Sorry if I'm intervening in this TL for the first time just to correct your grammar, but I think it should be "Nova Lusitânia".
"Lusitânia" is feminine.
The Popular Will: Reformism, Radicalism, Republicanism & Unionism in Britain 1815-1960
- Thread starter President Conor
- Start date
Sorry if I'm intervening in this TL for the first time just to correct your grammar, but I think it should be "Nova Lusitânia".
"Lusitânia" is feminine.
My apologies! I’ll get this changed, Portuguese isn’t my strong point
Supplemental: Extract from The Development of Christian Democracy in Britain 1891-1979
The Development of Christian Democracy in Britain 1891-1979, Jamie Parker, 2012
"A pivotal moment in the history of Europe occurred in 1878, in the chaos of the Orange insurgency in Britain, the death of Wilhelm I in Germany, and the establishment of the Spanish Civil War, which profoundly affected European politics. The beginning of Pope Leo XIII's papacy marked the end of the long and profoundly conservative turn of the Catholic Church under Pius IX ended, and Pope Leo represented a new turn in the Catholic Church's relationship with the world.
The assembled College of Cardinals had a decision to make: do they stick with the reaction to the modern world practiced by Pius or move to a more liberal-facing position? As with many choices at this time, the cardinals chose liberalism. The crisis facing much of Europe likely played into Leo's hands - the conclave was the least interfered affair in some time, and the Catholic monarchies of Europe had suffered a loss of influence through their instability.
Europe had been convulsing for nearly two decades when Leo became Pope. His experience had been touring small administrations, and he had developed a reputation as an outward-looking leader. The 1878 papal conclave had been a turning point, representing the end of hostilities between the Papacy and the Kingdom of Italy.
His papal name, Leo, was a homage to Leo XII, a peacemaker between the Church and foreign governments. His ascension represented a new era in which Leo integrated new elements, like the Anglo-Catholic Church, and diplomacy would be the order of the day.
Above all, Pope Leo XIII was a theologian and an academic. He looked to encourage understanding between the Catholic Church and the modern world. He was interested in science, technology, and sociology and was determined to prevent himself from being a "Prisoner in the Vatican," as his predecessor became known. Leo embarked on a world tour during the 1880s, visiting France, Argentina, Brazil, Austria, Russia, and Germany. Cardinal Manning attempted to encourage Leo to visit Britain in 1891, but the Papal Administration advised him that such a visit would be risky.
Still, Pope Leo and Prime Minister Chamberlain exchanged letters, ascending to power at similar times. These letters were a matter of strict secrecy until 2010, when they were found in a cupboard in Chamberlain's estate, ironically just as the Pope was planning to visit the Union. The actions would have been supremely controversial if they had been common knowledge then.
Pope Leo XIII
Leo's influence on British politics was mainly exercised through the Anglo-Catholic groups in the North and communities in Scotland and Ireland. He opposed the radical nature of the NDP and heavily supported the General League but supported the taxation of land; when the League was able to secure power, he questioned their ability to compete with the ideology of National Democracy in a letter to Archbishop Thomas Croke.
The failings of Political Catholicism to generate a competing ideology with contemporary political movements concerned Pope Leo, as did the growing dissatisfaction shown by the working class, leading to the anticlerical revolutions in Iberia. Leo believed that the Papacy had become isolated from both the concerns of the workers and non-Catholics. He thought a broader Christian movement involving Anglicans in Britain, the Eastern Churches, and Catholics would benefit the papacy and the world and create an advocacy bloc for workers to compete with the anticlerical socialist movement.
In this vein, Pope Leo wrote an encyclical, Rerum Novarum (“Of New Things”), in 1891. He was greatly influenced by Wilhelm Emmanual von Ketteler, a bishop who had sided with the working classes in his book Die Arbeiterfrage und das Christentum. The Rerum Novarum addressed social inequality and social justice for the first time and focused on the rights and duties of both sides of the labour market. Leo argued that capitalism and communism were flawed and introduced the idea of subsidiarity, a principle heavily featured in the Universal of the FDE, as a common good. He also advocated for the dignity of the poor, and believed that the poor should be supported by the community. It introduced the notion of Catholic social teaching, which would eventually become part of the broader political ideology of Christian Democracy.
Essentially, Leo XIII attempted to create a third way between the theories of Socialism and Capitalism. It asserted workers' rights but opposed the idea that a class struggle was necessary for progress. Rerum Novarum established the economic principle of Christianity, property ownership, but placed duties on the privilege.
Property owners had a Christian duty to provide for the common good and create a world for the benefit of others. Fair wages, charity, and, most importantly, freedom of association for workers must be established. Workers must achieve representation. The principle of subsidiarity meant that competent authorities (family, unions, local government, trade confederations) would allow intervention but at the immediate level rather than by oppressive state structures.
The Rerum Novarum is as revolutionary a document as any in history. It allowed the Catholic Church to change gradually from a Conservative to a Progressive force in European politics. Pope Leo XIII recognised that changes were ongoing in the world. Since the Industrial Revolution, the condition of the poor had become a significant element in international political discourse. Rerum Novarum attempted to provide a Catholic answer to the social question that could be agreed upon by Catholics and non-Catholics, respectively. It would have a few significant consequences for the Union of Britain. Some would be immediate; some would be more gradual.
Unsurprisingly, the document created quite a stir in Ireland. Rerum Novarum bridged the ideological gap between National Democracy and the General League, which had little uniting ideology behind the organisation. Catholic social doctrine dominated its party Congress in 1891, and some progressive social schemes, a Christian Trade Organisation, and expansion of the First Programme's welfare reforms in Ireland were proposed. This ideological drift also ended the land-value tax debate in Ireland, as absentee landlordism was seen as a dereliction of duty by landlords and, therefore, not in the common good. The effect of this, however, was that Rerum Novarum seemed to many in Ireland to be an endorsement of National Democracy as a creed, which saw anticlericalism within the Party fade.
The doctrine conversely brought the General League closer to the ideology of the Unionists. Progressive Unionists, in particular, were beginning to drift towards more significant intervention and sympathy towards workers to stave off socialism. In the British context, the attempt by Leo XIII to unite Catholics and non-Catholics was effective. The split between the Conservative Unionists, who were primarily a reactionary force, and Progressive Unionists, who were a reformist force, deepened. For now, Conservatives controlled the foreign policy impedes, while Progressives controlled domestic policy within the party. This would show itself in the upcoming Second Programme, to be unveiled at the Second Party Congress in November 1891."
"A pivotal moment in the history of Europe occurred in 1878, in the chaos of the Orange insurgency in Britain, the death of Wilhelm I in Germany, and the establishment of the Spanish Civil War, which profoundly affected European politics. The beginning of Pope Leo XIII's papacy marked the end of the long and profoundly conservative turn of the Catholic Church under Pius IX ended, and Pope Leo represented a new turn in the Catholic Church's relationship with the world.
The assembled College of Cardinals had a decision to make: do they stick with the reaction to the modern world practiced by Pius or move to a more liberal-facing position? As with many choices at this time, the cardinals chose liberalism. The crisis facing much of Europe likely played into Leo's hands - the conclave was the least interfered affair in some time, and the Catholic monarchies of Europe had suffered a loss of influence through their instability.
Europe had been convulsing for nearly two decades when Leo became Pope. His experience had been touring small administrations, and he had developed a reputation as an outward-looking leader. The 1878 papal conclave had been a turning point, representing the end of hostilities between the Papacy and the Kingdom of Italy.
