Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-10975360-20131216191302/@comment-4206034-20131216230956

But for that to happen, they would have to adopt some Socialist ideals - such as taxing the higher classes more. Most soldiers who were returning from the war did not identify themselves as the higher class and many of them had to rebuild their homes and such. If Churchill could have promoted that (much to the disdain of the Higher Classes) as well as played off on the fact it was "his" government which got them through the war - then it is not out of the question. However, the idea the Conservatives would adopt these ideas is what is the main problem. Find a way around it - you are sorted.

Conservatives in general are bad administrators (don't get me started on Thratcher or Cameron) but Churchill was of a different breed of men. He wanted British greatness and would not have ever cut down on industry. I would be very sure under his rule - he would have promoted much greater closeness of his African colonies against the Communist Bloc and although the going of India was certain - under him the colony could have been promised independence in say 1950, which would allow the Brits to sponge of more Indian riches as well as keeping the population in check by promising independence.

He could have changed the way the British evolved after World War II, but we never got to see that OTL. Let's see what you can cook up ATL.