Why did Labour Win in 1945 - Report Example

Why Did Labour Win in 1945? Why did Labour win in 1945? Winston Churchill was certainly the most British Prime minister between 1940 and 1945 after winning the Second World War. Opinion polls showed that he was the most preferred candidate for the position of the Prime Minister until the general elections of 1945. He had not come below 78% and in 1945 he was rated at 83%. Churchill was then the leader of the Conservative Party and politicians and commentators widely predicted that he would lead the conservative party to victory in 1945. However, Conservative Party lost to the Labor Party led by Clement Attlee in the July 5, 1945 elections whose results were delayed until July 26, 1945 due to the time it took to transport overseas results. This was indeed the first victory and the first majority government for the Labour Party which gave it the opportunity to implement its postwar reforms. Winston Churchill had great qualities that helped Britain to win in World War II. However, the same qualities did not suit the British domestic politics of postwar peacetime. This led to the defeat of the Conservative Party. Voters usually reject politicians because they have failed in office. Therefore, the defeat of Winston Churchill could possibly be attributed to his failure in office. His failure was because he had completed his superhuman victory of 1940 after the war. The war victory made Winston Churchill redundant and he could not implement reforms that the people of England expected in the peacetime. Conduct in war was his overriding passion, and victory in the military was a significant element in his goals. Everything else, including party politics was secondary. In this regard, he lacked the qualities that could enable him to win in political elections. When party politics returned in 1940s after the war, Churchill, who had been preoccupied with war, lacked clear sense of purpose and direction in politics. Another reason why Labour Party won the 1945 elections was because Churchill and the Conservatives had run a poor elections campaign as opposed to the Labour Party. In one of his campaign, Churchill argued that Attlee’s policies needed some kind of Gestapo to implement. This statement was not received comfortably by voters because they considered the statement as a poor judgment. The statement backfired dramatically, and the next day Attlee responded to the statement in an ironic manner. He thanked Winston Churchill for using the statement to differentiate between Winston Churchill of War time and Churchill the politician of the peacetime. Through this incident, Attlee argued for the case of public control over industry which was positively received by the people of Britain. Indeed, Churchill’s statement backfired on him and led the conservatives to fail in the 1945 elections. It was a poor campaign strategy which worked against him. As much as voters respected and applauded Churchill’s victory in the Second World War, they also distrusted the domestic and foreign policy record of the Conservative Party in 1930s. Churchill also handled issues single-mindedly and neglected the interests of his Conservative Party. In October 1944, a backbench MP of the Conservative Party wrote, “Never has a party been as leaderless as the Conservative Party is today” (Addison, 2011). This shows that the Conservative Party lost its leadership as Churchill tried to consolidate his authority as a war leader. Churchill did not think of his party as a political party to win elections, but as a mount to win wars. This did not work in a time of peace. The labour party won the 1945 elections partly because its leader Atlee, contrary to Churchill, had a clear sense of purpose and direction. He led his Labour Party to sell the postwar reforms of postwar era to its citizens (Smith and Spear, 1992). While Winston Churchill was in rejoicing mood after his victory in war, Atlee was busy reforming and building its Labour Party towards the interests of British voters. Britons wanted social change after the Second World War, and Attlee’s Labour Party was well prepared to offer them that. On the other hand, the Conservatives wanted to stick to the Laissez faire policies of 1930s which had led them to win in the Second World War. Arguably, policies meant for wartime cannot work for peacetime. The main reason for the victory of the Labour Party in the elections was because it had a progressive programme for social reform. One opinion poll showed that 41% of the respondents considered housing as the major challenge of the country15% mentioned labour policy, 7% mentioned social security, 6% mentioned nationalisation, and 5% mentioned international security. International security, which was of the least concern for the people of Britain, was emphasized by the Conservatives. Therefore, Labour Party, which had a clear focus on social reforms, received a greater support from the people than the Conservative Party. The Beveridge Report of 1942 offered a good platform for the Labour Party to implement its social reform. The report recommended the establishment of a welfare state and advocated for a change in British social policy through elimination of the five giants: want, disease, idleness, ignorance and squalor. The report called for the provision of nationalised healthcare, expanded education funded by the state, national insurance, and new housing policies. This report was widely supported, selling a great deal in the UK until it became the best seller. The Labour Party adopted the report optimistically, and the Conservatives supported its principles but regarded it as unaffordable. The Labour Party then offered a welfare policy to show that the social changes proposed by the report were needed and indeed affordable. The public supported those social changes. Since Churchill and his Conservatives were not willing to adopt the same social changes, they appeared to be against the public interests; hence it was just reasonable that they would lose in the general elections despite the