To What Extent Was There a ‘Post War Consensus’ in British Politics from 1951 to 1964?

‘The main reason for conservative dominance in the years 1951 to 1964 was labour disunity’ Assess the validity of this view. (June 2011)

Secondly, as Wilson faced crises in the failure of Trade Union reform and a stagnant economy, the Tories moved steadily to the right, many seeing this as a successful move by Heath. The move to the right got a massive publicity boost in Selsdon Park Hotel at a shadow cabinet meeting (January 1970) in the run-up to the election. In the public eye, the term ‘Selsdon Man’ (a phrase readily clutched by the media) meant a return to free enterprise -which directly contrasted Wilson’s policies of interventionism - the return to the values of hard work, trade union reform and a more efficient and independent industry. These ideas, although not particularly revolutionary in terms of policy for Tories, in election year provided a real incentive to frustrated voters, who looked at the struggling Wilson government whose interventionist policies were having little upswing effect on the economy. Many see the conference as an end of consensus politics, and the start of a marathon political battle between the two leaders. The fact that the Tories gained such publicity at Selsdon, and managed to convince the electorate that contrasting policies to the labour government such as the move to a more free market economy was necessary, showed Heath to be a successful leader in the outset of his campaign.

In this same article by Dalrymple, the economist from the London School of Economics, Sir Beveridge with the concept of reconstruction ideas came up with several social welfares that the state needs to adopt. The very first one on the list was the abolition of “want.” The idea here was that after the war that Britain should be able to provide above the minimum standard of living to its citizens. Want which is the very first giant to reconstruction is partly, if not completely tired to the fifth giant which is Idleness. So, if wants to increase after the war, why then did “most Britain’s” said that the period after the WWII was “the best period of their life?”

The year was 1940; the world’s second great World War was in full swing, with Britain and Germany at the forefront. The fall of Britain’s closest ally, France, stunned the British Empire and threw it into disarray. Through the chaos, Winston Churchill emerged. Churchill would be an inspiring leader who was able to rally the entire nation in times of hardship. Through his leadership, the “British Bulldog” would face the Axis powers and come out victorious, as well as become a public hero for the British people. Yet, immediately after the war, Churchill did not return to the prime minister seat because of a shocking defeat in his re-election, despite his immense reputation he gained from the war. Though lauded by the British population for his prowess as a wartime leader, Churchill’s conservative politics were out of touch with a population ready for post-war relief and led to his defeat in the 1945 election.

On the brink of war, with the enemy force appearing impenetrable and unstoppable, new Prime Minister Winston Churchill has the daunting task to rally parliament to enter the war. While speaking to the House of Commons, the representing body in the United Kingdom, he must not only create a lasting impression, but illustrate the logistics of the meeting as well as the dire importance of victory for the Allies. He opens with the immediate facts to answer any of the parliament’s doubts or concerns, then he focuses his attention to unity and expands his audience to the entire country of the United Kingdom to express the sentiment of unity and the importance of the call to arms.

This period of Labour rule is often marked down as a poor performance on behalf of the labour party, critically looked upon by many historians. There were many failings under the rule of this government however the circumstances they were placed in caused severe restraints in their options.

The election campaign in 1964 was a close run contest even though there was a low public approval of the current Prime Minister Alec Douglas-Home. The labour party only won a majority of 3 seats. The reason for the decline in support for the Conservative party was because of events and scandals such as the Profumo affair

By the early twentieth century the Liberal Government was worried that Britain’s military capability and general military power was not as strong and it once was. Therefore, the Government’s concern over national security definitely influenced the decision for the reforms. However, there are three main factors that also need to be taken into account when deciding if concern over national security was the real reason for the reforms: the Social reasons, concerns for Britain’s Empire and the Political motive. The Social reasons played a large part in persuading the Liberals to reform. The detailed reports of Booth and Rowntree, and the evidence which was brought to light, highlighted that nearly a 1/3 of Britain’s population lived in

Even before the climactic World War II, Churchill’s mental war starts with the Indian Independence movement. Churchill was brusque about his opinion on the movement, knowingly showing his opposition to the public. “To Churchill, all Indians were the pedestal for a throne. He would have died to keep England free, but was against those who wanted India free.(Tondon, n.d.)” With this ornery still in the mind of the public and government officials, Churchill’s 1940 election was met with opposition. In Churchill and Orwell, “Peter Eckersley, a Tory MP, predicted that “Winston won’t last five months.”(Ricks, pg. 91)” The general public were critical of such a disposition leading the United Kingdom during a time struggle. Even with the public’s pessimistic prospect of him, Churchill’s resilience will become a favorable trait to exhibit in this psychological war.

World War II was a period that changed many countries forever after the war ended: Germany was split in two, an iron curtain fell across the continent shortly after the war’s end, and acres of land and millions of people were destroyed and lost in the war. However, many changes happened during the war as well, and this is easily observed in Britain during the beginning of the war, when the country was constantly being bombed and attacked during the Battle of Britain. The Battle of Britain forced British citizens to change their mindset as a society and as a functioning economy in a split second, regardless of whether or not the people were ready for it.

The centrepiece of Labour 's programme of constitutional reform was undoubtedly devolution. This was achieved with remarkably few problems. There now seems no likelihood that the new arrangements could be reversed, even by a Conservative administration. The election on 6 May 1999 of a Parliament in Scotland, with extensive powers of primary legislation as well as tax-raising, and an Assembly in Wales, with powers of secondary legislation only, will have a profound impact on governance within the UK. In

On 2 April 1982, the British political system was rocked by news of an extraordinary event eight thousand miles away in the South Atlantic. A long-standing and thorny dispute with Argentina over sovereignty of the Falkland Islands – a tiny relic of empire proximate to the South American mainland – had erupted with a sudden and unprovoked invasion of British territory by Argentine forces. Britain’s Conservative government faced the greatest crisis in foreign affairs for a generation (Freedman, 1988). Behind this audacious Argentine manoeuvre laid the assumption that the British Government – struggling with union strife, plunging

The foreign policy failures of British governments in the years 1959 to 1964 were due to a lack of realism about Britain’s position in the post-war world

Here recently I have had the pleasure of listening to your speech at the convention, and I completely agree with you about your decisions, but also disagree. Some reasons why I agree is because fighting to get peace may be the easiest way earn your freedom and show how much you care for your country. Then again it could just cause a bigger conflict between Britain. I agree with your decisions because one way or another you have to show who you’re going to stand up for! Who you’re going to be fighting for and the kind of leader you are. An example of what you said yesterday is “If we wish to be free if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained, we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight!”

Butskellism derives from the two names of chancellors of Exchequer; Rab Butler, from the Conservative Party, and Hugh Gaitskell of the Labour Party. It is a term used to refer to the post war consensus created in 1950 that was inspired by an article in ‘The Economist’ which involved a character called Mr. Butskell. These two chancellors had been the main politicians involved in the post war consensus. The term Butskellism implied that both parties policies were indistinguishable from each other. They both agreed on the welfare state, full employment, a mixed economy, the consultation of trade unions and also agreed on foreign affairs such as decolonisation or joining NATO. Although Butskellism suggests both parties agreed on all the policies,