Kate Patrick Page 1 of 31 MT21W4 Attlee By Theme
Revision Sheet on Attlee: Labour’s Victory in 1945 and the Attlee Governments
Contents:
[1] Key debates/mapping
[2] Key authors + brief summaries
[3] Past questions
[4] Key Definitions
[5] By Theme
[5.1] Success at achieving goals?
[5.2] Factors for success
[5.3] Socialism or consensus?
[5.4] National support?
[5.5] Foreign policy
[6] Timeline
[7] Essay Plans
Key Debates/Mapping the literature:
(1) to what extent was Attlee gov successful in implementing policy goals (social reform and economic
planning)?
(a) Attlee gov successful: substantial and long lasting reforms like NHS and welfare state
- Tomlinson (1997); Morgan (1984)
(b) Attlee gov was constrained: economic constraints and political opposition
- Brooke (1992); Hess (1981)
(2) To what degree did the Labour Party shape the policies of the Attlee government? Socialism or
consensus?
(a) Labour Party v influential - particularly the Labour left ) - Attlee gov driven by commitment to
socialism - implement range of reforms that reflected this ideology - eg. NHS, expansion of welfare state,
nationalisation of key industries (coal, rail, steel)
- Jeffreys (1987); Rubinstein (1979); Tomlinson (1997); Morgan (1984); Addison (1993)
(b) Attlee gov was pragmatic in policy-making - Labour Party (left) less influential than often
assumed - consensus-building approach - aimed for stability - eg. Attlee’s efforts to build relationships with
business leaders/maintain good relations with the US
- Brooke (1989); Weiler (1987)
(c) Attlee gov pursued a hybrid approach - both elements of consensus and socialism - willing to
compromise on strategic socialist ideas wot achieve policy goals and political stability
- Warde (1982); Francis (1997)
(3) To what extent did the Attlee government have national support?
(a) Attlee gov tapped into a sense of national unity/shared purpose after WW2
- Langhamer (2018); Fielding (1996)
(b) Attlee gov met with resistance from significant sectors of society
- Rose (2003); Hess (1981)
(4) To what extend was the Attlee government successful at navigating foreign policy (Cold War,
decolonisation, British empire)
(a) Attlee largely successful
- Weiler (1987); Russell (2001)
(b) significant difficulties in balancing global power politics and domestic political goals
- Addition (1993); Brew (2016)
Key Authors:
,Kate Patrick Page 2 of 31 MT21W4 Attlee By Theme
Addison, Paul. The Road to 1945. British Politics and the Second World War (revd ed. Pimico, 1993),
new Introduction & chapters 9, 10.
How it fits in:
- consensus/socialism - argument for Whitehall consensus
- national support - argument for a war-radicalised optimistic populous but not necessarily in favour
of socialism
Brooke, Stephen Labour's War: The Labour Party and the Second World War, (1992), chapters 2–3,
7–8.
How it fits in:
Brooke, Stephen `Revisionists and fundamentalists: the Labour Party and economic policy during the
Second World War', HJ 32:1 (1989), pp. 157–175 Online here
How it fits in:
- consensus/socialism debate - no consensus within the party - divided between fundamentalists and
revisionist socialists
- a reason why the gov ultimately fell - internal divisions
- nationalisations as strategic in face of political/economic constraints + warnings from Soviets
Crowcroft, Robert (et al.), “The Fall of the Attlee Government, 1951” in How Labour Governments
Fall: From Ramsay Macdonald to Gordon Brown. Springer, 2013, Pages 61-82
How it fits in:
- 8 non-ideologically motivated reasons why the Attlee gov fell
Fielding, S. `What did "The People" want? The Meaning of the 1945 General Election' HJ 35:3 (1992),
pp. 623–39.
How it fits in:
- debate about national unity - says yes but anti-Tory, apathetic, disillusioned unity
- debate about consensus vs socialism - supports consensus side because Attlee gov responded to
electorate who wanted pragmatism not ideology and who just wanted the (Liberal) Beveridge report
implemented
Francis, Martin. Ideas and Policies under Labour 1945-51: Building a New Britain (Manchester
Univesity Press, 1997), chapters 1-4.
