You are very welcome and good luck!

Congratulations! Outstanding performance. While I am delighted you think my videos helped, I am sure that the effort and achievement is all yours. Well done and good luck with the A2! More videos on that to come ...

Bert Fegg look forward to it!

Glad to have helped. Not sure what to recommend specifically on U2, especially with only a day left. Make sure you know the difference between presidentialism and prime ministerial theory. Good luck!

Hi and thanks for the question. Your starting point is the role of government, every time. Unless you are doing A2 Ideologies, in which case it is the Human Condition (Hobbes: nasty, brutish, solitary and short and the role of government is to ameliorate that and you are back to government.) Thatcher said 'no government can achieve anything except through people' and that, not NSTAS (no such thing as society) is the best summary of her philosophy. So that leads into economics, which leads into social, and then a bit on Foreign. Hope this helps and good luck!

so helpful thank you so much!

one more question..... for A2 ideologies with a question that says distinguish (15 marker) e.g. distinguish between neo lib and neo con is it best to write two chunks (one neo lib chunk one neo con chunk) and then evaluate in the last paragraph or is it best to interweave between the two?

That would work or alternatively you could pick a couple of critical ideas and explain how the two ideologies approach them differently.

If a point is relevant it will be credited. The mark schemes are not that didactic. The critical idea is that you can use evidence to support your point.

Bert Fegg Thank you very much

Hoped it might, but I was rather anticipating post thatcherism. still, hey ho. Hope the videos helped. Onto U2!

Do you have any predictions of what might come up on tomorrow's paper?

The exam was set a couple of years ago and if i remember correctly sovereignty came up last year so perhaps not. I really am not sure to be honest but i hope U1 went well.

Alright, thank you.

They are all out there - just follow the links to all my videos and good luck.

Hi and thanks for the question. Well, no, not really. That is a massive question that would take months to answer. So I am going to be lazy and direct you towards www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2013/04/margaret-thatchers-macroeconomic-legacy. And for a couple of reasons: one it explains it better than I can and two, the style is (even) better than mine. Write as the Economist writes and you will never have to worry about any future exam or other written assignment. The short answer is that politicians who believed that Keynesian theory had ran its course were elected on both sides of the Atlantic and the rest is history. And sadly I cannot explain that in better detail than the Economist. Sorry to duck this one out! Do let me know if you have any other questions, however, Best wishes and good luck!

socialism believe in keeping away from international affairs and socialism is anti europe

Hi. I would argue that the Labour party rejected socialism lock stock and barrel during the New Labour period (Economic policy being the biggie and you could also discuss liberal internationalism and the close relationship with a very right wing US administration.) With Corbyn has come a significant swing back towards socialism - and the points you make establish that clearly. Good luck!

Socialism is not really anti-EU; historically, the governments of mainland europe have tended to be more left wing than the UK. The issues was that socialists in the UK - and Corbyn not least - perceived the EU to be a capitalist plot to frustrate the spread of socialist values.

Bert Fegg so you could just sat that corbyn was critical of the EU

I would probably say 'wary' or 'sceptical' rather than 'critical' but broadly speaking, yes

That would be telling and it rather presumes I buy into one specific set of ideas. Overall, I try to remain neutral and I would rather people guessed. Thanks for the interest!

Between may and corbyn which do you think is worse?

So far, Corbyn hasn't done anything so not really a fair comparison!

Would you say that corbyns ideas have worked better in the past than mays?

One of the things about being in opposition is that you can pretty much say anything you like; by the time you get elected people will have forgotten and you can always claim that 'things are different now' anyway. The thing that is becoming increasingly clear is that capitalism by itself does not work: it might lead to growth but as a general rule it tends to concentrate the rewards of that growth rather than distribute them, as its adherents propose. On the other hand, planned economies fail as they are too complex to manage effectively and it does indeed penalise ambition and entrepreneurship. The short answer is I do not know and if I did I would not be keeping it to the comments section of a youtube video! But the question is very welcome, thanks!

Thanks for the interest but I am not sure of the point you are seeking to make. I'm not arguing that social conservatism is inconsistent with free market economics and I agree that the Big Society was a good idea - it was just hard practically to implement and harder to evaluate any success. Multiculturalism might work but you certainly cannot just park it there and hope the long term benefits will mitigate the short term costs. So yes, I agree with that! Best wishes and thanks again for the interest.

@@drfegg288 thanks for your considered reply. Please continue with your videos and engaging people you post comments, it is appreciated.