Chang Zherong and Liang Minsu: British Marxist Historiography's Research on the Popular Radical Tradition
Structural changes within the British working class after World War II, as a major manifestation of the reorganization of the British social structure, not only drove the evolution of social currents of thought but also laid the foundation for the rise of radical social movements from the 1950s to the 1970s. The new social trends they formed continuously challenged and profoundly influenced the research horizons, theoretical frameworks, and methodological orientations of the historical profession. Against this backdrop, British Marxist historians actively traced the historical popular radical tradition. While emphasizing class formation and cultural resistance, they committed themselves to uncovering the agency and tradition of resistance among commoner actors and rebuilding the organic link between intellectuals and the labor movement. In doing so, they provided deep historical resources and intellectual reference points for understanding contemporary social crises and exploring paths for transformation.
Historical Context and Intellectual Origins
The study of the popular radical tradition by British Marxist historians emerged in the 1960s. It represented both a major transformation in historiographical methodology and an academic response to changes in social reality. The formation of this approach was deeply rooted in the multiple contexts of post-war British social change, intellectual contention, and the internal development of historiography.
After World War II, British society underwent rapid transformation, prompting groups and individuals to establish identity by looking back at history. This trend drove historians to conduct in-depth examinations of the historical constitution of social units such as the family, occupation, class, and ethnicity. As the subjects and forms of post-war social movements became increasingly diverse, sociological theories—particularly discussions regarding social structure, collective action, and cultural reproduction—were introduced into the field of history. This encouraged researchers to focus more on the mechanisms of group identity formation and the internal dynamics of social change, thereby broadening research topics and methodological horizons. Within this context, British Marxist historians, represented by E.P. Thompson and Eric Hobsbawm, gradually developed a radical social history approach characterized by a clear critical consciousness and a concern for the grassroots.
In terms of academic origins, British Marxist historians inherited the populist stance found in the early communist tradition, focusing on the attitudes, beliefs, and collective actions of the masses. They paid particular attention to early or transitional forms of popular struggle, such as peasant uprisings and the Luddite movement [1]. They emphasized reclaiming the historical experience of oppressed groups from the levels of culture and practice. While breaking through the limitations of traditional political history, they absorbed and transformed the theoretical methods of sociology and the Annales School [2], striving to push history toward an integrated analysis of social structures and cultural practices. This laid the foundation for subsequent research in labor history, gender history, and cultural history. Compared to the long-term focus of mainstream British historiography on state institutions and elite politics, social and intellectual changes after World War II prompted them to gradually expand their vision to socio-economic processes and the daily lives of ordinary people, achieving a research shift from "high politics" to "subculture."
Crucially, the rise of this research orientation was directly related to the historiographical debates of the time surrounding "Britishness" and the revolutionary tradition. In the 1950s and 1960s, the second generation of the New Left, represented by Perry Anderson, pointed out that the prevalence of reformism in Britain after the 19th century had inhibited the development of revolutionary Marxism; therefore, the British working class lacked true revolutionary character. This assertion was opposed by older Marxist historians such as Christopher Hill and E.P. Thompson. They emphasized that a powerful and continuous popular radical tradition existed in British history, which had merely been obscured by reformist narratives. Driven by this debate, Hill, Thompson, and others began to systematically unearth the popular radical tradition in British history—from the practices of early labor struggles to the Chartist movement [3], and from the germination of commoner radical thought to the trajectory of collective action. They used empirical research to respond to doubts about the "lack of revolutionary character in Britain," thereby laying the foundation for the study of the popular radical tradition.
Theoretical Substance and Paradigmatic Characteristics
The study of the British popular radical tradition is an important branch of the New Social History after World War II. It shares the latter’s concern for the grassroots and daily life, yet remains unique due to its distinct Marxist stance and consciousness of intervention. This approach expanded the subjects and categories of historical writing and critically reshaped the understanding of power structures and historical dynamics. In terms of theoretical methodology, British radical social history exhibits the following core paradigmatic characteristics:
First, it focuses on social inequality and marginalized groups, committing to rewriting history from a grassroots perspective to reveal forms of struggle and popular subjectivity obscured by mainstream narratives. For example, Thompson emphasized that the working class "formed" itself through political and cultural practices during the Industrial Revolution; Hobsbawm expanded the research scope of "primitive" [4] resistance (such as banditry and millenarian movements), demonstrating their significance as grassroots struggles.
