Just Finished Reading: The Men of 1924 – Britain's First Labour Government by Peter Clark (FP: 2023) [238pp] 

It was a risk but, they thought, worth it. The recent election had not provided any part with a clear majority but there was enough Liberal support to allow the brand-new Labour Party to form a government – the first in British history. Views across the country varied with political affiliation. Socialists, of which there were a growing number, saw it as an opportunity to gain for the working man and push back against the Capitalists. The trade unions saw it as an opportunity to bring in new laws and strike down old ones to protect jobs and improve the often-harsh working conditions in factories and mines. The working-class voters wanted to see what they could do, to give them a chance. 

The elected Labour politicians had hopes too, but they also were more than aware of the pitfalls and problems ahead of them. The first and foremost was the simple calculation of the number of Labour MPs – not enough. Certainly not enough to do anything ‘radical’ (as some members and some supporters certainly wanted them to do), not that the Labour leadership wanted any truck with that. Feared as either communists in sheep's clothing or some other form or revolutionary (as some of them were!) the leadership wanted to prove to the electorate – including Conservative and Liberal voters – that the country was in ‘safe hands’ despite everything they had heard or read in the papers. So, it was part ‘business as usual’ and part dressing appropriately to meet the King. 

A problem the whole Labour government was more than aware of – for obvious reasons – was their sheer lack of experience. Although many of the new members had been – and indeed many still were – leaders of various trade unions – few had been council leaders or in any other kind of administrative positions and fewer yet had knowledge or experience of foreign affairs. Picking cabinet posts was going to be difficult and challenging. Choosing members of the House of Lords to aid in any legislation was going to be even more of a challenge.  

Unfortunately, the opportunities to gain experience, pass meaningful legislation and prove to the electorate that they had nothing to fear from a Labour administration ended abruptly after only 10 months in office with the withdrawal of Liberal support and the loss of a confidence vote. Although they increased the number of MPs in the subsequent election, the Conservatives with Stanly Baldwin at the lead were back in power – and with a majority. The Labour experiment was over – for now. 

This was a surprisingly interesting – indeed often fascinating – look at the 20th century seismic political shift in British politics. For generations previously there had been two political parties – Conservative and Liberal. The growing Working class tended to vote Liberal but for a number of reasons that allegiance was falling away. Slowly (indeed very slowly) the number of Labour MPs increased and were increasingly voted into parliament. But it was only in 1924 that enough had done so to form a government – minority or not. Split into 3 parts – the political shift and the growth of Socialism, the government itself and mini-biographies of the men involved (the leader, Ramsey MacDonald, getting a whole chapter to himself) - this was chocked full of information and I honestly learnt a LOT.  

I do actually have quite the fascination for the ‘Between the Wars’ period as the world recovered from one global conflict and then prepared for another and this fills in a gap in my knowledge very nicely indeed. I have another book about this presently sitting on my Wish List so I’ll be deepening my knowledge of this event soon(ish). I’ll also see about adding a few more Prime Ministers from this period to my ‘list’. Definitely recommended for anyone interested in the emergence of British socialism and the Labour movement.

Happy Birthday: Paul Thomas Mann (6 June 1875 – 12 August 1955) was a German novelist, short story writer, social critic, philanthropist, essayist, and the 1929 Nobel Prize in Literature laureate. His highly symbolic and ironic epic novels and novellas are noted for their insight into the psychology of the artist and the intellectual. His analysis and critique of the European and German soul used modern versions of German and Biblical stories, as well as the ideas of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Arthur Schopenhauer.

The Mann family was part of the Hanseatic class. He portrayed both his family and the influential class in his first novel, Buddenbrooks (1901). Late major novels include The Magic Mountain (1924), the tetralogy Joseph and His Brothers (1933–1943), and Doctor Faustus (1947). He also wrote short stories and novellas, including Death in Venice (1912).

His older brother was novelist Heinrich Mann. Three of Mann's six children – Erika Mann, Klaus Mann and Golo Mann – also became significant German writers.

When Adolf Hitler came to power in 1933, Mann fled to Switzerland. When World War II broke out in 1939, he moved to the United States, returning to Switzerland after the war in 1952. Mann is one of the best-known exponents of the so-called Exilliteratur, German literature written in exile by those who opposed the Hitler regime.

[I haven't read anything by Mann (yet!), but I do have a copy of Buddenbrooks. I *think* I have a copy of Death in Venice and will probably try that one first as Buddenbrooks is HUGE!] 

Just Finished Reading: Authoritarianism – A Very Short Introduction by James Loxton (FP: 2024) [89pp] 

This certainly seemed to be a timely read – especially with the recent and long hoped for fall of Viktor Orban and the growing threat of authoritarian regimes across the world. Despite its somewhat disappointing length (although to be honest the average VSI book is around 120 pages) this was a very impressive look at the different types of authoritarianism, in the past and today, how they emerge, how they operate once up and running, how they die (and most do die), why some are far more durable than others and what their legacies are once thrown off. It was ALL very interesting especially, as we know, there is a push in some places to transition from more a democratic style to a more authoritarian one.  

Of course, authoritarianism does have its attractions to some – most especially those who struggle with being told NO by people they don’t respect (or indeed anyone). Naturally I suspect that such people have family histories that need looking at. One comment did make me smile/laugh when the author defined democracy – a system where parties loose elections. So, in a country where a party (even if they at least technically have an ‘opposition’) normally wins with 97% of the vote year after year after year, you’re probably NOT looking at a democracy – despite some of the trappings! 

Authoritarians HATE the possibility of legitimate opposition and usually go out of their way to eliminate them – up to and including prison or execution. Of course, pushing any opposition underground – as there’s no other way to oppose the regime and keep your liberty/life - is just sowing the seeds of overthrow or revolution (which all too often brings into existence a different type of authoritarian rule) which is why in some countries their politics cycles through regime after regime with, possible, brief periods of actual democracy. 

Drawing on examples across the world (I’m really looking forward to reading more about Portugal now) and from the last 100 years or so this was a great entry point to an important political philosophy of our time. Definitely recommended reading. 

Do you know the quote... and what movie its from?