alternatehistory.com

As we know, the Liberal Party is the natural party of government in Britain. The party has dominated politics for much of Britain's history, holding power for over 70 years in the 20th century—more than any other party in a developed country. They even completely dominated the Keynesian era (not surprisingly, they invented this School of Economics), as the country's strong economic and productivity growth allowed them to governed 40 years non-stop until the Stagflation.

But after the world war 1, they suffered a leadership crisis that nearly tore the party apart. But then Reginald McKenna stepped in and won the leadership, and then united the party with a radical platform. Their main achievements were NHS - welfare state, modernization of industries,, tackling industrial unrest, high growth and low inflation (e.g. average real GDP growth was around 4-5% per annum during the 1950s-1970s, while productivity growth was over 3% during the same period), and the EEC (of which Britain was a founding country). Their effort to push for pan-European Defense Scheme also helped save billions of pounds in defense spending. Even the Second World War could have been averted if they were in charge between 1933 and 1938).

How would Britain look like if the party actually broke apart in 1918?

OCC: Liberals' Keynesian economics ITTL involved much less nationalization, except for NHS and other public services. Their policies were similar to Jo Grimond's plan IOTL and thus also more pro-growth. The growth rates of other developed countries were the same as IOTL.
Top