His papal name, Leo, was a homage to Leo XII, a peacemaker between the Church and foreign governments. His ascension represented a new era in which Leo integrated new elements, like the Anglo-Catholic Church, and diplomacy would be the order of the day.
Above all, Pope Leo XIII was a theologian and an academic. He looked to encourage understanding between the Catholic Church and the modern world. He was interested in science, technology, and sociology and was determined to prevent himself from being a "Prisoner in the Vatican," as his predecessor became known. Leo embarked on a world tour during the 1880s, visiting France, Argentina, Brazil, Austria, Russia, and Germany. Cardinal Manning attempted to encourage Leo to visit Britain in 1891, but the Papal Administration advised him that such a visit would be risky.
Still, Pope Leo and Prime Minister Chamberlain exchanged letters, ascending to power at similar times. These letters were a matter of strict secrecy until 2010, when they were found in a cupboard in Chamberlain's estate, ironically just as the Pope was planning to visit the Union. The actions would have been supremely controversial if they had been common knowledge then.
Pope Leo XIII
Leo's influence on British politics was mainly exercised through the Anglo-Catholic groups in the North and communities in Scotland and Ireland. He opposed the radical nature of the NDP and heavily supported the General League but supported the taxation of land; when the League was able to secure power, he questioned their ability to compete with the ideology of National Democracy in a letter to Archbishop Thomas Croke.
The failings of Political Catholicism to generate a competing ideology with contemporary political movements concerned Pope Leo, as did the growing dissatisfaction shown by the working class, leading to the anticlerical revolutions in Iberia. Leo believed that the Papacy had become isolated from both the concerns of the workers and non-Catholics. He thought a broader Christian movement involving Anglicans in Britain, the Eastern Churches, and Catholics would benefit the papacy and the world and create an advocacy bloc for workers to compete with the anticlerical socialist movement.
In this vein, Pope Leo wrote an encyclical, Rerum Novarum (“Of New Things”), in 1891. He was greatly influenced by Wilhelm Emmanual von Ketteler, a bishop who had sided with the working classes in his book Die Arbeiterfrage und das Christentum. The Rerum Novarum addressed social inequality and social justice for the first time and focused on the rights and duties of both sides of the labour market. Leo argued that capitalism and communism were flawed and introduced the idea of subsidiarity, a principle heavily featured in the Universal of the FDE, as a common good. He also advocated for the dignity of the poor, and believed that the poor should be supported by the community. It introduced the notion of Catholic social teaching, which would eventually become part of the broader political ideology of Christian Democracy.
Essentially, Leo XIII attempted to create a third way between the theories of Socialism and Capitalism. It asserted workers' rights but opposed the idea that a class struggle was necessary for progress. Rerum Novarum established the economic principle of Christianity, property ownership, but placed duties on the privilege.
Property owners had a Christian duty to provide for the common good and create a world for the benefit of others. Fair wages, charity, and, most importantly, freedom of association for workers must be established. Workers must achieve representation. The principle of subsidiarity meant that competent authorities (family, unions, local government, trade confederations) would allow intervention but at the immediate level rather than by oppressive state structures.
The Rerum Novarum is as revolutionary a document as any in history. It allowed the Catholic Church to change gradually from a Conservative to a Progressive force in European politics. Pope Leo XIII recognised that changes were ongoing in the world. Since the Industrial Revolution, the condition of the poor had become a significant element in international political discourse. Rerum Novarum attempted to provide a Catholic answer to the social question that could be agreed upon by Catholics and non-Catholics, respectively. It would have a few significant consequences for the Union of Britain. Some would be immediate; some would be more gradual.
Unsurprisingly, the document created quite a stir in Ireland. Rerum Novarum bridged the ideological gap between National Democracy and the General League, which had little uniting ideology behind the organisation. Catholic social doctrine dominated its party Congress in 1891, and some progressive social schemes, a Christian Trade Organisation, and expansion of the First Programme's welfare reforms in Ireland were proposed. This ideological drift also ended the land-value tax debate in Ireland, as absentee landlordism was seen as a dereliction of duty by landlords and, therefore, not in the common good. The effect of this, however, was that Rerum Novarum seemed to many in Ireland to be an endorsement of National Democracy as a creed, which saw anticlericalism within the Party fade.
The doctrine conversely brought the General League closer to the ideology of the Unionists. Progressive Unionists, in particular, were beginning to drift towards more significant intervention and sympathy towards workers to stave off socialism. In the British context, the attempt by Leo XIII to unite Catholics and non-Catholics was effective. The split between the Conservative Unionists, who were primarily a reactionary force, and Progressive Unionists, who were a reformist force, deepened. For now, Conservatives controlled the foreign policy impedes, while Progressives controlled domestic policy within the party. This would show itself in the upcoming Second Programme, to be unveiled at the Second Party Congress in November 1891."
Part 5, Chapter XXI
V, XXI: The End of the First Emergency
The Emergency ended with a whimper, not a bang. Despite the international uncertainty, Britain was in a significantly more stable place domestically by 1891. Agitation from the workers had subsided, arrests had declined, and it seemed like normality was once again breaking out. Widespread discontent with wages following the Panic of 1890 had been solved through the efforts of the GFTU and representatives for Independent Trade Unions working together, thanks to the work of Senator Ruskin, among others. This intervention prevented a further strike wave in the winter of 1890 that could have severely disrupted order in the Union. Britain seemed to be over the worst of the crisis.
Therefore, the April 1891 statement from the Home Secretary, Henry Drummond-Wolff MP, caused surprise and consternation among assembled chamber.
"It is the opinion of His Excellency the Regent's Government that the State of Emergency should be extended until the end of the Parliamentary term in a year. Furthermore, the re-establishment of elected State Governments in 1892, in accordance with the State Act, should be suspended, and the scheduled elections should be cancelled. This ensures complete stability is returned to the Union through strong leadership and coordination before State Governments can be re-established outside the currently operating administrations. We shall, therefore, recommend to His Excellency, the Regent, that a renewed Order-in-Council be issued to continue the State of Emergency."
The statement was unexpected, and several MPs and Senators questioned the Government's assessment of the situation when a debate was brought forward. Chamberlain, Drummond-Wolff, and Senator Cecil had decided that the international situation rendered the resumption of politics-as-usual a complete fantasy.
Drummond-Wolff, as depicted by Spy
They decided to extend the extraordinary measures to ensure that no interference from the French could be achieved domestically. The extension of the State of Emergency had even caught many members of the Unionist Party off guard, especially progressive members like Senator Primrose, who questioned the decision in the Senate the next day to significant embarrassment. Most importantly, it caught the President-Regent unaware. Unionist cabinet member John Morley resigned, defected over the issue, and crossed the floor to join the Liberal Democratic Party.
President-Regent Stanley was beginning to slow by 1891, but he was still livid at his ministers' public interjection without consultation. Moreover, parliamentary convention dictated that the Union Council should also consult the Internal Affairs Committee of the Grand Council before commenting on internal security, as policing (which the State of Emergency directly affected) came under the remit of States. Chamberlain believed that Stanley could be circumvented when making decisions, and power had been vested for the entirety of the Emergency in the Union Council. The President-Regent considered it his constitutional duty to ensure that the Prime Minister was made aware of his mistakes.
Stanley called upon High Chancellor A.V. Dicey to bring together a Judicial Committee report on the actions of the Union Council immediately after the statement had been made, indicating that some form of censure was incoming. He then summoned Chamberlain and Drummond-Wolff to his residence for a dressing down.
