Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Labour Governments of 1945–51

  • Chapter
Democratic Socialism in Britain and Sweden

  • 13 Accesses

Abstract

As in 1918 the Second World War had a radicalising effect upon the policy of the Labour Party which, after its remarkable election victory of 1945, was for the first time in a position to implement its programme. This it did although reaction to this legislative programme varied from disappointment on the far left to almost complacent contentment among more moderate elements. While the party was busy implementing in parliament all those central aspects of earlier programmes which, it had always been thought, would lay the foundations of a socialist economy, doubts about how it should proceed in the future began to grow in the minds of some leading figures. Exactly what the party should commit itself to in terms of future policy, specific undertakings or general guidelines, became a major cause of contention and debate.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. In this they had the backing of the TUC. TUC report 1942, p. 125.

    Google Scholar 

  2. See The Old World and the New Society, Labour Party, 1942.

    Google Scholar 

  3. LPCR 1944, p. 161.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Many resolutions calling for a commitment to extensive nationalisation were submitted. LPCR 1944, pp. 163–68.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Addison (1975), p. 256; Foote (1962), pp. 490–92; Beer (1969), pp. 174–78.

    Google Scholar 

  6. This called for immediate nationalisation of the essential industries, namely transport, coal, gas, electricity, iron and steel, in the form of the public corporation with fair compensation for owners.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Campaign Sub-Committee Minutes, March–April, 1945; Dalton (1957), pp. 432–33.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hancock and Gowring (1949), p. 541.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cole (1948), p. 466.

    Google Scholar 

  10. For the officical history of the nationalisation measures, see Chester (1975).

    Google Scholar 

  11. For a recent and more subtle, if not entirely adequate (see below pp. 90–91), analysis along these lines see McEachern (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  12. For a discussion of the Conservative’s attitude to nationalisation and their response to some of the government’s proposals, see Harris (1972), pp. 85–105.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Miliband (1961), p. 288 and 301.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Eatwell (1979); Coates (1975); Morgan (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Shinwell (1955), pp. 172–73.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Morgan (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  17. The only relevant existing thoughts on the matter were the TUC’s proposals of 1934 based on an earlier Iron and Steel Trades Confederation (ISTC) demand of 1931. See Ross (1965), p. 42; TUC Report 1931, pp. 445–54.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Campaign Sub-Committee Minutes, March–April, 1945; Dalton (1957), pp. 432–33.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Dalton (1962), p. 137.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Foot (1973), p. 227.

    Google Scholar 

  21. McEachern (1981), p.99.

    Google Scholar 

  22. McEachern (1981), pp. 97–98.

    Google Scholar 

  23. For example, see Pritt (1963) and Eatwell (1979). The failure of socialism has, in a review of the latter, been well-described as ‘an imaginary event which exists only in the mind’; Fishman (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  24. For a catalogue of arguments for nationalisation prevalent in the Labour Party, see Hacker (1955).

    Google Scholar 

  25. For a balanced account, see Warde (1982), pp. 25–42. Cf. Morgan (1984), pp. 2–6.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Coates (1975), p.49.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Shell (1957).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Dahl (1947).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Associated with it was a strong currrent of utilitarian liberal-democratic individualism. For a recent study of the impact of the tradition upon the Labour Party in relation to the issue of workers’ control, see Currie (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  30. For the text see TUC Report, 1944, pp. 393–435.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Dahl (1947). See also Brady (1950), p. 564.

    Google Scholar 

  32. TUC Report 1944, p. 410.

    Google Scholar 

  33. LPCR 1944, p. 162.

    Google Scholar 

  34. LPCR 1945, p. 137.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Coates (1982), p. 183.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Rubinstein (1975).

    Google Scholar 

  37. LPCR 1948, pp. 167–72 and 1949, pp, 127–31.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Keeping Left, 1950. Quoted in Rubinstein (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Coates (1975), p.49.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Eatwell (1979), p. 57.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Eatwell (1979), p. 58.

    Google Scholar 

  42. See, for example, the policy statement Labour for Higher Production (1947), and Production: the Bridge to Socialism (1948).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Policy and Publicity Sub-Committee Minutes, November 25, 1947.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Labour Believes in Britain, p. 13.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Policy and Publicity Sub-Committee Minutes, July 19, 1948; Sub-Committee on Industries for Nationalisation Minutes, September 28, October 13, 1948.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Policy and Publicity Sub-Committee Minutes, September 26, October 17, and November 14, 1949. NEC Minutes, November 23, and December 21, 1949.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Warde (1982), p.26.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Loewenberg (1959), p. 237.

    Google Scholar 

  49. LPCR 1949, p. 147.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Keeping Left, (New Statesman, London, 1950)

    Google Scholar 

  51. It was noticed and commented on by Epstein (1951).

    Google Scholar 

  52. Let Us Win Through Together.

    Google Scholar 

  53. NEC Minutes, July 26, 1950.

    Google Scholar 

  54. NEC Minutes, June 27, 1951.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Butler (1952), p. 242.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Reading, UK

    Malcolm B. Hamilton (Lecturer in Sociology)

Authors
  1. Malcolm B. Hamilton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 1989 Malcolm B. Hamilton

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hamilton, M.B. (1989). The Labour Governments of 1945–51. In: Democratic Socialism in Britain and Sweden. University of Reading European and International Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-09234-5_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation