A Greater Britain, Mk2
- Thread starter EdT
- Start date
Hi all,
So yeah, I've decided to come back to 'A Greater Britain' and hopefully see it through to the bitter end this time! I originally ground to a halt on this last year, what with pressures of work and so on- in recent weeks though I've been a little less busy, so I thought I would come back to it and make a few alterations to some of the previous parts. I enjoyed coming to it afresh so much that I just kept going, hence the resurrection!
Essentially, I've gone through the whole thing with a fine toothcomb, re-writing anything that I don't like, improving the language, adding new material where I think it's needed, re-ordering the chapters and so on. This is particularly apparent towards the later segments. Then I've begun to take the story on, and am writing more as I speak. I reckoned it made more sense to post the whole thing from the beginning rather then starting from where I left off, plus it means that any new readers will have a better idea of what's going on.
The eventual idea is to publish a complete version of this in the form of a free e-book, with photos, maps, an index, a foreward discussing alternative history in general and a few appendices. I've done a few prototypes and am pretty pleased with the results- so far the thing runs to 182 pages (I'm expecting it to end up in the 350-400 region) and looks quite professional. The idea is that it should be possible to print the thing out and bind it as a proper paperback, if you were that way inclined...
So yeah, on with the content!
So yeah, I've decided to come back to 'A Greater Britain' and hopefully see it through to the bitter end this time! I originally ground to a halt on this last year, what with pressures of work and so on- in recent weeks though I've been a little less busy, so I thought I would come back to it and make a few alterations to some of the previous parts. I enjoyed coming to it afresh so much that I just kept going, hence the resurrection!
Essentially, I've gone through the whole thing with a fine toothcomb, re-writing anything that I don't like, improving the language, adding new material where I think it's needed, re-ordering the chapters and so on. This is particularly apparent towards the later segments. Then I've begun to take the story on, and am writing more as I speak. I reckoned it made more sense to post the whole thing from the beginning rather then starting from where I left off, plus it means that any new readers will have a better idea of what's going on.
The eventual idea is to publish a complete version of this in the form of a free e-book, with photos, maps, an index, a foreward discussing alternative history in general and a few appendices. I've done a few prototypes and am pretty pleased with the results- so far the thing runs to 182 pages (I'm expecting it to end up in the 350-400 region) and looks quite professional. The idea is that it should be possible to print the thing out and bind it as a proper paperback, if you were that way inclined...
So yeah, on with the content!
Chapter 1
“I feel the hand of History on my shoulder”
_____________________________________________
(Taken from “My Life” by Oswald Mosley, Longman 1961)
“…Six weeks before the election in November 1924 I entered the fight in Birmingham. I wanted to give some striking service to the party which had so well received me. The Chamberlains and their machine had ruled Birmingham for sixty years, first as Liberal-Radicals and then as Conservative-Unionists. Their party machine was at that time probably the strongest in the country. We had six weeks in which to smash it. I chose to fight Neville Chamberlain, who sat for the working-class constituency of Ladywood in the centre of the city; his brother Austen was the neighbouring M.P. and their names and abilities made them a formidable combination. Our own organisation had a paying membership of some two hundred, but when we started the canvass only three elderly women and two young men would accompany us….However, my raging speaking campaign, both indoor and outdoor, and the superb work done by Cimmie in leading the canvassing team, eventually turned the scales. It was a joyous day when in the courtyards running back from the streets in the Birmingham slums we saw the blue window cards coming down and the red going up….
…The count was a drama: there were two re-counts. First I was in by seven, then Chamberlain was in by six, and finally I was in by fifty-three[1]. It was alleged by some of their people that votes had disappeared, and uproar broke out with men fighting in the crowded public gallery and people pointing to the floor as they bellowed—'That one's got 'em in his pocket'. It appeared from our enquiry that their allegations could not be sustained. I was eventually declared the winner, and we left the Town Hall at six o'clock in the morning to find an enormous crowd in the square outside which had waited up all night to hear the result; they were singing the Red Flag. They seized me and carried me around with an enthusiasm which deeply moved me…”[2]
(Taken from “Labour; Drift and rediscovered purpose, 1924-1939” by Simon Greene, CUP 1982)
“…Mosley’s return to Parliament enabled him to further develop his ideas in the period while Labour was in opposition, and in 1925 he published a series of pamphlets outlining his economic views… He also devoted much time and effort towards securing Birmingham as a Labour stronghold, touring the constituency parties and overhauling their internal machinery- and in the process creating for himself a personal following. Mosley’s actions in support of the workers during the General Strike also hugely enhanced his standing in the city, moving Bernard Shaw to write;
Mosley’s effort was amply rewarded in 1929, when Birmingham saw a huge increase in the Labour vote and Mosley saw his own majority jump into the thousands… A trip to America in the summer of 1926 also developed his theories; as he put it ‘America had given me a vision, and I shall never forget the debt’… When the 1929 election brought Labour to power Mosley was offered the post of Lord Privy Seal[3], effectively acting as a coordinator for the effort against unemployment. That Mosley was given such a trusted role shows how highly he was thought of by the Labour hierarchy at the time, and also amply demonstrated the growing following he was beginning to attract within the Party.”
