Retrato do autor
18+ Works 473 Membros 7 Críticas

About the Author

Martin Pugh is former Professor of British History at Newcastle University, UK.

Inclui os nomes: Pugh Martin, Prof. Martin Pugh

Obras por Martin Pugh

Associated Works

The Life and Times of David Lloyd George (1991) — Contribuidor — 2 exemplares

Etiquetado

Conhecimento Comum

Membros

Críticas

Pretty good book that gives a good summary of the Labour Party's history. It gives a lot of space to the party's early history, which is probably for the best because it's an area that's given very little attention elsewhere. Sometimes, especially earlier on, I'd have appreciated more wider political context to explain things like the working-class appeal of the Conservatives, although I totally understand that there's only limited space and in general I think the author did a good job, although there are still some questions I'm really curious about - why trade union connection to the Liberals lasted so long even after Labour party affiliation and the true extent of working class conservatism. The book emphasises the long running conservative aspect of the Labour party, including the trade unions and much of the ILP - which makes the Bennite/Militant era seem more of a blip, and it's sometimes pro- a more right wing Labour (he tends to speak pretty highly of Kinnock for example). However, it's almost always sympathetic to the left, for example pointing out the threat of "left entryism" was overstated and the "hard left" was a reaction to the PLP being completely out of touch and CLPs being moribund and tiny enough that small groups could easily dominate them. It's also absolutely scathing of New Labour, suggesting that its successes masked a complete hollowing out of the party - pointing to a massive reduction in individual membership, the disaffection of unions, the reliance on a consensus with the Conservatives, the destruction of any distinctive program or intellectual tradition and the reliance on the whims of high finance and media barons. He ends by predicting a long stormy period for Labour comparable to the Edwardian Liberals, which seems pretty accurate in the time since the book was written in 2010. Worth pointing out the coverage of the later era is somewhat rushed compared to the earlier stuff, although IMO it's still covered in enough detail to get a good feel of things - eg 1960-2010 is 100 pages out of a ~400 page book. Overall it's recommended as long as you have at least a bit of political/political history background and can understand the context of the things he mentions but doesn't always explain.

It talks a little about the General Strike and it suggests that it was much less of a failure than generally assumed, at least for the Labour party - the expected large general fall in wages didn't really take place, parts of the strike that extended past the general one (like the miners) were very popular locally and the Conservative crackdown on unions after it moved a lot of previous working class Tories/Liberals over to Labour specifically out of anger at it. Which is an interesting perspective. Although also points out that the union and labour leaders' reluctance to go on strike led to a long build-up allowing the government to build up alternative systems in preparation and made their defeat much more likely when their bluff was called.

one of the things that crops up a bunch is mentions of official Labour party candidates talking about the decline of capitalism and the inevitable rise of socialism but nobody seems to have had any clue how it would take place. even Ramsay McDonald blamed his 1929-1930 failures on capitalism as a whole, yet his policies in power were incredibly moderate and based on very non socialist economics. The other consistent theme is the strong conservatism of most of the top figures in the Labour party, so the two just don't match up at all. it's hard to get a picture of what "socialism" really meant to these people, although there are some examples- maybe their views were just fundamentally incoherent. in general most of the top figures of the first few decades come off badly, Snowden being a rigid, conservative chancellor who fell out with other figures and ultimately condemned them publicly, Ramsey McDonald not willing to take any major actions which could help workers or even the economy in general, most of the early MPs either slotting into the establishment all too neatly or not knowing what to do past speeches. the sexism of the Labour party that meant there were very few women members compared to the conservatives, whose female membership was quite significant and had like 38% of the delegates at their 1931 conference female, is very notable too. also it's interesting how popular Moseley was before he left the Labour party and how he could have conceivably have been in a very powerful position after the expelling of MacDonald (because he was the only minister to put forward an alternative solution to the crisis). his founding his own party and later decline into fascism seems strange from that perspective. also interesting how the liberals were proposing a more radical policy than Labour in 1929. The MacDonald split was totally crippling for a time because he carried a decent chunk of MPs, Philip Snowden who'd been the chancellor left politics totally, and Labour were totally unable to mount a defence of their government's actions (acting very much in continuity with the Conservatives and doing things like means-tested unemployment pay).