High Chancellor, A.V Dicey
His brother, the Governor-General of Canada, revealed later that Stanley would most likely have permitted the extension of the State of Emergency had he been consulted through the proper channels. After the embarrassment of not being consulted, he said "he would have rather handed his regency to Gladstone" than buckle to Chamberlain's pressure. Consequently, the President-Regent indicated that he would use his veto for the first and only time of his regency to block the renewal of the emergency.
The President-Regent chose to call a Grand Committee of Parliament to explain his decision and the repercussions. "I believe that to guarantee the harmony of the Union, we must end the strife and special measures we have lived under since 1889. The emergency has passed, and we must move on. Therefore I have indicated to the Grand Council assembled that writs for elections will be issued for all Legislatures that have been hitherto suspended." Chamberlain looked on with scorn.
There were caveats to the lifting of Emergency measures. The London Trade Council, Social Democratic Federation, and Trade Union Congress remained categorised as illegal operations, but its member could stand in the elections at any level. This meant that, while they could stand, no fundraising could occur, and any candidates would be considered independent and unaffiliated with any party. Many SDF, LTC, and TUC members were released from prison. Irritating the Prime Minister further, the President-Regent pardoned 4,000 imprisoned known Socialists and former Metropolitan Chancellor Thomas Farrer. After the SDF's legal counsels submitted further appeals, 2,000 more interns were eventually freed.
The lifting of the State of Emergency sent Britain into a flurry of political activity as it became inevitable that a full slate of elections would be held in 1892. Over the summer, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and Unionists would hold Party Congresses. Meanwhile, Social Democratic Federation (SDF) members would travel to Madrid, the capital of the Democratic Federation of Spain, for a Congress of the Second International. In the latter half of 1891, all three groups would set their programs for the upcoming vote.
The Emergency ended with a whimper, not a bang. Despite the international uncertainty, Britain was in a significantly more stable place domestically by 1891. Agitation from the workers had subsided, arrests had declined, and it seemed like normality was once again breaking out. Widespread discontent with wages following the Panic of 1890 had been solved through the efforts of the GFTU and representatives for Independent Trade Unions working together, thanks to the work of Senator Ruskin, among others. This intervention prevented a further strike wave in the winter of 1890 that could have severely disrupted order in the Union. Britain seemed to be over the worst of the crisis.
Therefore, the April 1891 statement from the Home Secretary, Henry Drummond-Wolff MP, caused surprise and consternation among assembled chamber.
"It is the opinion of His Excellency the Regent's Government that the State of Emergency should be extended until the end of the Parliamentary term in a year. Furthermore, the re-establishment of elected State Governments in 1892, in accordance with the State Act, should be suspended, and the scheduled elections should be cancelled. This ensures complete stability is returned to the Union through strong leadership and coordination before State Governments can be re-established outside the currently operating administrations. We shall, therefore, recommend to His Excellency, the Regent, that a renewed Order-in-Council be issued to continue the State of Emergency."
The statement was unexpected, and several MPs and Senators questioned the Government's assessment of the situation when a debate was brought forward. Chamberlain, Drummond-Wolff, and Senator Cecil had decided that the international situation rendered the resumption of politics-as-usual a complete fantasy.
Drummond-Wolff, as depicted by Spy
They decided to extend the extraordinary measures to ensure that no interference from the French could be achieved domestically. The extension of the State of Emergency had even caught many members of the Unionist Party off guard, especially progressive members like Senator Primrose, who questioned the decision in the Senate the next day to significant embarrassment. Most importantly, it caught the President-Regent unaware. Unionist cabinet member John Morley resigned, defected over the issue, and crossed the floor to join the Liberal Democratic Party.
President-Regent Stanley was beginning to slow by 1891, but he was still livid at his ministers' public interjection without consultation. Moreover, parliamentary convention dictated that the Union Council should also consult the Internal Affairs Committee of the Grand Council before commenting on internal security, as policing (which the State of Emergency directly affected) came under the remit of States. Chamberlain believed that Stanley could be circumvented when making decisions, and power had been vested for the entirety of the Emergency in the Union Council. The President-Regent considered it his constitutional duty to ensure that the Prime Minister was made aware of his mistakes.
Stanley called upon High Chancellor A.V. Dicey to bring together a Judicial Committee report on the actions of the Union Council immediately after the statement had been made, indicating that some form of censure was incoming. He then summoned Chamberlain and Drummond-Wolff to his residence for a dressing down.
High Chancellor, A.V Dicey
His brother, the Governor-General of Canada, revealed later that Stanley would most likely have permitted the extension of the State of Emergency had he been consulted through the proper channels. After the embarrassment of not being consulted, he said "he would have rather handed his regency to Gladstone" than buckle to Chamberlain's pressure. Consequently, the President-Regent indicated that he would use his veto for the first and only time of his regency to block the renewal of the emergency.
The President-Regent chose to call a Grand Committee of Parliament to explain his decision and the repercussions. "I believe that to guarantee the harmony of the Union, we must end the strife and special measures we have lived under since 1889. The emergency has passed, and we must move on. Therefore I have indicated to the Grand Council assembled that writs for elections will be issued for all Legislatures that have been hitherto suspended." Chamberlain looked on with scorn.
There were caveats to the lifting of Emergency measures. The London Trade Council, Social Democratic Federation, and Trade Union Congress remained categorised as illegal operations, but its member could stand in the elections at any level. This meant that, while they could stand, no fundraising could occur, and any candidates would be considered independent and unaffiliated with any party. Many SDF, LTC, and TUC members were released from prison. Irritating the Prime Minister further, the President-Regent pardoned 4,000 imprisoned known Socialists and former Metropolitan Chancellor Thomas Farrer. After the SDF's legal counsels submitted further appeals, 2,000 more interns were eventually freed.
The lifting of the State of Emergency sent Britain into a flurry of political activity as it became inevitable that a full slate of elections would be held in 1892. Over the summer, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and Unionists would hold Party Congresses. Meanwhile, Social Democratic Federation (SDF) members would travel to Madrid, the capital of the Democratic Federation of Spain, for a Congress of the Second International. In the latter half of 1891, all three groups would set their programs for the upcoming vote.
@President Conor Could I beg a reading list off you, you TLs are inspirational to my own ideas about a Republican Britain, and I want to refine them from the crude outlines I have in my head.
I really love your timeline! I read it over a few days. It's a superb piece of work!
There are lots of resources I’ve used, but I found for the Chamberlain stuff Radical Joe by Dennis Judd has been useful, for Ireland I found the Trinity College lectures on YouTube useful. Elsewhere, the Liberal History site has been useful for pulling the Liberal political position, and Winston Churchill’s biography of his father has been particularly useful for the Unionist position.
Much appreciated! Glad to hear your enjoying it!
I am really waiting for your India update. I love all your updates but I prefer updates regarding Asia.
Might be a little while, as we've got a couple of bits to round off before we get back to Asia. We will get back there though and in-depth.
Part 5, Chapter XXII: The Eight Principles of Liberal Democracy
V, XXII: The Eight Principles of Liberal Democracy
In contrast to the Unionist Party, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) was a federal organization comprising different organizations around the Union. Despite this, its organisation leaned heavily on the experience of mass movements. The experiences of the mass congresses of the Democratic Federation influenced the leaders of the party immensely. To channel this into effective policy-making, the LDP Parliamentary Committee called a congress for October 1891 in Newcastle.
Despite this, the party's parliamentary leader, William Harcourt, came from the Liberal faction and had no time for mass politics. Harcourt stated his intention to miss the congress, an incredibly controversial act. He believed that the parliamentary committee should lead the policy debate and saw no role for members in party decision-making.
