Matthew Johnson | Durham University (original) (raw)

Books by Matthew Johnson

Militarism and the British Left, 1902-1914

Militarism is usually regarded as a phenomenon of the political right. It has traditionally been ... more Militarism is usually regarded as a phenomenon of the political right. It has traditionally been seen as alien – indeed, as antithetical – to the values and principles of the left. In Britain during the years before the Great War, however, the relationship between militarism and the politics of the left was a highly complex one. Militarism in pre-war British society was manifest in a variety of forms, from popular enthusiasm for war and martial values, to demands for greater provision to be made for the nation's defence, and even in calls for the militarization of society itself. The response of the political left to these challenges was ambivalent and contested. Whilst militaristic sentiment and practice did not always sit comfortably alongside progressive principles, an ideological space existed on the left in which militaristic ideas could take root. Indeed, militarism could take on ostensibly 'progressive' forms that proved particularly appealing to some elements on the left.

Moving beyond the focus on pacifism and anti-militarism that has characterized much of the existing scholarship on this subject, this book explores the ways in which Liberals, socialists, and others on the left of British politics were able to accommodate aspects of militarism during the years before 1914. In doing so it offers an intriguing new perspective on the nature of militarism itself.

Journal articles by Matthew Johnson

Journal of British Studies, 2023

The spectacular collapse of the Liberal Party in Britain has often been regarded as the result of... more The spectacular collapse of the Liberal Party in Britain has often been regarded as the result of a crisis in Liberal values, supposedly provoked by the unprecedented militarization of British society during the Great War. However, this interpretation typically fails to recognize the extent to which the most important and visible legacies of that process of militarization were accommodated within the Liberal Party itself. Between 1918 and 1929, more than a hundred ex-servicemen were elected to Parliament as Liberal MPs, and scores more stood as Liberal candidates. This article examines how these men negotiated, presented, and performed their military identities within the framework of postwar electoral politics; analyzes how they operated in Parliament; and traces the longer-term trajectories of their political careers. It challenges the assumption that Liberals were temperamentally or ideologically incapable of engaging with the war's legacies, demonstrating the ability of Liberal candidates to exploit the iconography and rhetorical tropes of military service when appealing to an electorate that had been profoundly shaped by the experience of war and military mobilization. Liberals sought to contest Conservative Party attempts to monopolize the politics of patriotism after 1918 by constructing gendered electoral appeals that acknowledged the unstable meanings of the Great War and the ambiguous status of the men who had fought in it. However, the inability of Liberal politicians to unite around a shared understanding of what the war had meant ultimately prevented them from exploiting the memory of the conflict as effectively as their Conservative and Labour rivals.

Lloyd George, the Liberal Crisis, and the Unionist Party during the First World War

Journal of Liberal History, 2023

The Great War was widely seen in Britain as a struggle for civilian and constitutional standards ... more The Great War was widely seen in Britain as a struggle for civilian and constitutional standards of government against the evils of ‘Prussian militarism’. Yet the British political class itself was by no means a purely ‘civilian’ caste. During the war 264 MPs—some 40 per cent of the membership of the House of Commons—volunteered to serve in the armed forces. These men occupied a unique and controversial position both within Parliament and in the forces. A shared experience of military service could provide a common identity, and even a basis for common action, for MPs from rival parties, and many of these men came to support an apparently ‘military’ agenda at Westminster. At the same time, fighting MPs could act as agents of parliamentary oversight and control over the military establishment. Yet the importance of these ‘Service Members’ was not only evident in the realm of civil–military relations, and this article explores the significance and consequences of attempts by Service Members to claim a special political authority as the ‘representatives’ of the armed forces in the House of Commons, to offer an important new perspective on wartime British debates about the workings of representative politics, the nature of political citizenship, and the authority of Parliament as an institution.

"The decade preceding the outbreak of the First World War saw Great Britain engaged in a naval ar... more "The decade preceding the outbreak of the First World War saw Great Britain engaged in a naval arms race of unprecedented expense against the German empire. The spiralling cost of armaments proved politically problematic for a Liberal ministry ostensibly committed to ‘Peace, Retrenchment, and Reform’. Outside the government, however, an organized navalist lobby agitated enthusiastically for ever greater levels of defence preparedness. Groups such as the Navy League have typically been regarded as bastions of the radical right. In fact, as this article demonstrates, Liberal engagement with and participation in the navalist lobby was far greater than historians have realized. Liberal MPs accounted for a significant portion of the Navy League’s support within Parliament, and Liberals held many leadership positions in the organization. These men were motivated by considerations of national defence, but they also identified their navalism as belonging to a coherent Liberal political tradition. The navy had long been associated with progressive political causes, above all with the maintenance of free trade, and was regarded as being free from the more regressive forms of militarism associated with standing armies. In this sense, navalism was not simply a phenomenon of the radical right; it also represented a distinctly Liberal form of militarism.
"

