 1945 election poster]]<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Fabian Society]]<br />
* [[Industrial Democracy]]<br />
<br />
==Further reading==<br />
<br />
* Davies, Andrew. ''To Build a New Jerusalem: The British Labour Party from Keir Hardie to Tony Blair'' (1996)<br />
* Favretto, Ilaria."'Wilsonism' Reconsidered: Labour Party Revisionism, 1952-64." ''Contemporary British History'' 2000 14(4): 54-80 in [[EBSCO]]]]<br />
* Morgan, Austen. ''Harold Wilson'' (1992), 625pp; negative appraisal<br />
* Morgan, Kenneth O. ''Britain since 1945: The People's Peace'' (2001)<br />
* Pimlott, Ben. ''Harold Wilson'' (1992). Pimlott tries to rehabilitate Wilson’s political reputation, revealing that he was the prisoner rather than the master of various domestic and international dilemmas. <br />
* Swift, John. ''Labour in Crisis: Clement Attlee and the Labour Party in Opposition, 1931-1940'' (2001)<br />
* Worley, Matthew. ''Labour inside the Gate: A History of the British Labour Party between the Wars'' (2005),<br />
<br />
==External links==<br />
*[http://www.labour.org.uk/home Official site]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
[[category:British Political Parties]]<br />
[[Category:British History]]<br />
[[Category:British Politics]]<br />
[[Category:Labor Unions]]<br />
[[Category:Socialism]]<br />
[[category:New Left]]<br />
[[category:1960s]]</div>Wiggyhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservative_Party_(UK)&diff=965873Conservative Party (UK)2012-03-04T15:58:47Z<p>Wiggy: Added pro-choice information</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:Conservatives.png|right|thumb|300px|The Conservative Party logo]]<br />
The '''Conservative Party''' is the largest right of center party in the [[United Kingdom]], and is one of that country's three major political parties. Its full official name is the ''Conservative and Unionist Party'', and it is commonly referred to as the ''Tory Party'' after its historical predecessor. Its current leader as of 2012 is [[David Cameron]]. Aside from Economic Conservatism or [[Thatcherism]] as known in the UK, there is little actually Conservative about the modern party which is, along with all the main political parties in the UK, [[Pro-choice]], pro-gay and pro-[[gun control]].<br />
<br />
==British conservatism==<br />
<br />
British conservatism has its own distinctive tradition, separate both from that of continental European conservatism and from that of American conservatism. Traditional British conservatism is rooted in pragmatism, practicality and concrete experience: this reflects a broader historical preference in British culture for the practical over the theoretical and for the concrete over the abstract. In continental Europe, many conservatives in past times, such as the Frenchman [[Joseph de Maistre]], were strongly ideological and defended causes such as absolute monarchy and Roman Catholicism. By contrast, the heroes of British conservatism (such as Sir [[Edmund Burke]] in the eighteenth century, Sir [[Robert Peel]] and [[Benjamin Disraeli]] in the nineteenth, and Sir [[Winston Churchill]] in the twentieth) were moderate, pragmatic and non-ideological. While a more ideological strand of conservatism was in the ascendant during the leadership of [[Margaret Thatcher|Lady Thatcher]] (1975-1990), the older, pragmatic trend has reasserted itself in more recent years.<br />
<br />
==The Conservative Party in recent years==<br />
<br />
The modern British Conservative Party ran the United Kingdom for nearly 20 years, beginning with Margaret Thatcher's victory for the Party in 1979. She came into office facing a British economy that had been crippled by industrial disputes, strikes, high unemployment, and collapsing public services, especially during the so-called 'Winter of Discontent' of 1978-9. Mrs. Thatcher turned that around, broke the iron grip of the trade unions, and restored the British economy to a free enterprise system that has continued to this day. She was succeeded by John Major in 1990, and, to the surprise of the media, Major won the general election in 1992 and extended the Conservative Party's power until 1997. <br />
<br />
By 1997 the Labour Party had finally embraced the more conservative direction for the country and abandoned many of its socialist economic policies of the past. Economic difficulties, including a dispute over whether the UK should join the currency of the European Union, hurt the Conservative Party further. This was coupled with a perception that the party had become corrupt, with a number of high-profile members of the party being involved in financial and sexual scandals. The Labour Party won in a landslide in 1997 and held power until 2010. <br />
<br />
Major was soon after replaced by [[William Hague]], whose election as party leader was seen as an affirmation that the party wanted to continue with its Thatcherite policies. Hague was the victim of smears and attacks by a media which became Labour-biased to an extent never before seen in British history, and any attempt he made to state his policies or attack the government was routinely ignored (the UK has media regulations similar to the [[Fairness Doctrine]], but does not regulate what the media are supposed to report, only how much time they allocate to each party). The 2001 election went little better than the previous for the Conservatives, for which Hague accepted responsibility and stepped down as leader. [[Iain Duncan Smith]] replaced Hague, seemingly getting elected for no reason other than the fact that he was endorsed by Thatcher, and made no real impact as party leader. After passing up chances to attack the government for their role in [[Operation Iraqi Freedom]] (which had far less support in the UK than it did in the US), the party decided that enough was enough and Duncan Smith was removed as leader in late 2003. [[Michael Howard]] was seen by many as the only possible man to take the Conservatives forward, and was elected as the new party leader without opposition. A far more adept period of leadership saw a recovery at the 2005 election, halving Labour's majority in the House of Commons. A few weeks later, Howard announced that while the recovery of the Conservative Party had begun, he had done all he could as party leader, and so would step down once a successor had been elected.<br />
<br />
==The modern Party==<br />
<!--[[Image:Caroline Spelman.jpg|right|thumb|250px|Caroline Spelman, the Conservative Party Chairman]] --><br />
Since the early 2000s, the Conservative Party leaders have softened its conservative stance on social and fiscal issues, and this has increased its popularity with the voters. Particularly since David Cameron - a self-declared "liberal conservative" (which in British English means "moderate conservative") - became leader of the Conservative Party, their support in the country has risen dramatically, however this is also due to the media-perpetuated anti-war feeling within the United Kingdom following [[Tony Blair]]'s era, coupled with the unpopularity of [[Gordon Brown]]'s government<ref>http://politics.guardian.co.uk/speeches/story/0,,1869970,00.html</ref> and recent polls. <ref>http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/2007/Guardian%20-%20Jan/guardian-jan-2007.asp</ref> <ref> http://politics.guardian.co.uk/labour/story/0,,2016791,00.html </ref><br />
<br />
Cameron can be seen as a more moderate conservative than many previous leaders. His party policies have gravitated towards a more "green" outlook as the concern about [[global warming]] has grown within the UK. He has also praised Britain's socialized healthcare system, the [[National Health Service|NHS]]; but has also considered privatisation of sections of the service in an attempt to decrease the deficit at which it currently operates. The party has also continued to support some traditional elements of Conservative policy, such as support for the family.<br />
<br />
Since forming the Coalition Government in 2010, Cameron's popularity has been rapidly declining, as indicated by various opinion polls conducted by the media. Current polls suggest the conservatives would tie with the labour party while the Liberal Democrats have slumped in popularity. <br />
<br />
David Cameron has established his own website. [http://www.webcameron.org.uk/]<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
<br />
* [[British politics]]<br />
* [[British conservatives]]<br />
* [[David Cameron]]<br />
* [[Margaret Thatcher]]<br />
* [[Conservative Party of New York State|Conservative Party of New York State (CPNYS)]]<br />
* [[American Conservative Party|American Conservative Party (ACP)]]<br />
<br />
==External Links==<br />
<br />
* [http://www.conservatives.com/ Conservative Party Official Website]<br />
* [http://www.conservatives.com/Policy/Manifesto.aspx Conservative Party Manefesto for the 2010 General Election]<br />
* [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-miliband-would-beat-cameron--unlike-ed-6292887.html]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