William Harcourt, first Leader of the LDP (1889-92)
This clash between the membership and leadership weakened the ability of the LDP to advocate for its beliefs to the wider public. Harcourt did not connect with the public, either. He was considered smart but cold and aloof and didn't have the political presence of Chamberlain, Churchill, or other senior Unionists. The defection of the Unionists from the Democrats had robbed the opposition of all of its most pertinent weapons.
Still, the Parliamentary nous of Harcourt made him a valuable asset, as did his intellectual might. He was a supreme orator and commanded a personal following in the Commons that few could match. Outside of the debating chamber, he was of little use as a leader. Similarly, many of the most prominent Liberal Democratic leaders, like Herbert Gladstone and Davitt, had little experience in Parliament, thanks to their backgrounds in state politics.
Harcourt was the most capable Parliamentarian that the group had in the House of Commons. His support would be crucial to its success. He finally agreed to attend the Congress and preside over its opening session around four weeks before it began. The Second LDP Congress needed to settle three issues. Firstly, it needed to agree on a party structure; secondly, it needed to appoint a leader; third, it needed to adopt a platform to unite the party. The Congress consisted of a delegation from member parties, nominated at individual party congresses in the leadup to the main party congress.
The assembly approved a drafting committee to decide on a party structure, which produced a proposal that the broader Congress accepted. It placed the Congress at the centre of the governing structure, with the right to elect a President, the Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Party. The congress would also elect a 30-man Executive Committee overseeing the party's day-to-day running between congresses.
A motion agreed upon by the congress ensured that the three elements of the party (municipal, state, and Parliamentary) would each have representatives on the Committee, and at least one member would represent each component party. Harcourt was elected President of the LDP at the Congress but was severely restricted by a radical Executive Committee that featured many National Democratic and Fusionist members. Francis Schnadhorst chaired the Executive Committee, a key advocate of the mass movement faction within the party, and its secretary was Henry Campbell-Bannerman, a traditional radical.
Concerning the party platform, the Executive Committee used the Congress to adopt two separate mission statements. One would be a general statement of aims, the other a more concrete policy 'shopping list.'
The general aims would be debated and added to the party constitution at the beginning of the Congress; members would then decide on the shopping list with an omnibus resolution at the end. The Executive Committee members hoped Harcourt would accept the omnibus resolution and make it part of the program. If he were not, the general aims would protect them. The Statement of General Aims is still a part of the LDP Constitution (although its application is iffy at best). The document is known as the "Eight Principles of Liberal Democracy."
The first aim would be the complete separation of church and state, with all subsidies and state control of the Church of England (C), ensuring that all religious groups were equal in the law. The second was Republicanism, and Harcourt delivered a speech at the conference confirming that should the LDP form the next government, it would bring forward legislation to abolish the regency and declare a Republic.
Third was pluralism, where multiple nationalities could co-exist within the Union. The fourth, populism, states people should be the ultimate driver of political action. The fifth principle was reformism, resisting violent revolution and working within the Parliamentary system to achieve their goals. The sixth principle was pacifism and opposition to war. Finally, the old Georgist calls for Free Trade and Free Land were the seventh and eighth principles.
As Executive Committee members were sworn in, Harcourt, as President, asked each to swear loyalty to the constitution and the founding principles of the Liberal Democratic Party. Each of the main factions was represented in its contents and mutually agreed to the remainder of the principles. A ninth principle of Solidarism would be eventually added in 1896, but we’ll get to that. One of the Executive Committee members, Henry Campbell-Bannerman, summed up the party's principles in a simple phrase; 'freedom of trade, freedom of land, and freedom of life.'
Secondly, the Congress drafted an omnibus motion to show support for various motions that formed what would be known as the 1892 Newcastle Programme, one of the first 'manifestos' of sorts in the Union.
The headline proposal was the commitment to abolishing the regency, its lands, and property, and declaring a republic with a President elected by the Grand Committee. Campbell-Bannerman called the Regency "a model of outdated nostalgia for a life not lived in reality." Republicanism united the whole party, even those who had traditionally been part of the Monarchist Liberal party.
On agricultural affairs, the LDP sought compulsory powers for States to acquire lands for small holdings, village halls, and labourers dwellings, a policy to turn rural workers into small-scale co-operative tenants. But the Party also sought a comprehensive national land value tax, freedom for tenants to sell holdings, and compensation for disturbance and improvement. These proposals attracted considerable opposition from aristocratic landlords, who began to fund the Unionist Party.
The party proposed disestablishing the Anglican Church in line with its secularist principle, removing their legal privileges and putting them on the same footing as other protestant sects while removing their influence from education. In addition, there would be a state commitment to a direct popular veto on the liquor trade and localised prohibition of alcohol to stem what the temperance movement condemned as a cause of poverty. Members also passed motions protecting the States' rights from central government, like allocating national matters such as calling an emergency subject to Grand Committee approval.
Electoral reforms were among the most developed of the Newcastle policies. Nationally, reform would secure faster registration of those who moved home and abolish plural voting. These proposals would diminish the power of larger property owners. The state would also pay MPs to encourage more working-class candidates, and the State would transfer the cost of polling from the candidates to the consolidated state funds.
The Congress also debated the direct election of the Senate and Lord Lieutenants, but a slim majority of members defeated this measure. The party also declared its support for a meritocratic society, and wanted to double down the pursuit of sinecure positions from across the civil service, something only halfheartedly engaged with by the Unionists.
From a forward-thinking policy standpoint, the LDP also supported linguistic reform to allow for national languages to be taught in schools. Pluralism was critical to the party's appeal in the Celtic nations. Michael Davitt announced his return to front-line politics with a landmark speech on the linguistic politics that would eventually form the basis of the foundation of the Gaelic League in 1893. Another essential policy emphasized judicial reform, proposing to simplify the Union courts and create an Independent Supreme Court nominated by the President-Regent and approved by a sitting of the Grand Committee.
Chamberlain painted the LDP as a rehashing of Gladstonian Liberalism, the party controlled by the old Liberal elite, and said the programme and its aims were a ‘conglomerate,’ an ‘undigested policy’ that would ‘crumble to pieces from its own weight.’ He also decried it as pure and simple faddism. He joked about the LDP's secretary, his former ally, Francis Schnadhorst, that 'if any man had a fad, let him write to Mr. Schnadhorst.' Schnadhorst would 'put into his programme something he thought likely to tickle the ears of every class.' Senator Cecil joined the criticism and said it was ‘capsules made up in gelatine, in which very nasty stuffs are enclosed’ when asked about the programme in the Carlton Club.
Unionist cartoon deriding the Liberal Democratic Party, 1892 Election
Despite the howls from the Unionists, the party's rank-and-file members supported the program and found it ‘desirable that a broad and far-reaching platform should be outlined.’ Campbell-Bannerman declared the country was ‘indebted to the Liberal Democratic Party for selecting and cataloging those reforms which are most urgent, and thus indicating, far in advance of legislative action, the path to be traversed.’
Others called the Congress a sign that the LDP was ‘a triumphant army marching to almost certain victory.’ The program was popular, and numerous LDP branches were formed nationwide in the aftermath of the Congress. On Harcourt's route back to London, he was swamped with messages of support. For example, a letter from the Darlington LDP, formed in the aftermath of the Congress, said, ‘we will place you in power with a large majority to aid you in passing many important measures in the Newcastle Programme.’
