4 May 1979
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 19, 2024, 12:40:06 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  International Elections (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  4 May 1979
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: 4 May 1979  (Read 1139 times)
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,515


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: June 04, 2007, 04:25:14 PM »

A date that is sure to make Al and a few others cringe...

Anyways, I've been re-reading Arthur Marwick's History of the British Isles and I figure I'd toss out a few questions and get some thoughts.

Was a "sea change" inevitable? Or was 4 May really an anti-labour vote rather than a mandate for Thatcher?

One might argue that the Labour Government deserved credit for coming through some serious challenges, circa 1976, but did it throw its chance to govern away (ala the early 1950s?)?

And to what extent did Irish/Scottish/Welsh nationalism bring about the "sea change"?

Thanks for the enlightenment.
Logged
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,515


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: June 04, 2007, 04:28:20 PM »

(yes yes, I realize it should be, "chance to continue governing"...carry on)
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,590
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: June 04, 2007, 06:15:28 PM »
« Edited: June 04, 2007, 06:18:22 PM by Llafur »

A date that is sure to make Al and a few others cringe...

Cringe is the wrong word... but do note that anything that I say about this period might be a little biased. Just a warning.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Depends what you mean by a "sea change" doesn't it? Personally I'm not a believer in the existence of a genuine Post-War consensus so...

But the rise of a harder Right (if that's the best way to put it) within the Tory party was, or so thinketh I, inevitable due to demographic changes (related to Post-War affluence), while there was certainly a sea change within economic policy in the late '70's, but o/c that had happend under Labour.

So yes and no Smiley

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

It wasn't really either; it was mainly a backlash against the public sector unions. It certainly wasn't a mandate for the economic policies of the early '80's (which were responsible for a sudden collapse in manufacturing employment) that's for sure. O/c Thatcherism as we know it (or not) today wasn't really born until well into the early '80's.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't think so. But then I wouldn't, would I? Wink

But Labour in 1979 was a different thing to Labour in 1980...

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

The narrow "defeat" of the second and the rout of the third are one reason for the election being held so soon after the Winter of Discontent.
Logged
afleitch
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,821


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: June 04, 2007, 06:25:34 PM »

But the rise of a harder Right (if that's the best way to put it) within the Tory party was, or so thinketh I, inevitable due to demographic changes (related to Post-War affluence)

The right of the 'harder right' wasn't immediate if you look closely and scrutinse the policy and policy makers of the '79 - '83 administration (which I hold in general good regard) even if all that is remembered of it is 'right to buy' and a tax raising budget. Mrs Thatcher was still at this time reminiscent of her old timid self of the late 60's and early 70's (where by party standards, on education, abortion and homosexuality she was actually quite liberal) and her first government reflected what she had inherited from Heath.

It was the Falklands and the landslide in 1983 that cemented the hard rights rise within Thatcher's inner circle and amongst some of the cabinet. Had that not happened as it did (and had Labour not been so inept) what we now refer to as Thatcherism would have been stillborn.

Logged
Harry Hayfield
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,975
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: 0.35

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: June 04, 2007, 06:29:49 PM »

If you will give me a little time (just finished tallying 1951 by constituency), I'll be able to give you a more detailed explaination. From what I can remember from the 1979 replay I got the impression this was happening:

Scotland: SNP collapse (following the failed referendum) splitting 75 - 25 to Lab / Con (thus allowing Labour to gain Cathcart)
Wales: Plaid collapse (well, collapse as you can in those days) with all parties seeming to benefit
England: Definite Lab to Con swing, Liberals falling as well.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,590
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: June 07, 2007, 04:20:25 PM »

The right of the 'harder right' wasn't immediate if you look closely and scrutinse the policy and policy makers of the '79 - '83 administration (which I hold in general good regard) even if all that is remembered of it is 'right to buy' and a tax raising budget. Mrs Thatcher was still at this time reminiscent of her old timid self of the late 60's and early 70's (where by party standards, on education, abortion and homosexuality she was actually quite liberal) and her first government reflected what she had inherited from Heath.

Fair point, fair point, though I was thinking more of the growth of that group within the party rather than them taking it over (much as the rise of the hard Left within Labour was inevitable for different, though related, social changes. Btw, if the moderates had stayed in charge, who would the Tory version of John Golding have been? More as a curiosity than anything else).
Logged
Peter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,030


Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -7.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: June 07, 2007, 04:44:39 PM »

Sir Ian Gilmour pretty much hated the right of the party. He'd be as good a candidate as any.
Logged
afleitch
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,821


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: June 07, 2007, 04:49:27 PM »

Sir Ian Gilmour pretty much hated the right of the party. He'd be as good a candidate as any.

If he didn't have the stomach for the, other contenders would probably be Jim Prior and later Peter Walker
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.212 seconds with 14 queries.