(Taken from “My Life” by Oswald Mosley, Longman 1961)
“…Labour at last had the great opportunity in the victory of 1929, because we could be sure enough of Liberal support at least to deal with the immediate unemployment problem. Here was the chance to do what we had promised after long years of effort. What then was the result of all these exertions, requiring some personal sacrifice in leading an arduous existence of incessant struggle in a storm of abuse instead of the good life we so much enjoyed and for which we had ample means? The answer presents a degree of frivolity and indeed of absurdity which it is difficult to credit. Before I became a Minister I used to say that Bernard Shaw's caricatures of the mind, character and behaviour of politicians were hardly funny because they were too remote from reality. After a year in office I felt inclined to say: Shaw's plays are an understatement…
I was not just the young man in a hurry, as they tried to pretend, or the advocate of 'wild-cat finance', in the phrase of Snowden. My plans were based on the new orthodoxy, of which they understood nothing, and had the backing not only of the dynamic genius of the older generation, Lloyd George—with all the immense authority of his peacetime achievement in office and of his wartime administration- but of the master of the new economic thinking himself, J. Maynard Keynes.”
(Taken from “British Unemployment, 1919-1939; a study in policy” by Andrew Jones, CUP 1985)
“Mosley’s inclusion within the Cabinet initially seemed to promise victory for the radical reformers, but these hopes were soon dashed. The proponents of economic orthodoxy were firmly entrenched in their control of policy, and Snowden’s installation as Chancellor meant that almost any proposal he did not personally approve of could be easily buried… Proposal after proposal was ignored by MacDonald and vetoed by Snowden on cost grounds, and by the early months of 1930 Mosley found himself utterly sick and disillusioned with his role in government. His last attempt to ram home his own policy came in May, when he submitted a detailed memorandum to the Cabinet outlining a complete policy shift towards radical interventionism and Keynesian economics. It received a frosty reception, especially from Snowden…. The document was then leaked to the press, possibly by Mosley, although he denied this... Angered by accusations of underhand activities and frustrated by the lack of progress he was making, Mosley resigned on the 16th May, remarking to a friend; “they wanted me to think the unthinkable, and now they criticise me for it!” The long decline of the Labour government had begun.”
(Taken from “My Life” by Oswald Mosley, Longman 1961)
“…The reception of my resignation speech by Lloyd George, Churchill and other speakers in the subsequent debate is well known, but a selection of letters I received from members of all parties may add something. They have never been published before, though none of them was marked private. They reveal the welcome from all sides of the House to an effort at action after years of drift;
'Your speech was the best I have ever heard in the House, and I imagine must be one of the best of parliamentary performances.'—Brendan Bracken.
'The best and most constructive speech I have heard in the House. It was fair and it was splendid.'—Clement Davies.
'It was, I suppose, the greatest parliamentary tour de force this generation will hear.'—Robert Boothby.
'A really great parliamentary performance ... I was enormously impressed by it... I don't believe there is anyone else in this House who could have done it.'—Violet Bonham-Carter.
'May a great admirer express his great admiration.'—John Simon.
Finally, the letter which pleased the speaker most came from his mother in the gallery, saying that 'people of all shades of opinion' thought it 'the finest speech heard in the House for twenty years'.