[[category:British Political Parties]]<br />
[[Category:British History]]</div>Wiggyhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Labour_Party_(UK)&diff=965872Labour Party (UK)2012-03-04T15:55:44Z<p>Wiggy: </p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Labour Party''' is a [[United Kingdom|British]] political party which at its roots is [[Socialism|democratic socialist]]<ref>http://www.labour.org.uk/labour_policies</ref>. However since 1994 it has arguably moved very much to the centre of British politics under the guise of New Labour. The party still pays lip service to many typical [[left-wing]] values and, along with all the main political parties in the UK, is [[Pro-choice]], pro-gay and pro-[[gun control]]. Under the leadership of [[Tony Blair]] and through the usage of talented spin doctors such as [[Peter Mandelson]], the modern Labour Party has been accused of being an extremely deceptive PR machine; being highly dishonest in its dealings with the public and media. <br />
<br />
The Labour Party was founded in 1900, and currently forms the [[Leader of the Opposition|Her Majesty's Opposition]], being the largest party in the UK not in currently in government. The current leader of the Labour Party is [[Ed Miliband]], who was elected by Labour party members on September 25th 2010, after their crushing defeat four months earlier in the UK's [[general election]]. [[Image:Labour logo.jpg|right|thumb|170px|The Labour Party's logo]]<br />
<br />
==History==<br />
===Origins===<br />
The Labour Party was formed out of an alliance of several prominent left-wing and socialist movements that existed in Britain at the turn of the century. Chief amongst them the were the [[Trades Union Congress]], the [[Fabian Society]], and the [[Independent Labour Party]]. The group took the name [[Labour Representation Committee]], later adopting the name [[Labour Party]] after achieving seats in the [[House of Commons]] at the 1906 election. Much of the intellectual energy came from the [[Fabian Socialism|Fabians, an informal group of intellectual socialists.]]<br />
<br />
The rise of Marxist socialism in the late 19th century in the Social Democratic Federation (SDF) (1881-1911) did not create a militantly atheistic and anti-religious force. From its beginnings, circa 1881, the SDF contained Christians, non-Christians, and anti-Christians. These groups generally coexisted in a state of compromise. The membership of the SDF was generally secularist and freethinking but religion was not a central issue. For all parties in the SDF, the central issue was commitment to socialism. <br />
<br />
[[File:Labour1910.jpg|thumb|290px|Labour called for abolition of the [[House of Lords]] in 1910; when elected, they kept it and appointed their own favourites to peerages. Later posters dropped the violent imagery and called for peaceful change.]]<br />
<br />
===Interwar period===<br />
In its early years the Labour Party benefited from an alliance with the other main left-wing party in Britain, the [[Liberal Party]]; from a growth in working class consciousness; and from dissatisfaction with both the Liberal and [[Conservative Party|Conservative]] parties in the wake of what were perceived to be their mistakes in the handling of the [[First World War]]. Winning growing numbers of seats at each election, the Labour Party was finally able to form a government in 1924 under the leadership of [[Ramsay MacDonald]]. However this was short-lived. The party did not have an outright majority, and in fact only had about one third of the total seats within the House. After just nine months the Party lost an important vote, and the government resigned. Four days before the election the ''[[Daily Mail]]'' published the "[[Zinoviev Letter]]", a forgery that seemed to indicate that the Communist Party of Great Britain was planning subversion or even a violent revolution in cooperation with Labour. The letter was leaked by the Foreign Ministry. The Labour Party was badly defeated in the 1924 general election, even though its vote increased by one million. The Conservative vote was up by two million as the Liberal party was rapidly collapsing. Historians agree the Zinoviev Letter was a forgery but their consensus is that it made little difference in the election. What is more important, after the election Labour leaders used it as an excuse for their failure; it became a roadblock to needed internal reforms in the Labour party.<br />
<br />
[[File:Labour1929.jpg|thumb|300px|Despite the deliberate appeal to middle class voters in this 1929 poster, most Labour voters were working class blokes who did not wear white collars and ties.]]<br />
The Labour Party briefly formed a government again in 1929, but this did not survive the effects of the [[Great Depression]]. In a dispute over the best way to handle the economic consequences of the global financial crash, the Party leadership fractured. A new "National Government" drawn from all parties was formed, with [[Ramsay MacDonald]] still as Prime Minister. However this was dominated by the other parties, particularly the Conservatives, who went on to dominate the British political scene for the rest of the interwar period.<br />
<br />
===Victory in 1945===<br />
The [[Second World War]] saw a major shift in political attitudes within Britain, and led to a landslide victory for [[Clement Attlee]] in 1945. The modest, unassuming intellectual Attlee named a cabinet that included all elements of the party. Of 37 ministers, eight were former coal miners, and eleven had been active trade unionists. <br />
<br />
This government introduced sweeping reforms of industry and the creation of the [[welfare state]]. Attlee's government nationalised major industries, founded the [[National Health Service]], and developed the idea of welfare from cradle to grave paid for out of taxation and available to everyone free of charge. Much of the welfare state is still in force today.<br />
<br />
The Labour government was fiercely anti-Communist, but the economy was so weak it had to relinquish a leadership role to the United States. Atlee pushed President [[Harry Truman]] to take over Britain's historic roles, especially in Greece, and indeed helped push the U.S. into the [[Cold War]] against the [[Soviet Union]].<br />
<br />
After losing in 1951, the Labour Party spent the next 13 years out of office and achieved little during the governments of Wilson (1964-1970 and 1974-1976) and his successor James Callaghan (1976-79). Their failures set the stage for the renewal of British energy and leadership under [[Margaret Thatcher]], beginning in 1979.<br />
<br />
===Socialism===<br />
Despite its historic commitment to socialism, the British Labour Party has been flexible and reformist in its doctrine ever since it was founded in 1900. After the crisis of 1931, the party adopted a broadly social democratic program in which socialism was linked with the idea of economic planning and social welfare. The Attlee government of 1945-51 was very moderate in its commitment to socialism. The years of opposition saw violent arguments in the party between left-wing Bevanites and the center-right supporters of [[Hugh Gaitskell]]. But the main differences concerned foreign and defense policy. On domestic issues, the party was now broadly revisionist, committed to the mixed economy and social equality.<br />
[[File:Atlee45.jpg|thumb|370px|Atlee defeats Churchill in 1945, and becomes bowler for the British cricket team; he faces difficult issues like housing and finance which are coming to bat.]]<br />
<br />
==New Left==<br />
Wilson, on becoming prime minister in 1964, tried to bypass old doctrinal arguments by harnessing nationalized industry to ideas of scientific modernization. But his government was a great failure, not least in its relations with the trade unions, the linchpin of the party since its founding. Wilson represented the older traditions of the Labour Party and never understood the emerging "New Left" with new social roots, new ideas and new styles of political behaviour in the late 1970s. Following the disillusion and demoralization of traditional Labour Party activists with Wilson's government, a more radical and well-educated local Labour leadership appeared at the local level. This bred much disillusionment and launched a new left-wing socialism in the 1970s. The Labour government of 1974-79 added to this division. The left-wing pressure reached its climax in the early 1980s when Thatcher was in power but resulted only in heavy defeats for Labour in 1983 and 1987. The general impression in 1989 is of a loss of political and intellectual confidence, with British socialism trapped between a cherished past and an uncertain future.<ref> Kenneth O. Morgan, ''Britain since 1945: The People's Peace'' (2001)</ref><br />
<br />
===Social issues===<br />
The Labour Party has also been a strong proponent of social reform. Under [[Harold Wilson]] in the late 60s, abortion and homosexuality were decriminalizes, the death penalty abolished and divorce was made easier. Unease from a perceived large number of immigrants from Commonwealth countries also led to four Race Relations Acts, all of which were passed under Labour governments.<br />
