I've been researching the internal dynamics of the party for a while, and I was interested by how diametrically opposed the views of the parties left and right are now to in, say 1946. Is there a way to keep the party as it was in the days of Bevin and Bevan, at least in this area, or do outside factors make that impossible?
-
Hi Guest!
The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
AHC: No realignment in the Labour Party on Israel Palestine
- Thread starter Skaven
- Start date
- Location
- Municipal Commune of Bourne
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I've been researching the internal dynamics of the party for a while, and I was interested by how diametrically opposed the views of the parties left and right are now to in, say 1946. Is there a way to keep the party as it was in the days of Bevin and Bevan, at least in this area, or do outside factors make that impossible?
this is something i was wondering about recently - i remember writing a thing about a 'reverse' suez crisis in which nye bevan fights a war against the arab kingdoms in defence of israel, while being left out to dry by the yanks.
That’s soooo good - I don’t think Truman would be the one to change course on Israel, but there was enough doubt among the movers and shakers at the time for a significant shift in America’s Israeli policy from OTL.this is something i was wondering about recently - i remember writing a thing about a 'reverse' suez crisis in which nye bevan fights a war against the arab kingdoms in defence of israel, while being left out to dry by the yanks.
And while I don’t know enough about this topic to comment, Bevan leading the heroic charge against the enemies of Israel is just *chef kiss*
Would Byrnes being President help make Mumby’s idea for a thing more possible?That’s soooo good - I don’t think Truman would be the one to change course on Israel, but there was enough doubt among the movers and shakers at the time for a significant shift in America’s Israeli policy from OTL.
And while I don’t know enough about this topic to comment, Bevan leading the heroic charge against the enemies of Israel is just *chef kiss*
- Location
- Albany, NY
- Pronouns
- She/Her
He's not a perfect fit, but it does certainly open more options. That said Byrnes would probably shatter the party in 1948 far more then IOTL so the real question would be what happens when the Republicans sweep in in 1948.Would Byrnes being President help make Mumby’s idea for a thing more possible?
- Location
- Municipal Commune of Bourne
- Pronouns
- He/Him
That’s soooo good - I don’t think Truman would be the one to change course on Israel, but there was enough doubt among the movers and shakers at the time for a significant shift in America’s Israeli policy from OTL.
And while I don’t know enough about this topic to comment, Bevan leading the heroic charge against the enemies of Israel is just *chef kiss*
its not very difficult to do, if you get an Old Right Republican in who thinks that whole WW2 thing was an exceptional situation and we'd really prefer to go back to bopping latin americans on the head thank you
- Location
- Albany, NY
- Pronouns
- She/Her
The only problem is that the leading Old Right Republican was a huge Israel Stan and one of his voice in the wilderness things was wanting to end the Arms Embargo and provide direct aid.its not very difficult to do, if you get an Old Right Republican in who thinks that whole WW2 thing was an exceptional situation and we'd really prefer to go back to bopping latin americans on the head thank you
Kind of weird that that's the one of Bob Taft's views that did become part of the GOP mainstream.
- Location
- Municipal Commune of Bourne
- Pronouns
- He/Him
The only problem is that the leading Old Right Republican was a huge Israel Stan and one of his voice in the wilderness things was wanting to end the Arms Embargo and provide direct aid.
Kind of weird that that's the one of Bob Taft's views that did become part of the GOP mainstream.
huh
thats interesting
- Location
- Albany, NY
- Pronouns
- She/Her
That said if you somehow get John Brickner back in the running after his flop into VPness in 1944, maybe have Taft's cancer arrive early so he's the man on scene he could pull it off in 48. Its just that he's such a lightweight compared to his Co-Senator from Ohio.huh
thats interesting
- Location
- Municipal Commune of Bourne
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I think possibly the displacement of Labor Zionism by Revionist Zionism (and the different attitude to Arabs that those ideologies entailed) as the more dominant school of Zionist thought also contributed to the realignment.
That’s soooo good - I don’t think Truman would be the one to change course on Israel, but there was enough doubt among the movers and shakers at the time for a significant shift in America’s Israeli policy from OTL.
