Clement Attlee Dies During WWII

I'm reading Born of Adversity which is a short history of the air industry in the UK and came across a mention of Clement Attlee almost being killed early on during WWII. Whilst flying over the Pentland Firth the de Havilland Dragon Rapide he was travelling on almost inadvertently flew over an Australian cruiser, flying directly over warships was against standing naval orders, so the pilot changed course. The cruiser however started flashing a signal at them with their signal light which aside from not understanding the pilot had no way of replying to without a signal light of his own, at which point the aircraft was surrounded by white bursts as the cruiser opened fire on them. The pilot apparently put the aircraft into a step dive and bank and was able to get away without suffering any damage.

But what if either he wasn't as quick to react or the Australian's gunnery is simply a bit better/luckier and the aircraft was shot down with all on-board being killed? Arthur Greenwood was the Deputy Leader of the Labour Party at the time and Minister Without Portfolio, but he doesn't seem to have made much of an impact considering the dearth of information on his from a few searches compared to some of the other major players. So does Greenwood become Leader temporarily before an election is held or perhaps stay on a while longer as a compromise candidate? Post-war would be interesting considering how the various players all seem to have detested each other whilst coveting the crown.
 
Arthur Greenwood always seems a bit undervalued in history and alternate history. He had quite a good standing in the party before the 1935 leadership election, but that was squandered by Bevin's aggressive campaigning and Attlee's surprise candidacy.

In WW2, I think he'd stand a good chance of being leader. For one, he has the virtue of not being Herbert Morrison, and just about every other leading light of the party would agree that not being him was one of life's greatest virtues. His drinking might be a problem, but that didn't stop George Brown running and nearly winning in 1963. There are few other compromise candidates, given that the ideological titans of the party would suddenly have nobody to keep them apart and under the thumb, and so I think the party would lump for Greenwood.
 
... given that the ideological titans of the party would suddenly have nobody to keep them apart and under the thumb...
That's one of the things I was wondering about come 1945. Greenwood helped mastermind the successful general election campaign so probably no real changes there but then you come to the issue of trying to keep the various egos in check for the following five years whilst in government.
 
That's one of the things I was wondering about come 1945. Greenwood helped mastermind the successful general election campaign so probably no real changes there but then you come to the issue of trying to keep the various egos in check for the following five years whilst in government.

I've done a lot of reading about him lately, as I was planning on a TL where he wins in 1935, and I think his greatest weakness would have been his own kindness. He was far too humble and well-meaning to ever seem like anything other than a grandfatherly figure, watching as his children squabbled. His health problems (his son, the ever suave and ever unscrupulous Anthony had to wheel him into Parliament in a wheelchair by 1950) and his drinking would mean either an early death or a resignation before it even got that far - he probably wouldn't last all five years anyway.

By about 1947/1948, the knives would be out again. Morrison would probably run and lose, leaving probably Dalton or Cripps to claim victory over the other in a succession battle that would leave the party in disarray.
 
Nye Bevan?

I'd have thought he would be the main post-war challenger to any Greenwood administration

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Arthur Greenwood always seems a bit undervalued in history and alternate history. He had quite a good standing in the party before the 1935 leadership election, but that was squandered by Bevin's aggressive campaigning and Attlee's surprise candidacy.

In WW2, I think he'd stand a good chance of being leader. For one, he has the virtue of not being Herbert Morrison, and just about every other leading light of the party would agree that not being him was one of life's greatest virtues. His drinking might be a problem, but that didn't stop George Brown running and nearly winning in 1963. There are few other compromise candidates, given that the ideological titans of the party would suddenly have nobody to keep them apart and under the thumb, and so I think the party would lump for Greenwood.

For someone who's looking into Labour politicians around this time, what was the major issue with Herbert Morrison?
 
For someone who's looking into Labour politicians around this time, what was the major issue with Herbert Morrison?

I believe that Peter Mandelson (Morrison's grandson) said something like "Morrison was the first Blairite". This is an obvious simplification, but Morrison shared the same view of Labour as the "modernising" party.

Morrison believed that making Labour into a respectable party of government was a his main aim, and that it should be the aim of every other Labourite. He held views hostile to the trade unions, believing them to be sectional interest groups that couldn't be as accountable as an elected Labour government. In a party based on representing the labour movement, that went down as well as a lead balloon.

Quite a few contemporaries regarded him as both "arrogant" and a "machine politician", too. He wouldn't have been as consensual a leader as Attlee was, for definite.

(The above is all probably me oversimplifying him as well, so I await somebody else to come along and slap me down)
 
On the off-chance that might get some more input I'll bump this for a first and last time.
 
Top