Why did British politicians initiate, and why did civil servants facilitate, the complete disposal of the government's oil assets, a vital national resource. Public choice theory has traditionally found it difficult to explain the retreat of the state, not because the theory is flawed, but because insufficient attention has been given to the parameters that actors face at both the domestic and international level. Four sets of parameters are particularly relevant to this case: international, industry, bureaucratic and political, which I review in sequence. First, though international factors are rarely incorporated into domestic policy-making analyses, they do have an impact. Realists' issue-specific models can be adapted to these analyses and help explain why Britain was forced to bow to international financial pressures and to work within the international oil structure. A balance of payments crisis in 1976 forced Britain's first asset sale while the development of a free market for oil (not dominated by a monopoly or cartel) made further sales more feasible, but not inevitable. Second, state-owned companies were often obstacles to privatization. A closer examination of the companies' structures explains the differing reactions of the managers of British National Oil Company (BNOC), British Gas Corporation (BGC) and British Petroleum (BP) and their abilities to achieve their preferences. The management of BP favoured privatization while the managers of BNOC and BGC opposed the sales of their oil assets. Though they could not prevent the fulfilment of the government's plans, they were able to cause delays and affect the form which privatization took. Third, contrary to budget-maximizing models, the British civil servants did not impede privatization. As members of a generalist bureaucracy, they were more concerned with their immediate work tasks and future career prospects across the civil service as a whole, than the long term future of the division or department where they were immediately located. In addition, because the Department of Energy was a relatively weak agency, individual level and career-maximizing strategies predominated rather than collective action strategies. Finally, because political demands for privatization were weak, other supply- side factors dominated politicians' decision to select privatization. These included party political pressures to cut public spending by means of asset sales and personal political advantage, which encouraged policy entrepreneurs to bear the initial costs of a potentially hazardous innovation.

In the immediate post-war years, the war is curiously, although not totally, absent in British film, which seem to be occupied with “getting on” with life and offering distraction from the realities of post-war life. It is the time of the celebrated Ealing comedies, such as Kind Hearts and Coronets (1949) and The Ladykillers (1955), Dickens adaptations, and the Archers’ most ambitious projects. Critics tend to ignore these films that suppress the presence of the war when drawing connections to the post-war situation. However, the impact of the war is very much present in these films through the types of characters portrayed and common themes of displacement and isolation. In looking at representation of middle-class women and men in British film of the post-war period, I examine the screen personae of Celia Johnson and Deborah Kerr, and Michael Redgrave and Alec Guinness. I look at how, through their various film incarnations, these four actors create screen personae of solid, dependable middle-class men and women, with their accompanying ideals of duty, community responsibility and obligation. I contextualize these identities in hardships of post-war life, using Angus Calder’s The People’s War. Focussing on Carol Reed’s The Third Man (1949) and Jules Dassin’s Night and the City (1951), I re-examine British film noir, suggesting these films reveal British vulnerability and anxieties about their own displacement by America during the so-called “American Occupation” of Britain. In these films, maladjusted, childlike American protagonists disrupt and upset the social stability of the ancient cities – London and Vienna – where they find themselves. The structural damage of these cities creates liminal space that allows outsiders like Holly Martins, Harry Lime, and Harry Fabian the room to operate and to disturb. The final chapter speculates on the possible reason for re-casting and adapting the iconic British narrative of Charles Dickens: Great Expectations (1946), Nicholas Nickleby (1947), Oliver Twist (1948) and Scrooge (1951). Drawing connections between the post-war study The Neglected Child and His Family and D.W. Winnicott’s theories on childhood development, I suggest that these narratives consider the problem of neglected children in post-war Britain through the safety of historical and literary distancing.

In the immediate post-war years, the war is curiously, although not totally, absent in British film, which seem to be occupied with “getting on” with life and offering distraction from the realities of post-war life. It is the time of the celebrated Ealing comedies, such as Kind Hearts and Coronets (1949) and The Ladykillers (1955), Dickens adaptations, and the Archers’ most ambitious projects. Critics tend to ignore these films that suppress the presence of the war when drawing connections to the post-war situation. However, the impact of the war is very much present in these films through the types of characters portrayed and common themes of displacement and isolation. In looking at representation of middle-class women and men in British film of the post-war period, I examine the screen personae of Celia Johnson and Deborah Kerr, and Michael Redgrave and Alec Guinness. I look at how, through their various film incarnations, these four actors create screen personae of solid, dependable middle-class men and women, with their accompanying ideals of duty, community responsibility and obligation. I contextualize these identities in hardships of post-war life, using Angus Calder’s The People’s War. Focussing on Carol Reed’s The Third Man (1949) and Jules Dassin’s Night and the City (1951), I re-examine British film noir, suggesting these films reveal British vulnerability and anxieties about their own displacement by America during the so-called “American Occupation” of Britain. In these films, maladjusted, childlike American protagonists disrupt and upset the social stability of the ancient cities – London and Vienna – where they find themselves. The structural damage of these cities creates liminal space that allows outsiders like Holly Martins, Harry Lime, and Harry Fabian the room to operate and to disturb. The final chapter speculates on the possible reason for re-casting and adapting the iconic British narrative of Charles Dickens: Great Expectations (1946), Nicholas Nickleby (1947), Oliver Twist (1948) and Scrooge (1951). Drawing connections between the post-war study The Neglected Child and His Family and D.W. Winnicott’s theories on childhood development, I suggest that these narratives consider the problem of neglected children in post-war Britain through the safety of historical and literary distancing.

Thesis--Columiba University. / Bibliography: p. 209-214.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Columbia University, 1941. / Lithoprinted. Vita. "Select bibliography": p. 113-118.

Thesis--Columiba University. / Bibliography: p. 209-214.

Thesis--Wisconsin. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 266-304).

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1967. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.A. in National Security Affairs) Naval Postgraduate School, December 2001. / Thesis advisor, Glenn E. Robinson. Includes bibliographical references (p. 77-78). Also available online.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1975. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.