Popular support and excitement grew for the prospects of the LDP, but the most important element of the Newcastle Programme was its precedent for major political parties using ordinary members to participate in policy development. It built upon the Unionist First Programme to develop the notion that a political manifesto is essential in presenting a party as a viable alternative constructive government.
In contrast to the Unionist Party, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) was a federal organization comprising different organizations around the Union. Despite this, its organisation leaned heavily on the experience of mass movements. The experiences of the mass congresses of the Democratic Federation influenced the leaders of the party immensely. To channel this into effective policy-making, the LDP Parliamentary Committee called a congress for October 1891 in Newcastle.
Despite this, the party's parliamentary leader, William Harcourt, came from the Liberal faction and had no time for mass politics. Harcourt stated his intention to miss the congress, an incredibly controversial act. He believed that the parliamentary committee should lead the policy debate and saw no role for members in party decision-making.
William Harcourt, first Leader of the LDP (1889-92)
This clash between the membership and leadership weakened the ability of the LDP to advocate for its beliefs to the wider public. Harcourt did not connect with the public, either. He was considered smart but cold and aloof and didn't have the political presence of Chamberlain, Churchill, or other senior Unionists. The defection of the Unionists from the Democrats had robbed the opposition of all of its most pertinent weapons.
Still, the Parliamentary nous of Harcourt made him a valuable asset, as did his intellectual might. He was a supreme orator and commanded a personal following in the Commons that few could match. Outside of the debating chamber, he was of little use as a leader. Similarly, many of the most prominent Liberal Democratic leaders, like Herbert Gladstone and Davitt, had little experience in Parliament, thanks to their backgrounds in state politics.
Harcourt was the most capable Parliamentarian that the group had in the House of Commons. His support would be crucial to its success. He finally agreed to attend the Congress and preside over its opening session around four weeks before it began. The Second LDP Congress needed to settle three issues. Firstly, it needed to agree on a party structure; secondly, it needed to appoint a leader; third, it needed to adopt a platform to unite the party. The Congress consisted of a delegation from member parties, nominated at individual party congresses in the leadup to the main party congress.
The assembly approved a drafting committee to decide on a party structure, which produced a proposal that the broader Congress accepted. It placed the Congress at the centre of the governing structure, with the right to elect a President, the Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Party. The congress would also elect a 30-man Executive Committee overseeing the party's day-to-day running between congresses.
A motion agreed upon by the congress ensured that the three elements of the party (municipal, state, and Parliamentary) would each have representatives on the Committee, and at least one member would represent each component party. Harcourt was elected President of the LDP at the Congress but was severely restricted by a radical Executive Committee that featured many National Democratic and Fusionist members. Francis Schnadhorst chaired the Executive Committee, a key advocate of the mass movement faction within the party, and its secretary was Henry Campbell-Bannerman, a traditional radical.
Concerning the party platform, the Executive Committee used the Congress to adopt two separate mission statements. One would be a general statement of aims, the other a more concrete policy 'shopping list.'
The general aims would be debated and added to the party constitution at the beginning of the Congress; members would then decide on the shopping list with an omnibus resolution at the end. The Executive Committee members hoped Harcourt would accept the omnibus resolution and make it part of the program. If he were not, the general aims would protect them. The Statement of General Aims is still a part of the LDP Constitution (although its application is iffy at best). The document is known as the "Eight Principles of Liberal Democracy."
The first aim would be the complete separation of church and state, with all subsidies and state control of the Church of England (C), ensuring that all religious groups were equal in the law. The second was Republicanism, and Harcourt delivered a speech at the conference confirming that should the LDP form the next government, it would bring forward legislation to abolish the regency and declare a Republic.
Third was pluralism, where multiple nationalities could co-exist within the Union. The fourth, populism, states people should be the ultimate driver of political action. The fifth principle was reformism, resisting violent revolution and working within the Parliamentary system to achieve their goals. The sixth principle was pacifism and opposition to war. Finally, the old Georgist calls for Free Trade and Free Land were the seventh and eighth principles.
As Executive Committee members were sworn in, Harcourt, as President, asked each to swear loyalty to the constitution and the founding principles of the Liberal Democratic Party. Each of the main factions was represented in its contents and mutually agreed to the remainder of the principles. A ninth principle of Solidarism would be eventually added in 1896, but we’ll get to that. One of the Executive Committee members, Henry Campbell-Bannerman, summed up the party's principles in a simple phrase; 'freedom of trade, freedom of land, and freedom of life.'
Secondly, the Congress drafted an omnibus motion to show support for various motions that formed what would be known as the 1892 Newcastle Programme, one of the first 'manifestos' of sorts in the Union.
The headline proposal was the commitment to abolishing the regency, its lands, and property, and declaring a republic with a President elected by the Grand Committee. Campbell-Bannerman called the Regency "a model of outdated nostalgia for a life not lived in reality." Republicanism united the whole party, even those who had traditionally been part of the Monarchist Liberal party.
On agricultural affairs, the LDP sought compulsory powers for States to acquire lands for small holdings, village halls, and labourers dwellings, a policy to turn rural workers into small-scale co-operative tenants. But the Party also sought a comprehensive national land value tax, freedom for tenants to sell holdings, and compensation for disturbance and improvement. These proposals attracted considerable opposition from aristocratic landlords, who began to fund the Unionist Party.
The party proposed disestablishing the Anglican Church in line with its secularist principle, removing their legal privileges and putting them on the same footing as other protestant sects while removing their influence from education. In addition, there would be a state commitment to a direct popular veto on the liquor trade and localised prohibition of alcohol to stem what the temperance movement condemned as a cause of poverty. Members also passed motions protecting the States' rights from central government, like allocating national matters such as calling an emergency subject to Grand Committee approval.
Electoral reforms were among the most developed of the Newcastle policies. Nationally, reform would secure faster registration of those who moved home and abolish plural voting. These proposals would diminish the power of larger property owners. The state would also pay MPs to encourage more working-class candidates, and the State would transfer the cost of polling from the candidates to the consolidated state funds.
The Congress also debated the direct election of the Senate and Lord Lieutenants, but a slim majority of members defeated this measure. The party also declared its support for a meritocratic society, and wanted to double down the pursuit of sinecure positions from across the civil service, something only halfheartedly engaged with by the Unionists.
From a forward-thinking policy standpoint, the LDP also supported linguistic reform to allow for national languages to be taught in schools. Pluralism was critical to the party's appeal in the Celtic nations. Michael Davitt announced his return to front-line politics with a landmark speech on the linguistic politics that would eventually form the basis of the foundation of the Gaelic League in 1893. Another essential policy emphasized judicial reform, proposing to simplify the Union courts and create an Independent Supreme Court nominated by the President-Regent and approved by a sitting of the Grand Committee.
Chamberlain painted the LDP as a rehashing of Gladstonian Liberalism, the party controlled by the old Liberal elite, and said the programme and its aims were a ‘conglomerate,’ an ‘undigested policy’ that would ‘crumble to pieces from its own weight.’ He also decried it as pure and simple faddism. He joked about the LDP's secretary, his former ally, Francis Schnadhorst, that 'if any man had a fad, let him write to Mr. Schnadhorst.' Schnadhorst would 'put into his programme something he thought likely to tickle the ears of every class.' Senator Cecil joined the criticism and said it was ‘capsules made up in gelatine, in which very nasty stuffs are enclosed’ when asked about the programme in the Carlton Club.
Unionist cartoon deriding the Liberal Democratic Party, 1892 Election
Despite the howls from the Unionists, the party's rank-and-file members supported the program and found it ‘desirable that a broad and far-reaching platform should be outlined.’ Campbell-Bannerman declared the country was ‘indebted to the Liberal Democratic Party for selecting and cataloging those reforms which are most urgent, and thus indicating, far in advance of legislative action, the path to be traversed.’
