Two politicians exemplify the continuing, rich and contradictory influence of liberalism in the United Kingdom since 1918: Roy Jenkins and Margaret Thatcher.
To deal with Thatcher first. It is undoubtedly true that many of Thatcher's instincts were authoritarian, and that she was not in any way an internationalist. However, i do claim that an important component of her ideology was Gladstonian liberalism, particularly in its emphases on the minimal state, individual responsibility, low taxation, and suspicion of vested interests. It is true that the State and the institutions which aroused Thatcher's animosity were different from those which Gladstone tried to reform ; but that is a matter of different historical contexts. The ideological affinity and lineage are clear. It is relevant that Thatcher's father, the Grantham businessman Alfred Roberts, who played such a dominant role in her ideological formation, had been a Liberal (see E. H. H. Green, 'Thatcher' (2006) ). Thatcher was, for much of the time, at odds with the Conservative Party and its ideological direction since Stanley Baldwin. Paradoxically, much of this ideological direction was the responsibility of two Liberals: Keynes and Beveridge.
As David Cannadine has pointed out in his concise (and incisive) biography of Thatcher, it is another question as to whether Thatcher (or, indeed, Gladstone) would have morally approved of the credit-fuelled, speculative economy which her policies ushered into being. The other affinity between liberalism and conservatism can be traced by looking at the fortunes of the 'National Liberals' after their participation in the National Government of 1931-35. They continued an electoral pact with the Conservatives until the 1960s. Michael Hesseltine's first attempt to win a Parliamentary seat was in 1959 as a 'National Liberal'. The fact that the constituency of Rochdale was held by the Liberals for some time is probably due to the informal persistence of such arrangements. David Cameron tried to transplant social liberalism to the Conservative Party (as evidenced by his support for gay marriage, a rather superficial environmentalism, and a certain degree of internationalism, shown by his support for aid to the Global South). However, as May and Johnson appear to have conclusively demonstrated, the Conservative Party has rejected social liberalism as a foreign body. The Conservatives' commitment to economic liberalism (or 'neoliberalism') sits uneasily with its increasing tendency to nationalist populism and to patronage-based 'crony capitalism', without any long-term economic strategy.
Roy Jenkins exemplifies two other aspects of liberalism. One is Asquithian 'New Liberalism', transmuted into Jenkinsite 'social democracy'. The other is the emphasis on abolishing stultifying social conventions, and to allowing, as far as possible, free rein to human expression and the development of the individual personality. This has its most renowned source in John Stuart Mill's 'On Liberty' (1859). Although Mill was viewed as a dangerous radical by his contemporaries (both Liberal and Tory) for his advocacy of female suffrage, his ideas are an inherent part of Liberalism's ideological inheritance.
The evidence of Liberalism's influence on Jenkins is shown in the reforms affecting abortion, divorce, theatre censorship, the partial decriminalisation of homosexuality, and racial discrimination. It is true that Jenkins himself did not instigate all these reforms, but his encouragement and support were crucial. It is also true that each of these reforms were incomplete, and had glaring shortcomings (e.g. the police were exempt from race discrimination legisaltion ; and prosecutions of gay men actually increased after the partial decriminalisation of homosexuality). Nonetheless, however halting and imperfect these steps were, theyconstituted, in the long term, progress in the direction of making society less hidebound by Victorian conventions, and more open-minded.
It is significant that, in his memoirs, Roy Jenkins states quite openly in his memoirs that he regarded himself as a Liberal long before he left the Labour Party (see Roy Jenkins, 'A Life at the Centre', (1991) ; Giles Radice, 'Friends and rivals' (2002) ), and that he secretly sympathised with Dick Taverne's candidacy as a Social Democrat in the Lincoln byelection of 1973, some years before the formation of the SDP. (Jenkins also wrote acclaimed biographies of three Liberals: Asquith, Gladstone, and Sir Charles Dilke). It is also significant that a source of the conflict between Roy Jenkins and David Owen lay in a conflict of ideology, which led to a clash of strategy. Jenkins desired a closer relationship with the Liberals ; Owen wanted the SDP to have a more distinctive social democratic identity (and contemplated at one stage that the SDP should apply to join the Socialist International) and was suspicious of what he regarded as the unrealistic idealism of the Liberals, particularly their unilateralist, CND-supporting tendencies.
The Liberals/Liberal Democrats have had a very interesting and chequered history, in which its collectivist and individualist tendencies have competed for dominance in the party. Under Grimond and Thorpe, the party attempted a position of equidistance between the two major parties, as evidenced by Thorpe's refusal to support either Tories or Labour in a Coalition after the election of February 1974. Under Steel, Ashdown, Kennedy and Campbell, the party moved in a more social democratic direction (as evidenced by the Lib-Lab pact of 1977, the alliance with the SDP, and Ashdown's overtures to Labour in the Blair years) ; under Clegg, it clearly favoured economic liberalism, which prepared the ground for the Coalition government. Since Clegg, the party has been unsure of its political direction, except as the repository of anti-Brexit votes. Under Sir Edward Davey even that distinguishing feature has been abandoned. The Liberal Democrats may well consign themselves to a position of political marginalisation, comparable to that which they endured between Lloyd George's last roar (the 'Yellow Book' plan) in 1929 and the Orpington byelection in 1962.
However, my intention in these two blogposts has been quite different: to trace the ideological fortunes of liberalism in Britain over the past eighty years. That is quite a different history, and a very intriguing one.
Note: The source for my assertion that David Owen considered seriously an application by the SDP to join the Socialist International is derived from the BBC Radio 3 series on the history of the SDP, broadcast in the early 1990s, presented by the journalist, broadcaster and political biographer Anthony Howard.