I depart from the usual practice, to which we English rightly adhere, for reasons I gave before; the whole requires an occasional immodesty. Certainly my life was abruptly changed, at least for a happy interval, by the effect of that speech. I had now moved from the left to the centre of British politics, where in underlying though sometimes unrecognised truth I have remained ever since. As Dalton wrote later: 'Men and women went to Mosley because something had to be done to save society'. The centre and even the right looked towards me, as well as all the more realistic and ardent spirits of the Labour Party….”[4]
_____________________________________________
[1] This is the Point of Departure from our Timeline (OTL) - Chamberlain won by 77 votes, here he’s either not as lucky or the counting isn’t as rigorous.
[2]This is all genuine Mosley, tweaked here and there to fit the changed circumstances.
[3] OTL Mosley got Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, and JH Thomas got Privy Seal. Here, Mosley's enhanced standing within the party means that he gets a more prestigious job- although it's not enough to let him actually enact any of the stuff that he'd like to.
[4] This is all pretty much verbatim from Mosley’s OTL biography- the man really does remind me of Enoch Powell in his complete lack of self-doubt…
“I feel the hand of History on my shoulder”
_____________________________________________
(Taken from “My Life” by Oswald Mosley, Longman 1961)
“…Six weeks before the election in November 1924 I entered the fight in Birmingham. I wanted to give some striking service to the party which had so well received me. The Chamberlains and their machine had ruled Birmingham for sixty years, first as Liberal-Radicals and then as Conservative-Unionists. Their party machine was at that time probably the strongest in the country. We had six weeks in which to smash it. I chose to fight Neville Chamberlain, who sat for the working-class constituency of Ladywood in the centre of the city; his brother Austen was the neighbouring M.P. and their names and abilities made them a formidable combination. Our own organisation had a paying membership of some two hundred, but when we started the canvass only three elderly women and two young men would accompany us….However, my raging speaking campaign, both indoor and outdoor, and the superb work done by Cimmie in leading the canvassing team, eventually turned the scales. It was a joyous day when in the courtyards running back from the streets in the Birmingham slums we saw the blue window cards coming down and the red going up….
…The count was a drama: there were two re-counts. First I was in by seven, then Chamberlain was in by six, and finally I was in by fifty-three[1]. It was alleged by some of their people that votes had disappeared, and uproar broke out with men fighting in the crowded public gallery and people pointing to the floor as they bellowed—'That one's got 'em in his pocket'. It appeared from our enquiry that their allegations could not be sustained. I was eventually declared the winner, and we left the Town Hall at six o'clock in the morning to find an enormous crowd in the square outside which had waited up all night to hear the result; they were singing the Red Flag. They seized me and carried me around with an enthusiasm which deeply moved me…”[2]
(Taken from “Labour; Drift and rediscovered purpose, 1924-1939” by Simon Greene, CUP 1982)
“…Mosley’s return to Parliament enabled him to further develop his ideas in the period while Labour was in opposition, and in 1925 he published a series of pamphlets outlining his economic views… He also devoted much time and effort towards securing Birmingham as a Labour stronghold, touring the constituency parties and overhauling their internal machinery- and in the process creating for himself a personal following. Mosley’s actions in support of the workers during the General Strike also hugely enhanced his standing in the city, moving Bernard Shaw to write;
'You will hear something more of Sir Oswald before you are through with him. I know you dislike him, because he looks like a man who has some physical courage and is going to do something; and that is a terrible thing. You instinctively hate him, because you do not know where he will land you.'
Mosley’s effort was amply rewarded in 1929, when Birmingham saw a huge increase in the Labour vote and Mosley saw his own majority jump into the thousands… A trip to America in the summer of 1926 also developed his theories; as he put it ‘America had given me a vision, and I shall never forget the debt’… When the 1929 election brought Labour to power Mosley was offered the post of Lord Privy Seal[3], effectively acting as a coordinator for the effort against unemployment. That Mosley was given such a trusted role shows how highly he was thought of by the Labour hierarchy at the time, and also amply demonstrated the growing following he was beginning to attract within the Party.”