How it fits in:
[1] nice definition of socialism
[2] argues that Attlee gov WAS ideologically motivated and comitted to socialism
[3] detailed account of arguments for nationalisation - efficiency WAS a motivation but (a) one
consistent with socialism and (b) not the only motivation
Hayes, Nick. ‘Did we really want a National Health Service?’ EHR 127:526 (2012), pp. 625-61
Online here
How it fits in:
- debate over whether Labour had massive national support - evidence against as little support for
NHS in 1945 manifesto
- evidence on policy success - despite initial reticence, Labour able to enact long lasting reforms
Hess, J.C.`The social policy of the Attlee Government' in W.J.Mommsen (ed.) The Emergence of the Welfare
State in Britain and Germany (Croom Helm, 1981)
Bennett (1999) A Most Extraordinary and Mysterious Business: The Zinoviev Letter of 1924
,Kate Patrick Page 3 of 31 MT21W4 Attlee By Theme
How it fits in:
- makes case that the whole establishment - MI5/6 + press + senior civil servants + men in the City
were appalled by Ramsay Mac being PM
Howell, D. (1977). Revisionist History in Britain - Paul Addison: The Road to 1945: British Politics and
the Second World War Cape, London, 1975.
How it fits in:
- critique of Addison/consensus argument (though note the early version before he revised it to a
Whitehall consensus)
- Addison relegates Labour's commitment to socialism to the 'realm of symbolism’ - ideas gave a
sense of purpose/direction
- Attlee gov WAS socialist - how?
[1] from the 30s
- yes programs justified partially with respect to w/c interests but also as first steps toward
socialism eg. Attlee's The Labour Party in Perspective (1937)
[2] rifts in the 50s
- on the basis of principles
[3] party leadership not good rep of party
- party leaders often justified nationalisations with appeals to efficiency (eg. 1944 Reading
public ownership)
- does not take away from the party's socialist commitment
-
Langhamer, Claire. "‘Who the hell are ordinary people?’ Ordinariness As a Category of Historical Analysis."
Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 28 (2018): 175-195.
McKibbin, Ross. Parties and the People, England 1914-1951 (OUP, 2010), chapters 5 and 6.
Reeves, Rachel “Let us Face the Future 1945-1959” in Women of Westminster: The MPs who Changed
Politics. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2020
Rubinstein, D. `Socialism and the Labour Party: the Labour Left and Domestic Policy 1945-1950' in
David E. Martin and David Rubinstein (eds.), Ideology and the Labour Movement (Croom Helm,
1979).
How it fits in:
- consensus/socialism debate - says the left wanted radicalism but failed to have influence on the
party elites - party elites were moderate bulwarks focusing on consensus over socialism
- explains this with relation to lack of clarity/unity within the left
- policy success debate - argues that the LEFT of the party failed to achieve its goals
Tomlinson (1998) Why so Austere? The British Welfare State of the 1940s
Morgan, K. Labour in Power, 1945-51 (1984)
Layton-Henry, Z. Democracy and Reform in the Conservative party (1978)
Key Questions:
(i) Could socialists claim an electoral mandate in 1945?
(ii) Given the constraints under which it worked, how should we explain the legislative achievements of the
Attlee Governments?
Why was the Attlee government unable to sustain its momentum?
Did the Attlee government pursue socialism or consensus?
, Kate Patrick Page 4 of 31 MT21W4 Attlee By Theme
Why was the 1945 election a Labour landslide?
Did the Attlee Governments do more to promote socialism or to reinvigorate capitalism
Given its legislative achievements, why did the Attlee government fail to maintain its majority of 1945?
Why were Attlee’s governments able to achieve so much?
‘Attlee’s governments faced more constraints than any other Labour governments, yet they were
Labour’s most innovative governments.’ Discuss.
Why was the Attlee Government so much more successful than the first two Labour governments?
(2022)
Key Definitions:
Electoral mandate (2 interps): the transfer of authority to a group to perform a set of actions on the behalf
of the electorate.
Weak interpretation: majority of seats in parliament is sufficient
Strong interpretation: contingent on voter motivations - why were voters voting? If voting tactically,
ignorantly, apathetically etc. then no (or at least less of) a mandate then a fully-informed enthusiastic vote\
Socialism:
- in general agreement over what socialism meant (Francis, 1997)
1. Equality (opportunity, income, property)
2. Public ownership/central planning - redistribute economic power
3. Efficiency
4. Extension of democracy (redistribute political power)\
Constraints:
[1] economic
[1.1] liabilities/debt
[1.2] revenue raising power
[2] political
[1.1] majority in parliament?
[1.2] consensus within own party/whipping
[3] external political interests/lobbying
[4] promises/manifesto (as determines what you have a mandate for)
[5] public opinion\
Innovative:
- how radically new/different?
[1] policies - instruments
[2] way of doing gov/style of politics
[3] presentation
[4] philosophy\
Successful:
[1] achieving manifesto commitments
[2] fewer gov induced disasters/crises
[3] compared to similar countries at the time (controlling for shared constraints)
Consensus:
