Richard Toye – författare

Arguing about Empire analyses the most divisive arguments about empire between Europe''s two leading colonial powers from the age of high imperialism to the post-war era of decolonization. Focusing on the domestic contexts underlying imperial rhetoric, Arguing about Empire adopts a case-study approach, treating key imperial debates as historical episodes to be investigated in depth. The episodes in question have been selected both for theirchronological range, their variety, and, above all, their vitriol. Some were straightforward disputes; others involved cooperation in tense circumstances. These include the Tunisian and Egyptian crises of 1881-2, which saw France and Britain establish new North African protectorates, ostensibly in co-operation, but actually incompetition; the Fashoda Crisis of 1898, when Britain and France came to the brink of war in the aftermath of the British re-conquest of Sudan; the Moroccan crises of 1905 and 1911, early tests of the Entente Cordiale, when Britain lent support to France in the face of German threats; the 1922 Chanak crisis, when that imperial Entente broke down in the face of a threatened attack on Franco-British forces by Kemalist Turkey; World War Two, which can be seen in part as anundeclared colonial war between the former allies, complicated by the division of the French Empire between De Gaulle''s Free French forces and those who remained loyal to the Vichy Regime; and finally the 1956 Suez intervention, when, far from defusing another imperial crisis, Britain colluded with France and Israel toinvade Egypt — the culmination of the imperial interference that began some eighty years earlier.

Rhetoric is often seen as a synonym for shallow, deceptive language, and therefore as something negative. But if we view rhetoric in more neutral terms, as the ''art of persuasion'', it is clear that we are all forced to engage with it at some level, if only because we are constantly exposed to the rhetoric of others. In this Very Short Introduction, Richard Toye explores the purpose of rhetoric. Rather than presenting a defence of it, he considers it as the foundation-stone of civil society, and an essential part of any democratic process. Using wide-ranging examples from Ancient Greece, medieval Islamic preaching, and modern cinema, Toye considers why we should all have an appreciation of the art of rhetoric. ABOUT THE SERIES: The Very Short Introductions series from Oxford University Press contains hundreds of titles in almost every subject area. These pocket-sized books are the perfect way to get ahead in a new subject quickly. Our expert authors combine facts, analysis, perspective, new ideas, and enthusiasm to make interesting and challenging topics highly readable.

Rhetoric is often seen as a synonym for shallow, deceptive language, and therefore as something negative. But if we view rhetoric in more neutral terms, as the ''art of persuasion'', it is clear that we are all forced to engage with it at some level, if only because we are constantly exposed to the rhetoric of others. In this Very Short Introduction, Richard Toye explores the purpose of rhetoric. Rather than presenting a defence of it, he considers it as the foundation-stone of civil society, and an essential part of any democratic process. Using wide-ranging examples from Ancient Greece, medieval Islamic preaching, and modern cinema, Toye considers why we should all have an appreciation of the art of rhetoric. ABOUT THE SERIES: The Very Short Introductions series from Oxford University Press contains hundreds of titles in almost every subject area. These pocket-sized books are the perfect way to get ahead in a new subject quickly. Our expert authors combine facts, analysis, perspective, new ideas, and enthusiasm to make interesting and challenging topics highly readable.