<br />
===Industrial Strife===<br />
see [[Winter of Discontent]]<br />
<br />
The Labour Party always prided itself on strong links with [[Labor union|trade unions]], but by the late 1960s there was growing industrial unrest. Inflation was becoming a growing problem and unemployment began to rise. Harold Wilson was elected for a third time in February 1974, taking over from Conservative [[Edward Heath]] whose government was brought to its knees by oil shortages and a crippling coal miners' strike in 1973. Throughout the late 1970s strikes were commonplace, tight controls on pay rises, known as incomes policy, was struggling to curb inflation which reached a high of 28%. A series of devastating strikes in the winter of 1978/79 which became known as the [[Winter of Discontent]] led to the government of [[James Callaghan]] being defeated in a vote of no confidence and a general election which was won by the Conservative Party led by [[Margaret Thatcher]].<br />
<br />
===A swing to the left===<br />
[[Michael Foot]] became leader of the Labour Party in 1980 and took the party in a far left direction. The 1983 manifesto pledged to reverse all Thatcher's economic reforms; renationalise all privatised businesses, return taxes on the rich to the punitive level of the 1970s (98% in some cases), restore trade union powers, leave the European Economic Community, unilaterally surrender Britain's nuclear weapons and campaign for a united Ireland as a solution to the paramilitarism and terrorism that had beset the province of Northern Ireland throughout the 70s. The manifesto became known as the "longest suicide note in history" and was defeated by Thatcher's Conservatives in a landslide. Pro-EEC Labour Party members who formed their own party, the SDP, nearly polled more votes than the Labour Party. If not for the SDP's poorly thought-out electoral strategy (which gained plenty of votes, but almost no seats in the Commons), Labour could have been reduced to third party status in this election.<br />
<br />
Foot was succeeded by [[Neil Kinnock]], who ditched much (but not all) of the far-left baggage from 1983. Under Kinnock, Labour was again defeated in a landslide in 1987 but, crucially, Labour came well ahead of the SDP (now in alliance with the Liberal Party).<br />
<br />
===Tony Blair and "New Labour"===<br />
The term New Labour didn't come into being until [[Tony Blair]] became leader in 1994, but the reform of the Labour Party took place long before then. By 1992, it was clear that Thatcher's reforms had struck a chord with voters and the Labour party were no longer promising to renationalise industries or restore trade union powers. Only the top rate of income tax would be raised from 40 to 50%. Opinion polls during the election campaign predicted a very close result, but the Conservative party won a narrow victory of 23 seats after an unusually high turnout.<br />
<br />
John Smith became leader in 1992, but his sudden death in 1994 led to Tony Blair to become leader and the term "New Labour" was born. Blair started by reforming Clause IV. Clause IV dealt with the purpose of the Party and referred direct to its erstwhile desire for public ownership of the means of production; the current version instead calls for 'a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few'.<br />
The revised version mentions "socialism" as a sop to the old timers:<br />
:The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few.’<br />
<br />
Blair promised no increases in income tax and pledged to run a stable economy. He scored landslide victories in 1997, and again in 2001.<br />
<br />
One of Blair's most controversial decisions was to [[Iraq War|invade Iraq]] in 2003 alongside the Americans and other allies. Britain became the second largest contributor of armed forces to [[George W. Bush]]'s "Coalition of the Willing", and Blair staunchly defended the position, and won supporting votes in parliament. Partly due to the war's unpopularity, and partly to a perception that the Government had raised taxes on business and individuals to unacceptable levels, the Labour party won a much smaller majority in 2005 and has seen key bills defeated by backbench revolts such as the plan to hold terrorist suspects for up to 90 days without charge.<br />
<br />
Blair had lost his momentum, so he retired in mid-2007 and was replaced per prior arrangement by his long-time Chancellor, [[Gordon Brown]]. The worldwide [[Recession of 2008]], continuing into 2009, hit Britain hard and has yet to bottom out. Labour took much of the blame, and its polling rates dropped to levels not seen since the early 1980s. Labour's popularity continued to decline in 2009, as the party made its worst electoral showing in a hundred years in the EU elections in June 2009. Brown, however, beat back his disunited critics, reorganized his cabinet, and stumbled onward. The Conservatives maintain a large lead for the next general election, which must be held by spring 2010.<br />
<br />
<br />
==Sharia Infiltration==<br />
A 2010 newspaper report repeated a claim by [[Jim Fitzpatrick]], the MP for [[Poplar and Canning Town]] that the Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) had effectively created a party within the party in east London. The IFE seeks to make Britain and [[Europe]] an Islamic state. In covert investigations by the media it was determined that the IFE were expressing opposition to democracy, support for sharia law or mocking black people and organized meetings with extremists, including [[Taliban]] allies. <ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/labour/7333420/Islamic-radicals-infiltrate-the-Labour-Party.html Islamic radicals 'infiltrate' the Labour Party, TelegraphUK, February 27, 2010]</ref><br />
<br />
{{cquote| [They are] placing people within the political parties, recruiting members to those political parties, trying to get individuals selected and elected so they can exercise political influence and power, whether it's at local government level or national level.}}<br />
<br />
==Prime Ministers==<br />
<br />
* [[Ramsay MacDonald]] (1924 and 1929-1935) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page136.asp]<br />
<br />
[[File:Labour45.jpg|thumb|270px|Labour won an unexpected landslide in 1945]]<br />
* [[Clement Attlee]] (1945-1951) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page133.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[Harold Wilson]] (1964-1970 and 1974-1976) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page129.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[James Callaghan]] (1976-1979) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page127.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[Tony Blair]] (1997-2007) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page4.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[Gordon Brown]] (2007-2010)<br />
[[File:Labour45b.jpg|thumb|275px|left|Iconic 1945 election poster]]<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Fabian Society]]<br />
* [[Industrial Democracy]]<br />
<br />
==Further reading==<br />
<br />
* Davies, Andrew. ''To Build a New Jerusalem: The British Labour Party from Keir Hardie to Tony Blair'' (1996)<br />
* Favretto, Ilaria."'Wilsonism' Reconsidered: Labour Party Revisionism, 1952-64." ''Contemporary British History'' 2000 14(4): 54-80 in [[EBSCO]]]]<br />
* Morgan, Austen. ''Harold Wilson'' (1992), 625pp; negative appraisal<br />
* Morgan, Kenneth O. ''Britain since 1945: The People's Peace'' (2001)<br />
* Pimlott, Ben. ''Harold Wilson'' (1992). Pimlott tries to rehabilitate Wilson’s political reputation, revealing that he was the prisoner rather than the master of various domestic and international dilemmas. <br />
* Swift, John. ''Labour in Crisis: Clement Attlee and the Labour Party in Opposition, 1931-1940'' (2001)<br />
* Worley, Matthew. ''Labour inside the Gate: A History of the British Labour Party between the Wars'' (2005),<br />
<br />
==External links==<br />
*[http://www.labour.org.uk/home Official site]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
[[category:British Political Parties]]<br />
[[Category:British History]]<br />
[[Category:British Politics]]<br />
[[Category:Labor Unions]]<br />
[[Category:Socialism]]<br />
[[category:New Left]]<br />
[[category:1960s]]</div>Wiggyhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Agnosticism&diff=965219Agnosticism2012-03-02T00:05:21Z<p>Wiggy: Rephrasing to make more accurate</p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:65375.jpg|thumb|David Hume]]<br />
'''Agnosticism''' is, in weaker forms, an affirmation of ignorance regarding the existence of [[God]], and in stronger forms, the assertion that God's existence is not capable of being known (unknowable).<br />
<br />
