TLIAW: Shuffling A Deck, One Of Those With Junkers On the Back

Mumby

Mumby

HWAT

you know those decks they had in the war where they had junkers and heinkels and shit on them

IS THIS A WAR ONE

no

WHAT IS IT THEN YOU USED JUNKERS

its primarily interwar, but it covers that period from 1900 to 1945 when britain was either at war or was waiting for one

SUCH A HACK

why

I DONT KNOW YOU JUST ARE

u arent nyce

HOW ARE YOU EVEN GOING TO DO THIS IN A WEEK

i... i cud

YOU HAVE A FULL TIME JOB AND YOURE FLAKEY AS SHIT

okay

...

Basically, expect this to take longer than a week. I'll do my best to do it in a week.

We begin our story in 1900, as the build-up to the 'khaki election' takes an unexpected turn...
 
Mumby

Mumby

800px-The_Great_Irish_Ventriloquist%2C_with_his_Performing_Parliamentary_Manikin_%283257199969%29.jpg


1900-1903: Henry Campbell-Bannerman (Liberal minority, with supply and confidence from the Irish Parliamentary Party and Labour)
​
The 1900 general election was a tremendous upset to put it mildly. When Lord Salisbury asked the Queen to dissolve Parliament, it was an atmosphere of patriotic fervour. The country had barely been at war with the Boer Republics of South Africa for a year, but already the Orange Free State had fallen and it was believed that victory had been attained. The Unionist Pact of Conservatives and the Liberal Unionists led by the charismatic imperialist Joseph Chamberlain expected a strong victory. This was to be helped by the expectation that a great many seats held by Unionists would be uncontested. But events conspired against them in the short weeks before Parliament dissolved. First was a string of terrible defeats in South Africa, as the manoeuvrable guerrilla fighters were able to maintain a flexible frontier. Thousands of British soldiers died in mere weeks. This was an enormous scandal and the government's trumpets of victory seemed premature and infantile. This was worsened by revelations of what was being done to attain victory, namely the tactic of scorched earth which devastated homesteads and the terrible conditions in the refugee camps set up for those displace offended the sensitivities of even the most ardent imperialists who tended to see the Empire as having a civilising mission. Henry Campbell-Bannerman scented blood in the water and accordingly prepared for a more competitive election than had been anticipated. The barrel was scraped for election funds, candidates were hurriedly selected and the Pact with Labour was reaffirmed to fill gaps in industrial areas where the socialists were growing stronger. Even so, some forty-five Unionists enjoyed uncontested fights for their seats.

It was a Herculean effort, but the result was clear. No party had attained a majority, though the Liberals had narrowly emerged the larger party. The pact with Labour and a renewed deal with the IPP gave Campbell-Bannerman a majority, though neither party committed to a formal coalition. Campbell-Bannerman was now in the same position as the last Liberal leader to win a general election. He was reliant on the Irish for the survival of his government. They would remain allied only for as long as he could secure Home Rule, but in that endeavour he would be opposed by the Unionist House of Lords. It seemed that his victory had been a poisoned chalice. The Liberal's war chest was looking uncomfortably empty with such a tenuous arrangement.

For now however, Campbell-Bannerman was helped by emerging splits in the Unionist Pact, not between Conservatives and Liberal Unionists, but between free traders and protectionists. The idea of trade protection was nothing new in Britain, indeed was traditional ground for the Tories. One of the great transforming issues of the last century had been the Corn Laws and their abolition. The Conservatives had largely toed the free trade line established then, but the growing expenditure of the Boer War and the expensive ideas of social reformers like Joseph Chamberlain, Randolph Churchill and Arthur Balfour had led to the idea of protective tariffs being resurrected somewhat. As long as this clash went on, the government was safe in the Commons.

Campbell-Bannerman was restrained by his weak position in the Commons, but he certainly achieved some modest reforms. The Trade Disputes Act and Workmen's Compensation Act granted greater rights to employees and imposed more responsibilities on employers to their workers'. The Probation of Offenders Act 1901 was passed which provided an alternative to prison for young offenders. Campbell-Bannerman was very much a man in the mould of Gladstone, a social reformer but one who preferred to avoid any great state expenditure.