''''My aunt, listening to the Prime Minister''s speech, remarked of "our greatest orator", "He''s no speaker, is he?"'' -diary of teacher M.A. Pratt, 11 Nov. 1942.The popular story of Churchill''s war-time rhetoric is a simple one: the British people were energized and inspired by his speeches, which were almost universally admired and played an important role in the ultimate victory over Nazi Germany. Richard Toye now re-examines this accepted national story - and gives it a radical new spin.Using survey evidence and the diaries of ordinary people, he shows how reactions to Churchill''s speeches at the time were often very different from what we have always been led to expect. His first speeches as Prime Minister in the dark days of 1940 were by no means universally acclaimed - indeed, many people thought that he was drunk during his famous ''finest hour'' broadcast - and there is little evidence that they made a decisive difference to the British people''s will to fight on.In actual fact, as Toye shows, mass enthusiasm sat side-by-side with considerable criticism and dissent from ordinary people. Yes, there were speeches that stimulated, invigorated, and excited many. But there were also speeches which caused depression and disappointment in many others, and which sometimes led to workplace or family arguments. Yet this more complex reality has been consistently obscured from the historical record by the overwhelming power of a treasured national myth.The first systematic, archive based examination of Churchill''s World War II rhetoric as a whole, The Roar of the Lion considers his oratory not merely as a series of ''great speeches'', but as calculated political interventions which had diplomatic repercussions far beyond the effect on the morale of listeners in Britain. Considering his failures as well as his successes, the book moves beyond the purely celebratory tone of much of the existing literature. It offers new insight into how thespeeches were written and delivered - and shows how Churchill''s words were received at home, amongst allies and neutrals, and within enemy and occupied countries.This is the essential book on Churchill''s war-time speeches. It presents us with a dramatically new take on the politics of the 1940s - one that will change the way we think about Churchill''s oratory forever.

''''My aunt, listening to the Prime Minister''s speech, remarked of "our greatest orator", "He''s no speaker, is he?"'' -diary of teacher M.A. Pratt, 11 Nov. 1942.The popular story of Churchill''s war-time rhetoric is a simple one: the British people were energized and inspired by his speeches, which were almost universally admired and played an important role in the ultimate victory over Nazi Germany. Richard Toye now re-examines this accepted national story - and gives it a radical new spin.Using survey evidence and the diaries of ordinary people, he shows how reactions to Churchill''s speeches at the time were often very different from what we have always been led to expect. His first speeches as Prime Minister in the dark days of 1940 were by no means universally acclaimed - indeed, many people thought that he was drunk during his famous ''finest hour'' broadcast - and there is little evidence that they made a decisive difference to the British people''s will to fight on.In actual fact, as Toye shows, mass enthusiasm sat side-by-side with considerable criticism and dissent from ordinary people. Yes, there were speeches that stimulated, invigorated, and excited many. But there were also speeches which caused depression and disappointment in many others, and which sometimes led to workplace or family arguments. Yet this more complex reality has been consistently obscured from the historical record by the overwhelming power of a treasured national myth.The first systematic, archive based examination of Churchill''s World War II rhetoric as a whole, The Roar of the Lion considers his oratory not merely as a series of ''great speeches'', but as calculated political interventions which had diplomatic repercussions far beyond the effect on the morale of listeners in Britain. Considering his failures as well as his successes, the book moves beyond the purely celebratory tone of much of the existing literature. It offers new insight into how thespeeches were written and delivered - and shows how Churchill''s words were received at home, amongst allies and neutrals, and within enemy and occupied countries.This is the essential book on Churchill''s war-time speeches. It presents us with a dramatically new take on the politics of the 1940s - one that will change the way we think about Churchill''s oratory forever.

Before Winston Churchill made history, he made news. To a great extent, the news made him too. If it was his own efforts that made him a hero, it was the media that made him a celebrity - and it has been considerably responsible for perpetuating his memory and shaping his reputation in the years since his death. Churchill first made his name via writing and journalism in the years before 1900, the money he earned helping to support his political career (at a time when MPs did not get salaries). Journalistic activities were also important to him later, as he struggled in the interwar years to find the wherewithal to run and maintain Chartwell, his country house in Kent. Moreover, not only was journalism an important aspect of Churchill''s political persona, but he himself was a news-obsessive throughout his life. The story of Churchill and the news is, on one level, a tale of tight deadlines, off-the-record briefings and smoke-filled newsrooms, of wartime summits that were turned into stage-managed global media events, and of often tense interactions with journalists and powerful press proprietors, such as Lords Northcliffe, Rothermere, and Beaverbrook. Uncovering the symbiotic relationship between Churchill''s political life and his media life, and the ways in which these were connected to his personal life, Richard Toye asks if there was a ''public Churchill'' whose image was at odds with the behind-the-scenes reality, or whether, in fact, his private and public selves became seamlessly blended as he adjusted to living in the constant glare of the media spotlight.On a wider level, this is also the story of a rapidly evolving media and news culture in the first half of the twentieth century, and of what the contemporary reporting of Churchill''s life (including by himself) can tell us about the development of this culture, over a period spanning from the Victorian era through to the space age.

