The last phase of principled politics in England came with the appearance of Benjamin Disraeli. He learned to think inductively from his profound father Isaac Disraeli, and moulded his political scepticism on the principles of Bolingbroke. Disraeli failed because his insight into politics coincided with the hey-day of laisser-faire. The transitory economic advantages of that system brooked no criticism while they lasted, Disraeli laboured after a precautionary unity that was not for the moment an economic necessity. In the Conservatism of Sir Robert Peel, he found a middle-class and short-sighted policy. The Conservative party was in much the same state as it is to-day, appealing to moderate opinion because it was entirely noncommittal through a confusion of values. It tried to apply Tory standards to Liberal conditions and inevitably sacrificed the standards to the conditions. The ruling classes had lain fallow since the Napoleonic wars, and principles of government were laid aside heedless of the future. Disraeli looked on the growing City of London as a Whig creation, and he understood Protection as Bismarck did, and later Joseph Chamberlain, from a national and not a manufacturers' point of view. To Disraeli the items that figured on a balance sheet were only important so far as they fostered the character of the people. He legalised the Trade Unions and one can fairly surmise that he recognised in Socialism an exhibition of the unled forces of revolting Toryism. It is doubtful if in August, 1930, he would have called a Government national that was opposed to those forces. Disraeli would have co-ordinated industry even in those days on a national and static basis. He was sixty years before his time in attempting to achieve unity in modern industrialism. In comparison with Mr. Baldwin it is important to remember that Disraeli's theory of the two nations might have rendered a great service to political concord, if later Conservatives had not taken to appealing to middle-class opinion.

What It Means

This is a placeholder explanation generated by the low-overhead model. It interprets "The last phase of principled politics in England came with the appearance of Benjamin Disraeli. He learned to think inductively from his profound father Isaac Disraeli, and moulded his political scepticism on the principles of Bolingbroke. Disraeli failed because his insight into politics coincided with the hey-day of laisser-faire. The transitory economic advantages of that system brooked no criticism while they lasted, Disraeli laboured after a precautionary unity that was not for the moment an economic necessity. In the Conservatism of Sir Robert Peel, he found a middle-class and short-sighted policy. The Conservative party was in much the same state as it is to-day, appealing to moderate opinion because it was entirely noncommittal through a confusion of values. It tried to apply Tory standards to Liberal conditions and inevitably sacrificed the standards to the conditions. The ruling classes had lain fallow since the Napoleonic wars, and principles of government were laid aside heedless of the future. Disraeli looked on the growing City of London as a Whig creation, and he understood Protection as Bismarck did, and later Joseph Chamberlain, from a national and not a manufacturers' point of view. To Disraeli the items that figured on a balance sheet were only important so far as they fostered the character of the people. He legalised the Trade Unions and one can fairly surmise that he recognised in Socialism an exhibition of the unled forces of revolting Toryism. It is doubtful if in August, 1930, he would have called a Government national that was opposed to those forces. Disraeli would have co-ordinated industry even in those days on a national and static basis. He was sixty years before his time in attempting to achieve unity in modern industrialism. In comparison with Mr. Baldwin it is important to remember that Disraeli's theory of the two nations might have rendered a great service to political concord, if later Conservatives had not taken to appealing to middle-class opinion." in the context of "John Green, Mr. Baldwin: A Study in Post-War Conservatism (1933), pp. 174-175" to mean that wisdom is timeless.