Crisis of Conservatism
Published in the 1930s, The Strange Death of Liberal England was a political history authored by the fabulously named George Dangerfield, whick took as its subject the spectacular collapse of the British Liberal Party in the early part of the 20th Century.
After 1922, the party which had produced some of Britain’s most illustrious prime ministers - Palmerston, Gladstone, Asquith and Lloyd George – never formed government again. By the end of the century, the Liberal Party had ceased to exist – though half of its name and a good many of its former members went to make up the modern-day Liberal Democrats.
Might a book one day be written entitled The Strange Death of Liberal Australia, focussing on the demise of a once-great party which dominated post-war politics and produced the country’s two longest serving prime ministers - Robert Menzies and John Howard.
For the first time since Federation, Labor not only occupies the Lodge in Canberra, but controls ever state and territory government. By contrast, the Liberal Party’s highest office holder in the land rejoices in the title of .
While Kevin Rudd enjoys the highest approval ratings since pollsters started measuring such things, , the new Liberal leader, suffers from the worst – he even , which is close to political flat-lining.
Some of the party’s headline acts – former Treasurer Peter Costello and former Foreign Affairs Minister Alexander Downer – have retreated to the leather-bound comfort of the backbenches to consider their retirement options – Canberra’s answer to I’m a Celebrity, Get Me Out Of Here.
John Howard, meanwhile, has undertaken a morale-boosting trip to the US, popping up at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington to receive the – a glass bauble which celebrates one of the founding fathers of the neo-conservative movement. At the black-tie event, he was applauded by Paul Wolfowitz and "Scooter" Libby, two fellow ideological battlers whose time in office also came to an abrupt and unwelcome end.
Nelson, a former doctor with a penchant for loud music and even louder motorbikes, has come up with a possible remedy. This week he said he would stake his leadership on a merger between the Liberal Party and its former coalition party, the rural-based Nationals. But he as soon as senior figures expressed misgivings, in a manner which once again undercut his personal authority.
No wonder then that newspaper cartoons which dwell on Dr Nelson’s plight commonly feature Malcolm Turnbull wielding a dagger. But the Liberals’ post-election drama does not quite rise to the level of Shakespeare. To many, it resembles a pantomime – with the stage-struck Dr Nelson fearful of ever looking behind him.
In the absence of John Howard and without the firm smack of leadership of, say, Peter Costello, the party seems ideological adrift and bereft of new thinking. Since the election it has ditched its opposition both to Kyoto and even backed away from its controversial WorkChoices labour reforms. Fashioning a new conservative agenda – along with a leader to animate it – is proving difficult. Right now, its strategy appears based on managerialism: the hope that if the economy goes belly-up then voters will turn again to the Liberal Party to turn things around.
Of course, it is always well to remember Mark Twain at moments like this. The Liberal Party is not riven with a hotly-contested ideological issue, like Europe for the British Tories or immigration for the American Republicans, which has the potential to cleave it in two. On the upside, it can also look to states like New South Wales, in which the Labor government appears to be in a perpetual state of crisis, to mount its comeback. In Malcolm Turnbull, it has a leader-in-waiting who might well have the political skill and policy vision to revive his party. Brendan Nelson might even rediscover the kind of recuperative dexterity that he learned all those years back at medical school. The economy might indeed go belly-up. And could not much of the above have been written about the Labor Party under, say, Simon Crean, who led the party in the wake of its 2001 defeat.
The Strange Death of Liberal Australia? Like all political obituaries written in advance of the true moment of bereavement, it may well be exaggerated.
I'm 
°ä´Ç³¾³¾±ð²Ô³Ù²õÌýÌý Post your comment
My dear friend, me thinks you make your political bias quite clear.....
Me also sees that you are quite - and deliberately might I say - blinded to the huge splits to be found both in the US Democrat party and the Labour party of the UK.
If as a journalist you can't be more objective and unbiased, then go join your favored political party, where you'll fit nicely into the climate non-objectivity - something which most readers like me find extremely boring in a journalist such as like you clearly are.
Remember my dear 'unbiased' moderators....this is not an attack on the man, merely on what he writes and his unobjective political bias.
As someone who has voted for both major parties in the past (and usually the party that won), I think I have a better understanding of why people vote one way or the other, than many of the so-called experts.
The Liberal party is far from dead. Now that Labour is in Canberra, you will find that the Liberals will pick up one state after another, over the next few years. Labour will probably hold on to Canberra for 2 or 3 further elections (unless they stuff it up), until people think it is time for another change.
