Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Something I read on Twitter - what seemingly insignificant event had a massive effect? Gordon Brown's mic being left on, Alf Broughton being well enough to vote, that sort of thing.

Charlie Kennedy having one for the road...

A couple of questions. Who is Alf Broughton? And why, out of the tens of millions of voters in this country, is him being well enough to vote considered a game-changer?

MP for Batley.

Wiki wrote:On 28 March 1979, the [Labour] government faced a knife-edge vote of no confidence when Broughton was on his deathbed at his home in Batley.[2] Broughton's doctors were extremely concerned for him and strongly advised him not to travel. Broughton knew that his death was imminent, but he was still willing to come down to vote with the government.[3] However, Deputy Chief Whip Walter Harrison, with the agreement of Prime Minister James Callaghan, decided it would be unacceptable to ask him to do so, in case he died during the ambulance journey.[3] The government lost by one vote; had Broughton been present, the Government would have survived, assuming Speaker George Thomas would have broken the tie in favour of the status quo per Speaker Denison's rule. Broughton died five days later, aged 76.

Thanks Malc. I didn't know about that.

Can't recall the details but it was something like Hitler appeaser Lord Halifax having the squits so couldn't attend dinner with George VI that would have offered him the premiership following Chamberlain's resignation.

As much as I hate the man, I offer this: Alexander Johnson picking the “leave” column to submit.

Cummings failing his civil service fast track exam.

Malcolm Armsteen wrote: ↑Sun Oct 06, 2024 2:47 pm MP for Batley.

Wiki wrote:On 28 March 1979, the [Labour] government faced a knife-edge vote of no confidence when Broughton was on his deathbed at his home in Batley.[2] Broughton's doctors were extremely concerned for him and strongly advised him not to travel. Broughton knew that his death was imminent, but he was still willing to come down to vote with the government.[3] However, Deputy Chief Whip Walter Harrison, with the agreement of Prime Minister James Callaghan, decided it would be unacceptable to ask him to do so, in case he died during the ambulance journey.[3] The government lost by one vote; had Broughton been present, the Government would have survived, assuming Speaker George Thomas would have broken the tie in favour of the status quo per Speaker Denison's rule. Broughton died five days later, aged 76.

We can never know for sure the what ifs of history, but I do wonder how much difference that vote of no confidence really made. As an election was due in October 1979 come what may, all the NC vote actually achieved was to bring it forward five months, is there any reason to suppose an October GE result would have been significantly different if Callaghan had stayed in office through the summer?

One of history's classics is the premature death of Ogedai Khan, 1241.

Son and successor to Genghis Khan.
His armies were overrunning Hungary and Poland at the time of his death.
As custom demanded, the warlords and their hordes returned to Ulaan Bator to participate in selection of the new Khan.
A process which, in this case took five years.

Poland, Germans and the Austrian Empire were saves and the hordes never menaced central Europe again.

Some historians insist that a continues invasions would have swept to the bay of Biscay unchecked.
Others insist that entirely horse borne armies would have been checked in the Black Forest and alps.
This would have left a Mongol central Europe.

Beyond doubt is the rise of the Russian city states like Moscow and Novogrod might never have happened had the Mongol empire reached several thousand miles further westward.

On a later historic note: Gavrilio Princip shooting Archduke Franz Ferdinand.

Or a few decades on: Tom Cruise dropping off his suitcase bomb the wrong side of Hitler's table leg.

More history, featuring some well ken't names.,

https://intellectualtakeout.org/2017/07 ... f-history/

Oboogie wrote: ↑Sun Oct 06, 2024 4:37 pm

Malcolm Armsteen wrote: ↑Sun Oct 06, 2024 2:47 pm MP for Batley.

Wiki wrote:On 28 March 1979, the [Labour] government faced a knife-edge vote of no confidence when Broughton was on his deathbed at his home in Batley.[2] Broughton's doctors were extremely concerned for him and strongly advised him not to travel. Broughton knew that his death was imminent, but he was still willing to come down to vote with the government.[3] However, Deputy Chief Whip Walter Harrison, with the agreement of Prime Minister James Callaghan, decided it would be unacceptable to ask him to do so, in case he died during the ambulance journey.[3] The government lost by one vote; had Broughton been present, the Government would have survived, assuming Speaker George Thomas would have broken the tie in favour of the status quo per Speaker Denison's rule. Broughton died five days later, aged 76.

We can never know for sure the what ifs of history, but I do wonder how much difference that vote of no confidence really made. As an election was due in October 1979 come what may, all the NC vote actually achieved was to bring it forward five months, is there any reason to suppose an October GE result would have been significantly different if Callaghan had stayed in office through the summer?

Yeah I mean the ecomonic picture would have been much the same and it's possible the result could have been worse for Labour.

The death of the John Smith in 1994. If he'd lived there'd have been no "yo, Blair".

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2024 9:54 pm Yeah I mean the ecomonic picture would have been much the same and it's possible the result could have been worse for Labour.

The bigger turning point was Sunny Jim Callaghan bottling the decision to go to the country the previous Autumn.

Bones McCoy wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2024 1:27 am More history, featuring some well ken't names.,

https://intellectualtakeout.org/2017/07 ... f-history/

Was the sinking of the Titanic really a turning point of history, and was the shooting of Archduke Ferdinand really the only possible excuse that the great powers could have come up with to start a war that many of them were spoiling for anyway?

All that article does is show that events are influenced by other events.

True turning points, like disasters, are multi-causal.

Killer Whale wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2024 7:44 am

Bones McCoy wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2024 1:27 am More history, featuring some well ken't names.,

https://intellectualtakeout.org/2017/07 ... f-history/

Was the sinking of the Titanic really a turning point of history, and was the shooting of Archduke Ferdinand really the only possible excuse that the great powers could have come up with to start a war that many of them were spoiling for anyway?

Titanic, No.

I'd argue that the shot that triggered the first world war played a large part in aligning and mobilising the minor powers.
Especially in, and adjacent to the Balkans.

But, and I make the point through gritted teeth, the shot that precipitated the Austrian reaction which led to war with Serbia and then, by alliance, with Russia, which led to war with France and therefore Britain, did not by itself cause the Great War and the Great Unfinished Business, the Cold War, German reunification and Putin. It was the catalyst to a warlike situation that had been festering for years - since the Congress of Vienna.

That's how history works. Not this simplistic hinge event stuff.

Also certain things if heading in a direction will always happen, they will play out differently but if the direction is trending it will take that direction.

I remember the tea party back in the 00s they were trending a certain way, they’ve ended up in a place they didn’t expect but you play that game you get that result.