(Taken from “My Life” by Oswald Mosley, Longman 1961)
“…Labour at last had the great opportunity in the victory of 1929, because we could be sure enough of Liberal support at least to deal with the immediate unemployment problem. Here was the chance to do what we had promised after long years of effort. What then was the result of all these exertions, requiring some personal sacrifice in leading an arduous existence of incessant struggle in a storm of abuse instead of the good life we so much enjoyed and for which we had ample means? The answer presents a degree of frivolity and indeed of absurdity which it is difficult to credit. Before I became a Minister I used to say that Bernard Shaw's caricatures of the mind, character and behaviour of politicians were hardly funny because they were too remote from reality. After a year in office I felt inclined to say: Shaw's plays are an understatement…
I was not just the young man in a hurry, as they tried to pretend, or the advocate of 'wild-cat finance', in the phrase of Snowden. My plans were based on the new orthodoxy, of which they understood nothing, and had the backing not only of the dynamic genius of the older generation, Lloyd George—with all the immense authority of his peacetime achievement in office and of his wartime administration- but of the master of the new economic thinking himself, J. Maynard Keynes.”
(Taken from “British Unemployment, 1919-1939; a study in policy” by Andrew Jones, CUP 1985)
“Mosley’s inclusion within the Cabinet initially seemed to promise victory for the radical reformers, but these hopes were soon dashed. The proponents of economic orthodoxy were firmly entrenched in their control of policy, and Snowden’s installation as Chancellor meant that almost any proposal he did not personally approve of could be easily buried… Proposal after proposal was ignored by MacDonald and vetoed by Snowden on cost grounds, and by the early months of 1930 Mosley found himself utterly sick and disillusioned with his role in government. His last attempt to ram home his own policy came in May, when he submitted a detailed memorandum to the Cabinet outlining a complete policy shift towards radical interventionism and Keynesian economics. It received a frosty reception, especially from Snowden…. The document was then leaked to the press, possibly by Mosley, although he denied this... Angered by accusations of underhand activities and frustrated by the lack of progress he was making, Mosley resigned on the 16th May, remarking to a friend; “they wanted me to think the unthinkable, and now they criticise me for it!” The long decline of the Labour government had begun.”
(Taken from “My Life” by Oswald Mosley, Longman 1961)
“…The reception of my resignation speech by Lloyd George, Churchill and other speakers in the subsequent debate is well known, but a selection of letters I received from members of all parties may add something. They have never been published before, though none of them was marked private. They reveal the welcome from all sides of the House to an effort at action after years of drift;
'Your speech was the best I have ever heard in the House, and I imagine must be one of the best of parliamentary performances.'—Brendan Bracken.
'The best and most constructive speech I have heard in the House. It was fair and it was splendid.'—Clement Davies.
'It was, I suppose, the greatest parliamentary tour de force this generation will hear.'—Robert Boothby.
'A really great parliamentary performance ... I was enormously impressed by it... I don't believe there is anyone else in this House who could have done it.'—Violet Bonham-Carter.
'May a great admirer express his great admiration.'—John Simon.
Finally, the letter which pleased the speaker most came from his mother in the gallery, saying that 'people of all shades of opinion' thought it 'the finest speech heard in the House for twenty years'.
I depart from the usual practice, to which we English rightly adhere, for reasons I gave before; the whole requires an occasional immodesty. Certainly my life was abruptly changed, at least for a happy interval, by the effect of that speech. I had now moved from the left to the centre of British politics, where in underlying though sometimes unrecognised truth I have remained ever since. As Dalton wrote later: 'Men and women went to Mosley because something had to be done to save society'. The centre and even the right looked towards me, as well as all the more realistic and ardent spirits of the Labour Party….”[4]
_____________________________________________
[1] This is the Point of Departure from our Timeline (OTL) - Chamberlain won by 77 votes, here he’s either not as lucky or the counting isn’t as rigorous.
[2]This is all genuine Mosley, tweaked here and there to fit the changed circumstances.
[3] OTL Mosley got Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, and JH Thomas got Privy Seal. Here, Mosley's enhanced standing within the party means that he gets a more prestigious job- although it's not enough to let him actually enact any of the stuff that he'd like to.
[4] This is all pretty much verbatim from Mosley’s OTL biography- the man really does remind me of Enoch Powell in his complete lack of self-doubt…
Chapter 2
“I did not come into politics to change the Labour Party. I came into politics to change the country.”
