Gang of four hijack the Labour Party?

Could the "gang of four" founders of the Social Democratic Party have stayed in the Labour Party, and seized power, turning it into a rightwing social democrat party years before the Kinnock, Smith, Blair process that created New Labour?

If they had done this would it have led to a possible leftwing split led by people like Benn and Foot, and maybe including Militant and the smaller trot factions? Or indeed a more moderate leftwing split that blamed the Millies and the gang of four equally, and rejected both?
 
If you think the Kinnock reforms were Rightwing social democracy, then a successful Jenkins or Owen leadership wouldn't be advancing the process by very much, would it?
 
I don't know - how do you 'seize power' in a political party ?

I was using hyperbole, I mean win control of the leading positions between them, and win control over drafting of the manifesto.

If you think the Kinnock reforms were Rightwing social democracy

I don't think that, I do think he started the process of internal reform that allowed Blair et al to create New Labour.
 
I don't think that, I do think he started the process of internal reform that allowed Blair et al to create New Labour.

How does he describe himself? I haven't followed UK Labour Party politics in some time, but I don't see a problem in describing all sorts of labour politicians in other countries as 'Rightwing social democratic' without it being offensive.

Is it an old term of abuse in Britain, or just associated with the SDP split? (Benn has always called Labour's apostates 'revisionists', per Hugh Gaitskell's attempt to revise the party constitution in the fifties, ditching Clause 4.)
 
How does he describe himself? I haven't followed UK Labour Party politics in some time, but I don't see a problem in describing all sorts of labour politicians in other countries as 'Rightwing social democratic' without it being offensive.

Is it an old term of abuse in Britain, or just associated with the SDP split? (Benn has always called Labour's apostates 'revisionists', per Hugh Gaitskell's attempt to revise the party constitution in the fifties, ditching Clause 4.)

I don't mean it as a term of abuse, it is simply shorthand for describing the policies of the SDP, and how a 1980s Labour under "gang of four" leadership could have developed.

I'm sure Kinnock describes himself as a democratic socialist or a social democrat, but that doesn't have anything to do with what I'm talking about.
 
Top