Before Winston Churchill made history, he made news. To a great extent, the news made him too. If it was his own efforts that made him a hero, it was the media that made him a celebrity - and it has been considerably responsible for perpetuating his memory and shaping his reputation in the years since his death. Churchill first made his name via writing and journalism in the years before 1900, the money he earned helping to support his political career (at a time when MPs did not get salaries). Journalistic activities were also important to him later, as he struggled in the interwar years to find the wherewithal to run and maintain Chartwell, his country house in Kent. Moreover, not only was journalism an important aspect of Churchill''s political persona, but he himself was a news-obsessive throughout his life. The story of Churchill and the news is, on one level, a tale of tight deadlines, off-the-record briefings and smoke-filled newsrooms, of wartime summits that were turned into stage-managed global media events, and of often tense interactions with journalists and powerful press proprietors, such as Lords Northcliffe, Rothermere, and Beaverbrook. Uncovering the symbiotic relationship between Churchill''s political life and his media life, and the ways in which these were connected to his personal life, Richard Toye asks if there was a ''public Churchill'' whose image was at odds with the behind-the-scenes reality, or whether, in fact, his private and public selves became seamlessly blended as he adjusted to living in the constant glare of the media spotlight.On a wider level, this is also the story of a rapidly evolving media and news culture in the first half of the twentieth century, and of what the contemporary reporting of Churchill''s life (including by himself) can tell us about the development of this culture, over a period spanning from the Victorian era through to the space age.

Arguing about Empire analyses the most divisive arguments about empire between Europe''s two leading colonial powers from the age of high imperialism to the post-war era of decolonization. Focusing on the domestic contexts underlying imperial rhetoric, Arguing about Empire adopts a case-study approach, treating key imperial debates as historical episodes to be investigated in depth. The episodes in question have been selected both for theirchronological range, their variety, and, above all, their vitriol. Some were straightforward disputes; others involved cooperation in tense circumstances. These include the Tunisian and Egyptian crises of 1881-2, which saw France and Britain establish new North African protectorates, ostensibly in co-operation, but actually incompetition; the Fashoda Crisis of 1898, when Britain and France came to the brink of war in the aftermath of the British re-conquest of Sudan; the Moroccan crises of 1905 and 1911, early tests of the Entente Cordiale, when Britain lent support to France in the face of German threats; the 1922 Chanak crisis, when that imperial Entente broke down in the face of a threatened attack on Franco-British forces by Kemalist Turkey; World War Two, which can be seen in part as anundeclared colonial war between the former allies, complicated by the division of the French Empire between De Gaulle''s Free French forces and those who remained loyal to the Vichy Regime; and finally the 1956 Suez intervention, when, far from defusing another imperial crisis, Britain colluded with France and Israel toinvade Egypt — the culmination of the imperial interference that began some eighty years earlier.