The proponent of the weaker form does not make a claim to knowledge about existence, but he simply suspends from making a decision. A suspension of decision, in terms of logic, does not have a truth value, and therefore they are not making an argument. The proponent of the stronger form goes a step further and makes a claim to knowledge by saying, ''I know that the existence of God cannot be known''. <br />
<br />
The word "agnostic" was coined in 1869 by [[T. H. Huxley]]<ref>T. H. Huxley was also an early and influential supporter of [[Darwinism]].</ref> from the [[Greek language|Greek]] roots ''a-'' not, and ''-gnostic,'' knowing; the philosopher [[Herbert Spencer]] was influential in spreading its use. One nineteenth-century saw held that "There is no god but the Unknowable, and Herbert Spencer is his prophet."<ref>London, Jack (1913), ''Martin Eden,'' [http://london.sonoma.edu/Writings/MartinEden/chapter13.html Chapter 13]</ref> ]<br />
<br />
Some accuse agnostics of being cowardly atheists, due to their supposedly wishy-washy rejection of God. It is also said by particular Christian groups, particularly but not exclusively in the United States of America, that those who know of [[Jesus]] but do not accept him are just as damned as those who reject him explicitly. <br />
<br />
==Atheism and agnosticism==<br />
Some agnostics bristle at the term ''[[atheist]]''. They say they aren't atheists, because they don't "believe that God does not exist" but rather "neither believe nor disbelieve". <br />
<br />
Agnostics differ from regular [[Atheism|atheists]] in that they do not deny God's existence.<br />
<br />
Many religious [[believer]]s make no distinction among [[non-believer]]s. If you're not sure that God exists, they combine the unsure and "surely not" into one lump. For these believers, an "atheist" is any [[faithless]] person who doesn't [[believe]] in God.<br />
<br />
Among those who have not decided whether to believe in God, or to disbelieve in Him, there are two main groups:<br />
#Those who simply haven't made a decision<br />
#Those who declare no rational decision is possible, on the grounds that the existence of God is not knowable.<br />
<br />
[[Bertrand Russell]] once wrote that, in describing his beliefs,<br />
:I never know whether I should say 'Agnostic' or whether I should say 'Atheist'.... As a [[philosopher]], if I were speaking to a purely philosophic audience I should say that I ought to describe myself as an Agnostic, because I do not think that there is a conclusive argument by which one [can] prove that there is not a God. On the other hand, if I am to convey the right impression to the ordinary man in the street I think I ought to say that I am an Atheist, because when I say that I cannot prove that there is not a God, I ought to add equally that I cannot prove that there are not the [[Greek mythology|Homeric gods]].<ref>Russell, Bertrand (1947) [http://www.luminary.us/russell/atheist_agnostic.html Am I An Atheist Or An Agnostic?] Most online sources say "by which one prove," probably a mistake.</ref><br />
<br />
== Norman Geisler on Complete Agnosticism ==<br />
<br />
[[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] [[Norman Geisler]] wrote on complete agnosticism: <br />
{{cquote|Complete agnosticism is self-defeating; it reduces to the self-destructing assertion that "one knows enough about reality in order to affirm that nothing can be known about reality." This statement provides within itself all that is necessary to [[falsify]] itself. For if one knows something about reality, then he surely cannot affirm in the same breath that all of reality is unknowable. And of course if one knows nothing whatsoever about reality, then he has no basis whatsoever for making a statement about reality. It will not suffice to say that his knowledge about reality is purely and completely negative, that is, a knowledge of what one cannot meaningfully affirm that something is not – that it follows that total agnosticism is self-defeating because it assumes some knowledge about reality in order to deny any knowledge of reality (Geisler, Apologetics, p. 20).<ref>http://www.greatcom.org/resources/secular_religions/ch01/default.htm</ref>}}<br />
<br />
==Frequency==<br />
[[File:Belief-god.jpg|thumb|550px|Financial Times (FT)/Harris Poll among adults in 5 countries in 2006]]<br />
Agnosticism has become a fairly common belief system in Western culture with 14% of people in the [[United States]], 32% of people in [[France]] and 35% of people in [[Great Britain]] self-identifying as agnostics.<ref>http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/allnewsbydate.asp?NewsID=1131</ref><br />
<br />
==Agnosticism and Uncharitableness==<br />
[[Per capita]] atheists and agnostics in the [[United States]] [[Atheism and Uncharitableness|give significantly less to charity than theists]].<br />
== Famous Agnostics ==<br />
<br />
*[[Richard Dawkins]] (see: [[Richard Dawkins' worldview]])<br />
*[[Bill Maher]]<br />
*[[Larry King]]<br />
*[[Albert Einstein]] (assumed)<ref>http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/quotes_einstein.html</ref><br />
*[[Steve Wozniak]]<br />
<br />
== Agnostic population and health habits ==<br />
<br />
''For more information please see:'' [[Agnosticism, obesity and self-esteem]]<br />
<br />
[[File:11834504 3cc3c49559.jpg|180px|right|thumbnail|Two of the major risk factors for becoming [[obesity|obese]] according to the [[Mayo Clinic]] are poor dietary choices and inactivity.<ref>http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/obesity/DS00314/DSECTION=causes</ref> Thus, it appears as if agnostics/non-religious are more prone to becoming [[obese]] than very religious individuals.<ref>http://www.gallup.com/poll/145379/Religious-Americans-Lead-Healthier-Lives.aspx</ref><ref>http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/obesity/DS00314/DSECTION=causes</ref><br />
<br /><br />
<br /><br />
<small>(photo obtained from [http://www.flickr.com/photos/wader/11834504/ Flickr], see [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/deed.en license agreement])</small> ]]<br />
According to the [[Gallup Organization]], "Very religious Americans are more likely to practice healthy behaviors than those who are moderately religious or nonreligious."<ref>http://www.gallup.com/poll/145379/Religious-Americans-Lead-Healthier-Lives.aspx</ref><br />
<br />
Gallup further declares:<br />
{{cquote|Very religious [[American]]s make healthier choices than their moderately religious and nonreligious counterparts across all four of the Healthy Behavior Index metrics, including [[smoking]], [[healthy eating]], and regular exercise. Smoking is one area of particular differentiation between the very religious and less religious Americans, with the nonreligious 85% more likely to be smokers than those who are very religious.<ref>http://www.gallup.com/poll/145379/Religious-Americans-Lead-Healthier-Lives.aspx</ref>}}<br />
<br />
Two of the major risk factors for becoming [[obesity|obese]] according to the [[Mayo Clinic]] are poor dietary choices and inactivity, thus it appears as if agnostics/non-religious may be more prone to becoming [[obese]] than very religious individuals.<ref>http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/obesity/DS00314/DSECTION=causes</ref><br />
<br />
== Comparing Agnosticism, Atheism, and Theism from an Acultural Standpoint ==<br />
In the absence of any cultural, metaphysical, and scientific history, as passed from one individual to another, the default position is a 'seeking theism'. Atheism and agnosticism are, at best, merely self-preserving coping responses to others' personally existentially unsatisfactory claims to having 'found God'. In their strongest forms, atheism and agnosticism are, for the individual, comparable respectively to what communist dictatorship and regressive anarchy are for the society: the presence of ontological disharmonies between individuals motivating, for lack of a complete basic knowledge of the world, an ''oppressive'' civil structure and a randomly destructive ''lack'' of civil structure.<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
*[[Christianity in Conservapedia]]<br />
*[[Definitions of Atheist and Agnostic]]<br />
*[[Atheist factions]]<br />
*[[Atheism]]<br />
*[[Apatheism]]<br />
<br />
== External Links ==<br />
* [http://www.greatcom.org/resources/secular_religions/ch01/default.htm Atheism, Agnosticism, and Skepticism] Synopsis of Understanding Secular Religions by [[Josh McDowell]] and Don Stewart<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<br />
<References/><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[category:religion]]<br />
[[category:philosophy]]<br />
[[Category:Agnosticism]]</div>Wiggyhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Labour_Party_(UK)&diff=965218Labour Party (UK)2012-03-01T23:56:37Z<p>Wiggy: Fixed some errors and added some detail</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Labour Party''' is a [[United Kingdom|British]] political party which at its roots is [[Socialism|democratic socialist]]<ref>http://www.labour.org.uk/labour_policies</ref>. However since 1994 it has arguably moved very much to the centre of British politics under the guise of New Labour. The party still pays lip service to many typical [[left-wing]] values and, along with all the main political parties in the UK, is [[Pro-choice]] and pro-gay. Under the leadership of [[Tony Blair]] and through the usage of talented spin doctors such as [[Peter Mandelson]], the modern Labour Party has been accused of being an extremely deceptive PR machine; being highly dishonest in its dealings with the public and media. <br />