Others called the Congress a sign that the LDP was ‘a triumphant army marching to almost certain victory.’ The program was popular, and numerous LDP branches were formed nationwide in the aftermath of the Congress. On Harcourt's route back to London, he was swamped with messages of support. For example, a letter from the Darlington LDP, formed in the aftermath of the Congress, said, ‘we will place you in power with a large majority to aid you in passing many important measures in the Newcastle Programme.’
Popular support and excitement grew for the prospects of the LDP, but the most important element of the Newcastle Programme was its precedent for major political parties using ordinary members to participate in policy development. It built upon the Unionist First Programme to develop the notion that a political manifesto is essential in presenting a party as a viable alternative constructive government.
Last edited:
Domestic affairs dominate the LDP, Imperial affairs dominate the Unionists at the moment.
Part 5, Chapter XXIII
V, XXIII: The Worker's International & the SDF
Part 1: The Cultural Strategy
Despite being an illegal organisation, SDF members had been busy in the preceding two years. A slew of sister organisations was unaffected by the Emergency, like its legal consulate, education programmes, and sports teams, which popped up nationwide. Led by Senator John Ruskin, the Cultural Strategy, adopted after the ban, opened Working Men’s Clubs across the mainland Union, bringing Socialists closer to the workers they claimed to represent. Therefore, lifting some political restrictions was combined with an organisational base to improve the chances of local Trade Union candidates.
While Britons were tired of the strict centralism that began to form within the political doctrine of Unionism, local SDF members began to switch from lofty, utopian goals to more measurable outcomes for workers. In States where Home Governments were left unaffected, back door channels with State Councillors saw expansions in the remit of the First Programme.
While the suspension of legislatures stalled revenue-raising, State Governments still looked to implement new initiatives where they could. They looked to Socialist organisations like the Free College of Medicine and the Republican Union of Nurses to expand the minimum levels of care given to the poor, open clinics, and apply free medicine to children. A scheme bringing nurses into schools to provide care free of charge was extremely popular and well-received in Manchester. The Reddish Working Men’s Club, the oldest in the country, offered free medical care outside the remit of the First Programme’s healthcare legislation.
Reddish Working Men's Club, the oldest Working Men's Club in the Union.
SDF members also saw themselves join Medical Boards, which approved and coordinated new doctors. The community element of the SDF’s affiliated organisations made its members popular despite the nationwide ban, even if the restrictions contained these efforts to more moderate states: every Working Men’s Club in Mercia, for example, was closed between 1889 and 1891 by Mercian State Police for defying the ban and in England, the SDF was completed strangled wherever it attempted to engage civic society.
The intellectual movement behind the SDF formed the Owen Society, which provided free courses for workers using funds collected from its members. The two-tier membership of the organisation, with members either choosing to be a member of the Federation proper or a member of an affiliated organisation. This policy left wiggle room for the SDF to organise everywhere but in the open. It was a mass movement, not a party in the truest sense, with many interlocking parts, an open membership, and many factions within the umbrella.
Finally, as the Panic of 1890 and the imposition of tariffs on goods exported to America depressed wages, SDF-affiliated “unofficial” Unions, with membership nearly the same as the banned Independent Trade Unions, negotiated with employers and developed a reputation for practical efficiency in labour disputes. While the rate of wildcat strikes decreased significantly after the Directorate pursued Independent Labour Union leaders, as their deputies began to assume control of the organisations outside the law, strikes became less common even as owners slashed wages. Independent unions prioritised protections for factory inspection and health care funds and worked unofficially with some employers to solve wage disputes, much to the ire of the Unionists. The SDF had jettisoned revolutionary action for helping people at the lowest level.
The Workers International: A History, Harry Pollitt, 1926
"The publication of Engel’s new introduction to Marx's work The Class Struggle in France indicated that most Socialists worldwide were coming to similar conclusions. Engels used his introduction to make a comparison between the failures of the Paris Commune and the success of the Democratic Federation of Spain.
He concluded that the cooperation of moderate and anarchist elements against the capitalist class with the leaders of the Socialist movement produced a prosperous state built on the doctrine of Internationalism. Cooperation in the short-term, therefore, would be the most effective tactic to bring about Socialist ideals. The split between Anarchist and Marxist groups in Second International should end.
With this in mind, the Second International met again in the Internationalist utopia in Madrid in June 1891. The meeting would be pivotal in determining the direction of the Socialist movement in the years to come. The loosening of restrictions allowed many SDF members to make the journey to attend the conference. Still, in a sign that the ongoing dispute between the Anarchists and Marxists was ending, the delegates from Britain were allowed to conceal their identities. Therefore, a definitive list of British attendees is unknown, but Senator Ruskin, Aveling, Annie Besant, and Eleanor Marx confirmed later that they had attended. All in all, around 120 delegates from across Britain descended on Madrid.
The main groups represented were; the Federation of Spanish Workers, French exiles in Belgium, the Belgian Labour Party (POB-BWP), the British Social Democratic Federation (SDF) and Trade Union Congress (TUC), the German Social Democratic Party (SPD), the Russian Emancipation of Labour group, the Confederação dos Sindicatos dos Trabalhadores Portugueses (CSTP) and various Eastern European peasant groups. A few members from Holland, North and South America also attended.
The debate began over whether to form a new International, revive the International Workingman's Association, or continue the Second International. They decided that as the conditions of Socialism had changed since the last meeting, and as Socialism was victorious in one country, a new International, the Workers International or Third International, would be formed.
Three figures, Ruskin, Pi, and the German Edward Bernstein, would collectively drive the agenda for the new organisation. Five pillars would underpin the organisation of the Third International; Revisionism (creating a new Socialist doctrine), Pactism (Pi's philosophy of building alliances), Gradualism (rejection of violent revolution), Legalism (pursuing legal means), and Communitarianism (focusing on community politics). The delegates passed a motion accepting that capitalist society was in its death throws but advocating the peaceful dismantling of the system through legal means.
Then, they passed motions supporting attempts to introduce more working-class candidates into legislatures and support all attempts to create better working conditions while embracing the community-style politics that the SDF had furthered in Britain. To achieve their ends, they rejected violent politics, assassination attempts, and extra-legal activity, with Pi brutally condemning Anarchist bombing campaigns. Finally, they enshrined Pactism, the voluntary creation of networks advocating egalitarian action, as a cornerstone of their unified philosophy.
However, only some delegates were happy with the congress's decisions. Pure Anarchists, led by hardcore members of the FRE-AIT, withdrew after the motions were passed. This faction, known as the 'disidentes,' held a splinter congress that revived the IWA and endorsed propaganda of the deed to bring about stateless anarchism. Another group dissatisfied with the result of the Congress was the radical-left faction of the SPD, led by Rosa Luxembourg, who believed that large-scale intervention, the overthrow of the monarchy in Germany, and the establishment of a worker's republic would be the only method for achieving socialism.
Supporters of pure Marxism, led by anti-revisionists in the Emancipation of Labour Group, some of the Eastern European peasant groups, SPD, and SDF, continued to align with the Second International. The Continuity IWA and Second International, however, were smaller in number. To both these groups, despite the successes in major countries, legislative politics was off the agenda for them.
With growing influence in Britain, a sizeable Parliamentary faction in Germany, and control of the state apparatus in Spain, the Third International was a true international force with actual, existing power. The Third International would be the breakthrough organization prior to the outbreak of the Turbulence and would see many advances made in Socialism in the coming five years."
