Skip Navigation

Twentieth Century British History 2002 13(1):62-85; doi:10.1093/tcbh/13.1.62
© 2002 by Oxford University Press
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Corthorn, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

The Labour Party and the League of Nations: The Socialist League's Role in the Sanctions Crisis of 1935

Paul Corthorn1

1 Robinson College, Cambridge

When the Labour Party—influenced by the NEC and the TUC General Council—decided to support League of Nations sanctions against Italy in 1935 this signalled its recognition that it was necessary to challenge the fascist dictators with collective force. The way in which this decision marked the discrediting of pacifism within the Labour Party has been fully examined. The Socialist League—the organ of the Labour left—also unsuccessfully opposed the sanctions policy. Nevertheless, existing accounts have focused on its chairman, Cripps, and his refusal to trust the ‘capitalist’ and ‘imperialist’ National Government to impose sanctions. Instead, this article considers the Socialist League as a whole and highlights divisions that emerged within it over sanctions. The official Socialist League line demanded ‘mass resistance’ against the National Government. However, a sizeable minority—particularly those with overtly pro-Soviet affinities—decided to support collective security now that the Soviet Union had joined the League of Nations. These internal divisions seriously weakened the Socialist League case. They explain how the NEC–TUC was able so conclusively to defeat its radical anti-capitalist arguments, thereby gaining a fuller mandate with which to develop its policy of armed collective security before the Second World War.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.