Age of Promises explores the issue of electoral promises in twentieth century Britain - how they were made, how they were understood, and how they evolved across time - through a study of general election manifestos and election addresses. The authors argue that a history of the act of making promises - which is central to the political process, but which has not been sufficiently analysed - illuminates the development of political communication and democratic representation. The twentieth century saw a broad shift away from politics viewed as a discursive process whereby, at elections, it was enough to set out broad principles, with detailed policymaking to follow once in office following reflection and discussion. Over the first part of the century parties increasingly felt required to compile lists of specific policies to offer to voters, which they were then considered to have an obligation to carry out come what may. From 1945 onwards, moreover, there was even more focus on detailed, costed, pledges. We live in an age of growing uncertainty over the authority and status of political promises. In the wake of the 2016 EU referendum controversy erupted over parliamentary sovereignty. Should ''the will of the people'' as manifested in the referendum result be supreme, or did MPs owe a primary responsibility to their constituents and/or to the party manifestos on which they had been elected? Age of Promises demonstrates that these debates build on a long history of differing understandings about what status of manifestos and addresses should have in shaping the actions of government.

Age of Promises explores the issue of electoral promises in twentieth century Britain - how they were made, how they were understood, and how they evolved across time - through a study of general election manifestos and election addresses. The authors argue that a history of the act of making promises - which is central to the political process, but which has not been sufficiently analysed - illuminates the development of political communication and democratic representation. The twentieth century saw a broad shift away from politics viewed as a discursive process whereby, at elections, it was enough to set out broad principles, with detailed policymaking to follow once in office following reflection and discussion. Over the first part of the century parties increasingly felt required to compile lists of specific policies to offer to voters, which they were then considered to have an obligation to carry out come what may. From 1945 onwards, moreover, there was even more focus on detailed, costed, pledges. We live in an age of growing uncertainty over the authority and status of political promises. In the wake of the 2016 EU referendum controversy erupted over parliamentary sovereignty. Should ''the will of the people'' as manifested in the referendum result be supreme, or did MPs owe a primary responsibility to their constituents and/or to the party manifestos on which they had been elected? Age of Promises demonstrates that these debates build on a long history of differing understandings about what status of manifestos and addresses should have in shaping the actions of government.

This is not a book about Winston Churchill. It is not principally about his politics, nor his rhetorical imagination, nor even about the man himself. Instead, it addresses the varied afterlives of the man and the persistent, deeply located compulsion to bring him back from the dead, capturing and explaining the significance of the various Churchill myths to Britain''s history and current politics.The authors look at Churchill''s portrayal in social memory. They demonstrate the ways in which politicians have often used the idea of Churchill as a means of self-validation - using him to show themselves as tough and honest players. They show the man dramatized in film and television - an onscreen persona that is often the product of a gratuitous mixing of fact and fantasy, one deliberately shaped to meet the preferences of the presumed audience. They discuss his legacy in light of the Brexitdebate - showing how public figures on both sides of the Leave/Remain debate were able to use elements of Churchill''s words and character to argue for their own point-of-view.

This is not a book about Winston Churchill. It is not principally about his politics, nor his rhetorical imagination, nor even about the man himself. Instead, it addresses the varied afterlives of the man and the persistent, deeply located compulsion to bring him back from the dead, capturing and explaining the significance of the various Churchill myths to Britain''s history and current politics.The authors look at Churchill''s portrayal in social memory. They demonstrate the ways in which politicians have often used the idea of Churchill as a means of self-validation - using him to show themselves as tough and honest players. They show the man dramatized in film and television - an onscreen persona that is often the product of a gratuitous mixing of fact and fantasy, one deliberately shaped to meet the preferences of the presumed audience. They discuss his legacy in light of the Brexitdebate - showing how public figures on both sides of the Leave/Remain debate were able to use elements of Churchill''s words and character to argue for their own point-of-view.