Second, it opposes economic determinism, focusing on the interaction mechanisms between group consciousness, collective action, and social structure. It unearths political practices and cultural symbols outside the establishment and pays attention to micro-social foundations such as community, family, and emotion. For instance, Dorothy Thompson’s research on the Chartist movement revealed how the working class constructed collective identity through forms such as sermons and songs; Raymond Challinor’s investigation of Lancashire miners demonstrated the connection between grassroots self-organization and the shaping of class positions.
Third, it focuses on the dissemination and reception mechanisms of radical ideas, especially the ways in which concepts are embedded in daily life and their role in driving social change. In this regard, Christopher Hill’s analysis of the "Diggers" and "Levellers" [5] in the English Revolution elucidated how Puritan thought laid the foundation for capitalist ideology while becoming embedded in the daily lives of the masses; George Rudé, through his study of pre-industrial protest, broke the traditional narrative of the "mob," revealing the social composition and trans-regional commonalities of protesters.
Fourth, it critically analyzes the maintenance and operation of power relations, exposing the connections and distinctions between the superstructure—such as law, institutions, and culture—and class power and ideology, as well as how these become sites of domination and resistance. In this area, C. Desmond Greaves used song materials to present the historical course of colonialism and resistance between Britain and Ireland; John Saville meticulously analyzed the means of surveillance, judicial, and ideological control employed by the state during the Chartist movement.
Fifth, it possesses a clear consciousness of political intervention and theoretical reflexivity. This school upholds a socialist stance, and its research aims not only to reconstruct history but also to provide theoretical and historical resources for left-wing movements. Although some scholars question its tendency toward "over-politicization," it is precisely this value-laden position that distinguishes it from positivist historiography and highlights the public nature and critical potential of history.
Cross-Regional Expansion and Contemporary Value
Since the 1990s, the research by British Marxist historians on the popular radical tradition, as an important part of the 20th-century wave of historiographical innovation, has centered on criticizing traditional historiographical paradigms, focusing on marginalized groups, and revealing power structures. It has long focused on the interaction mechanism of "resistance-power." Its theories and methods have not only resonated globally but have also undergone creative local transformation and critical acceptance in different contexts.
Within Western academia, related research has deepened in two directions: on the one hand, scholars have reflected on the class theory represented by Thompson, breaking through single radical narratives and emphasizing the complex interaction between radical and conservative forces in history while pushing for a re-examination of local archives and folk documents to expand research into dimensions of culture, gender, and region. On the other hand, Hobsbawm’s theory of "social rebellion" has been used in Latin American and African studies to analyze the "pre-political" resistance of peasant and indigenous communities, revealing the significance of these forms as sources of modern political identity.
At the same time, this paradigm has deeply influenced the historical writing of scholars in the Global South, providing key analytical tools for identity politics research in post-colonial societies (such as Subaltern Studies and Afrocentric historiography), helping them challenge Eurocentric intellectual hegemony. African scholars have used this to focus on the cultural practices and informal resistance of labor within the colonial system, while the Latin American academic community has integrated class culture, the moral economy, and the critique of transnational capitalism to highlight the symbiotic relationship between economic and cultural demands in struggle.
At present, this field increasingly applies multi-disciplinary participatory perspectives. Methodologically, it integrates feminism, post-colonial theory, and cultural studies, incorporating categories such as race, gender, coloniality, and religion into the analysis. Regarding research themes, it extends from institutional struggles to cultural practices, memory construction, and emotional dimensions. In terms of horizon, it emphasizes transnational comparison and global connectivity. By revealing the historical agency of obscured groups and the power essence of the "natural order," radical social history has not only driven the innovation of historiographical methods but also provided critical intellectual resources for addressing contemporary issues such as inequality and ecological crises.
In both academic and political senses, radical social history has not only reconstructed the subjects and content of historical writing but has also profoundly intervened in the critique of structural power and the pursuit of social justice. It is dedicated to restoring the historical presence and agency of obscured actors (workers, women, colonial masses, ethnic minorities) and revealing the social construction and power essence of the so-called "natural order." This paradigm has promoted the self-innovation of historiographical methodology, advocating for the use of non-traditional historical materials, the development of micro-narratives, and the integration of a global perspective to achieve a deeper interpretation of mechanisms of oppression. This demonstrates that history can provide resources of legitimacy and bases of identity for contemporary struggles. At a time when globalized contradictions are deepening, inequality is intensifying, and ecological crises are looming, the problem-consciousness and methodology of British Marxist historians regarding the popular radical tradition still provide irreplaceable intellectual resources and discursive paths for understanding the past and examining the present.