<br />
The Labour Party was founded in 1900, and currently forms the [[Leader of the Opposition|Her Majesty's Opposition]], being the largest party in the UK not in currently in government. The current leader of the Labour Party is [[Ed Miliband]], who was elected by Labour party members on September 25th 2010, after their crushing defeat four months earlier in the UK's [[general election]]. [[Image:Labour logo.jpg|right|thumb|170px|The Labour Party's logo]]<br />
<br />
==History==<br />
===Origins===<br />
The Labour Party was formed out of an alliance of several prominent left-wing and socialist movements that existed in Britain at the turn of the century. Chief amongst them the were the [[Trades Union Congress]], the [[Fabian Society]], and the [[Independent Labour Party]]. The group took the name [[Labour Representation Committee]], later adopting the name [[Labour Party]] after achieving seats in the [[House of Commons]] at the 1906 election. Much of the intellectual energy came from the [[Fabian Socialism|Fabians, an informal group of intellectual socialists.]]<br />
<br />
The rise of Marxist socialism in the late 19th century in the Social Democratic Federation (SDF) (1881-1911) did not create a militantly atheistic and anti-religious force. From its beginnings, circa 1881, the SDF contained Christians, non-Christians, and anti-Christians. These groups generally coexisted in a state of compromise. The membership of the SDF was generally secularist and freethinking but religion was not a central issue. For all parties in the SDF, the central issue was commitment to socialism. <br />
<br />
[[File:Labour1910.jpg|thumb|290px|Labour called for abolition of the [[House of Lords]] in 1910; when elected, they kept it and appointed their own favourites to peerages. Later posters dropped the violent imagery and called for peaceful change.]]<br />
<br />
===Interwar period===<br />
In its early years the Labour Party benefited from an alliance with the other main left-wing party in Britain, the [[Liberal Party]]; from a growth in working class consciousness; and from dissatisfaction with both the Liberal and [[Conservative Party|Conservative]] parties in the wake of what were perceived to be their mistakes in the handling of the [[First World War]]. Winning growing numbers of seats at each election, the Labour Party was finally able to form a government in 1924 under the leadership of [[Ramsay MacDonald]]. However this was short-lived. The party did not have an outright majority, and in fact only had about one third of the total seats within the House. After just nine months the Party lost an important vote, and the government resigned. Four days before the election the ''[[Daily Mail]]'' published the "[[Zinoviev Letter]]", a forgery that seemed to indicate that the Communist Party of Great Britain was planning subversion or even a violent revolution in cooperation with Labour. The letter was leaked by the Foreign Ministry. The Labour Party was badly defeated in the 1924 general election, even though its vote increased by one million. The Conservative vote was up by two million as the Liberal party was rapidly collapsing. Historians agree the Zinoviev Letter was a forgery but their consensus is that it made little difference in the election. What is more important, after the election Labour leaders used it as an excuse for their failure; it became a roadblock to needed internal reforms in the Labour party.<br />
<br />
[[File:Labour1929.jpg|thumb|300px|Despite the deliberate appeal to middle class voters in this 1929 poster, most Labour voters were working class blokes who did not wear white collars and ties.]]<br />
The Labour Party briefly formed a government again in 1929, but this did not survive the effects of the [[Great Depression]]. In a dispute over the best way to handle the economic consequences of the global financial crash, the Party leadership fractured. A new "National Government" drawn from all parties was formed, with [[Ramsay MacDonald]] still as Prime Minister. However this was dominated by the other parties, particularly the Conservatives, who went on to dominate the British political scene for the rest of the interwar period.<br />
<br />
===Victory in 1945===<br />
The [[Second World War]] saw a major shift in political attitudes within Britain, and led to a landslide victory for [[Clement Attlee]] in 1945. The modest, unassuming intellectual Attlee named a cabinet that included all elements of the party. Of 37 ministers, eight were former coal miners, and eleven had been active trade unionists. <br />
<br />
This government introduced sweeping reforms of industry and the creation of the [[welfare state]]. Attlee's government nationalised major industries, founded the [[National Health Service]], and developed the idea of welfare from cradle to grave paid for out of taxation and available to everyone free of charge. Much of the welfare state is still in force today.<br />
<br />
The Labour government was fiercely anti-Communist, but the economy was so weak it had to relinquish a leadership role to the United States. Atlee pushed President [[Harry Truman]] to take over Britain's historic roles, especially in Greece, and indeed helped push the U.S. into the [[Cold War]] against the [[Soviet Union]].<br />
<br />
After losing in 1951, the Labour Party spent the next 13 years out of office and achieved little during the governments of Wilson (1964-1970 and 1974-1976) and his successor James Callaghan (1976-79). Their failures set the stage for the renewal of British energy and leadership under [[Margaret Thatcher]], beginning in 1979.<br />
<br />
===Socialism===<br />
Despite its historic commitment to socialism, the British Labour Party has been flexible and reformist in its doctrine ever since it was founded in 1900. After the crisis of 1931, the party adopted a broadly social democratic program in which socialism was linked with the idea of economic planning and social welfare. The Attlee government of 1945-51 was very moderate in its commitment to socialism. The years of opposition saw violent arguments in the party between left-wing Bevanites and the center-right supporters of [[Hugh Gaitskell]]. But the main differences concerned foreign and defense policy. On domestic issues, the party was now broadly revisionist, committed to the mixed economy and social equality.<br />
[[File:Atlee45.jpg|thumb|370px|Atlee defeats Churchill in 1945, and becomes bowler for the British cricket team; he faces difficult issues like housing and finance which are coming to bat.]]<br />
<br />
==New Left==<br />
Wilson, on becoming prime minister in 1964, tried to bypass old doctrinal arguments by harnessing nationalized industry to ideas of scientific modernization. But his government was a great failure, not least in its relations with the trade unions, the linchpin of the party since its founding. Wilson represented the older traditions of the Labour Party and never understood the emerging "New Left" with new social roots, new ideas and new styles of political behaviour in the late 1970s. Following the disillusion and demoralization of traditional Labour Party activists with Wilson's government, a more radical and well-educated local Labour leadership appeared at the local level. This bred much disillusionment and launched a new left-wing socialism in the 1970s. The Labour government of 1974-79 added to this division. The left-wing pressure reached its climax in the early 1980s when Thatcher was in power but resulted only in heavy defeats for Labour in 1983 and 1987. The general impression in 1989 is of a loss of political and intellectual confidence, with British socialism trapped between a cherished past and an uncertain future.<ref> Kenneth O. Morgan, ''Britain since 1945: The People's Peace'' (2001)</ref><br />
<br />
===Social issues===<br />
The Labour Party has also been a strong proponent of social reform. Under [[Harold Wilson]] in the late 60s, abortion and homosexuality were decriminalizes, the death penalty abolished and divorce was made easier. Unease from a perceived large number of immigrants from Commonwealth countries also led to four Race Relations Acts, all of which were passed under Labour governments.<br />
<br />
===Industrial Strife===<br />
see [[Winter of Discontent]]<br />
<br />
