• 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

AHC/WI: Labour win in 1959

AgentRudda

I DID EVERYTHING RITE AND THEY INDICTED MEee 👐
Pronouns
He/Him
How can a Labour majority victory be achieved at the 1959 general election, or at least Labour as the largest party?

It was an election that many expected Labour to win, or at least beat the Tories. But obviously, the Tories never had it so good. But how could that have been avoided? The obvious answer is a different PM succeeding Eden in '57. Rab Butler is the obvious choice here.

Hugh Gaitskell's health wasn't the best, though maybe the stress of being PM would have killed him earlier than OTL. Maybe it doesn't.
 
The impression I got from one contemporary memoir--it can't remember if it was Denis Healey's or Roy Mason's--was that the main reason why Labour didn't seem to benefit from a theoretically favourable political environment was that the voting public were scared of the fact that Gaitskell was at odds with his party (e.g. over disarmament) and the sense that Labour were not fit to govern. Not necessarily because of any specific policy position, but because of the sense that Gaitskell wasn't able to lead and you were voting for the mystery box with no sense of what a Labour Government would actually be like.
 
The impression I got from one contemporary memoir--it can't remember if it was Denis Healey's or Roy Mason's--was that the main reason why Labour didn't seem to benefit from a theoretically favourable political environment was that the voting public were scared of the fact that Gaitskell was at odds with his party (e.g. over disarmament) and the sense that Labour were not fit to govern. Not necessarily because of any specific policy position, but because of the sense that Gaitskell wasn't able to lead and you were voting for the mystery box with no sense of what a Labour Government would actually be like.
Could a solution be Attlee stepping down earlier and allowing Gaitskell more time to consolidate power?
 
Could a solution be Attlee stepping down earlier and allowing Gaitskell more time to consolidate power?
I think that makes it less likely it would be Gaitskell, and I'm not sure how much of an impact him having been leader for longer would make any way. I think the key moment is more Frank Cousins becoming the T and G general secretary - and if the POD is that not happening (which I don't really know enough to talk about with authority) then the Labour left will probably be completely unrecognisable thereafter (to the point I've seen some claim there wouldnt be one, though I rather doubt that).
 
I don't have my sources to hand, but basically AIUI that was the (re?)emergence of a non-Communist left in the unions and the following few years were what saw links emerge between them and the Parliamentary left, which had previously mostly been seen by trade unionists across the spectrum as too champagne-heavy.
 
Back
Top