Part 2: The Manchester Programme
Having coordinated with the workers of the world, the SDF's leadership, led by Senator Ruskin, looked to develop a program for the upcoming election and held its first Congress, officially in secret, in Manchester in August 1892. In line with the Internationalist philosophy, the party declined to elect a single leader but elected an organisational committee and an executive committee that could govern the party between congresses. The executive committee chairman would be the only member of both bodies and, therefore, the most important. Senator Ruskin was elected chairman and was able to take a key position in leading the party. His Cultural Strategy would chafe some of the more radical members of the party, especially the Yorkshire miners, the Glasgow ship workers, and factory workers across the north. Still, it would allow the party to establish itself in the coming years.
With the housekeeping out of the way, SDF members used the Congress to pass the Manchester Programme, which would form the basis of its election campaigning for nominally independent candidates at the 1892 election. This programme included support for any candidate that advocated the end of repression against the SDF (opening the door for cooperation with the LDP). They also supported the promotion of working-class candidates to all levels of governance, legislation for an eight-hour workday, an expansion of Cooperative industries, legislation for workers' ownership of the means of production, the declaration of a Republic, and the legalisation of all Trade Unions.
The cessation of the emergency didn’t necessarily change some things for the SDF, as candidates weren't forthcoming despite the emergence of the party that had real support in many social circles. For the upcoming elections, the SDF could only muster around 70 candidates. Many areas didn’t have any representatives at all, Ireland, for example. For now, save a few delegates in Dublin, the ‘Feds,’ as they became known, were an all-mainland affair.
Still, the constituent parts of the SDF we know today began to form in this period as usually much of the work was done by the independent unions directly as a consequence of the anti-socialist law: advocating socialism in public, or advocating for the LTC, TUC, or SDF were still crimes. As a result, in line with Ruskin’s cultural strategy, ‘new’ parties popped up.
Senator John Ruskin, de-facto President, and Chairman of the Executive Committee, of the SDF
One of the more noticeable would be the Scottish Labour Party, a group that popped up after a prominent member of the NDP, Keir Hardie, resigned and formed a party with seven legislators aligned with the SDF. In Yorkshire, Independent Labour Party candidates came from a coalition of six of the largest independent trade unions in the block. In Lancashire, Liverpool, and Glasgow, the ILP began to attract scores of Catholic workers who were paid less and treated poorly compared to Protestant workers who usually had better prospects.
The SDF didn’t control the socialist or internationalist movement; it coordinated it. Local parties did what they needed to do, state parties likewise, and parliamentary likewise. Usually, voters knew they were from the organisation many people were part of, but few would admit to being part of it. Despite this, there simply weren’t enough candidates to elect hundreds of commons and legislative seats. Equally, the SDF could gain more senators with wins at the legislative level, or so was the thought of Ruskin and the leadership, presumably because he wanted more company in the chamber.
The members opposed to the revisionist line taken by the SDF shunned Parliamentarianism altogether. They formed a group called Socialist Action, which advocated for overthrowing the Union and imposing a dictatorship of the proletariat. Socialist Action had around 150 members and acted without a centralised leadership on the model of Anarchist cells operating in France. Socialist Action soon aligned with the Second International. On the opposite side, the movement of Ruskin against the presumed leader of British socialism, Henry Hyndman, led the Senator, whose term expired in 1892, on the edge of the conveyor belt. Hyndman would be politically homeless for some time but would eventually become a leader of the Society of St George in a few years. Again, we’ll get there.
The Manchester Programme would go a long way to legitimise the SDF, but it would remain a banned organisation until 1895. Despite this, even some Unionist officials realised that the federation could not be subdued and decided that political intervention, rather than political repression, would be required to stop the formation of a widespread Socialist group.
Part 1: The Cultural Strategy
Despite being an illegal organisation, SDF members had been busy in the preceding two years. A slew of sister organisations was unaffected by the Emergency, like its legal consulate, education programmes, and sports teams, which popped up nationwide. Led by Senator John Ruskin, the Cultural Strategy, adopted after the ban, opened Working Men’s Clubs across the mainland Union, bringing Socialists closer to the workers they claimed to represent. Therefore, lifting some political restrictions was combined with an organisational base to improve the chances of local Trade Union candidates.
While Britons were tired of the strict centralism that began to form within the political doctrine of Unionism, local SDF members began to switch from lofty, utopian goals to more measurable outcomes for workers. In States where Home Governments were left unaffected, back door channels with State Councillors saw expansions in the remit of the First Programme.
While the suspension of legislatures stalled revenue-raising, State Governments still looked to implement new initiatives where they could. They looked to Socialist organisations like the Free College of Medicine and the Republican Union of Nurses to expand the minimum levels of care given to the poor, open clinics, and apply free medicine to children. A scheme bringing nurses into schools to provide care free of charge was extremely popular and well-received in Manchester. The Reddish Working Men’s Club, the oldest in the country, offered free medical care outside the remit of the First Programme’s healthcare legislation.
Reddish Working Men's Club, the oldest Working Men's Club in the Union.
SDF members also saw themselves join Medical Boards, which approved and coordinated new doctors. The community element of the SDF’s affiliated organisations made its members popular despite the nationwide ban, even if the restrictions contained these efforts to more moderate states: every Working Men’s Club in Mercia, for example, was closed between 1889 and 1891 by Mercian State Police for defying the ban and in England, the SDF was completed strangled wherever it attempted to engage civic society.
The intellectual movement behind the SDF formed the Owen Society, which provided free courses for workers using funds collected from its members. The two-tier membership of the organisation, with members either choosing to be a member of the Federation proper or a member of an affiliated organisation. This policy left wiggle room for the SDF to organise everywhere but in the open. It was a mass movement, not a party in the truest sense, with many interlocking parts, an open membership, and many factions within the umbrella.
Finally, as the Panic of 1890 and the imposition of tariffs on goods exported to America depressed wages, SDF-affiliated “unofficial” Unions, with membership nearly the same as the banned Independent Trade Unions, negotiated with employers and developed a reputation for practical efficiency in labour disputes. While the rate of wildcat strikes decreased significantly after the Directorate pursued Independent Labour Union leaders, as their deputies began to assume control of the organisations outside the law, strikes became less common even as owners slashed wages. Independent unions prioritised protections for factory inspection and health care funds and worked unofficially with some employers to solve wage disputes, much to the ire of the Unionists. The SDF had jettisoned revolutionary action for helping people at the lowest level.
The Workers International: A History, Harry Pollitt, 1926
"The publication of Engel’s new introduction to Marx's work The Class Struggle in France indicated that most Socialists worldwide were coming to similar conclusions. Engels used his introduction to make a comparison between the failures of the Paris Commune and the success of the Democratic Federation of Spain.
He concluded that the cooperation of moderate and anarchist elements against the capitalist class with the leaders of the Socialist movement produced a prosperous state built on the doctrine of Internationalism. Cooperation in the short-term, therefore, would be the most effective tactic to bring about Socialist ideals. The split between Anarchist and Marxist groups in Second International should end.
With this in mind, the Second International met again in the Internationalist utopia in Madrid in June 1891. The meeting would be pivotal in determining the direction of the Socialist movement in the years to come. The loosening of restrictions allowed many SDF members to make the journey to attend the conference. Still, in a sign that the ongoing dispute between the Anarchists and Marxists was ending, the delegates from Britain were allowed to conceal their identities. Therefore, a definitive list of British attendees is unknown, but Senator Ruskin, Aveling, Annie Besant, and Eleanor Marx confirmed later that they had attended. All in all, around 120 delegates from across Britain descended on Madrid.