The Labour Party always prided itself on strong links with [[Labor union|trade unions]], but by the late 1960s there was growing industrial unrest. Inflation was becoming a growing problem and unemployment began to rise. Harold Wilson was elected for a third time in February 1974, taking over from Conservative [[Edward Heath]] whose government was brought to its knees by oil shortages and a crippling coal miners' strike in 1973. Throughout the late 1970s strikes were commonplace, tight controls on pay rises, known as incomes policy, was struggling to curb inflation which reached a high of 28%. A series of devastating strikes in the winter of 1978/79 which became known as the [[Winter of Discontent]] led to the government of [[James Callaghan]] being defeated in a vote of no confidence and a general election which was won by the Conservative Party led by [[Margaret Thatcher]].<br />
<br />
===A swing to the left===<br />
[[Michael Foot]] became leader of the Labour Party in 1980 and took the party in a far left direction. The 1983 manifesto pledged to reverse all Thatcher's economic reforms; renationalise all privatised businesses, return taxes on the rich to the punitive level of the 1970s (98% in some cases), restore trade union powers, leave the European Economic Community, unilaterally surrender Britain's nuclear weapons and campaign for a united Ireland as a solution to the paramilitarism and terrorism that had beset the province of Northern Ireland throughout the 70s. The manifesto became known as the "longest suicide note in history" and was defeated by Thatcher's Conservatives in a landslide. Pro-EEC Labour Party members who formed their own party, the SDP, nearly polled more votes than the Labour Party. If not for the SDP's poorly thought-out electoral strategy (which gained plenty of votes, but almost no seats in the Commons), Labour could have been reduced to third party status in this election.<br />
<br />
Foot was succeeded by [[Neil Kinnock]], who ditched much (but not all) of the far-left baggage from 1983. Under Kinnock, Labour was again defeated in a landslide in 1987 but, crucially, Labour came well ahead of the SDP (now in alliance with the Liberal Party).<br />
<br />
===Tony Blair and "New Labour"===<br />
The term New Labour didn't come into being until [[Tony Blair]] became leader in 1994, but the reform of the Labour Party took place long before then. By 1992, it was clear that Thatcher's reforms had struck a chord with voters and the Labour party were no longer promising to renationalise industries or restore trade union powers. Only the top rate of income tax would be raised from 40 to 50%. Opinion polls during the election campaign predicted a very close result, but the Conservative party won a narrow victory of 23 seats after an unusually high turnout.<br />
<br />
John Smith became leader in 1992, but his sudden death in 1994 led to Tony Blair to become leader and the term "New Labour" was born. Blair started by reforming Clause IV. Clause IV dealt with the purpose of the Party and referred direct to its erstwhile desire for public ownership of the means of production; the current version instead calls for 'a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few'.<br />
The revised version mentions "socialism" as a sop to the old timers:<br />
:The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few.’<br />
<br />
Blair promised no increases in income tax and pledged to run a stable economy. He scored landslide victories in 1997, and again in 2001.<br />
<br />
One of Blair's most controversial decisions was to [[Iraq War|invade Iraq]] in 2003 alongside the Americans and other allies. Britain became the second largest contributor of armed forces to [[George W. Bush]]'s "Coalition of the Willing", and Blair staunchly defended the position, and won supporting votes in parliament. Partly due to the war's unpopularity, and partly to a perception that the Government had raised taxes on business and individuals to unacceptable levels, the Labour party won a much smaller majority in 2005 and has seen key bills defeated by backbench revolts such as the plan to hold terrorist suspects for up to 90 days without charge.<br />
<br />
Blair had lost his momentum, so he retired in mid-2007 and was replaced per prior arrangement by his long-time Chancellor, [[Gordon Brown]]. The worldwide [[Recession of 2008]], continuing into 2009, hit Britain hard and has yet to bottom out. Labour took much of the blame, and its polling rates dropped to levels not seen since the early 1980s. Labour's popularity continued to decline in 2009, as the party made its worst electoral showing in a hundred years in the EU elections in June 2009. Brown, however, beat back his disunited critics, reorganized his cabinet, and stumbled onward. The Conservatives maintain a large lead for the next general election, which must be held by spring 2010.<br />
<br />
<br />
==Sharia Infiltration==<br />
A 2010 newspaper report repeated a claim by [[Jim Fitzpatrick]], the MP for [[Poplar and Canning Town]] that the Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) had effectively created a party within the party in east London. The IFE seeks to make Britain and [[Europe]] an Islamic state. In covert investigations by the media it was determined that the IFE were expressing opposition to democracy, support for sharia law or mocking black people and organized meetings with extremists, including [[Taliban]] allies. <ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/labour/7333420/Islamic-radicals-infiltrate-the-Labour-Party.html Islamic radicals 'infiltrate' the Labour Party, TelegraphUK, February 27, 2010]</ref><br />
<br />
{{cquote| [They are] placing people within the political parties, recruiting members to those political parties, trying to get individuals selected and elected so they can exercise political influence and power, whether it's at local government level or national level.}}<br />
<br />
==Prime Ministers==<br />
<br />
* [[Ramsay MacDonald]] (1924 and 1929-1935) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page136.asp]<br />
<br />
[[File:Labour45.jpg|thumb|270px|Labour won an unexpected landslide in 1945]]<br />
* [[Clement Attlee]] (1945-1951) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page133.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[Harold Wilson]] (1964-1970 and 1974-1976) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page129.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[James Callaghan]] (1976-1979) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page127.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[Tony Blair]] (1997-2007) [http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page4.asp]<br />
<br />
* [[Gordon Brown]] (2007-2010)<br />
[[File:Labour45b.jpg|thumb|275px|left|Iconic 1945 election poster]]<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Fabian Society]]<br />
* [[Industrial Democracy]]<br />
<br />
==Further reading==<br />
<br />
* Davies, Andrew. ''To Build a New Jerusalem: The British Labour Party from Keir Hardie to Tony Blair'' (1996)<br />
* Favretto, Ilaria."'Wilsonism' Reconsidered: Labour Party Revisionism, 1952-64." ''Contemporary British History'' 2000 14(4): 54-80 in [[EBSCO]]]]<br />
* Morgan, Austen. ''Harold Wilson'' (1992), 625pp; negative appraisal<br />
* Morgan, Kenneth O. ''Britain since 1945: The People's Peace'' (2001)<br />
* Pimlott, Ben. ''Harold Wilson'' (1992). Pimlott tries to rehabilitate Wilson’s political reputation, revealing that he was the prisoner rather than the master of various domestic and international dilemmas. <br />
* Swift, John. ''Labour in Crisis: Clement Attlee and the Labour Party in Opposition, 1931-1940'' (2001)<br />
* Worley, Matthew. ''Labour inside the Gate: A History of the British Labour Party between the Wars'' (2005),<br />
<br />
==External links==<br />
*[http://www.labour.org.uk/home Official site]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
[[category:British Political Parties]]<br />
[[Category:British History]]<br />
[[Category:British Politics]]<br />
[[Category:Labor Unions]]<br />
[[Category:Socialism]]<br />
[[category:New Left]]<br />
[[category:1960s]]</div>Wiggyhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=National_Health_Service&diff=965217National Health Service2012-03-01T23:43:37Z<p>Wiggy: /* All party support */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''National Health Service (NHS)''' is the [[United Kingdom]]'s nationalised [[health]] care system. It was established in 1948 as part of [[Clement Attlee]]'s post-[[World War II]] [[Labour Party|Labour]] government's socialist program, and has been supported by politicians of every party since then.<br />
<br />