The advent of conscription in Britain in 1916 was greeted with profound dismay by many in the Lib... more The advent of conscription in Britain in 1916 was greeted with profound dismay by many in the Liberal party. At Westminster, however, a significant minority of Liberal MPs, who were members of the Liberal War Committee (LWC), were amongst the most enthusiastic advocates of compulsory service, from a surprisingly early stage in the war. It has usually been assumed that those Liberals who embraced conscription were effectively abandoning their progressive principles, and moving to another, more reactionary, political allegiance. This article argues that this was not the case. The Liberal advocates of conscription represented a range of political opinions, but all insisted that they remained Liberals, and many went to considerable lengths to reconcile their support for universal military service with their continued adherence to the Liberal creed. This article reassesses the phenomenon of Liberal support for compulsory service, examining the arguments, activities, and personnel of the LWC. It sheds new light on the vitality of Liberal principles in wartime, demonstrating that Liberal doctrine was often far more flexible than scholars have realized.

Chapters in edited collections by Matthew Johnson

‘A Fighting Man to Fight for You’: The Armed Forces, Ex-Servicemen, and British Electoral Politics in the Aftermath of Two World Wars

Electoral Pledges in Britain Since 1918: The Politics of Promises, 2020

Modern Britain has conventionally been regarded as an essentially ‘civilian’ polity. However, dur... more Modern Britain has conventionally been regarded as an essentially ‘civilian’ polity. However, during the twentieth century hundreds of soldiers, sailors, and airmen who had fought in the world wars sought election to the House of Commons, and ex-servicemen became one of the best-represented occupational groups in Parliament. This chapter explores the ways in which these aspirant MPs constructed their appeals to voters. It examines the promises they made to different electoral constituencies and the more performative and presentational ways in which they sought to attract popular support, focusing in particular on how the self-fashioning of soldiers and ex-servicemen as parliamentary candidates evolved in response to changing popular attitudes towards war, military service, and martial masculinity.

Civilian and Military Power (Great Britain and Ireland) - 1914-1918 International Encyclopedia, 2019

By the early 20th century the United Kingdom had a well-established tradition of civilian control... more By the early 20th century the United Kingdom had a well-established tradition of civilian control over the armed forces. This tradition came under strain during the Great War as the line dividing Britain's military and political establishments became blurred, and disputes arose between Cabinet "frocks" and the army "brass hats" over the direction of military strategy, relations with Allied forces, and the allocation of resources and manpower.

'Peace and Retrenchment? The Edwardian Liberal Party, the Limits of Pacifism, and the Politics of National Defence', in A. Gestrich & H. Pogge von Strandmann (eds.), Bid for World Power?: New Research on the Outbreak of the First World War, (Oxford University Press, 2017)

The Great War marked a period of profound upheaval in British politics. The old controversies of ... more The Great War marked a period of profound upheaval in British politics. The old controversies of Edwardian politics were replaced by new debates about military strategy, civil-military relations and the capacity of the state to mobilize the nation for “total war.” The traditional structures of party politics began to buckle as new fault lines emerged within parties, and shifting coalitions were formed and broken between them. In just four years, the war witnessed the destruction of Britain’s last Liberal government, a Conservative resurgence after almost a decade in Opposition and the opening up of new political horizons for the Labour Party.

Other papers by Matthew Johnson

Media coverage of the centenary of the Great War

Dr Matthew Johnson (Durham) reflects on recent media coverage of the centenary of the First World... more Dr Matthew Johnson (Durham) reflects on recent media coverage of the centenary of the First World War. He is a specialist on militarism as a political and ideological phenomenon in Britain during the twentieth century and is the author of Militarism and the British Left (Basingstoke, 2013)

Link here: https://royalhistsoc.org/?s=matthew+johnson

Reviews by Matthew Johnson

Among the many familiar narratives of the Great War is one which describes what might be termed t... more Among the many familiar narratives of the Great War is one which describes what might be termed the 'illiberalisation' of the British state. As the conflict progressed, Britain's traditional system of voluntary recruiting was replaced by military conscription, 'business as usual' was swept away by a raft of economic controls and new legislation gave the government sweeping powers of censorship, surveillance and control over the civilian population. Some historians-most notably and most trenchantly Brock Millman-have gone so far as to argue that, by 1918, the British government, in collaboration with right-wing 'patriot' gangs, was contemplating a pre-emptive 'counterrevolutionary' coup in order to crush dissent and suppress anti-war unrest. David Monger's monograph takes a very different line in its assessment of the British state's management of the home front. In common with Millman, Monger is interested in the question of how the government sought to contend with the erosion of civilian morale during the war, in particular during its final fifteen months. But, where Millman was concerned with state coercion, Monger focuses on the continued importance of popular consent in sustaining the war effort. In essence, his monograph examines in close detail how the process of what John Horne calls national 're-mobilisation' was achieved in Britain during the second half of the war.

waited loyally for their leader to set policy, but they were not shy of indicating their opinions... more waited loyally for their leader to set policy, but they were not shy of indicating their opinions, in private through direct contacts with professional local party agents and their MP. As Ball demonstrates, back benchers, in particular, were the essential link that allowed the party to communicate downwards and upwards.