AHC: Liberal/Labour duopoly in Britain

I've seen a number of threads that deal with the postwar political realignment of British politics, where the Liberal Party declines from their once prominent position to be replaced by Labour, with their votes (and more than a few MPs) getting divided between Labour and the Tories. Some of these threads explore the Liberals holding out, or Labour failing to rise, or one party coming to dominate entirely. Your challenge is to find a way for British politics to be dominated by a Liberal/Labour duopoly, with the Conservatives dwindling into the wilderness. Understandably this is no small task, so feel free to use any time after 1900 for PoDs.
 
From what I've read, it was the Great War which really broke the Liberal Party. Perhaps if the Conservatives could have been in power, they would have taken the hit?
 
I've seen a number of threads that deal with the postwar political realignment of British politics, where the Liberal Party declines from their once prominent position to be replaced by Labour, with their votes (and more than a few MPs) getting divided between Labour and the Tories. Some of these threads explore the Liberals holding out, or Labour failing to rise, or one party coming to dominate entirely. Your challenge is to find a way for British politics to be dominated by a Liberal/Labour duopoly, with the Conservatives dwindling into the wilderness. Understandably this is no small task, so feel free to use any time after 1900 for PoDs.

hmm well. Lets see.
Scenario one. There is no great war. The Liberals are in Government and bring forward the Government of Ireland Act. The Conservatives are pushed into supporting a General mutiny of Ulster Unionist inclined military units in Ireland.
The Ulster Unionists forces over react to protests and massacre a large number of Nationalists/Catholics, including women and children.
This is heavily covered by British and international Media the public reaction is largely hostile and is supportive of a Government hard line.
There is a long sustained confrontation at the end of which the word Tory is seen as another word for murderer and traitor by the majority of the British and Irish public.
Scenario two. The Liberal Party is helped by an earlier extension of mass ownership of radios to perform significantly better in the 1929 General election, in which they did poll 8 Million votes OTL. The famous yellow book based manifesto "We can conquer unemployment" is successfully delivered Labour is converted as a result to Keynesianism.
The Conservative response is split between moderates ie Chamberlin and ultra traditionalist opponents. A coherent response becomes difficult and the Conservatives split, with the majority taking a hard line. This proves suicidal.
Scenario Three is 2 possible versions of a similar departure. Firstly Lloyd George has a more united party due to Asquith having a fatal accident. He feels stronger as a result and does not need the coupon. The liberal party fights and very narrowly wins the 1918 election.
He realises the need to win the peace and pushes forward with "Homes fit for Heroes" after WW1 as a priority, instead of getting involved in foreign adventures. The Conservative response is mixed and divided, but finally bitterly hostile.
This proves a mistake as the Liberal governments programme proves moderately successful economically and further limited welfare reforms are enacted. The Tories fail to adapt and by the 1920's recession have adopted ultra laissez faire policies allied with high tariffs as a policy.
The conservatives almost win several times in the 20's and early 30's on this platform as the Liberal Party has to seek Labour support to stay in office, but by the early 30's the liberal-Labour response is seen to be working much better than the Tory alternatives as the US and Europe test traditional economics to the breaking point. The Tories plummet and never recover.
Some what on the same lines, but less plausibly, the conservatives do not learn the lessons of real politic, helped by Churchill being stubborn and less influence for certain moderate conservatives. They oppose the Labour reforms of 1945 far longer than they should. Labour and Liberals both benefit from Conservative determination to reverse them and in particular abolish the NHS.
Finally Eden refuses to withdraw from Suez after US Economic pressure. US and British relations completely break down and the US actually takes sanctions. There is economic mayhem in Britain and France. The conservative party falls apart under the pressure and forces Eden out, but struggles to find a stable leadership.
The party is humiliated and divided and eventually dwindles into impotent factions.
 
Sanity check: what you're asking is for the Liberals to be the new right-wing party, weaponizing classical liberalism to look something like Thatcherism but without the Europhobia. This indeed happened in France during the Third Republic, and in Denmark, where the main center-right party is still called Venstre, "left," after what its electoral position was in the early 20c.
 
the Liberals become the party of economic growth,

Labour becomes the party of distribution and taking on the corporations when necessary.

Or, maybe even the reverse.

PS I'm a Yank, so this may not at all be realistic.
 
I think this is very difficult. Politics has for thousands of years been effectively between two main factions: those that govern on behalf of the rich and powerful, and those that purport to govern on behalf of the poor (with the occasional bout of genuine advancement of the poor). Of course, the conservatives have the rich vote already stitched up. It seems to me the real battleground, as in OTL, is for the poor and middle class voters. This will necessarily be between Liberals and Labour.

Hmmm, on second thought you might be able to prolong the conflict between the new rich (ie, the capitalists) and the old rich (ie, the aristocracy) but you will have to restrict the voting franchise for a long time. In this scenario the Liberals might be able to position themselves as the rich party when the franchise is gradually extended to the poor, thereby reducing the Conservatives support base to the very few remaining nobles. It would also help if the Liberals reverse their support of Irish Home Rule and get Joseph Chamberlain's Liberal Unionists back into the party.
 
I think this is very difficult. Politics has for thousands of years been effectively between two main factions: those that govern on behalf of the rich and powerful, and those that purport to govern on behalf of the poor (with the occasional bout of genuine advancement of the poor). Of course, the conservatives have the rich vote already stitched up. It seems to me the real battleground, as in OTL, is for the poor and middle class voters. This will necessarily be between Liberals and Labour.

Hmmm, on second thought you might be able to prolong the conflict between the new rich (ie, the capitalists) and the old rich (ie, the aristocracy) but you will have to restrict the voting franchise for a long time. In this scenario the Liberals might be able to position themselves as the rich party when the franchise is gradually extended to the poor, thereby reducing the Conservatives support base to the very few remaining nobles. It would also help if the Liberals reverse their support of Irish Home Rule and get Joseph Chamberlain's Liberal Unionists back into the party.

whilst not impossible this would probably require a POD well before 1900 as by then the Liberal Party was almost defined by being pro home rule for Ireland. Additionally chamberlain was not just separated from the Liberals by that issue, but also by the Free Trade/tariff issue, which was still a big Liberal vote winner pre WWI, so little chance of reunion at that point.
it would also require Disraeli to not exist for it was he who outflanked the Liberals with the 1867 reform act to gain a working class vote for the Tories., so the franchise had already been extended pre the suggested POD.
 
Top