The Post War Impact on Britain
The impact of World War Two on British society was extensive. Pre-war the UK experienced an
economic depression aided in part by the First World War.1 This was also due to factors such as
Britain’s main profit industries such as coal and steel being in heavy decline. 2 The Wall Street Crash
of 1929 affected the world globally and this contributed to Britain’s economic downfall. 3 Society had
begun to change through the enfranchisement of women as by 1928 all women could vote. 4 Despite
this, society, inclusive of womens’ role therein, had continued along a similar vein as previously.
During the Second World War the stigma towards poverty was gradually changing, but there needed
to be comprehensive legislation to reinstate this. 5 By 1945 over 3.5 million British men had served in
the army for the Second World War.6 Of those more than 417,000 died and those who came home had
returned to a different Britain. This essay will focus on the impact the war had predominantly on the
status of woman, healthcare, immigration and the economic aspects.
Arguably the actual enfranchisement of women didn’t necessarily correlate to a different paradigm of
British society. 7 Moreover, the ability to vote in itself did not necessarily extend to removing barriers
to the empowerment of women. The war then, with the obvious departure of a large swathe of male
society, meant the role of women had to fill the necessary void. Women were forced to work and
increasingly had to perform jobs previously male-dominated. After the war society then couldn’t
revert to the way it had been previously. Women had worked for years at this point and survived in a
society with significantly reduced male influence, so were hardly likely to go back to their older
traditional roles given this newfound freedom. 8This meant society had to adapt to the greater
influence of the female sex in the workplace initially, and increasingly in the political sphere also.
9
Pre-war the societal view on poverty was indifferent at best and many held the view that it was a self-
inflicted burden.10 Society’s view and the general momentum in the advancement of the working class
1
Christina D. Romer, Great Depression, Encyclopaedia Britannica,( 2003) pp2-6
2
Romer, “Great Depression”, (2003) pp2
3
Eve Colpus; Women, Service and Self-actualization in Inter-War Britain, Past & Present, Volume 238, Issue
1, (2018) pp4
4
Colpus; “Women” (2018)pp1-3
5
Buchanan, Patrick J., and Hitler Churchill. "the Unnecessary War." How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West
Lost the World. New York (2008) pp303-305
6
Buchanan “Unnecessary War." (2008).pp303
7
Colpus; “Women” (2018)pp4-5
8
Colpus; “Women” (2018)pp1-5
9
Davey Smith, George, Daniel Dorling, and Mary Shaw, eds. Poverty, inequality and health in Britain: 1800-
2000: A reader. Policy Press, (2001) pp34
10
Davey Smith et Al,”Poverty, inequality and Health” (2001) pp16
, was insipid and slow-moving.11 The war, however, forced different strata together in a confined space,
and in a setting where bonds were quickly and strongly formed. 12 This meant there was real
intercourse between disparate classes which led to the realisation of real equality. 13 The all for one and
one for all ethos of wartime propaganda emanated into the post-war nation which meant classes were
no longer so separate or distinct.14 This led to the belief that class wealth wasn’t necessarily earned
and people didn’t necessarily deserve the poverty they were born into. Furthermore, basic rationing
encouraged a sense of equality, as everyone received the same rations and the same bottom line. 15
This general upswell in socialist thought led to the election of the Labour government in 1945 who
then turned to a man named William Beveridge.16 He had released a report in 1942, namely the
Beveridge report, that highlighted class inequality through five giant evils of society: idleness,
squalor, want, disease and ignorance.17 To tackle the giant of disease the new Labour government
brought in the hugely controversial National Health Service Act 1946. 18The act was not without
opposition, an example of which is that many doctors didn’t wish to be government employees. The
positivity regarding the formation of, and the idea behind, the new NHS was society’s changing
perception of the working class.19 The idea that everyone, without exception, deserved access to the
most fundamental medical care showed the transformation of attitudes from the apathy of before the
war to active participation.20 The positivity surrounding the NHS was exemplified by the immediate
uptake, whereby 97% of the British Public registered with General Practitioners. 21 The immediate and
fervent adoption of the system, however, created problems for the financing of the system. 22 Such
overwhelming demand coupled with the increasing life expectancy (due to increased availability of
drugs, better access to food and cessation of hostilities) meant the state struggled to support the
fledgling entity. 23The state intention was to pay for the NHS from National Insurance contributions,
but the act was costlier than anticipated and additionally had to be paid for from ordinary taxes. 24
11
Harris, Jose. "War and Social History: Britain and the Home Front during the Second World War."
Contemporary European History 1, no. 1 (1992): pp 17-18
12
Jose, "War and Social History” (1992)pp 17
13
Hill, Michael. "The welfare state in Britain." Palgrave (1993) pp30-35
14
Davey Smith et Al,”Poverty, inequality and Health” (2001) pp16-18
15
Whiteside, Noel. “The Beveridge Report and Its Implementation: a Revolutionary Project?”, vol. 24, no. 3,
(2014) pp. 24
16
Noel. “The Beveridge Report and Its Implementation: a Revolutionary Project?” (2014) pp. 24-25
17
Noel. “The Beveridge Report and Its Implementation: a Revolutionary Project?” (2014) pp. 25
18
Lowe, Rodney. The welfare state in Britain since 1945. Macmillan International Higher Education, 1998
pp194-197
19
Davey Smith et Al,”Poverty, inequality and Health” (2001) pp114
20
Kernick, David, ed. Getting health economics into practice. Radcliffe Publishing, (2002)pp269
21
Rodney “welfare state” (1998) pp179-81
22
Rodney “welfare state” (1998) pp83-85
23
Davey Smith et Al,”Poverty, inequality and Health” (2001) pp113-118
24
Davey Smith et Al,”Poverty, inequality and Health” (2001) pp44
