Arguably 20th century British politics has been defined by a series of splits, declines and revivals amongst the Left set against the far calmer and more dominant Right in the form of the Conservatives. This owes something to the decline of the 'Lib-Labers', trade union MPs sponsored by the Liberal Party due to disagreements over industrial disputes and the rise of groups such as the ILP and SDF. The led to the formation of the parliamentary Labour Representation Committee in 1900, renamed the Labour Party in 1906. Soon Labour proved the fastest growing political party in British History, moving from creation to its first government in 24 years, much to the detriment of the Liberal Party who were effectively spent as an equal political force in the early 1920s.
However is it possible that the Liberals could retain their position?
A major turning point in Liberal-TU relations was the 1901 Taff Vale Case, where a Railway company successfully sued unionists for going on strike due to 'damages' caused by the workers in question not going into work. Balfour's Tory government backed the result while more importantly, the Liberals said little on the matter, though in 1906 they would pass the Trade Disputes Act, effectively overturning the verdict. Regardless the case had a major impact on the nascent Labour movement and by 1903 the LRC's membership had almost tripled in two years to 900,000.
After this, despite efforts and some solid examples of the Liberals being at the forefront of progressive economics well into the 1940s, they continuously lost ground to Labour amongst the working-class, while their only gains were consistently with middle-class Tories.
Philosophically the Labour movement owes a lot to Kiere Hardie and his anti-Marxist Christian Socialism that dominated the ILP, while in terms of numbers and money the TUC was obviously crucial. Hardie was raised an atheist but converted later in life, if this does not happen a major plank of his popular ideas (and the valuable experience of being a lay preacher) goes away.
In relation to the Unions the 1880s-1890s saw a large struggle between various trains of thought, some skilled unions retained a conservative, largely apolitical outlook, while the main conflict was between 'labour representation' which sort Parliamentary influence via Lib-Lab MPs, and the syndicalists, who favoured direct action and 'one-big-union'. If the syndicalists in the form of the General Federation of Trade Unions can win this debate (rather than the TUC did in OTL), labour candidates are pretty much dead in the water, not only due to electoral expenses to also wages while in Parliament and the built-in mass support of union members.
Then you have the Marxists in the form of the Social Democratic Federation under Hyndman who were close to the ILP and embryonic Labour Party. Say no moderate Labour Representation model comes forward in the late 1890s, will the more radical SDF try to fill the gap?
Then you have the effects this will have on the Liberals themselves. In 1886 the recently formed Fabian Society was growing close to them already, with only the Marxist SDF to offer an alternative, the progressive Fabians will probably stick with the Liberals. On top of this, if the Lib-Lab system is still strong by 1910 and the arrival of New Liberalism, we might see the modernisers within the Liberal Party push for greater working-class representation in the Commons and even greater reform in the People's Budget.
So what are people's thoughts?
However is it possible that the Liberals could retain their position?
A major turning point in Liberal-TU relations was the 1901 Taff Vale Case, where a Railway company successfully sued unionists for going on strike due to 'damages' caused by the workers in question not going into work. Balfour's Tory government backed the result while more importantly, the Liberals said little on the matter, though in 1906 they would pass the Trade Disputes Act, effectively overturning the verdict. Regardless the case had a major impact on the nascent Labour movement and by 1903 the LRC's membership had almost tripled in two years to 900,000.
After this, despite efforts and some solid examples of the Liberals being at the forefront of progressive economics well into the 1940s, they continuously lost ground to Labour amongst the working-class, while their only gains were consistently with middle-class Tories.
Philosophically the Labour movement owes a lot to Kiere Hardie and his anti-Marxist Christian Socialism that dominated the ILP, while in terms of numbers and money the TUC was obviously crucial. Hardie was raised an atheist but converted later in life, if this does not happen a major plank of his popular ideas (and the valuable experience of being a lay preacher) goes away.
In relation to the Unions the 1880s-1890s saw a large struggle between various trains of thought, some skilled unions retained a conservative, largely apolitical outlook, while the main conflict was between 'labour representation' which sort Parliamentary influence via Lib-Lab MPs, and the syndicalists, who favoured direct action and 'one-big-union'. If the syndicalists in the form of the General Federation of Trade Unions can win this debate (rather than the TUC did in OTL), labour candidates are pretty much dead in the water, not only due to electoral expenses to also wages while in Parliament and the built-in mass support of union members.
Then you have the Marxists in the form of the Social Democratic Federation under Hyndman who were close to the ILP and embryonic Labour Party. Say no moderate Labour Representation model comes forward in the late 1890s, will the more radical SDF try to fill the gap?
Then you have the effects this will have on the Liberals themselves. In 1886 the recently formed Fabian Society was growing close to them already, with only the Marxist SDF to offer an alternative, the progressive Fabians will probably stick with the Liberals. On top of this, if the Lib-Lab system is still strong by 1910 and the arrival of New Liberalism, we might see the modernisers within the Liberal Party push for greater working-class representation in the Commons and even greater reform in the People's Budget.
So what are people's thoughts?