Abstract
This paper critiques the largely incommensurate approaches taken both by historians and political scientists to the governmental past of the British Labour Party. It argues that revisionist historians, in flight from the traditional left critique of parliamentary socialism, are in danger of damaging their capacity to produce general explanations, while political scientists (who specialise in the latter) have tended to preserve an outdated version of Labour's past that supports their greater interest in its present and future. Both approaches dovetail with the political strategy of the Party's current leadership, but do little to contribute to what could be a profitable breaking-down of the barriers between the two disciplines in this area.
Subject
Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law,Political Science and International Relations
Cited by
8 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献