Clement Atlee comes off very poorly here (the author clearly prefers Herbert Morrison among the possible leaders). He's presented as totally mediocre and chosen exactly because of that mediocrity and inoffensiveness. He also showed incredible deference to the governmental system and crown and almost boasted of how many public school boys he brought into his ministerial team. His 1945-1950 government success is presented as more that he had a great team and his willingness to let them get on with it worked ok. But he went into the 1945 election thinking he was bound to lose and then at the 1950 and 51 elections thought a thumping majority was certain - calling both the latter elections at poor and unnecessary times, even choosing to call the 1950 one at a time when the party had organised 50th anniversary of the party's founding celebrations. He promoted Gaitskell to chancellor even though he was relatively new and preferencing him over Bevan, who was sidelined even though he had an excellent record and seniority. Gaitskell himself pushed the totally unnecessary health charges almost purely to spite Bevan, causing a split with multiple shadow cabinet resignations. The complete attachment to the US led to massive military budgets. Because nationalisation was on a technocratic basis, with no worker involvement, it had little popularity among the workers, while the lack of any central planning between the various nationalised bodies meant the possible advantages were never realised.
… (mais)
 
Assinalado
tombomp | 1 outra crítica | Oct 31, 2023 |
David Lloyd George has never wanted for biographers, yet there is a surprising dearth of first-rate works about him. Two historians, John Grigg and Bentley Brinkerhoff Gilbert, attempted multi-volume studies of his life and career, yet both died before they could complete their labors. There are comprehensive single-volume accounts, most notably Peter Rowland's David Lloyd George: A Biography, but Rowland's book suffers from a lack of analysis that would make sense of the details he provides.

Perhaps the greatest challenge that authors who attempt such an effort face is coming to terms with such a long and complicated life. Lloyd George's career can seem to be a mass of contradictions: the pro-Boer who supported Britain's entry into the First World War and who subsequently led the nation to victory, the radical who was prime minister of a Conservative-dominated government, the dynamic Liberal whose tenure as his party's leader saw its decline into political irrelevance. This is the great merit of Martin Pugh's short biography of Lloyd George. In less than 200 pages, he offers an analysis of his subject that reconciles these contradictions into a coherent political career. Pugh's Lloyd George is not so much contradictory as he is complex, with a political philosophy of "radical centrism" that was not at home in either party. Patriotic and reformist, his beliefs were reflected in policies as diverse as his advocacy of old age pensions and his support for imperial expansion, all of which combine to make his legacy a rich one that defined the country more profoundly than most other prime ministers.

Pugh advances his interpretation in clear and forceful prose. Though he confines his citations to published primary sources, it is a book that reflects both his prior archival research and his mastery of the considerable secondary source literature on his subject. Much has been added to this corpus since Pugh's book was first published, yet while it may no longer be up-to-date his analysis has weathered the years well. For anyone seeking to understand this complex and important figure, Pugh's biography is a worthy addition to their reading list.
… (mais)
 
Assinalado
MacDad | Mar 27, 2020 |
Martin Pugh makes the case that the 1950s and 1960s were shaped by changes in social attitudes that started to form in the 1920s and 1930s. These weren't the years of hunger and depravation - for most - that are sometimes imagined. For many people, they were a time of slight emancipation; for the first time, an increasing number of people outside of the privileged classes had some disposable income and were able to enjoy consumer goods, leisure time and even small luxuries. Pugh is very good on the rise of mass entertainment (especially radio and cinema) and particularly good on the changing role of women. Invited out of the home and into the workforce during the First World War many were very reluctant to be shuffled back into homemaker roles to accommodate men returning from the war. They were especially reluctant to take on domestic service, and Pugh has an excellent chapter on "the servant problem".

A very interesting social history of a rarely discussed period. Minus half a star for occasional repetition
… (mais)
½
 
Assinalado
Opinionated | 2 outras críticas | Oct 29, 2016 |
Really enjoyed Martin Pugh’s social history of Britain between the wars; it covers so much ground, but never in a dull or boring way. This book is totally engaging, with discussions on subjects as diverse as women’s suffrage, mass entertainment, motor transport, monarchy, and immigration, and all of them framed within a political context. It’s a long book – 500 pages – but I can honestly say it doesn’t feel like that, and it never drags. Pugh is a very readable historian, his work here being completely accessible to the general reader, but you never get the feeling that you’ve been short-changed or that he’s ‘dumbed-down’ the academic credibility of the work. My only real criticism is that it felt as though there was slightly more attention paid to the 1930s, as opposed to the 20s, and at times I felt I would have liked more detail on the earlier decade. An excellent read and highly recommended.
© Koplowitz 2012
… (mais)
 
Assinalado
Ant.Harrison | 2 outras críticas | Apr 29, 2013 |

You May Also Like

Associated Authors

Estatísticas

Obras
18
Also by
1
Membros
473
Popularidade
#52,094
Avaliação
½ 3.5
Críticas
7
ISBN
65

Tabelas & Gráficos