The NHS is nominally funded out of "National Insurance contributions", a form of personal [[taxation]] comparable to the US [[Social Security]] system. The NHS revenue stream is, in theory, entirely separate in operation from income tax.<ref>http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1394285&</ref> In practice, the NHS is funded from general taxation, and is accepted by the British electorate as being funded in this way. All prescription medicines (however not over-the-counter ones) are available for a low standard fee in [[England]]. Prescriptions are entirely free of charge in [[Wales]]<ref>http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Healthcare/Medicinespharmacyandindustry/Prescriptions/NHScosts/DH_508</ref>. NHS treatment is available to all residents of the UK. Most services, including complex and expensive surgical procedures and drugs, are free at the point of use, and those that are not (such as the provision of glasses and dental care) are free to people on low incomes. This ensures that everyone is able to be treated, no matter what their individual wealth or means may be.<ref>http://www.nhs.uk/England/AboutTheNhs/Default.cmsx</ref> "Private" (i.e. non-NHS) doctors and hospitals do exist in Britain, but fewer than 10% of Britons choose to buy private health insurance in preference to using the NHS. (The big exception to this is in the area of dental care: NHS dentists are relatively difficult to find in many areas, and many people are forced to "go private", even if uninsured.)<br />
<br />
The NHS is Britain's largest employer, 1.3 million workers. This cradle-to-grave entitlement costs Britain $158 billion (USD) per year. Britain’s Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron is looking to reform the state-run health-care system, which he called "second-rate" due to the program’s massive cost and lackluster performance. <ref>[http://dailycaller.com/2011/01/17/prime-minister-cameron-plans-to-reform-britains-government-run-health-care-system/ Prime Minister Cameron plans to reform Britain’s government-run health-care system, The Daily Caller, Jaunuary 17, 2011]</ref><br />
<br />
==Rationing==<br />
Official figures published in 2009 revealed that more than 230,000 patients are being forced to wait more than 18 weeks for hospital treatment. <ref>[http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/120458/Burnham-forgets-230-000-on-list BURNHAM FORGETS 230,000 ON LIST, Daily Express UK, August 14, 2009]</ref> As a result of its comprehensive coverage, the resources of the NHS have been consistently tightly stretched for many years, leading to lengthy waiting lists for everything from dental work to surgery. This was the case in the 1980s and 1990s in particular. Since 1997, the NHS has benefited from substantially increased spending under the Labour Party, but there is a perception among many in Britain that the extra money has not been well spent or delivered appropriate improvements. Read more about ''"Delay, Denial and Dilution, The Impact of NHS Rationing on Heart Disease and Cancer."'' <ref>[http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/rationreport.pdf Rationing PDF Report]</ref> There are many more examples of disasters caused by government intervention in the British health care system.<br />
<br />
==Poor quality care==<br />
One million NHS patients have been the victims of appalling care in hospitals across Britain, according to a major report released Aug. 27, 2009. In the last six years, says the Patients Association, hundreds of thousands have suffered from poor standards of nursing, often with 'neglectful, demeaning, painful and sometimes downright cruel' treatment. <br />
<ref> Rebecca Smith, "'Cruel and neglectful' care of one million NHS patients exposed," [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6092658/Cruel-and-neglectful-care-of-one-million-NHS-patients-exposed.html ''Telegraph'' (London) 27 Aug 2009]</ref><br />
Many critics, including Daniel Hannan, have expressed serious concern over the failure of the NHS in providing Britain with an acceptable health care. Criticism included the immense wasteful costs of the NHS, shortage of doctors and other vital employees, lack of available care, and poor quality of facilities and care.<br />
<br />
==NICE==<br />
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) proudly boasts of "Developing a series of national clinical guidelines to secure consistent, high quality, evidence based care for patients." NICE is responsible for giving advice which effectively rations the supply of government provided treatments and drugs. It does this by a careful and complicated consideration of Quality Adjusted Life Years (the QALY), taking into account how a particular treatment affects this figure on average. Ultimately the number of dollars per QALY is what dictates whether a medicine is then made available via the NHS. These decisions are inevitably controversial at times and some even go so far as to accuse them of denying life saving medication and effectively becoming the government's "death panels". <ref>[http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/campaigns/nhsinjustice/8251183.Anger_as_Nice_denies_cancer_patient_life_extending_drug/ END NHS INJUSTICE, The Northern Echo, July 2, 2010]</ref><br />
<br />
==All party support==<br />
The NHS is supported by politicians of all parties in the UK, but is widely regarded as the child of the Labour Party, and inspires particular affection in the supporters of this party. All post [[World War II]] governments have consistently supported the National Health Service. British voters take great pride in what they regard as the free provision of basic human needs such as healthcare and schooling. Many politicians including [[Margaret Thatcher]] have worked to reform the National Health Service and make it more efficient <Ref>http://www.margaretthatcher.org/essential/biography.asp#ess87-90</Ref>. However, perhaps due to its overwhelming size and entrenched popularity, this has continued to be a difficult and controversial task.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==External Links==<br />
*[http://www.nhs.uk/ NHS Official Homepage]<br />
*[http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/socialized.html#britain The Problems with Socialized Health Care (Britain)]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:British Politics]]<br />
[[Category:Health]]</div>Wiggyhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=National_Health_Service&diff=965215National Health Service2012-03-01T23:40:55Z<p>Wiggy: Added some more detail about QALYs</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''National Health Service (NHS)''' is the [[United Kingdom]]'s nationalised [[health]] care system. It was established in 1948 as part of [[Clement Attlee]]'s post-[[World War II]] [[Labour Party|Labour]] government's socialist program, and has been supported by politicians of every party since then.<br />
<br />
The NHS is nominally funded out of "National Insurance contributions", a form of personal [[taxation]] comparable to the US [[Social Security]] system. The NHS revenue stream is, in theory, entirely separate in operation from income tax.<ref>http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1394285&</ref> In practice, the NHS is funded from general taxation, and is accepted by the British electorate as being funded in this way. All prescription medicines (however not over-the-counter ones) are available for a low standard fee in [[England]]. Prescriptions are entirely free of charge in [[Wales]]<ref>http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Healthcare/Medicinespharmacyandindustry/Prescriptions/NHScosts/DH_508</ref>. NHS treatment is available to all residents of the UK. Most services, including complex and expensive surgical procedures and drugs, are free at the point of use, and those that are not (such as the provision of glasses and dental care) are free to people on low incomes. This ensures that everyone is able to be treated, no matter what their individual wealth or means may be.<ref>http://www.nhs.uk/England/AboutTheNhs/Default.cmsx</ref> "Private" (i.e. non-NHS) doctors and hospitals do exist in Britain, but fewer than 10% of Britons choose to buy private health insurance in preference to using the NHS. (The big exception to this is in the area of dental care: NHS dentists are relatively difficult to find in many areas, and many people are forced to "go private", even if uninsured.)<br />
<br />
The NHS is Britain's largest employer, 1.3 million workers. This cradle-to-grave entitlement costs Britain $158 billion (USD) per year. Britain’s Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron is looking to reform the state-run health-care system, which he called "second-rate" due to the program’s massive cost and lackluster performance. <ref>[http://dailycaller.com/2011/01/17/prime-minister-cameron-plans-to-reform-britains-government-run-health-care-system/ Prime Minister Cameron plans to reform Britain’s government-run health-care system, The Daily Caller, Jaunuary 17, 2011]</ref><br />
<br />
==Rationing==<br />
Official figures published in 2009 revealed that more than 230,000 patients are being forced to wait more than 18 weeks for hospital treatment. <ref>[http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/120458/Burnham-forgets-230-000-on-list BURNHAM FORGETS 230,000 ON LIST, Daily Express UK, August 14, 2009]</ref> As a result of its comprehensive coverage, the resources of the NHS have been consistently tightly stretched for many years, leading to lengthy waiting lists for everything from dental work to surgery. This was the case in the 1980s and 1990s in particular. Since 1997, the NHS has benefited from substantially increased spending under the Labour Party, but there is a perception among many in Britain that the extra money has not been well spent or delivered appropriate improvements. Read more about ''"Delay, Denial and Dilution, The Impact of NHS Rationing on Heart Disease and Cancer."'' <ref>[http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/rationreport.pdf Rationing PDF Report]</ref> There are many more examples of disasters caused by government intervention in the British health care system.<br />
