Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://hdl.handle.net/2440/115255
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Anthonisz, Michael | - |
dc.date.issued | 1989 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/2440/115255 | - |
dc.description.abstract | High amongst the most controversial figures in Australian Labor Party history, and Australian political history in general, are Lang and Whitlam. Lang was Premier of New South Wales from 1925 to 1927 and again from 1930 to 1932. Whitlam was Prime Minister of Australia from 1972 to 1975, winning a second term in between in 1974. During these times they dominated the Australian Labor Party and the political scene in general. Both became embroiled in controversy during their terms in office and both suffered the same political fate in the end, dismissal by officials of the British Crown by recourse to the Australian Constitution. Lang was dismissed by Governor Game in May 1932, while Whitlam was dismissed by Governor-General Kerr in November 1975. Their dismissals, some forty years apart, stand as high points of drama in Australian political history. This thesis is a comparison of Lang and Whitlam concentrating on the background, rise in the Australian Labor Party, dominance of it, the "radical" and/or more controversial actions during the periods of power, and aspects of the dismissals, of both political figures. Therefore, Chapter 1 deals with Jack Lang in regard to the above criteria, while Chapter 2 deals with Gough Whitlam in the same way. Chapter 3 is a comparison noting similarities and differences between Lang and Whitlam on the above criteria by combining the findings of Chapter 1 and Chapter 2. | en |
dc.language.iso | en | en |
dc.title | Lang and Whitlam : a comparison | en |
dc.type | Theses | en |
dc.contributor.school | Dept. of Politics | en |
dc.provenance | This electronic version is made publicly available by the University of Adelaide in accordance with its open access policy for student theses. Copyright in this thesis remains with the author. This thesis may incorporate third party material which has been used by the author pursuant to Fair Dealing exceptions. If you are the owner of any included third party copyright material you wish to be removed from this electronic version, please complete the take down form located at: http://www.adelaide.edu.au/legals | en |
dc.description.dissertation | Thesis (B. A. Hons.) -- University of Adelaide, Dept. of Politics, 1990 | en |
Appears in Collections: | School of History and Politics |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
01front.pdf | 44.76 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open | |
02whole.pdf | 1.98 MB | Adobe PDF | View/Open | |
Permissions Restricted Access | Library staff access only | 92.87 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.