And while I don’t know enough about this topic to comment, Bevan leading the heroic charge against the enemies of Israel is just *chef kiss*
Foot claims that while Bevan wasn't a Zionist he was a great friend to the Zionists, including Yigal Allon when they met at a kibbutz. I know Richard Crossman was very against any British disengagment with the Middle East as it would hurt Israel, but he was quite independent of Bevan so isn't as representative as I'd like.
If I was going to do my PhD straight after my current Masters, I would probably do it on this topic. Did a lot of research recently to see what was in the field (alongside dips into the archives myself) and I think the issue of Labour’s shifts on Israel has been mischaracterised. At least, I think it wasn’t as clear a break as it’s made out to be.
I think Morrison’s comments about how “Zionists make good colonisers” sum up what many right-wing Labour figures (Ernie Bevin excluded) thought about Israel - the ‘it was a colonial project and that wasn’t a bad thing’ approach. After that, I’m less sure of Labour right positioning but I can tell you that the Labour left’s Zionism was a bit all over the place and less consistent than some might think. Anthony Greenwood, for example, was the first Chair of Labour Friends of Israel and had established himself as a principled defender of Jews, both in Britain and abroad (if anyone wants a good laugh, read what fascists in Hampstead called him in the mid-Forties for saying Jewish refugees should be settled in the borough). He was also more of the dovish persuasion than many other members of Labour Friends of Israel, and so privately lamented that Moshe Sharett had been deposed and that the Israelis were too unreasonable with Egypt’s Nasser. You’d think the premier Zionist (or close enough) of the Labour left would have been less open-minded about the primacy of peace in the Middle East - as opposed to the single-minded furtherance of Israel’s expansionist objectives - but he was not at all the caricature that people paint of the Zionist tendency of the Labour Party.
I think Morrison’s comments about how “Zionists make good colonisers” sum up what many right-wing Labour figures (Ernie Bevin excluded) thought about Israel - the ‘it was a colonial project and that wasn’t a bad thing’ approach. After that, I’m less sure of Labour right positioning but I can tell you that the Labour left’s Zionism was a bit all over the place and less consistent than some might think. Anthony Greenwood, for example, was the first Chair of Labour Friends of Israel and had established himself as a principled defender of Jews, both in Britain and abroad (if anyone wants a good laugh, read what fascists in Hampstead called him in the mid-Forties for saying Jewish refugees should be settled in the borough). He was also more of the dovish persuasion than many other members of Labour Friends of Israel, and so privately lamented that Moshe Sharett had been deposed and that the Israelis were too unreasonable with Egypt’s Nasser. You’d think the premier Zionist (or close enough) of the Labour left would have been less open-minded about the primacy of peace in the Middle East - as opposed to the single-minded furtherance of Israel’s expansionist objectives - but he was not at all the caricature that people paint of the Zionist tendency of the Labour Party.
Last edited:
If I was going to do my PhD straight after my current Masters, I would probably do it on this topic. Did a lot of research recently to see what was in the field (alongside dips into the archives myself) and I think the issue of Labour’s shifts on Israel has been mischaracterised. At least, I think it wasn’t as clear a break as it’s made out to be.
I think Morrison’s comments about how “Zionists make good colonisers” sum up what many right-wing Labour figures (Ernie Bevin excluded) thought about Israel - the ‘it was a colonial project and that wasn’t a bad thing’ approach. After that, I’m less sure of Labour right positioning but I can tell you that the Labour left’s Zionism was a bit all over the place and less consistent than some might think. Anthony Greenwood, for example, was the first Chair of Labour Friends of Israel and had established himself as a principled defender of Jews, both in Britain and abroad (if anyone wants a good laugh, read what fascists in Hampstead called him in the mid-Forties for saying Jewish refugees should be settled in the borough). He was also more of the dovish persuasion than many other members of Labour Friends of Israel, and so privately lamented that Moshe Sharett had been deposed and that the Israelis were too unreasonable with Egypt’s Nasser. You’d think the premier Zionist (or close enough) of the Labour left would have been less open-minded about the primacy of peace in the Middle East - as opposed to the single-minded furtherance of Israel’s expansionist objectives - but he was not at all the caricature that people paint of the Zionist tendency of the Labour Party.
One thing I was surprised to discover is how staunch Wilson was on the subject, gives the Israelis a very favourable write up for the Six Day War and according to Jenkins his account of Britain's involvment in the Middle East is pretty strongly pro-Israel.