Did the Cold War favor the GOP?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

This is the kind of theory that 'makes sense' until you start poking around at the details. Then it all sort of falls apart a little. Remember that the Soviet Union had been around since 1917; 'Communism' had been an electoral issue for the Right (however defined) in most countries from that point onwards and was frankly more of an electoral gift during the interwar years than during the Cold War. Most social democrats (and their New Deal capital D Democrat semi-equivalents) were as openly hostile to the Soviet Union as political conservatives; this had not been the case in the 20s and 30s.

What the Cold War certainly did do electorally was completely fyck over the various Western Communist parties and their various fellow travellers. The smaller ones mostly collapsed and the larger ones were frozen in electoral ghettos; permanently locked out of power and basically unable to attract new support save by birth.

Mostly the Cold War led to - or at least heavily encouraged - political stability; sometimes in an 'artificial' manner (as in the countries with large Communist parties: France and Italy for instance), but generally in a more 'natural' way.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Of course, and this is not a pattern confined to the United States. The Cold War, and the broader ideology of 'anti-Communism' grealty benefited right-wing political parties in the UK, Australia, New Zealand and Germany (some of the more prominent examples), as the left (especially in the 1940's, 50's and 60's) could be portrayed rather easily as soft on communism.

Could they though? Let's look at Britain. Until 1955 the Labour Party was led by Clement Attlee who had led a government that had sent troops to fight Communists in Greece and Korea, had played a leading role in the establishment of NATO, had developed nuclear weaponry, had prioritised military spending over social spending, and had systematically expelled parliamentarians suspected of being fellow travellers. After 1955 it was led by Hugh Gaitskell who had built up profile within the Party largely because of his strong anticommunist views, who had been the Chancellor who had prioritised military spending over social spending, and who's closest advisor was a man who used the Durham Miners Gala as an annual anti-Soviet propaganda show. This was not a political party that could be credibly accused of being 'soft on communism'; indeed the only people who thought it was were gin-addled Daily Telegraph-reading colonels and the like, and such people were (it is fair to say) rarely known to be swing voters. Labour lost elections in the 50s because the Tories had been lucky enough to squeak into power just as the postwar economic boom got going, not because of the Cold War.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Well in Italy and France the Left was dominated by... Communists. The situation in (West) Germany was, how shall we say, rather more complicated than you allow for. Besides it was the Cold War that allowed the SPD to monopolise the Left vote for the first time since the party split during the First World War...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Two excellent examples, though I wouldn't say the party can be defined by its leaders so easily; least not by such a consensual leader like Attlee who is almost the opposite of a dominating "one-man-party" type

That's true, but the record of the Attlee government was something that even the younger senior Labour figures were firmly associated with.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

They did indeed try to paint Bevan as a dangerous extremist, but I don't think anyone who wasn't a retired colonel in reality - or in spirit - ever believed he was 'soft on communism' (by the end of the 40s he was pretty bluntly hostile towards the Soviet Union, and kept moving in that general direction throughout the rest of his life.* Though generally in a classic Left-of-the-Left way that was also deeply sceptical of the Americans), and, anyway, he was a popular figure: very unlikely that they picked up many votes that way. But, basically, 'communism' hardly featured in Conservative campaigns during the Cold War - this was not the case in the '20s and '30s.

Worth noting - very briefly - that there were always elements on the Labour hard Left who were less than hostile towards the Soviet Union, but they were generally kept as far away from the front bench as possible.

_{*He was involved, as were many other senior Labour figures, in the less than sober (but very sincere) heckling of Khrushchev during his visit to Britain in 1956.}

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In Britain I think the Cold War was felt more in the '50s than the '70s, but basically yes. Wilson might have been thought of as a Soviet spy by the more deranged elements in MI5, but he backed the Vietnam War (the Vietnam War!) - even if he was clever enough to not get British troops involved - despite hailing from the Labour Left.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Developments on the Left of the Left in the 70s and 80s are where things start to get deeply weird, yes.* But they were generally looked on with hostility by the leadership. It's notable that when Labour was attacked in the 80s for being extreme it wasn't really attacked - at least not often - in Cold War terms. 'Loony Left' rather than Reds Under The Bed or whatever.

_{*The weirdest part was that the CPGB basically ceased to be a Communist Party in anything other than its personal finances.}

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The Australian case is an interesting one, yeah. Though I do always wonder to what extent 'Communism' was a code-issue for other things.