The Common Wealth Party (UK)

[ed miliband]

Anybody know anything about this party? I can find some basic details on their history, but does anybody have any solid information on what they stood for? I have seen their platform described as "libertarian socialist" and I'm quite intrigued by that, especially considering they contested elections and even had MPs (I think?).

Cheers in advance.

[ed miliband]

Nobody? :(

I really want to read their pamphlet intitled 'Nationalisation is not socialism' or something along those lines.

[(A)narcho-Matt]

They were a small socialist party during ww2. They Sorta existed until the 1990s.

Anyway use google or check wiki for more info. I doubt many on here are old enough to remember them.

[ed miliband]

I've checked google but there isn't much info about them online and, as I said, I'm familiar with their history but want to know more about what they stood for.

[Red Commissar]

Well I don't know more than what is available on the internet, so no more than you do. I may be able to put it together in more relevant terms.

It seems the CWP was formed out of a merger of between various leftists, many of whom were former Independent Labour Party politicians and/or members of the 1941 Committee, and a grouping around former liberal MP (Acland) who was leading some sort of Christian movement called Forward March.

Ideologically it seemed very messy. One one end you would have the Marxist Tom Wintringham, while on the other hand Mr. Acland whose shifting ideologies could have easily driven him into fascism if the conditions were right. They used a lot of Christian-influenced morals and ethics to provide a more appealing version of socialism.

This is a video of their General Secretary giving a speech on the CWP's stance. Listening to his views, it seems to be some combination of democratic socialism infused with Christian principles.

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=18331536

Their main difference with Labor apparently was over the question of nationalization and Labour's decision to participate in the wartime government and the agreements it entailed. Past that they shared most of the opinions of that party and the Communist parties in their stance on the colonies.

The other significant thing about the party is that it was able to draw middle-class support to a socialist movement, a segment of society which traditionally did not support socialism.

Looking at the party's successes and later collapse though, I think it served more as a vessel for people who were not pleased with Labour's decision to work with the Tories in the work time government. After the war no longer became a threat and the agreements stopped, many of their members went back to Labour. Looking from that I don't think they were as ideologically consistent as they may've been portrayed.

Looking at some of these documents on MIA,

http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/revhist/upham/11upham.html#b107

Electoral contests were the raison d’etre of Common Wealth: when the truce ended, it died.

http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/fi/vol04/no06/notes.htm

The leading strata of the labor fakers are also worried by the rise of the middle-class party, Common Wealth, which has been successfully contesting by-elections on demagogic slogans of precisely that reformist character which the Labourites would be raising were they not self-gagged by participation in the coalition cabinet.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/grant/1943/05/ilp.htm

The middle class is beginning to break away from allegiance to the traditional parties of British capitalism, as the growth and success of the Common Wealth movement has shown.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/grant/1944/01/tasks.htm

On the other side, the middle class is completely ruined, and is even looking towards the left, looking towards the social revolution. Common Wealth is an indication of the complete failure of the working class leaders to give a lead to the middle class, in their tremendous push towards the left. That process is taking place in front of our eyes today. The ruling class has less basis in the mass of the population than at any other time in history; even during the General Strike, they could still rely on a large section of the middle class.

Past this there is nothing more I can provide, since most of their documents and stuff are not online but archived at British universities.

[Green/Red]

The following information and quotation are taken from the book The British General Election of 1945 by R. B. McCallum and Alison Readman.

The Common Wealth party were:

a strange party which had emerged during the war as the result of the electoral truce. Common ownership was the central article of their creed, and Sir Richard Acland their leader. At this election they stood for full Socialism, rather than the moderate dose advocated by the official Labour party. They believed in common ownership as an end in itself. However, unlike the early Socialists, they were not primariy concerned with giving a better share of the wealth of the world to the underprivileged. They were perhaps more concerned with the spiritual harm that is suffered by those in control of great economic power. The Common Wealth party were striving to introduce a spirit of co-operation and 'Fellowship' into the administration of the affairs of the country, to supersede the motive of self-interest, which they declared is everywhere predominant. Commonwealth was manifestly a Utopian party. In so far as they appealed to any particular class, it was to the middle rather than the working class.

They contested 23 out of the 640 seats in the 1945 general election, all in seats hopeless for Labour. They polled 110,634 votes and elected one member of parliament, for Chelmsford which they had won in a by-election in April 1945.

[ed miliband]

Thank you, Greed/Red and Red Commissar, I really appreciate the the research you have done.

I'm a little disappointed, although I had a sneaking suspicion that the CWP were utopian socialists rather than libertarian socialists. I'm still interested in finding some of their pamphlets, though.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Perhaps "commonwealth" should be considered as part of the name for a new party on the British left that breaks with Labourism.

[Green/Red]

Originally posted by aufkleben
I'm still interested in finding some of their pamphlets, though.

The Commonwealth party archive is held at the University of Sussex. My post count is not high enough to post a link, but if you google commonwealth party the link to the university of sussex archive is about half way down the first page. The archive is very extensive.