_____________________________________________
(Taken from “Labour; Drift and rediscovered purpose, 1924-1939” by Simon Greene, CUP 1982)
“Mosley’s resignation speech- a parliamentary triumph- was a long-premeditated claim to leadership designed to appeal to the political centre. Henceforth he constantly spoke about “energetic leadership” and “decisiveness”. Working with an increasingly significant parliamentary following, Mosley continued to emphasise his original policy of Keynesian monetary reform, loan-financed public works and massive “state action”, all of which would be accompanied by a general reorganisation of the cabinet and civil service intended to improve governmental efficiency…
…Interestingly considering his later criticism of the concept of “National Government” in 1931, in his period out of office Mosley was careful to cultivate contacts with figures from across the political spectrum- Macmillan and Oliver Stanley from the Conservatives, and the likes of Nicholson and Sinclair from the Liberals. There was even talk of a cross-party “young alliance” against the older generation of politicians, although this was a pipedream and inevitably came to nothing… Such talk does demonstrate however that Mosley’s radicalism was part of the general post-war shift in British politics, as the rising stars of the 1920’s increasingly chafed at the relaxed style of their Edwardian forebears…”
(Taken from “The Crisis of 1931” by George Barlow, Picador 1990)
“From May 1930, Mosley formed another small group of parliamentary rebels, and attempted to use the extra-parliamentary Party to impose his policies upon the cabinet… To some extent, these pressures could be ignored or contained. The TUC, ILP and Mosleyites tended to be mutually antipathetic, although from November the latter two had forged links and attempted to coordinate their efforts, albeit in an ineffectual way…
Criticisms from all three groups aggravated existing uneasiness within the Labour party. While Party loyalty and the recognition of parliamentary difficulties kept discontent in check to a certain extent, ministers were subjected to a constant stream of complaint from the parliamentary Party, the NEC and Party committees… The near success of a Mosleyite motion at the Party conference in October[5] and its originator’s subsequent election to the NEC confirmed both Party discontent with government unemployment policy and the existence of a major potential threat to the leadership…
After his victories at the Party conference, Mosley found himself in a position that his impulsive nature naturally rebelled against… He could be reasonably confident in the fact that he commanded great support in the Labour Party, and his confidants constantly rammed home the point that all he needed to do to progress was to continue his opposition to MacDonald and patiently wait until the Government drifted into a crisis…
Mosley’s impatience was never far beneath the surface however, and in an ill-advised speech at Edgebaston in February 1931 he lashed out at the cabinet, calling Snowden a “dull, lethargic mediocrity” amongst other terms. His comments angered many within the party and enraged the government, who saw his criticism as ungentlemanly and a direct challenge to the Prime Minister. In April Mosley’s impatience reached its peak, when he even went as far as seriously considering abandoning the Labour party and forming a movement of his own[6]… While Mosley was quickly dissuaded from his quixotic plan by being convinced that his grass-roots support would not follow him outside Labour, the incident shows how his instincts even at this stage were towards decisive action, even to the point of being self-defeating. It was a character trait that would dog Mosley throughout his political career…”
(Taken from “The Encyclopaedia of 20th Century British Politics”, Eds. June + Peterson. Longman, 1999)
“MAY REPORT, THE: Report issued in July 1931 by the Economy Committee on National Expenditure, chaired by Sir George May. The committee warned that in 1932 the government would have a budget deficit of £120 Million, a gap that would have to be closed by radical budget cuts. Publication of the report caused an economic and political crisis in Britain, and led directly to the fall of Ramsay MacDonald’s Labour government as the retrenchment proposals irrevocably split the cabinet.”
(Taken from “The Crisis of 1931” by George Barlow, Picador 1990)
“After an ‘impassioned appeal’ by MacDonald for acceptance of his proposals, each Cabinet Minister was asked to express his or her view. In the event, ten ministers supported the unemployment benefit cut… Ten were opposed. With such an even split, the Cabinet immediately agreed upon resignation. It was decided that the King should immediately be informed, and advised to summon a Baldwin-Samuel-MacDonald conference the following morning…MacDonald arrived at the palace at 10.15 pm, looking “scared and unbalanced”. The King urged him not to resign, but instead to consider the national alternative, although he admitted that it seemed unlikely that the Conservatives and Liberals would acquiesce to such an arrangement[7]…
…Macdonald then telephoned from the palace to arrange a meeting that evening with Baldwin and Samuel, before returning to Downing St…. The Conservatives and Liberals arrived around 11 pm. Baldwin had brought Chamberlain, who attempted to convince the uncertain MacDonald to remain in a “National Government”. Although MacDonald would likely have few parliamentary supporters, he could ‘command strong support in the country’… Samuel strongly supported Chamberlain, while Baldwin said nothing. Only after the meeting when pressed by Chamberlain did he express approval, adding that he had remained silent because the appeal to MacDonald seemed hopeless…. Ironically it was Baldwin’s attitude that finally decided Macdonald. Interpreting his silence as indicating disapproval[8], MacDonald despondently informed the palace that he intended to resign the following day, and the prospect of a Conservative-Liberal emergency government became a reality on the 25th…”
(Taken from “Labour; Drift and rediscovered purpose, 1924-1939” by Simon Greene, CUP 1982)
“The resignation of MacDonald and the abrupt entry of Labour into opposition necessitated a general reorganisation of the Party. At a meeting called on the 25th August MacDonald’s resignation was accepted. The contest for the Party’s leadership seemed destined to be between youth and experience, the extroverted radical Mosley being pitted against Arthur Henderson, a veteran widely regarded as a ‘safe pair of hands’.