<br />
==Poor quality care==<br />
One million NHS patients have been the victims of appalling care in hospitals across Britain, according to a major report released Aug. 27, 2009. In the last six years, says the Patients Association, hundreds of thousands have suffered from poor standards of nursing, often with 'neglectful, demeaning, painful and sometimes downright cruel' treatment. <br />
<ref> Rebecca Smith, "'Cruel and neglectful' care of one million NHS patients exposed," [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6092658/Cruel-and-neglectful-care-of-one-million-NHS-patients-exposed.html ''Telegraph'' (London) 27 Aug 2009]</ref><br />
Many critics, including Daniel Hannan, have expressed serious concern over the failure of the NHS in providing Britain with an acceptable health care. Criticism included the immense wasteful costs of the NHS, shortage of doctors and other vital employees, lack of available care, and poor quality of facilities and care.<br />
<br />
==NICE==<br />
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) proudly boasts of "Developing a series of national clinical guidelines to secure consistent, high quality, evidence based care for patients." NICE is responsible for giving advice which effectively rations the supply of government provided treatments and drugs. It does this by a careful and complicated consideration of Quality Adjusted Life Years (the QALY), taking into account how a particular treatment affects this figure on average. Ultimately the number of dollars per QALY is what dictates whether a medicine is then made available via the NHS. These decisions are inevitably controversial at times and some even go so far as to accuse them of denying life saving medication and effectively becoming the government's "death panels". <ref>[http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/campaigns/nhsinjustice/8251183.Anger_as_Nice_denies_cancer_patient_life_extending_drug/ END NHS INJUSTICE, The Northern Echo, July 2, 2010]</ref><br />
<br />
==All party support==<br />
The NHS is supported by politicians of all parties in the UK, but is widely regarded as the child of the Labour Party, and inspires particular affection in the supporters of this party. All post [[World War II]] governments have consistently supported the National Health Service. British voters take pride in free services. [[Margaret Thatcher]] worked to reform the National Health Service and make it more efficient <Ref>http://www.margaretthatcher.org/essential/biography.asp#ess87-90</Ref> but it has continued to grow more and more bureaucratic and inefficient.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==External Links==<br />
*[http://www.nhs.uk/ NHS Official Homepage]<br />
*[http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/socialized.html#britain The Problems with Socialized Health Care (Britain)]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:British Politics]]<br />
[[Category:Health]]</div>Wiggyhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Lesbianism&diff=965214Lesbianism2012-03-01T23:30:57Z<p>Wiggy: Deleted irrelevant sentence, added brief description of Sappho, corrected history of word.</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Lesbianism''' is [[sex]]ual activity or attraction between [[women]]. Female [[homosexual]]s are often called '''lesbians''' (after the [[Greek]] island of [[Lesbos]], home of [[Sappho]], the poetess of Lesbos). Women who are attracted to both women and men are called [[bisexual]]s. <br />
<br />
The first known written usage of the word "lesbian" in the sense meant here dates only from the 19th century. Earlier uses of the word from as far back as the 17th century, can be found but used in an entirely different sense. Lesbianism is also called ''sapphism'' or ''female homosexuality''. (Sappho penned love sonnets to women. She lived from 610-580 B.C.)<br />
<br />
In 1997, the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Prevention Program included lesbians as a priority population.<ref>[http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/conference/ppt/linda_ellis.ppt#291,3, Progress has been made in recognizing lesbians as a target population]</ref><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
In the United States, estimates of lifetime same-sex behavior among women are 8%–20%, and 1.4%–4.3% of all women may be sexually active with other women. An estimated 2.3 million women describe themselves as lesbian. In its 1999 report, Lesbian Health: Current Assessment and Directions for the Future, the Institute of Medicine emphasized that more data on sexually transmitted infections (STIs), Pap smear screening, and risk for cervical cancer in lesbians were needed.<ref>[http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol10no11/04-0622_08.htm Lesbians and Infectious Diseases]</ref><br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
==Lesbianism and Health Issues==<br />
''For more information please see:'' [[Lesbianism and Obesity]]<br />
<br />
[[File:11834504 3cc3c49559.jpg|175px|right|thumbnail|In April of 2007, the ''American Journal of Public Health'' analyzed data from 2002 National Survey of Family Growth and the data suggested that [[United States|American]] lesbian women were 2.69 times more likely to be overweight and 2.47 times more likely to be obese than all other female sexual orientation groups.<br />
<ref name="ajph">[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=17463369&ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum Overweight and Obesity in Sexual-Minority Women: Evidence From Population-Based Data, Ulrike Boehmer, Deborah J. Bowen, Greta R. Bauer, American Journal of Public Health, 2007 Jun;97(6):1134-40. E pub 2007 Apr 26.]</ref><br />
<br /><br />
<br /><br />
<small>(photo obtained from [http://www.flickr.com/photos/wader/11834504/ Flickr], see [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/deed.en license agreement])</small> ]]<br />
In regards to lesbianism and obesity, in April of 2007, the ''American Journal of Public Health'' analyzed data from 2002 National Survey of Family Growth and the data suggested that [[United States|American]] lesbian women were 2.69 times more likely to be overweight and 2.47 times more likely to be obese than all other female sexual orientation groups.<br />
<ref name="ajph">[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=17463369&ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum Overweight and Obesity in Sexual-Minority Women: Evidence From Population-Based Data, Ulrike Boehmer, Deborah J. Bowen, Greta R. Bauer, American Journal of Public Health, 2007 Jun;97(6):1134-40. E pub 2007 Apr 26.]</ref> The abstract for this study indicated that "lesbians are at greater risk for morbidity and mortality linked to overweight and obesity." <ref name="ajph" /> <br />
<br />
In 2009, the ''PubMed'' article abstract for a Polish psychiatry journal ''Psychiatria Polska'' article declared:<br />
{{Cquote|Homosexual women are less concentrated on physical appearance and more satisfied with their bodies while being more tolerant to obesity.... For lesbian women the ideal body image is more massive than for heterosexual women.<ref>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19694404?itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum&ordinalpos=1</ref>}}<br />
<br />
In 2007, a purported lesbian wrote to [[Andrew Sullivan]], the political commentator and administrator of ''The Daily Dish'' blog:<br />
{{Cquote|And - oh heck, I'll admit it - aesthetics have value, too! As a woman, I may not be as focused on looks as men are predisposed to be, but I sure am tired of seeing so many queer ladies out there who are way past 200 pounds. Way, way past. Sorry, but no amount of "fat acceptance" is going to make that a pleasant sight - gay, straight, butch, femme, male or female.<ref>http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/05/obesity_and_les.html</ref>}}<br />
<br />
<br />
However, liberals assert that lesbians are considered to be amongst the lowest risk groups for some STDs including HIV <ref name="HIV">[http://www.metrokc.gov/health/glbT/lbstd.htm]</ref><br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
<br />
*[[Homosexuality and health]]<br />
*[[Gertrude Stein]]<br />
<br />
== External links ==<br />
<br />
*[http://www.britannica.com/ebc/article-9384264 Lesbianism] Encyclopædia Britannica.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Homosexuality]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Sexuality]]</div>Wiggy