Prime Minister George Lansbury (CHALLENGE)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Lansbury

I have to admit I did not know of this guy, a huge ignorance which Jeremy Paxman has thankfully disabused me of on University Challenge

So, can we make him Prime Minister ?

Do we simply need to do something to Baldwin so that the Conservatives cease to dominate ?

Would Edward VIII coming to the throne a few years earlier make any difference ?

Grey Wolf

BWAHAHAHAHA! Blatant Necromancy!!!!

Well sort of.

I came across the wikipedia article on George Lansbury a couple of days ago while looking for information on British politics in the 30's and have been thinking about a thread since then. When I did a search for his name to see if my questions had already been asked and answered this one came up complete with link.

So what would a Britain with Lansbury in Downing Street during the 30's look like?

I have to say I'm far from impressed by what I've read about him. IMO this quote is at best foolish and at worst unspeakable arrogant:

I would close every recruiting station, disband the Army and disarm the Air Force. I would abolish the whole dreadful equipment of war and say to the world "do your worst".

Click to expand...

It shows a man who places his own beliefs before the lives of the citizens of his country.

Also I fail to see his logic in opposing sanctions on Italy over the invasion of Ethiopia. He seems to be saying gas as many people as you like, we won't do anything.

While I know he'd never get in as PM and wouldn't be able to get a single vote past Parliament if he did I'm still perversly fascinated by the idea of him facing off against Hitler. So how would George Lansbury run the UK if he was Prime Minister during the 1930's?

Any interest in this at all?

So what did he want to do with the navy? I would doubt that he could actually disband the army but I suppose he could cut their funding enough to render them pretty insignifigant.

jamhaw said:

So what did he want to do with the navy? I would doubt that he could actually disband the army but I suppose he could cut their funding enough to render them pretty insignifigant.

Click to expand...

The more I read about him the less likely this idea becomes. He just comes across as a befuddled old man totally out of touch with the world.

Landshark said:

Any interest in this at all?

Click to expand...

It will probably butterfly away "Bagpuss", but it's not all bad news! It will probably also butterfly away "Murder She Wrote".

Both are poducts of his grandchildren, Oliver Postgate, and of course, Angela.

Will Ritson said:

It will probably butterfly away "Bagpuss", but it's not all bad news! It will probably also butterfly away "Murder She Wrote".

Both are poducts of his grandchildren, Oliver Postgate, and of course, Angela.

Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that the loss of Bagpuss is evened out by the loss of Murder She Wrote?

Murder She Wrote equal to Bagpuss!?!

Are you mad or insane!?!

According to the wikipedia article Lansbury was "an unusually popular politician."

Here is one scenario to get him Prime Minister: Austen Chamberlain becomes leader of the Conservative party and Prime Minister instead of Baldwin when Bonar Law resigns in May 1923. Unlike Baldwin in OTL he does not call a general election in December 1923. At the next general election in 1927 the Conservatives are returned with an overall majority because of economic prosperity. The Great Depression happens as in OTL, and in the general election of 1931 or 1932 Labour are elected with an overall majority. Arthur Henderson, who is now the leader of the Labour party instead of Ramsay MacDonald, becomes Prime Minister. He appoints Lansbury to a senior post in his cabinet, such as Foreign Secretary. Following Henderson's death on 20 October 1935, Labour MPs elect Lansbury as their leader and he becomes Prime Minister.

Lansbury only became leader because after the debacle of '31, there was effectively no-one else left, and Labour disposed of him after other candidates became viable. If Labour are in government, then by definition the possiblity of him becoming PM becomes effectively non-existant. Same applies if Labour are in 'normal' circumstances in opposition.

I can only really see Lansbury as PM as a caretaker/compromise (let's say Labour are in government, a vacancy arises, the Parliament has only six months left, Labour are clearly heading for defeat, and the leadership fight is deadlocked) or if he's PM but the ministry is controlled by someone else, like MacDonald vis-a-vis Baldwin.

I doubt we would be having this conversation if he had have been unless his policies were immediately so disastrous that he lost power pretty quickly. Hitler would have won and we would be part of the Third Reich. Lansbury had good intentions and did a good job at Poplar but would have been a bigger disaster than Michael Foot as Prime Minister but also as unelectable