In the event however, the long-promised showdown between Labour’s establishment and radical wings never materialised. Henderson was naturally inclined not to seek the leadership[9], and his belief that the Party could not be reformed in time to avoid a crushing defeat at the next election made him go as far as to tell friends that the position would be a ‘poisoned chalice’. Against the advice of his allies then Henderson indicated to Mosley on the evening of the 30th that he would not contest the leadership. The following day the Party returned Mosley as leader by a huge margin… Amongst the general jubilation a single delegate rose and began shouting ‘An English Hitler!’ He was swiftly silenced by his neighbours…”[10]
_____________________________________________
[5] OTL, Mosley put his ‘manifesto’ to the Labour conference of 1930- it was rejected by a relatively narrow margin of 1,046,000 for compared to 1,251,000 against. In this Timeline (ITTL) Mosley’s greater influence and popularity in the Party is enough to make things closer, 1,112,000 for to 1,185,000 against.
[6] Of course in February 1931 OTL Mosley did exactly this, setting up the “New Party”. ITTL he has rather better advice, and realises that he has a far greater chance of achieving his objectives within the Labour movement.
[7] OTL, George V overplayed the receptiveness of Baldwin towards National Government, which made Macdonald feel that it was a practical alternative. Here the King is a more reliable messenger, which discourages a Prime Minister already far more aware of the potential party schism he could cause then OTL.
[8] The meeting occurred OTL, but here MacDonald is already more inclined to dismiss National Government as unworkable, which colours his perceptions somewhat.
[9] OTL the only reason he did it really was because he felt he was the only option in the dire straits Labour found itself. That’s not the case ITTL.
[10] No, the heckler was not an 8-year old Jewish kid from Frankfurt…. I can promise however that Walter will make a conference-based cameo towards the end of the TL.
“I did not come into politics to change the Labour Party. I came into politics to change the country.”
_____________________________________________
(Taken from “Labour; Drift and rediscovered purpose, 1924-1939” by Simon Greene, CUP 1982)
“Mosley’s resignation speech- a parliamentary triumph- was a long-premeditated claim to leadership designed to appeal to the political centre. Henceforth he constantly spoke about “energetic leadership” and “decisiveness”. Working with an increasingly significant parliamentary following, Mosley continued to emphasise his original policy of Keynesian monetary reform, loan-financed public works and massive “state action”, all of which would be accompanied by a general reorganisation of the cabinet and civil service intended to improve governmental efficiency…
…Interestingly considering his later criticism of the concept of “National Government” in 1931, in his period out of office Mosley was careful to cultivate contacts with figures from across the political spectrum- Macmillan and Oliver Stanley from the Conservatives, and the likes of Nicholson and Sinclair from the Liberals. There was even talk of a cross-party “young alliance” against the older generation of politicians, although this was a pipedream and inevitably came to nothing… Such talk does demonstrate however that Mosley’s radicalism was part of the general post-war shift in British politics, as the rising stars of the 1920’s increasingly chafed at the relaxed style of their Edwardian forebears…”
(Taken from “The Crisis of 1931” by George Barlow, Picador 1990)
“From May 1930, Mosley formed another small group of parliamentary rebels, and attempted to use the extra-parliamentary Party to impose his policies upon the cabinet… To some extent, these pressures could be ignored or contained. The TUC, ILP and Mosleyites tended to be mutually antipathetic, although from November the latter two had forged links and attempted to coordinate their efforts, albeit in an ineffectual way…
Criticisms from all three groups aggravated existing uneasiness within the Labour party. While Party loyalty and the recognition of parliamentary difficulties kept discontent in check to a certain extent, ministers were subjected to a constant stream of complaint from the parliamentary Party, the NEC and Party committees… The near success of a Mosleyite motion at the Party conference in October[5] and its originator’s subsequent election to the NEC confirmed both Party discontent with government unemployment policy and the existence of a major potential threat to the leadership…