In South Africa, Campbell-Bannerman moved to bring an end to the conflict as soon as possible. By the time the general election was over, Britain was nominally in control of both the Boer Republics. However, beyond the cities they occupied, in reality they controlled little. Campbell-Bannerman brought an end to General Kitchener's campaign and sought terms with the remnant governments of both states. Despite his rhetoric, Campbell-Bannerman was clear that his government could not afford to be seen as unpatriotic. The eventual result was not the outright annexation of the republics but instead established them as independent dominions within the British Empire, along with the Dominions of the Cape and Natal. There were provisions to eventually federate the Dominions as a single 'Union of South Africa' but this ultimately came to naught. Despite his best efforts, Campbell-Bannerman still succeeded in upsetting his imperialist colleagues. Worse, the Boer Dominions consistently elected anti-British, Nationalist governments which would come to be a thorn in the Empire's side.

Like Gladstone before him however, Campbell-Bannerman was brought down by Irish Home Rule. His government relied on Irish votes, and so in 1902 a new Irish Home Rule Bill was brought to the table. It narrowly passed in the Commons, but it failed once again in the Lords. Campbell-Bannerman was urged by his more radical colleagues to make reforms to the Lords, to restrain the upper house from obstructing Bills that passed in the Commons too often. The Prime Minister had a friendly ear to these proposals, but was torn by the sheer radicalism of them. This was the moment when his erstwhile allies struck.

The Liberal Imperialists had grown frustrated by the Prime Minister's caution and timidity, and his failure to confront the Lords and crush their power to continually block Irish Home Rule was too much for them. The plotters, led by Herbert Asquith, managed to remove the Prime Minister by getting the support of the Irish and Labour on side and isolating the aged Gladstonian Radicals and Whiggish elements of the Liberals. Campbell-Bannerman was given a peerage, while Asquith was installed as Leader of the House of Commons and First Lord of the Treasury.

Time has not been kind to Campbell-Bannerman. Until recently, he was little more than an answer at a pub quiz 'Who was the first Prime Minister of the 20th Century'. But his legacy has been re-evaluated and his generally judged positively by historians. A quiet radical who won a general election against the odds, perhaps a little too late in his career, and made some worthwhile reforms while being constantly undermined by his own tenuous position.
 
Gonzo

Gonzo

This is amazing @Mumby. Home Rule at this time went about as well as expect for C-B. Looking immensely forward to seeing my second favourite Tory leader/PM after Salisbury, Bonar Law perhaps get a better time of things at the top ITTL.
 
Mumby

Mumby

Herbert_Henry_Asquith00..jpg


1903-1904: Herbert Henry Asquith (Liberal minority with supply and confidence from the Irish Parliamentary Party and Labour)
1904-1904: Herbert Henry Asquith (Liberal minority)​

Asquith came to office on a groundswell of support from the influx of young, radical Liberal Imperialists allied with the Irish Nationalists and the Labour Party. The situation of 1900-1902, of a divided Unionist Pact and a united Liberal Party was now reversed. Asquith was even more reliant on the beneficence of the other parties than his predecessor, as he could not entirely rely on the loyalty of his own party. Nevertheless, this did not stymie his ambition.

Asquith had been frustrated by his predecessor's seeming lack of ambition, the 'Toryism' of his reforms, the ossified constitutionalism that prevented the passage of a Home Rule Act and heightened tensions and violence in Ireland, and Campbell-Bannerman's failure to challenge it. It was his own ambition to transform the country through radical legislation, and defy the House of Lords in the process that spelled his doom.

Asquith had emerged as a potential leader for the future over ten years before upon attaining the position of Home Secretary in Gladstone's fourth ministry. When the Liberals lost the 1895 election, Asquith had only grown in prominence and over the previous three years since 1900 had enjoyed the powerful position of Chancellor of the Exchequer. It was while he was Chancellor that he crafted his plans for a 'Peoples Budget' that would raise taxes on the wealthy, and the landed, while redistributing that wealth through mechanisms like old age pensions. The plans were radical, though hardly unprecedented considering attempts at Land Reform in Ireland and the social reforms proposed by Conservatives like Arthur Balfour.