The Liberal Party is on the nose by most Australians because it has mover far to the right of its founder Robert Gordon Menzies. Menzies recognised that Australian's desired to own their home. He delivered policies to ensure wages and the lending policies of the major Australian banks would ensure they did own their homes. Howard and the right wing personnel who have taken the Liberal party to the far right producing policies that would horify Menzies. The problems besetting hospitals, education, training, health, and transport infrastructure in the states and territories of Australia are the product of this group's insatiable desire to privatise these essential public systems. The members of the Liberal Party must work to remove these foolish people and replace them with people who have similar beliefs as Menzies. Howard is welcome in the United States of America as this nation is currently run by similar right wing personnel.
I was a Liberal voter, but they have done or suggested, just too many daft things.
Re-creating pre-revolutionary conditions in the workplace was one, plaster the sunburnt country with nuclear power stations another. The idea to have hospitals managed by community committees was quite frightening.
Through this and other things they turned themselves 'unelectable'. And then, Howard spoke of ex-Chancellor Helmut Kohl as his friend, an insult to anyone who knows Germany like I do. The designated successor Peter Costello made some really stupid comments - voting Liberal ceased to be an option for me, and many others.
Gee, how long have you been in Australia mate !!! the political cycle goes around and around,,yes all states and the ACT and N.T are controlled by Labor,,the domino effect will soon click in,just look at the mess the Labor party are in,,,
in N.S.W. as for "Can do Newman" the Brisbane Lord Mayor,,,we will find out tomorrow the 15/03/08,when Queensland has their Local Government Elections........
Gee, how long have you been in Australia mate !!! the political cycle goes around and around,,yes all states and the ACT and N.T are controlled by Labor,,the domino effect will soon click in,just look at the mess the Labor party are in,,,
in N.S.W. as for "Can do Newman" the Brisbane Lord Mayor,,,we will find out tomorrow the 15/03/08,when Queensland has their Local Government Elections........
Floundering? or FOUNDERING? I thought you guys invented the Ænglish language.
The death of the Liberal party and the replacement of it by a new anti-labor grouping is likely, especially since the Liberal party itself is heir to a string of anti-labor parties running from Deakin's Liberals, through the Nationalists, the UAP and the current party.
The party's largest problems at the moment are the factionalism and the preference of many backdoor borkers to reign in opposition rather than serve in government, the NSW state branch being the worst example. Labor shares this factionalism, but seemingly formalising it has kept it somewhat in check.
But unless the party can adjust its priorities to make a dent against the NSW government (the second worst in the country's history) in relatively unideologically based state issues (service delivery), the party will never win again.
I'm a proud New South Welshman, and I've got to say - the thought of a Liberal state government makes me want to pack up and move to the ACT!
Mandatory sentencing, stupid ultra conservative laws, a mix of church and state, ignorance of the subtle nuances of social cohesion. You think things are bad here NOW?? This would be infinitely WORSE under the liberal party! The state libs (particularly here in NSW) are controlled by ultra-right wing conservatives with a very strong religious element. No thanks, that isn't my idea of a "fresh start". I'm not keen on the idea of the exclusive bretheren having the NSW Premier on speed-dial.
If elections are about voting for the least-worst people, Labor in NSW has my vote.
The thought of the Libs finally sinking into the sands of time? lovely.
I was a Liberal voter, but they have done or suggested, just too many daft things.
Re-creating pre-revolutionary conditions in the workplace was one, planning to plaster the sunburnt country with nuclear power stations another. The idea to have hospitals managed by community committees was quite frightening, because it was setting them up for failure, so they could all be privatised. Privatisation is for chocolate factories, not core essentials.
Through this and other things they turned themselves 'unelectable'. And then, John Howard spoke of ex-Chancellor Helmut Kohl as his friend, an insult to everyone who knows Germany like this ex-German does. (Can there be a friendship between people who need interpreters?). The designated successor Peter Costello made some really stupid comments - voting Liberal ceased to be an option for me, and obviously for many others as well.
The idea there can be a 'neo-conservative' agenda is actually laughable, which is why it does not exist now and will probably never emerge. Once everything is deregulated and privatised, what is there to vote for? For Company X to build the toll road or for Company Z? For company A to run prisons and company B to be police? We could not vote for a new train service - it happens when it is deemed profitable, regardless of our votes for or against. Could we vote for a moratorium on population growth until we have enough desalination plants? Or maybe we'd like to vote for preventing the upstream syphoning off by cotton growers? That is not listed on the agenda because it would mean reversing privatisation of water resources. Desertification is okay, but reversing mistakes in privatisation is forbidden.
The conservative agenda has been nearly fulfilled, what issue could there be that is neo-conservative and worth voting for? I do not think, anybody in Australia cares whether the solutions come from a neo-conservative or tartan ideology. The Liberals will have a very long wait, if we see that some of our problems get solved. If they aren't we'll try the other mob again. Following ideologies went bust when The Wall went down in my hometown.