After his victories at the Party conference, Mosley found himself in a position that his impulsive nature naturally rebelled against… He could be reasonably confident in the fact that he commanded great support in the Labour Party, and his confidants constantly rammed home the point that all he needed to do to progress was to continue his opposition to MacDonald and patiently wait until the Government drifted into a crisis…
Mosley’s impatience was never far beneath the surface however, and in an ill-advised speech at Edgebaston in February 1931 he lashed out at the cabinet, calling Snowden a “dull, lethargic mediocrity” amongst other terms. His comments angered many within the party and enraged the government, who saw his criticism as ungentlemanly and a direct challenge to the Prime Minister. In April Mosley’s impatience reached its peak, when he even went as far as seriously considering abandoning the Labour party and forming a movement of his own[6]… While Mosley was quickly dissuaded from his quixotic plan by being convinced that his grass-roots support would not follow him outside Labour, the incident shows how his instincts even at this stage were towards decisive action, even to the point of being self-defeating. It was a character trait that would dog Mosley throughout his political career…”
(Taken from “The Encyclopaedia of 20th Century British Politics”, Eds. June + Peterson. Longman, 1999)
“MAY REPORT, THE: Report issued in July 1931 by the Economy Committee on National Expenditure, chaired by Sir George May. The committee warned that in 1932 the government would have a budget deficit of £120 Million, a gap that would have to be closed by radical budget cuts. Publication of the report caused an economic and political crisis in Britain, and led directly to the fall of Ramsay MacDonald’s Labour government as the retrenchment proposals irrevocably split the cabinet.”
(Taken from “The Crisis of 1931” by George Barlow, Picador 1990)
“After an ‘impassioned appeal’ by MacDonald for acceptance of his proposals, each Cabinet Minister was asked to express his or her view. In the event, ten ministers supported the unemployment benefit cut… Ten were opposed. With such an even split, the Cabinet immediately agreed upon resignation. It was decided that the King should immediately be informed, and advised to summon a Baldwin-Samuel-MacDonald conference the following morning…MacDonald arrived at the palace at 10.15 pm, looking “scared and unbalanced”. The King urged him not to resign, but instead to consider the national alternative, although he admitted that it seemed unlikely that the Conservatives and Liberals would acquiesce to such an arrangement[7]…
…Macdonald then telephoned from the palace to arrange a meeting that evening with Baldwin and Samuel, before returning to Downing St…. The Conservatives and Liberals arrived around 11 pm. Baldwin had brought Chamberlain, who attempted to convince the uncertain MacDonald to remain in a “National Government”. Although MacDonald would likely have few parliamentary supporters, he could ‘command strong support in the country’… Samuel strongly supported Chamberlain, while Baldwin said nothing. Only after the meeting when pressed by Chamberlain did he express approval, adding that he had remained silent because the appeal to MacDonald seemed hopeless…. Ironically it was Baldwin’s attitude that finally decided Macdonald. Interpreting his silence as indicating disapproval[8], MacDonald despondently informed the palace that he intended to resign the following day, and the prospect of a Conservative-Liberal emergency government became a reality on the 25th…”
(Taken from “Labour; Drift and rediscovered purpose, 1924-1939” by Simon Greene, CUP 1982)
“The resignation of MacDonald and the abrupt entry of Labour into opposition necessitated a general reorganisation of the Party. At a meeting called on the 25th August MacDonald’s resignation was accepted. The contest for the Party’s leadership seemed destined to be between youth and experience, the extroverted radical Mosley being pitted against Arthur Henderson, a veteran widely regarded as a ‘safe pair of hands’.
