scholarly journals ‘The pioneers of the great army of democrats’: the mythology and popular history of the British Labour party, 1890–1931

2018 ◽  
Vol 91 (254) ◽  
pp. 723-743 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antony Taylor
2003 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 133-153 ◽  
Author(s):  
JEREMY NUTTALL

This article uses the broad concept of ‘improvement of minds’ to refer to the idea of improving people's sense of morality, their ability and willingness to reason, and the depth of their emotional experiences. Such an objective has been little explored in the context of the history of the British Labour party. Yet, discussion of it is worth integrating into histories of the party for two reasons. First, the goal of improving minds was a strand – though often unsystematically developed – in the agendas of many Labour party politicians, activists, and thinkers. Secondly, the very fact that it was an unsystematically developed strand, the very limits of the party's attention to, and success in achieving, ‘mental progress’ amongst the twentieth-century British population – that is to say, simply, the limits to the party's pursuit and achievement of the objective of making people more caring, rational, and sensitive – is one important explanation for many of Labour's failures. The article begins to explore the aims, processes, and outcomes of Labour's attempts to improve minds, as well as to explain and examine the consequences of the limits of the party's attention to this goal, through the case study of Tony Crosland.


1965 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 140-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard W. Lyman

The purpose of this paper is to set forth, somewhat arbitrarily, a composite view of the British Labour Party's history between the Wars, to be labelled the orthodox Labour interpretation, and then to set against it a contrasting view which has been expressed by several left-wing writers within the Labour Party. This examination of conflicting opinions can scarcely be dignified with the title historiographical inquiry. In the first place, there are other more or less coherent interpretations of Labour Party history in this period besides the two sketched herein, most notably a Communist view, expressed in such works as Allen Hutt's The Post-War History of the British Working Class. Secondly, as Stephen Graubard has recently said in relation to the Fabian Society, much of the Labour Party history in this period is in fact autobiography. Finally, as will soon become distressingly apparent, the interpretations that most writers have given of Labour between the Wars have been influenced by, connected with, even in some cases identical to the same authors' views on Labour today. History used to be called “past politics”; in this case it cannot entirely escape becoming “present politics.”According to the orthodox view, the Labour Party was emerging from its infancy in the 1920s, having established its claim to be considered a major contestant for power as recently as 1918. As Francis Williams puts it:With the acceptance of the new constitution and the endorsement of the international policy contained in the Memorandum on War Aims and the domestic programme contained in Labour and the New Social Order, the Labour Party finally established itself. The formative years were ended. Now at last it was an adult party certain of its own purpose; aware also at last of what it must do to impress that purpose upon the nation.


2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 289-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin T Pettitt

The organizational history of the British Labour Party is to a significant degree the story of an ongoing struggle over the ‘how’ of election manifestos, a struggle, partly driven by a broad-based agreement over the ‘why’ of manifestos. This is a struggle between a ‘parliamentary independence’ wing and a ‘grass-roots control’ wing. Because the manifesto is seen as a programme for government action, this also means that the answer to the how takes on huge importance, because controlling the how means controlling government action. This article will show the nature and extent of the disagreement between the two wings and argue that it has repeatedly damaged the Labour Party’s ability to operate effectively. In this struggle, the two opposing sides have at various times scored temporary ‘victories’. However, whichever argument ‘won’ at any given time, the long-term result was damage to the party’s ability to function properly. The article will also argue that after multiple generations of struggle, this issue is essentially still unresolved.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document