17,394
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 33:
Line 33: − + − + + + + + + + − + + + + Line 47:
Line 56: + + + + + + +
add
In 1965, Johnson proposed that the United States prop up Britain's pound sterling. In return he sought from Wilson's government such measures as support of deflationary policies and of American policies in the Vietnam War (he did not seek soldiers from britain). The initiative failed to materialize. Wilson defenders say the United States reneged after Wilson fended off American efforts to compromise Britain's sovereignty. Americans believe the change in US policy stemmed from new perceptions in the Johnson administration on Labour Party misrule in Britain. Americans concluded it was a mistake to indulge Britain in light of the Wilson government's unsatisfactory positions on Vietnam, its smaller contributions to European defense, its international monetary ideas, and its Middle Eastern policies.<ref> John Dumbrell, "The Johnson Administration and the British Labour Government: Vietnam, the Pound and East of Suez" ''Journal of American Studies'' 1996 30(2): 211-231. </ref>
In 1965, Johnson proposed that the United States prop up Britain's pound sterling. In return he sought from Wilson's government such measures as support of deflationary policies and of American policies in the Vietnam War (he did not seek soldiers from britain). The initiative failed to materialize. Wilson defenders say the United States reneged after Wilson fended off American efforts to compromise Britain's sovereignty. Americans believe the change in US policy stemmed from new perceptions in the Johnson administration on Labour Party misrule in Britain. Americans concluded it was a mistake to indulge Britain in light of the Wilson government's unsatisfactory positions on Vietnam, its smaller contributions to European defense, its international monetary ideas, and its Middle Eastern policies.<ref> John Dumbrell, "The Johnson Administration and the British Labour Government: Vietnam, the Pound and East of Suez" ''Journal of American Studies'' 1996 30(2): 211-231. </ref>
===High Tech===
===Economy===
The Labour Party, out of power in the early 1960s, argued that Britain was lagging behind in science and technology. In 1963 Wilson, as party leader, pledged that a Labour government would lead the country through the "white heat" of a technological revolution. In fact, Britain in the 1960s spent more on research and development (R&D), both industrially and governmentally funded, than any other capitalist country besides the United States. The Labour government coming to power in 1964 found that Britain lacked not technology but strong industrial organization and management. Under [[Anthony Wedgwood Benn]], 1966-70, the Ministry of Technology attempted to rectify these deficiencies in high technology industries. This effort, only marginally successful, confirmed the lack of positive correlation between R&D and overall economic growth. Indeed, overexpenditure on "high tech" R&D could even be detrimental to such growth.<ref> David Edgerton, "The 'White Heat' Revisited: The British Government and Technology in the 1960s." ''Twentieth Century British History'' 1996 7(1): 53-82. </ref>
Much of the disillusionment with Wilson was due to his perceived failure on the economic front. He pledged not to devalue sterling, but did exactly that in 1967. He also promised to keep unemployment low, but by 1970 had accepted a higher rate of joblessness than the Conservatives had endorsed. Wilson failed to implement two radical election pledges: to produce a comprehensive state earnings-related pension scheme and to introduce the 'income guarantee' - a minimum benefit to be paid without recourse to the traditional means test.
Wilson's problems and defeats have obscured some of the modest achievements of the period. Science and education spending grew very quickly, industrial investment rose, and government was increasingly well-informed and better advised about the performance of the economy. In an increasingly unstable and rapidly changing economic environment, this government's economic record was one of muddling through, with little long-term vision.<ref> O'Hara (2006)</ref>
The Labour Party when it was out of power in the early 1960s argued that Britain was lagging behind in science and technology. In 1963 Wilson, as party leader, pledged that a Labour government would lead the country through the "white heat" of a technological revolution. In fact, Britain in the 1960s spent more on research and development (R&D), both industrially and governmentally funded, than any other capitalist country besides the United States. The Labour government coming to power in 1964 found that Britain lacked not technology but strong industrial organization and management. Under [[Anthony Wedgwood Benn]], 1966-70, the Ministry of Technology attempted to rectify these deficiencies in high technology industries. This effort, only marginally successful, confirmed the lack of positive correlation between R&D and overall economic growth. Indeed, overexpenditure on "high tech" R&D could even be detrimental to such growth.<ref> David Edgerton, "The 'White Heat' Revisited: The British Government and Technology in the 1960s." ''Twentieth Century British History'' 1996 7(1): 53-82. </ref>
Wilson realized he had to fight the 1966 strike by the National Union of Seamen. Determined to save his government's income policy and bolster the British pound, Wilson declared a state of emergency. When that proved ineffective, he turned to claiming that the union was being influenced by Communists. The 47-day strike ended when the shipowners presented an acceptable offer. While Wilson appeared to be the winner, his tactics antagonized many Labour Party supporters.<ref> Keir Thorpe, "The 'Juggernaut Method': The 1966 State of Emergency and the Wilson Government's Response to the Seamen's Strike". ''Twentieth Century British History'' 2001 12(4): 461-485 in [[EBSCO]].</ref>
===Socialism===
===Socialism===
Despite its alleged commitment to socialism, the British Labour Party has been flexible and reformist in its doctrine ever since it was founded in 1900. After the crisis of 1931, the party adopted a broadly social democratic program in which socialism was linked with the idea of economic planning and social welfare. The Attlee government of 1945-51 was very moderate in its commitment to socialism. The years of opposition saw violent arguments in the party between left-wing Bevanites and the center-right supporters of Hugh Gaitskell. But the main differences concerned foreign and defense policy. On domestic issues, the party was now broadly revisionist, committed to the mixed economy and social equality.
