|WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom||(Rated Start-class)|
|WikiProject Politics / Political parties||(Rated Start-class)|
If the Radicals had nothing to do with socialism, why is there an external link to a history of the Co-op, a socialist organisation? The linked article even starts off taling about Robert Owen, the father of socialism.
John Stuart Mill
Mill was a Radical MP from 1865 to 1868. Worth mentioning in its own right I'd say, but also throws the article into question a bit since it seems to mean that the party did not merge with the Whigs in 1859, as what's there now suggests. 220.127.116.11 21:46, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- Being a Radical was more a tendency than a political party. Most self-described Radicals would have also considered themselves to be Liberals, and this is true going back to well before 1859. 1859 represents the final merger of the remaining Peelites (Gladstone, Graham, Herbert, Newcastle) with Palmerston and Russell's Liberals, who were themselves a loose coalition of Whigs and Radicals. The "Radicals" as a distinct subset of the Liberal Party lasted until at least 1886, if not to the First World War. john k 16:26, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Cotton Tom Heflin
Ok so if someone asks someone if they are a Radical and the person responds by saying, "I'm about as radical as Cotton Tom Heflin", what do they mean by that? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ray1416 (talk • contribs) 13:49, 17 January 2007 (UTC).
- Presumably they mean to convey that they've got an obscure sense of humour. Please find a verifiable source if this is something you want to add to the article. .. dave souza, talk 15:10, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
These liberals were classical liberals - today they would be considered libertarians. Also the tone of the article is typical of the uninformed left.
duties on imported grain which raised the price of food to help landowners but harmed manufacturers
is nonsense. Corn laws harmed everybody, but the most harmed were the working poor.
Industrial Radical Party
I'm not sure that fictional parties are really relevant for this article, but at least now the reference mentions what novel it comes from. However, I wonder if this party should be excised altogether. Wardog (talk) 11:08, 1 May 2009 (UTC)