Labour later faced difficulties with the Liberal party who were regrouping and picking up momentum in the Commons. They managed to field 486 candidates in the 1923 election: a significant number for a party who had been so divided. It has been said that had the Conservatives fielded a more unanimously backed, popular and well-known candidate then Baldwin would have been ousted from his post from the results. Yet he stayed on as the largest party, however he had lost the balance of power into the arms of the Labour party. That election the case was more of Conservative’s loss than the Labour party’s win.
The crisis of 1931 which evolved following the Wall Street crash of 1929 in America and subsequent world economic crisis developed into a full blown political furore within Britain. AJP Taylor suggested however that unemployment, not Baldwin was the downfall of the party. It ran at nearly 12% and was the most serious issue of the era, and more people cared about who could provide working class stability than the person who ran for office. This is a reasonable explanation as to why the Labour party experienced a surge in votes.
Therefore it is easy to see the circumstances in which the party managed to achieve success, yet why they failed to hold on to it is more contentious. The period of 1929 to 1931 was possibly one of the most difficult politically, with the exception of wartime, in twentieth century politics. Ramsay MacDonald promised to sort out the Coalmines Act, a Housing Act, unemployment issues and also foreign policy, which was extremely popular with the working classes.
Baldwin held office for most of the nineteen twenties, with the exception of the Labour party’s short periods. Baldwin found himself out of office almost as a rebellious act by the British people, who, when dissatisfied with an event or policy’s handling dared to vote out in protest. The General Strike of 1926 had caused much discontent amongst the British people; the economic crises of the early and late twenties much worry.
The impression which is given over by these intermittent periods in office, usually without much longevity, is that the working classes who had voted for the party were in fact feeling betrayed slightly by the inability of the Labour party to be revolutionary enough and improve their lives through Socialist policies. It is obvious to the political observer that this was more an act of appeasement to the centre and right wing of British voters rather than a lack of ambition by the Labour party’s policy makers. To some Labour party voters, this would seem too defeatist: if the party who was supposedly one of them made no difference to their lives – why vote for them again? The events of the period were shambolic leading up to World War Two: the left tore away, led by those such as Oswald Mosley, who were frustrated at a lack of change and revolution, who then started the British fascist party, circling the British political spectrum.
National governments are traditionally popular amongst the voters: it means that the best parts of each party are combined, rather than through totalitarian leadership which inevitably brings out the worst. It signals unity and working together, and has led Britain through many a crisis, yet to some it appears weak and unsound. The first one, during the war had led to Labours first wave of success, the second period of this form of government had led almost to their collapse: after the 1931 election Labour won not a seat in their traditional heartlands of industrial Manchester, Sheffield or Birmingham. The coalition however was strong. Ramsay MacDonald continued as Prime Minister to 1935, and the National Government which succeeded was only interrupted by war in 1939.
In conclusion Labour was able to gain power through appearing to be revolutionary: they were the answer to many working class people’s prayers, but they fell down through their distaste for strong left wing, socialist action. This disappointed their heartlands and didn’t win over enough of the middle ground voters, who had probably voted Liberal before. The pull of Asquith and Lloyd George and their mild resurgence meant that Labour lost votes where they should have pulled out all the stops, such as in 1929 when they roundly trounced the Conservatives ‘safety first’ policy through imagination and creative policies. They soon went the way of the main parties in forgetting their traditional voters in an attempt to woo new ones, and lost character MPs such as Mosley who were the future of the party from the ageing MacDonald, Henderson and Snowden.