Before Winston Churchill made history, he made news. To a great extent, the news made him too. If it was his own efforts that made him a hero, it was the media that made him a celebrity - and it has been considerably responsible for perpetuating his memory and shaping his reputation in the years since his death. Churchill first made his name via writing and journalism in the years before 1900, the money he earned helping to support his political career (at a time when MPs did not get salaries). Journalistic activities were also important to him later, as he struggled in the interwar years to find the wherewithal to run and maintain Chartwell, his country house in Kent. Moreover, not only was journalism an important aspect of Churchill's political persona, but he himself was a news-obsessive throughout his life. The story of Churchill and the news is, on one level, a tale of tight deadlines, off-the-record briefings and smoke-filled newsrooms, of wartime summits that were turned into stage-managed global media events, and of often tense interactions with journalists and powerful press proprietors, such as Lords Northcliffe, Rothermere, and Beaverbrook. Uncovering the symbiotic relationship between Churchill's political life and his media life, and the ways in which these were connected to his personal life, Richard Toye asks if there was a 'public Churchill' whose image was at odds with the behind-the-scenes reality, or whether, in fact, his private and public selves became seamlessly blended as he adjusted to living in the constant glare of the media spotlight.On a wider level, this is also the story of a rapidly evolving media and news culture in the first half of the twentieth century, and of what the contemporary reporting of Churchill's life (including by himself) can tell us about the development of this culture, over a period spanning from the Victorian era through to the space age.

''My aunt, listening to the Prime Minister's speech, remarked of "our greatest orator", "He's no speaker, is he?"' -diary of teacher M.A. Pratt, 11 Nov. 1942. The popular story of Churchill's war-time rhetoric is a simple one: the British people were energized and inspired by his speeches, which were almost universally admired and played an important role in the ultimate victory over Nazi Germany. Richard Toye now re-examines this accepted national story - and gives it a radical new spin. Using survey evidence and the diaries of ordinary people, he shows how reactions to Churchill's speeches at the time were often very different from what we have always been led to expect. His first speeches as Prime Minister in the dark days of 1940 were by no means universally acclaimed - indeed, many people thought that he was drunk during his famous 'finest hour' broadcast - and there is little evidence that they made a decisive difference to the British people's will to fight on. In actual fact, as Toye shows, mass enthusiasm sat side-by-side with considerable criticism and dissent from ordinary people. Yes, there were speeches that stimulated, invigorated, and excited many. But there were also speeches which caused depression and disappointment in many others, and which sometimes led to workplace or family arguments. Yet this more complex reality has been consistently obscured from the historical record by the overwhelming power of a treasured national myth. The first systematic, archive based examination of Churchill's World War II rhetoric as a whole, The Roar of the Lion considers his oratory not merely as a series of 'great speeches', but as calculated political interventions which had diplomatic repercussions far beyond the effect on the morale of listeners in Britain. Considering his failures as well as his successes, the book moves beyond the purely celebratory tone of much of the existing literature. It offers new insight into how the speeches were written and delivered - and shows how Churchill's words were received at home, amongst allies and neutrals, and within enemy and occupied countries. This is the essential book on Churchill's war-time speeches. It presents us with a dramatically new take on the politics of the 1940s - one that will change the way we think about Churchill's oratory forever.

Arguing about Empire analyses the most divisive arguments about empire between Europe's two leading colonial powers from the age of high imperialism to the post-war era of decolonization. Focusing on the domestic contexts underlying imperial rhetoric, Arguing about Empire adopts a case-study approach, treating key imperial debates as historical episodes to be investigated in depth. The episodes in question have been selected both for their chronological range, their variety, and, above all, their vitriol. Some were straightforward disputes; others involved cooperation in tense circumstances. These include the Tunisian and Egyptian crises of 1881-2, which saw France and Britain establish new North African protectorates, ostensibly in co-operation, but actually in competition; the Fashoda Crisis of 1898, when Britain and France came to the brink of war in the aftermath of the British re-conquest of Sudan; the Moroccan crises of 1905 and 1911, early tests of the Entente Cordiale, when Britain lent support to France in the face of German threats; the 1922 Chanak crisis, when that imperial Entente broke down in the face of a threatened attack on Franco-British forces by Kemalist Turkey; World War Two, which can be seen in part as an undeclared colonial war between the former allies, complicated by the division of the French Empire between De Gaulle's Free French forces and those who remained loyal to the Vichy Regime; and finally the 1956 Suez intervention, when, far from defusing another imperial crisis, Britain colluded with France and Israel to invade Egypt -- the culmination of the imperial interference that began some eighty years earlier.

