Prime Minister Hugh Gaitskell?

Hugh Gaitskell was a leader of the right-wing in the Labour Party during the 1959 general election. Although Labour was expected to win a majority in Parliament, they were divided over economic issues, and were thus defeated by the Conservatives.

Inspired by an idea in the "Timeline with the Most Potential" thread, what if Gaitskell had kept the Labour Party and its conservative and liberal factions united, and had defeated the Conservatives in 1959 as expected? What can we expect of Prime Minister Gaitskell? Would he support the Vietnam War if he served that long (which is likely), and what would his foreign policy look like?

The idea intrigues me, and I was hoping to get more info on this.
 
Political disaster waiting to happen with the ticking time bomb of his affair with Ann Fleming.

Plus heart trouble and an ideologically fractious party. The ensuing leadership election would make OTL's '80 contest look like a picnic...
 
Any thoughts on his policies? I'm not quite sure where Gaitskell is on the political scale. Was he actually conservative, or was he more of a moderate?
 
Any thoughts on his policies? I'm not quite sure where Gaitskell is on the political scale. Was he actually conservative, or was he more of a moderate?

Moderate social democrat, like most prominent Labour and Conservative figures back then. Expect something similar to what we actually got, after all they didn't call it Butskellism for nothing.
 

Thande

Donor
Yeah, exactly. It would moderate the political consensus somewhat and make it harder for Wilson to become Labour leader/PM later on, IMO.
 
Any thoughts on his policies? I'm not quite sure where Gaitskell is on the political scale. Was he actually conservative, or was he more of a moderate?
He was the proto-Blairite in several areas, attempting to amend Clause IV decades before Blair managed it. Divisions in the party would stop any major reform though. To be honest, I think Gaitskill would have been less succesful than Harold Wilson as PM.
 

Thande

Donor
He was the proto-Blairite, attempting to amend Clause IV decades before Blair managed it. Divisions in the party would stop any major reform though. To be honest, I think Gaitskill would have been less succesful than Harold Wilson as PM.

Which in turn would help the Conservative establishment considerably. If Labour screw up on their own due to division and the potential chaos if Gaitskell dies in office, the Tories feel no pressure to reform because they can coast back to power and paint Labour as unfit to govern. They could still be choosing leaders by the old boys' network with no formal elections well into the 1970s.
 
Yeah, exactly. It would moderate the political consensus somewhat and make it harder for Wilson to become Labour leader/PM later on, IMO.

What about foreign policy though? Specifically, the EEC? The 1959 manifesto does mention agricultural tariffs being hiked, if obliquely.

Defence: ending conscription and nuke tests, condemns overreliance on nukes. That might mean some of the more infamous White Paper victims might survive. Decolonisation preceded by democratic transition. Some sort of arms control treaty.
 
Which in turn would help the Conservative establishment considerably. If Labour screw up on their own due to division and the potential chaos if Gaitskell dies in office, the Tories feel no pressure to reform because they can coast back to power and paint Labour as unfit to govern. They could still be choosing leaders by the old boys' network with no formal elections well into the 1970s.
I don't disagree with any of this. Interestingly in my opinion, it would probably stop the rise of Ted Heath and with it Margaret Thatcher also as there would be no need for a youthful leader to challenge Wilson and without Heath and the old boy network in charge, Thatcher may have struggled more than she did.
 

Thande

Donor
What about foreign policy though? Specifically, the EEC? The 1959 manifesto does mention agricultural tariffs being hiked, if obliquely.
Well the early 1960s aren't a time when a difference in policy there would make much difference...Labour would be more anti entering the EEC than the Tories were in OTL, but it's not like the UK entering the EEC was an option anyway thanks to de Gaulle's veto.

Defence: ending conscription and nuke tests, condemns overreliance on nukes. That might mean some of the more infamous White Paper victims might survive. Decolonisation preceded by democratic transition. Some sort of arms control treaty.
Ending National Service early would lead to significant cultural effects. I don't want to go into specifics because it would probably start a flamewar over differing opinions.

Nuclear stuff, though not as crazy as Labour in the 80s, could cause problems. I tend to think the result would be something like Yes Minister--reducing nuclear weapons would last exactly as long as it takes for the US president to threaten a diplomatic snub, then it would mysteriously go back to the old policy again.

Decolonisation policy, though well intended, would probably have unfortunate results--create a few more Rhodesia-type white UDIs and/or even worse black ruled states than OTL. Come to think of it, it feels as though this is shaping up to be an all-round foreign policy disaster that the Tories can exploit. One also wonders what would happen with South Africa, as with no Macmillan there'll be no Winds of Change speech.

Actually, without Macmillan's involvement, decolonisation might not even be such a bipartisan issue. TTL could see a Tory party with some rather unpleasant attitudes towards race if it perceives it as a vote-winner, and Powell is still considered a possible future leader...
 

Thande

Donor
I don't disagree with any of this. Interestingly in my opinion, it would probably stop the rise of Ted Heath and with it Margaret Thatcher also as there would be no need for a youthful leader to challenge Wilson and without Heath and the old boy network in charge, Thatcher may have struggled more than she did.

I doubt Heath and Thatcher could become leaders without the one member one vote MPs-based party leadership electoral system put in place by Douglas-Home, indeed. The Tory establishment would doubtless consider them 'oikish commoner' and 'stay in the kitchen' respectively.
 
Top