In the event however, the long-promised showdown between Labour’s establishment and radical wings never materialised. Henderson was naturally inclined not to seek the leadership[9], and his belief that the Party could not be reformed in time to avoid a crushing defeat at the next election made him go as far as to tell friends that the position would be a ‘poisoned chalice’. Against the advice of his allies then Henderson indicated to Mosley on the evening of the 30th that he would not contest the leadership. The following day the Party returned Mosley as leader by a huge margin… Amongst the general jubilation a single delegate rose and began shouting ‘An English Hitler!’ He was swiftly silenced by his neighbours…”[10]
_____________________________________________
[5] OTL, Mosley put his ‘manifesto’ to the Labour conference of 1930- it was rejected by a relatively narrow margin of 1,046,000 for compared to 1,251,000 against. In this Timeline (ITTL) Mosley’s greater influence and popularity in the Party is enough to make things closer, 1,112,000 for to 1,185,000 against.
[6] Of course in February 1931 OTL Mosley did exactly this, setting up the “New Party”. ITTL he has rather better advice, and realises that he has a far greater chance of achieving his objectives within the Labour movement.
[7] OTL, George V overplayed the receptiveness of Baldwin towards National Government, which made Macdonald feel that it was a practical alternative. Here the King is a more reliable messenger, which discourages a Prime Minister already far more aware of the potential party schism he could cause then OTL.
[8] The meeting occurred OTL, but here MacDonald is already more inclined to dismiss National Government as unworkable, which colours his perceptions somewhat.
[9] OTL the only reason he did it really was because he felt he was the only option in the dire straits Labour found itself. That’s not the case ITTL.
[10] No, the heckler was not an 8-year old Jewish kid from Frankfurt…. I can promise however that Walter will make a conference-based cameo towards the end of the TL.
It is so good I couldn't tell it wasn't an AH scenario! (Although to be fair I have not knowledge of internal British politics during said time period.)
Well, I for one am glad that the founder and leader of the British Union of Fascists did not gain power IOTL...
Thanks all for the kind comments, is nice to see that people are pleased to see this back!
I keep meaning to revisit ASHATW- I like the thrust of the TL but whenever I read it I'm very aware that I wrote it five years ago and it needs a fair bit of work done to it. Maybe sometime in the future...
More stuff coming soon btw!
I keep meaning to revisit ASHATW- I like the thrust of the TL but whenever I read it I'm very aware that I wrote it five years ago and it needs a fair bit of work done to it. Maybe sometime in the future...
More stuff coming soon btw!
maverick
Banned
ED THOMAS! YOU MAGNIFICENT BASTARD!
You've done it again!
Hell! publish the bloody book and I'll buy it!
(when I can get out of College, get a job and afford books once again)
Same here!
You've done it again!
Hell! publish the bloody book and I'll buy it!
(when I can get out of College, get a job and afford books once again
)Finally, the reason I joined this site is back
Same here!Oh yes... Obviously I don't want to descend into Turtledovian cut and paste AH, but there are certain parallels that I think are faintly amusing and there are a fair few references scattered around the place
I'm surprised, given Mosley's greater stature and the greater popularity of Keynesianism within the party that the deadlock in government lasts as long as it did in OTL.
I would imagine that when the run on the banks starts, Mosely's supporters in Cabinet bring the matter to a head earlier, and bring the government down then.
I would imagine that when the run on the banks starts, Mosely's supporters in Cabinet bring the matter to a head earlier, and bring the government down then.
Thande
Donor
Excellent start.
So in OTL did Mosley make a similar resignation speech as Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, and did MPs including Churchill and Lloyd George praise him for it, or does that part not follow OTL so closely?
Was Hitler that well known in 1931 for that heckler to make the comparison? Wouldn't Mussolini have been a more likely comparison? After all, he'd already been in power and implementing fascism for years...
So in OTL did Mosley make a similar resignation speech as Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, and did MPs including Churchill and Lloyd George praise him for it, or does that part not follow OTL so closely?
Was Hitler that well known in 1931 for that heckler to make the comparison? Wouldn't Mussolini have been a more likely comparison? After all, he'd already been in power and implementing fascism for years...
"Angered by accusations of underhand activities and frustrated by the lack of progress he was making, Mosley resigned on the 16th May, remarking to a friend; “they wanted me to think the unthinkable, and now they criticise me for it!” The long decline of the Labour government had begun.”"
Frank Field as well as Blair, eh?
This is excellent stuff. I think I lost track of it first time round, but will be following with interest.
Frank Field as well as Blair, eh?
This is excellent stuff. I think I lost track of it first time round, but will be following with interest.