high ranking of Churchill in opinion polls. Using the campaign message “Let us face the future”, the Labour Party managed to win the trust of the general public as they face the new challenges of the peacetime (Bogdanor, 1981). The people knew they were facing real social challenges and they needed real social changes. It was no longer the time to seek victory in war, but a time to reform the domestic socioeconomic conditions. As a result, they needed a government that would lead them to achieve such social challenges. The Labour Party offered them that promise, and they unanimously rewarded it with the elections victory of 1945. As the Labour Party spent most of its campaigns selling its social programmes, the conservatives dwelled on the personal achievements of their leader Winston Churchill in World War II. Since the popularity of Winston Churchill remained high until the year of elections, the conservatives remained confident of victory until they forgot to campaign on the platform of social change that would suit the peacetime more than the military and foreign policies that became less popular after the war. The Labour Party asked voters to make a clear distinction between Winston Churchill and Conservative Party throughout its campaigns (Norris, 1995). Furthermore, voters doubted the ability of Churchill to lead the country in domestic affairs. Throughout the heated campaigns of 1945, the Labour Party constantly reminded the people of Britain about the past failures of the conservatives. For instance, memory of the 1930s policy of appeasement was aroused during the campaigns. This policy had been conducted by Churchill’s conservative predecessors Neville Chamberlain and Stanley Baldwin, and was considered to have allowed Adolf Hitler of Germany to become too strong (Marr, 2008). Throughout this period, conservatives were entirely in power and as a result the conservatives were blamed for the mistakes committed at the time. Apart from the policy of appeasement, the conservative reign was also blamed for the inflation and unemployment that accompanied the Great Depression. After winning the First World War, the peace that followed was not maintained, and the Second World War erupted again. The Conservatives were also blamed for losing the peace that had been achieved after the First World War. The Labour Party promised to maintain the peace that would follow the Second World War, and never allow the peace to be lost to another war again. This shows that the Conservatives were crushed by anti-campaign strategies by the Labour Party which unveiled all the mistakes that the Conservatives committed to cause problems to the people of Britain. As a result, the people preferred a party and a leader who would avoid such mistakes and help them to overcome the problems they had been facing since the Depression and the Second World War. As Churchill continued building his single mindedness which was appropriate in a period of national emergency, Attlee and the Labour Party spread effective propaganda in the domestic field. They blamed Churchill and the conservatives for being appeasers if Hitler and for failing o re-arm Britain. The Labour Party also painted 1930s in dark colours and termed it as a period of abject poverty and uncontainable unemployment (Fry, 1991). The party then promised a social reform to clear up all this messes. The campaigns also played a key role in the victory of the Labour Party in 1945 general elections. Conservative campaigns were manly built around the personality and achievements of Winston Churchill. Churchill was therefore handed the full responsibility of presenting the conservative case. The Beveridge reform was presented to the Prime Minister to give an opportunity to prove himself as not only a successful warlord but also constructive peacetime statesman and reformer (Weir, 1992). However, he squandered that opportunity and circled himself around single-mindedness campaigns which are only necessary in wartime. As the Conservative Party’s campaigns centered on Churchill’s achievements, Labour Party’s campaigns were built around social reforms in form of industrial nationalisation, social security, housing policy and full employment (Burgess, 1991). Conservative’s campaigns also involved statements made by Churchill which caused discontentment in the public arena. Churchill also attempted to woo Clement Attlee to form a coalition government with him, but the National Executive Committee of the Labour Party led by Harold Laski maintained that any deals entered between Churchill and Attlee were not binding for the party. From this discussion, it is clear that the failure of the Conservative Party, or rather the victory of the Labour Party in 1945 elections, was motivated by two key issues: campaign strategies of the two parties and the Beveridge Report. While Labour’s campaign strategy involved an effective propaganda and focus on social reforms, Conservative’s campaign dwelled on Churchill’s personal achievements. Furthermore, the Labour Party focused supported the Beveridge report which sought to improve the social status of the people while the Conservative Party opposed it. References list Addison, P. (2011). Why Churchill Lost in 1945. BBC. Accessed April 10, 2014 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/election_01.shtml. Bogdanor, V. (1981). The People and the Party System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Burgess, S. (1991). 1945 Observed: A History of the Histories. Contemporary Record, 5(1), 155-170. Fry, G.K. (1991). A Reconsideration of the British General Election of 1935 and the Electoral Revolution of 1945. History, 76(246), 43-55. Marr, A. (2008). A History of Modern Britain. London: Macmillan Publishers. Norris, P. (1995). The Politics of Electoral Reform in Britain. International Political Science Review, 16(1), 65-78. Smith, M.J. and J. Spear. (1992). The Changing Labour Party. London: Routledge. Weir, S. (1992). Waiting for Change: Public Opinion and Electoral Reform. Political Quarterly, 63(2), 197-221. Read More