The Budget of 1904 was predictably hard fought and Asquith struggled to even pass it in the Commons in the face of disquiet amongst the Whiggish landowners on his own backbenches. Fortunately for him, the IPP backed him up and Labour came out strongly in support, though both hoped to take advantage of Liberal weakness to put their own ideas on the agenda. Unprecedentedly the Budget went on to fail in the Lords, where the Unionist majority, composed wealthy landowners who stood to lose out voted it down. Asquith seemed oddly pleased, as it now gave him the excuse to bring Lords Reform onto the agenda, citing the government's popular mandate to pass the Budget and proposing a reform that would prevent the Lords interfering.

This proved to be a step over the line for Asquith's backbenchers who refused to support his 'Parliament Act'. The loss was humiliating and fully exposed the government's weakness. Without the Parliament Act, Asquith had no power to deliver on any of the promises he had made to the IPP and Labour and they soon abandoned him. The Unionist Pact, seemingly reunited under a new leader in the Commons, soon called a vote of confidence which the government unsurprisingly failed to win. Asquith, lacking the confidence of Parliament or indeed half his party in Parliament, was forced into an ignominous retirement.

Asquith today receives a poor showing in modern estimates of Prime Minister. Partly this is due to his short time in power, but much is concerned with criticism of his own self-destructive ambition. Asquith was to Britain's last Liberal Prime Minister, and at least a portion of the blame for the party's rapid demise lays at his door.
 
Last edited:
Mumby

Mumby

It's gratifying this has got such a positive reception.

I of course cannot answer anything about future PMs, because that'll spoil the fun.
 
Mumby

Mumby

800px-He%27s_Good_Enough_for_Me_%283258029366%29.jpg

1904-1905: Arthur Balfour (Conservative / Liberal Unionist --- Unionist Pact minority)
1905-1909: Arthur Balfour (Conservative / Liberal Unionist --- Unionist Pact majority)
1909-1910: Arthur Balfour (Conservative leading War Government)
​
Some had doubted that Balfour was truly the man for the job of leading the Tories out of the defeat of 1900. It was an election they should have won, almost perfectly crafted for a Unionist landslide. But scandal had squandered the laurels of war, and they snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. With Salisbury exhausted and demoralised, it was clear that a new generation had to step up to the plate. But no sooner had Salisbury taken a step back, than the Unionists fell upon each other over the issue of tariff reform. In this atmosphere, there was a general desire for a clean break from Salisbury, this perhaps being Joseph Chamberlain's chance to ascend to the top of the Unionists. Instead, the eventually victor of the struggle for the future of British Toryism was Arthur Balfour, the former Prime Minister's nephew.

Balfour was a radical, as far as one could be when one is a Conservative. He proposed social reforms and public works, more ambitious than those which had been condemned as 'state socialism' under his uncle. And his position in 1904 was not very auspicious. Despite the Liberal's divisions, they were still the largest party in Parliament. Balfour managed to shore up his support in the Commons through informal deals with the Labour Party and to a lesser extent the IPP. This was a sign of things to come as the Labour Party severed it's formal ties with the Liberals and set out on it's own path. Just how transformative Balfour's premiership would be was revealed in the Budget of 1904. It was shocking in that it was similar in many respects to Asquith's 'Peoples Budget' which had been shot down only a few short months before. It too established the framework of land reform, tax reform and redistributory mechanisms that presaged the modern welfare state. Local government reform, particularly in Ireland, managed to neatly circumvent the ever present issue of Home Rule.

The out cry was tremendous on the Liberal benches. But, lacking a leader and divided between the Whigs and the Imperialists, they could barely put up a fight. Enough Liberals voted with the government, along with Labour and the IPP for the Budget to pass. It had been a gamble for the government, considering their minority position, but they had come out on top. David Lloyd George emerged prominently on the Opposition benches in support of the Budget, declaring 'this is a war Budget. It is for raising money to wage implacable warfare against poverty and squalidness.' This too indicated the direction of travel in the country, as the political ground shifted. Lloyd George would ultimately triumph as his challengers and became Liberal Leader, and would remain so for years, playing a leading role in the party's transformation.