Before Winston Churchill made history, he made news. To a great extent, the news made him too. If it was his own efforts that made him a hero, it was the media that made him a celebrity - and it has been considerably responsible for perpetuating his memory and shaping his reputation in the years since his death. Churchill first made his name via writing and journalism in the years before 1900, the money he earned helping to support his political career (at a time when MPs did not get salaries). Journalistic activities were also important to him later, as he struggled in the interwar years to find the wherewithal to run and maintain Chartwell, his country house in Kent. Moreover, not only was journalism an important aspect of Churchill's political persona, but he himself was a news-obsessive throughout his life. The story of Churchill and the news is, on one level, a tale of tight deadlines, off-the-record briefings and smoke-filled newsrooms, of wartime summits that were turned into stage-managed global media events, and of often tense interactions with journalists and powerful press proprietors, such as Lords Northcliffe, Rothermere, and Beaverbrook. Uncovering the symbiotic relationship between Churchill's political life and his media life, and the ways in which these were connected to his personal life, Richard Toye asks if there was a 'public Churchill' whose image was at odds with the behind-the-scenes reality, or whether, in fact, his private and public selves became seamlessly blended as he adjusted to living in the constant glare of the media spotlight.On a wider level, this is also the story of a rapidly evolving media and news culture in the first half of the twentieth century, and of what the contemporary reporting of Churchill's life (including by himself) can tell us about the development of this culture, over a period spanning from the Victorian era through to the space age.

Arguing about Empire analyses the most divisive arguments about empire between Europe's two leading colonial powers from the age of high imperialism to the post-war era of decolonization. Focusing on the domestic contexts underlying imperial rhetoric, Arguing about Empire adopts a case-study approach, treating key imperial debates as historical episodes to be investigated in depth. The episodes in question have been selected both for their chronological range, their variety, and, above all, their vitriol. Some were straightforward disputes; others involved cooperation in tense circumstances. These include the Tunisian and Egyptian crises of 1881-2, which saw France and Britain establish new North African protectorates, ostensibly in co-operation, but actually in competition; the Fashoda Crisis of 1898, when Britain and France came to the brink of war in the aftermath of the British re-conquest of Sudan; the Moroccan crises of 1905 and 1911, early tests of the Entente Cordiale, when Britain lent support to France in the face of German threats; the 1922 Chanak crisis, when that imperial Entente broke down in the face of a threatened attack on Franco-British forces by Kemalist Turkey; World War Two, which can be seen in part as an undeclared colonial war between the former allies, complicated by the division of the French Empire between De Gaulle's Free French forces and those who remained loyal to the Vichy Regime; and finally the 1956 Suez intervention, when, far from defusing another imperial crisis, Britain colluded with France and Israel to invade Egypt -- the culmination of the imperial interference that began some eighty years earlier.

Age of Promises explores the issue of electoral promises in twentieth century Britain - how they were made, how they were understood, and how they evolved across time - through a study of general election manifestos and election addresses. The authors argue that a history of the act of making promises - which is central to the political process, but which has not been sufficiently analysed - illuminates the development of political communication and democratic representation. The twentieth century saw a broad shift away from politics viewed as a discursive process whereby, at elections, it was enough to set out broad principles, with detailed policymaking to follow once in office following reflection and discussion. Over the first part of the century parties increasingly felt required to compile lists of specific policies to offer to voters, which they were then considered to have an obligation to carry out come what may. From 1945 onwards, moreover, there was even more focus on detailed, costed, pledges. We live in an age of growing uncertainty over the authority and status of political promises. In the wake of the 2016 EU referendum controversy erupted over parliamentary sovereignty. Should 'the will of the people' as manifested in the referendum result be supreme, or did MPs owe a primary responsibility to their constituents and/or to the party manifestos on which they had been elected? Age of Promises demonstrates that these debates build on a long history of differing understandings about what status of manifestos and addresses should have in shaping the actions of government.

