PoliticalFeasibilityIn1832

Context : OnWhiggery

Say at time t0 we have a social contract called 'status quo'. Then something changes - eg. a technological innovation, a natural disaster - that shifts the boundaries of what is politically feasible. The new feasibility set at t1, which I''ll call X1, contains all the social contracts that are now feasible.

In the early 1830's Whigs tried to get a reform act through parliament that they believed would avert the spectre of revolution by enfranchising the middle classes. This classic reform debate can be modelled - with great oversimplifications - as a debate over the contents of the feasibiility set X1.

The Wellingtonian Tory position is: the status quo contract SQ is still feasible, and we want to stay there.

The Whig position is: the status quo SQ is no longer feasible. Instead, Whigs propose a reform package REF that will avert revolution. On the whole, whigs were what Binmore calls 'reforming conservatives' - they didn't really want to let the bourgeoisie in but they thought they had to.

Then we have different shades of radicals - to oversimplify, again, the mainstream of middle class radicalism is happy with REF. Whigs and radicals, therefore, both agree that REF is in the feasible set X1 - the difference being that radicals actually want REF.

The working class political societies, which have no parliamentary representation, demand manhood suffrage. Further still to the left, some want even more radical forms of social change - Owenite socialism; anarchy, even. But for simplicity lump them altogether as advocating an 'extreme' contract MAN.

An 1830's Whig hates the idea of MAN, which he equates with the French terror. If he takes it seriously as a proposal, he argues that it is unfeasible as an equilibrium of the game of life.

Perhaps the majority on the left also agree that MAN is unfeasible at present. This belief leads them to support the Whigs and middle-class radicals in campaigning for the reform act. They believe that REF is a 'first installment' on the road to MAN. They have a strategy for achieving MAN which might go something like this: we support the middle classes now in getting REF. Once they are enfranchised, the radicals will help us get further towards MAN. This decision by supporters of MAN to rally around a campaign for REF turns out to be crucial to the outcome, and REF is achieved.

After the reform act is passed, it doesn't take long for working class activists to realise they have been sold down the river. The radicals are now generally content, and have no interest in keeping promises to push on towards MAN.

The Whigs are relatively content - with the radical/working-class alliance irrevocably split, revolution is averted.

Were working class activists wrong to support REF? Many will now conclude so, while others will still assess that MAN is now nearer - and more feasible - than it was. But whether their strategy was right or wrong, the way events have developed will lead them to reassess the strategy for getting to MAN. Not to abandon strategy altogether.