1.6 Labour Were Weak and Divided 1951-64

Question 1

Who were the Bevanites and what characterized their ideology?

Answer 1

Left-wing faction associated with the ‘Keep Left’ movement; key figures included Ian Mikardo, R.H.S. Crossman, and Michael Foot.

Question 2

What were significant events highlighting Bevanite dissent?

Answer 2

In 1952, 57 Bevanites opposed the Conservative rearmament program. In 1955, Bevan and others abstained from a vote on the H-Bomb, leading to internal tensions.

Question 3

What caused divisions within Labour regarding defence policy?

Answer 3

The rise of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) and a row at the 1960 Labour Party Conference over unilateralist defence policy.

Question 4

What characterised Attlee’s leadership by the early 1950s?

Answer 4

Seen as outdated; led the party since the 1930s, prompting calls for change.

Question 5

How did Gaitskell differ in leadership style from the Left?

Answer 5

Took over in 1955, opposed left-wing ‘utopianism,’ aimed for a more unified Labour Party but struggled against opponents like Macmillan.

Question 6

How did nationalisation affect internal party ideologies?

Answer 6

Nationalisation divided left and right factions; Anthony Crosland argued that it didn’t necessarily achieve equality, challenging both left and right doctrines.

Question 7

What was the impact of Gaitskell’s attempt to revise Clause 4?

Answer 7

Gaitskell’s push for Clause 4 revision failed despite his appeal for a rethinking of the Party Constitution regarding nationalization.

Question 8

How did Labour’s image and campaigns fare in the 1955 and 1959 elections?

Answer 8

In 1955, Labour struggled with Attlee’s outdated image. In 1959, despite more unity, Gaitskell’s tax promise and the Conservatives’ clear campaign affected Labour’s appeal.

Question 9

What was Clause 4?

Answer 9

Clause 4 was a rule in the Labour Party’s guidebook that said important businesses and services should be owned by everyone together, not by just one person or company. It aimed for fairer sharing of profits and resources among workers.

In 1995, the rule changed to fit more with modern ideas, moving away from owning everything together and focusing more on fairness in how things are run.