Having triumphed in the Budget and still enjoying his honeymoon after Asquith's lamentable premiership, Balfour chose to go to the country and secure a majority for himself. The general election took place in the early months of 1905, and secure Balfour comfortably as Prime Minister. Indeed, Balfour would become the first person to formally enjoy that title. His comfortable majority was further accentuated by the position of the Opposition. Lloyd George was continually sniped at by the Whiggish wing of his party opposed to his 'Toryism', and on the left the Labour Party had managed to displace the Liberals in many urban constituencies they had once considered their heartlands. Balfour now found his greatest enemy was not on the other side of the ballot box but within his own party.

The issue of tariffs returned once again. The Budget of 1904 had made no mention of them, as they had needed Liberal votes to pass and Balfour well knew it. Now he had a majority, he could no longer ignore the increasingly strong protectionist wing of his party. While avoiding Chamberlain's 'Imperial Preference', Balfour did pursue a policy of retaliatory tariffs in an attempt to encourage global free trade. Another dividing issue was that of Europe. Many in the party sympathised with Germany, over the country's more traditional opponents of France and Russia. While Balfour had no love for Russia, detesting in particular that country's virulent anti-Semitism, he believed that Germany presented the greater threat to the balance of power and world peace and in 1905 the country entered into the Entente Cordiale. Britain had left the comfortable position of splendid isolation. They were now involved.

In 1906, Joseph Chamberlain suffered a stroke. Tragedy though this was, it did weaken the protectionist and pro-German wing of the Unionists and strengthened Balfour's own position. The following years were distinguished by the Tory Reforms that continued the work begun in 1904, implementing a new consensus ironically modelled after the welfare system of the German Reich. This was not cheap and Balfour was eventually compelled to raise more tariffs, though he managed to avoid the problem of drastically increasing the price of food by the skin of his teeth. More popular was a programme that tore down the appalling slums of many cities and provided cheap accommodations to the former tenants. Women's suffrage became a major issue, albeit one Balfour attempted not to engage with, which came to damn him.

In 1909, the event which would come to define his premiership took place. Bosnia and Herzegovina were formaly territories of the Ottoman Empire, albeit occupied by the Austro-Hungarian Empire. These territories were formally annexed by Vienna, triggering a diplomatic crisis. The Pan-Slavic nationalists of Serbia protested this, alongside the Entente Cordiale. Russia stepped in, demanding that Austria reverse the annexation and either return the territories to the Ottomans, or to give them to Serbia. Austria-Hungary refused to back down, believing Russia would not seriously intervene, looking back to the Dreikaiserbund of over a decade before. This was unwise. The government of Russia was struggling with internal unrest, and her ministers believed a short victorious war would bring the people back into line. The Balkans was nearby, a traditional sphere of Russian influence and they had local allies, while Austria was aging, lacked local support and had triggered the crisis themselves. Serbia declared war on Austria, Russia declared war on Austria in turn. Germany declared war on Russia, and Russia turned to the Entente Cordiale to back them up. And so began the First World War.

Balfour brought Britain into the war out of a sense of honour. But this was to be a war without honour. Millions would die in the blood-soaked trenches of Flanders, radicalising a generation. While Balfour's management of the war effort was largely perceived as competent, his agreement to go along with Winston Churchill's 'Baltic Gambit' to land troops in East Prussia and aid the Russian war effort on the Eastern Front led to catastrophic naval Battle of Aland. Perceived as a defeat in Britain, it actually ensured the German High Seas Fleet would never go to sea again, but the failure of the ambitious plan led to his downfall. With the Unionists torn by the conduct of the war, a National Unity Government would be necessary to proceed. The Liberals and other parties were invited but a condition was that Balfour was to resign. He did so honourably and returned to the backbenches.

Balfour would remain in Parliament for many years, notably ensuring after the war that the Pale of Jewish Settlement was adequately defended by the League of Nations. He would return to the frontbenches in the Cabinet of his successor. Balfour is largely regarded positively in modern estimations, as the architect of the welfare state, as the defender of European Jewry after the First World War, and as the metaphorical midwife of the Conservative's 20th century transformation. Where he does stumble is in his management of the First World War itself, and of his own party as it's schisms and factions undermined him and he relied too much on his own circle of friends and their family.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top