Despite its alleged commitment to socialism, the British Labour Party has been flexible and reformist in its doctrine ever since it was founded in 1900. After the crisis of 1931, the party adopted a broadly social democratic program in which socialism was linked with the idea of economic planning and social welfare. The Attlee government of 1945-51 was very moderate in its commitment to socialism. The years of opposition saw violent arguments in the party between left-wing Bevanites and the center-right supporters of Hugh Gaitskell. But the main differences concerned foreign and defense policy. On domestic issues, the party was now broadly revisionist, committed to the mixed economy and social equality.
===New Left===
===New Left===
Wilson, on becoming prime minister in 1964, tried to bypass old doctrinal arguments by harnessing socialism to ideas of scientific modernization. But his government was a great failure, not least in its relations with the trade unions, the linchpin of the party since its founding. This bred much disillusionment and launched a new left-wing socialism in the 1970s. Wilson represented the older traditions of the Party and never understood the emerging "New Left" with new social roots, radical new ideas and new styles of political behaviour in the late 1970s. Following the disillusion and demoralization of traditional Labour Party activists with Wilson's government, a more radical and well-educated local Labour leadership appeared at the local level. The Labour government of 1974-79 added to this division. The left-wing pressure reached its climax in the early 1980s when Thatcher was in power, but resulted only in heavy defeats for Labour in 1983 and 1987. The general impression in 1989 is of a loss of political and intellectual confidence, with British socialism trapped between a cherished past and an uncertain future.<ref> Kenneth O. Morgan, ''Britain since 1945: The People's Peace'' (2001)</ref>
Wilson, on becoming prime minister in 1964, tried to bypass old doctrinal arguments by harnessing socialism to ideas of scientific modernization. But his government was a great failure, not least in its relations with the trade unions, the linchpin of the party since its founding. This bred much disillusionment and launched a new left-wing socialism in the 1970s. Wilson represented the older traditions of the Party and never understood the emerging "New Left" with new social roots, radical new ideas and new styles of political behaviour in the late 1970s. Following the disillusion and demoralization of traditional Labour Party activists with Wilson's government, a more radical and well-educated local Labour leadership appeared at the local level. The Labour government of 1974-79 added to this division. The left-wing pressure reached its climax in the early 1980s when Thatcher was in power, but resulted only in heavy defeats for Labour in 1983 and 1987. The general impression in 1989 is of a loss of political and intellectual confidence, with British socialism trapped between a cherished past and an uncertain future.<ref> Kenneth O. Morgan, ''Britain since 1945: The People's Peace'' (2001)</ref>
===Europe===
In October 1966 Wilson quietly began an nquiry among European Economic Community (EEC) countries to see if the conditions existed for British membership in the EEC. His move politically rather than economically motivated. Faced with the contraction of Britain's political influence in Europe and in the Atlantic alliance, the erosion of Britain's position in the Commonwealth, and the termination of Britain's defense commitments east of Suez, Wilson had little choice but to turn to the EEC.
===Administration===
Changes to the machinery of government were central to the British Labour Party's policy agenda during 1964-70, key parts of which, particularly the drive for planned economic growth, were not achieved. The ideological basis for the objectives being pursued, such as economic expansion, was never properly explored or developed. However, some of Wilson's innovations, such as the incorporation of more outsiders into Whitehall, the first use of special advisers, and the establishment of the Ministry of Overseas Development and the Welsh Office, were successful.<ref>Andrew Blick, "Harold Wilson, Labour and the Machinery of Government" ''Contemporary British History'' 2006 20(3): 343-362 </ref>
==Image==
==Image==
Wilson acquired a reputation as a somewhat devious, scheming figure. He cultivated a particular image of himself in the media, which included ostentatiously smoking a pipe, though in private he is said to have preferred cigars. He came from a working-class background, and retained a northern English working-class accent throughout his life.
Wilson acquired a reputation as a somewhat devious, scheming figure. He cultivated a particular image of himself in the media, which included ostentatiously smoking a pipe, though in private he is said to have preferred cigars. He came from a working-class background, and retained a northern English working-class accent throughout his life.
He died of colon cancer and Alzheimer's disease in 1995.
He died of colon cancer and Alzheimer's disease in 1995.
==Further reading==
==Further reading==
* Fielding, Steven. "Rethinking Labour's 1964 Campaign". ''Contemporary British History'' 2007 21(3): 309-324
* Fielding, Steven and John W. Young, eds. ''The Wilson Government 1964-70'' (3 vol., 2004), highly detailed, favourable analysis
* Morgan, Austen. ''Harold Wilson'' (1992), 625pp; negative appraisal
* Morgan, Austen. ''Harold Wilson'' (1992), 625pp; negative appraisal
* O'Hara, Glen. "'Dynamic, Exciting, Thrilling Change': The Wilson Government's Economic Policies, 1964-70," ''Contemporary British History'' 2006 20(3): 383-402
* Pimlott, Ben. ''Harold Wilson'' (1992). Pimlott tries to rehabilitate Wilson’s political reputation, revealing that he was the prisoner rather than the master of various domestic and international dilemmas.
* Pimlott, Ben. ''Harold Wilson'' (1992). Pimlott tries to rehabilitate Wilson’s political reputation, revealing that he was the prisoner rather than the master of various domestic and international dilemmas.
* Ponting, Clive. ''Breach of Promise: Labour in Power, 1964-70'' (1989)
* Vickers, Rhiannon. "Harold Wilson, the British Labour Party, and the War in Vietnam". ''Journal of Cold War Studies'' 2008 10(2): 41-70 30p.in [[EBSCO]]
====References====
====References====
<references/>
<references/>