This is not a book about Winston Churchill. It is not principally about his politics, nor his rhetorical imagination, nor even about the man himself. Instead, it addresses the varied afterlives of the man and the persistent, deeply located compulsion to bring him back from the dead, capturing and explaining the significance of the various Churchill myths to Britain's history and current politics.The authors look at Churchill's portrayal in social memory. They demonstrate the ways in which politicians have often used the idea of Churchill as a means of self-validation - using him to show themselves as tough and honest players. They show the man dramatized in film and television - an onscreen persona that is often the product of a gratuitous mixing of fact and fantasy, one deliberately shaped to meet the preferences of the presumed audience. They discuss his legacy in light of the Brexit debate - showing how public figures on both sides of the Leave/Remain debate were able to use elements of Churchill's words and character to argue for their own point-of-view.

Rhetoric is often seen as a synonym for shallow, deceptive language, and therefore as something negative. But if we view rhetoric in more neutral terms, as the 'art of persuasion', it is clear that we are all forced to engage with it at some level, if only because we are constantly exposed to the rhetoric of others. In this Very Short Introduction, Richard Toye explores the purpose of rhetoric. Rather than presenting a defence of it, he considers it as the foundation-stone of civil society, and an essential part of any democratic process. Using wide-ranging examples from Ancient Greece, medieval Islamic preaching, and modern cinema, Toye considers why we should all have an appreciation of the art of rhetoric.ABOUT THE SERIES: The Very Short Introductions series from Oxford University Press contains hundreds of titles in almost every subject area. These pocket-sized books are the perfect way to get ahead in a new subject quickly. Our expert authors combine facts, analysis, perspective, new ideas, and enthusiasm to make interesting and challenging topics highly readable.

Against the backdrop of a 20-year revolt against free trade orthodoxy by economists inside the UN and their impact on policy discussions since the 1960s, the authors show how the UN both nurtured and inhibited creative and novel intellectual contributions to the trade and development debate. Presenting a stirring account of the main UN actors in this debate, The UN and Global Political Economy focuses on the accomplishments and struggles of UN economists and the role played by such UN agencies as the Department of Economic (and Social) Affairs, the United Nations Commission on Trade and Development, and the Economic Commission for Latin America (and the Caribbean). It also looks closely at the effects of the Latin American debt crisis of the 1980s, the growing strength of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in the 1990s, and the lessons to be drawn from these and other recent developments.

‘I have not become the King’s First Minister in order to preside over the liquidation of the British Empire.’ These notorious words, spoken by Churchill in 1942, encapsulate his image as an imperial die-hard, implacably opposed to colonial freedom – a reputation that has prevailed, and which Churchill willingly embraced to further his policies. Yet, as a youthful minister at the Colonial Office before World War I, his political opponents had seen him as a Little Englander and a danger to the Empire. Placing Churchill in the context of his times and his contemporaries, Richard Toye evaluates his position on key Imperial questions and examines what was conventional about Churchill’s opinions and what was unique. Combining a lightness of touch and entertaining storytelling with expert and insightful analysis, the result is a vivid and dynamic account of a remarkable man and an extraordinary era.'Wonderfully informative' Daily Telegraph'Excellent' Spectator‘Mature, intelligent, thoughtful, judicious’ Washington Times‘One of Britain's smartest young historians’ Independent

The two most significant British political figures of the twentieth-century, Churchill and Lloyd George were political rivals but personal friends. Between them their ministerial careers spanned seventy years and two world wars. Althought they could not have been more different temperamentally, and often disagreed violently about politics, theirs was 'the longest political friendship in the life of Great Britain' and Churchill was the only person outside his family to call Lloyd George 'David'. Richard Toye's book is a dynamic account of their relationship. Drawing on diaries and letters, some never before published, (there are more than 1,000 pieces of correspondence between the two men), he explores their long-standing friendship and rivalry, the impact they had on each other's careers, and the fate of their respective reputations, arguing that Lloyd George's major achievements have been undeservedly overshadowed, in part as a consequence of Churchill's later mythmaking. It is a major work from a brilliant young historian.