The main groups represented were; the Federation of Spanish Workers, French exiles in Belgium, the Belgian Labour Party (POB-BWP), the British Social Democratic Federation (SDF) and Trade Union Congress (TUC), the German Social Democratic Party (SPD), the Russian Emancipation of Labour group, the Confederação dos Sindicatos dos Trabalhadores Portugueses (CSTP) and various Eastern European peasant groups. A few members from Holland, North and South America also attended.
The debate began over whether to form a new International, revive the International Workingman's Association, or continue the Second International. They decided that as the conditions of Socialism had changed since the last meeting, and as Socialism was victorious in one country, a new International, the Workers International or Third International, would be formed.
Three figures, Ruskin, Pi, and the German Edward Bernstein, would collectively drive the agenda for the new organisation. Five pillars would underpin the organisation of the Third International; Revisionism (creating a new Socialist doctrine), Pactism (Pi's philosophy of building alliances), Gradualism (rejection of violent revolution), Legalism (pursuing legal means), and Communitarianism (focusing on community politics). The delegates passed a motion accepting that capitalist society was in its death throws but advocating the peaceful dismantling of the system through legal means.
Then, they passed motions supporting attempts to introduce more working-class candidates into legislatures and support all attempts to create better working conditions while embracing the community-style politics that the SDF had furthered in Britain. To achieve their ends, they rejected violent politics, assassination attempts, and extra-legal activity, with Pi brutally condemning Anarchist bombing campaigns. Finally, they enshrined Pactism, the voluntary creation of networks advocating egalitarian action, as a cornerstone of their unified philosophy.
However, only some delegates were happy with the congress's decisions. Pure Anarchists, led by hardcore members of the FRE-AIT, withdrew after the motions were passed. This faction, known as the 'disidentes,' held a splinter congress that revived the IWA and endorsed propaganda of the deed to bring about stateless anarchism. Another group dissatisfied with the result of the Congress was the radical-left faction of the SPD, led by Rosa Luxembourg, who believed that large-scale intervention, the overthrow of the monarchy in Germany, and the establishment of a worker's republic would be the only method for achieving socialism.
Supporters of pure Marxism, led by anti-revisionists in the Emancipation of Labour Group, some of the Eastern European peasant groups, SPD, and SDF, continued to align with the Second International. The Continuity IWA and Second International, however, were smaller in number. To both these groups, despite the successes in major countries, legislative politics was off the agenda for them.
With growing influence in Britain, a sizeable Parliamentary faction in Germany, and control of the state apparatus in Spain, the Third International was a true international force with actual, existing power. The Third International would be the breakthrough organization prior to the outbreak of the Turbulence and would see many advances made in Socialism in the coming five years."
Part 2: The Manchester Programme
Having coordinated with the workers of the world, the SDF's leadership, led by Senator Ruskin, looked to develop a program for the upcoming election and held its first Congress, officially in secret, in Manchester in August 1892. In line with the Internationalist philosophy, the party declined to elect a single leader but elected an organisational committee and an executive committee that could govern the party between congresses. The executive committee chairman would be the only member of both bodies and, therefore, the most important. Senator Ruskin was elected chairman and was able to take a key position in leading the party. His Cultural Strategy would chafe some of the more radical members of the party, especially the Yorkshire miners, the Glasgow ship workers, and factory workers across the north. Still, it would allow the party to establish itself in the coming years.
With the housekeeping out of the way, SDF members used the Congress to pass the Manchester Programme, which would form the basis of its election campaigning for nominally independent candidates at the 1892 election. This programme included support for any candidate that advocated the end of repression against the SDF (opening the door for cooperation with the LDP). They also supported the promotion of working-class candidates to all levels of governance, legislation for an eight-hour workday, an expansion of Cooperative industries, legislation for workers' ownership of the means of production, the declaration of a Republic, and the legalisation of all Trade Unions.
The cessation of the emergency didn’t necessarily change some things for the SDF, as candidates weren't forthcoming despite the emergence of the party that had real support in many social circles. For the upcoming elections, the SDF could only muster around 70 candidates. Many areas didn’t have any representatives at all, Ireland, for example. For now, save a few delegates in Dublin, the ‘Feds,’ as they became known, were an all-mainland affair.
Still, the constituent parts of the SDF we know today began to form in this period as usually much of the work was done by the independent unions directly as a consequence of the anti-socialist law: advocating socialism in public, or advocating for the LTC, TUC, or SDF were still crimes. As a result, in line with Ruskin’s cultural strategy, ‘new’ parties popped up.
Senator John Ruskin, de-facto President, and Chairman of the Executive Committee, of the SDF
One of the more noticeable would be the Scottish Labour Party, a group that popped up after a prominent member of the NDP, Keir Hardie, resigned and formed a party with seven legislators aligned with the SDF. In Yorkshire, Independent Labour Party candidates came from a coalition of six of the largest independent trade unions in the block. In Lancashire, Liverpool, and Glasgow, the ILP began to attract scores of Catholic workers who were paid less and treated poorly compared to Protestant workers who usually had better prospects.
The SDF didn’t control the socialist or internationalist movement; it coordinated it. Local parties did what they needed to do, state parties likewise, and parliamentary likewise. Usually, voters knew they were from the organisation many people were part of, but few would admit to being part of it. Despite this, there simply weren’t enough candidates to elect hundreds of commons and legislative seats. Equally, the SDF could gain more senators with wins at the legislative level, or so was the thought of Ruskin and the leadership, presumably because he wanted more company in the chamber.
The members opposed to the revisionist line taken by the SDF shunned Parliamentarianism altogether. They formed a group called Socialist Action, which advocated for overthrowing the Union and imposing a dictatorship of the proletariat. Socialist Action had around 150 members and acted without a centralised leadership on the model of Anarchist cells operating in France. Socialist Action soon aligned with the Second International. On the opposite side, the movement of Ruskin against the presumed leader of British socialism, Henry Hyndman, led the Senator, whose term expired in 1892, on the edge of the conveyor belt. Hyndman would be politically homeless for some time but would eventually become a leader of the Society of St George in a few years. Again, we’ll get there.
The Manchester Programme would go a long way to legitimise the SDF, but it would remain a banned organisation until 1895. Despite this, even some Unionist officials realised that the federation could not be subdued and decided that political intervention, rather than political repression, would be required to stop the formation of a widespread Socialist group.
What is Engels policy towards mon Whites in various colonies of European powers? Is there any concrete policy taken how to engage with them?
What is the policy regarding religion?
What is the policy regarding religion?
His policy is similar to OTL, but with the existence of the FDE, he believes that this method of expansion will most likely irradiate imperialism globally. Engels is still very critical of English socialists, who he believes are profiting from Imperialism. The coherent Imperial policy from the left will emerge at the outbreak of the Turbulence.
What's Engels position to the Program of the Revisionists? Yes, he seems willing to cooperate with anarchists to achieve the proletarian revolution, but I don't see him not supporting all of Bernstein's thesis. Kautsky would also (at least right now) be critical, along with Luxembourg.
Engels isn't on board with revisionism at all (this will be clarified later), but rather the impression that he has changed his mind (and posthumously Marx would have changed his mind) is powerful for the left. The cooperation between the Anarchists and Socialists is still intended to be a temporary arrangement, to Engels, it is proof that the FDE and the West is moving towards the second stage of revolution.
Before his death, he'll have another philosophical grenade to throw into the mix!