J.H. Whitley came from an established business family in Halifax, where he engaged in youth work and municipal politics before becoming MP for Halifax from 1900 to 1928. He was a Liberal Radical who worked with Labour, gave his name to the industrial councils of the First World War, was Speaker of the House of Commons 1921-28 presiding over the debates at the time of the General Strike of 1926. In 1929-31 he toured India as chairman of the Royal Commission on Indian Labour and was chairman of the BBC between 1930 and 1935. He was thus a vitally important political figure who was active at the rise of Labour and the decline of Liberalism, involved in the Liberal reforms of the Edwardian age, and deeply concerned about industrial relations in early twentieth century Britain and beyond. This volume brings together leading academics and provides new information and analysis on the life, work and times of J.H. Whitley, offering a study of his career in British politics and society, focusing particularly on the last decade of the nineteenth century and the first three decades of the twentieth century.

Why do people write about politics? And why does political writing get published? This innovative study explores the diverse world of modern British political writing, examining its evolving genres and their pivotal role in shaping political identities, ideologies, and movements. Spanning memoirs, biographies, parliamentary novels, fanzines, and grassroots publications, chapters consider how these forms have documented lived experiences, challenged authority, and influenced political discourse across all levels of society. Contributions from leading scholars illuminate the creative strategies and cultural contexts of political writing since the late nineteenth-century across varied regional contexts, from Beatrice Webb's diaries to punk zines and Conservative pamphlets. In doing so, they examine the interplay of literature, propaganda, and activism, offering fresh perspectives on the connections between politics and publishing. Accessible and insightful, this study provides a window into how political ideas are crafted, disseminated, and reinforced through the written word. This title is also available as open access on Cambridge Core.

Why do people write about politics? And why does political writing get published? This innovative study explores the diverse world of modern British political writing, examining its evolving genres and their pivotal role in shaping political identities, ideologies, and movements. Spanning memoirs, biographies, parliamentary novels, fanzines, and grassroots publications, chapters consider how these forms have documented lived experiences, challenged authority, and influenced political discourse across all levels of society. Contributions from leading scholars illuminate the creative strategies and cultural contexts of political writing since the late nineteenth-century across varied regional contexts, from Beatrice Webb's diaries to punk zines and Conservative pamphlets. In doing so, they examine the interplay of literature, propaganda, and activism, offering fresh perspectives on the connections between politics and publishing. Accessible and insightful, this study provides a window into how political ideas are crafted, disseminated, and reinforced through the written word. This title is also available as open access on Cambridge Core.

Cecil Bisshop Harmsworth, 1st Baron Harmsworth (1869-1948), was the younger brother of the press proprietors Lord Northcliffe and Lord Rothermere. Although he played a role in the early development of the Harmsworth journalistic empire, Cecil chose a political career. He served as Liberal MP for Droitwich from 1906 to 1910, and for Luton from 1911 to 1922. After holding a number of minor government positions under Asquith, Harmsworth became a member of Lloyd George's War Cabinet Secretariat in 1917, and from 1919 to 1922 served as Under-Secretary of State at the Foreign Office. Harmsworth's diary forms a highly readable record of the politics of the period, detailing late-night Commons sittings and the rough and tumble of the campaign trail, as well as giving skilful pen-portraits of the major figures of the day. Northcliffe complained that Harmsworth lacked the ambition to make it to the front rank of politics, but his diary is a fascinating source.

This collection explores the aftermath of the Representation of the People Act, which gave some British women the vote. Experts examine the paths taken by both former-suffragists as well as their anti-suffragist adversaries, the practices of suffrage commemoration, and the changing priorities and formations of British feminism in this era.