OK, a few observations. We've discussed this previously.
1. The main reasons for the lack of such a revolution historically are twofold; resistance, legal and illegal, by anti-revolutionary forces and the lack of actual organised will amongst those who did favour a significant change in government.
2. Just because a lot of workers and soldiers annoyed at the government and "Establishment" does not mean there will be a nation-wide revolution
3. This is not going to lead to a communist state; in 1919 there was no great support for such and there factor that allowed the Bolsheviks to seize power in Russia during the revolutions (organisation and determination) were lacking. I don't think
@Mynock was suggesting such in his OP.
4. It would be wise to remember the Bolsheviks did not enjoy majority support in Russia, even amonst the left; the decapitated the leadership of a popular revolution and guided it down their chosen path. Cf France and Iran.
5. There is not going to be a minority Labour government in 1919, the factors that led to the Churchill wipout of 1945, dissatisfaction with Conservative governance and the desire for change. are not present to that degree. Also remember the franchise requirements were very different; the RotPA 1918 was the first extension of voting rights.
Its an interesting angle to go down, but it does beg the question of how Labour wind up in power in the first place. IMO if there is going to be a revolution it would have to happen in 1918-1919, it seems tricky to get a Labour minority in that time frame.
This is absolutely true.
So, to alter the events of 1919 there will need to be some changes. The obvious one is to worsen the effects of the Great War, even have a Central Powers victory. The problem with that, specifically in the context of a revolution in 1918-19, is that it's really unlikely that the CPs could win at so late a stage. But maybe something happens, no flood of US
cannon fodder troops to save the day. A collapse of French morale, similar to the historical Aisne /Nivelle mutinies of 1917 and Pétain does something
really stupid (not much of a stretch) and starts shooting people en masse rather than just the 26 he had killed historically. The French troops remain on the defensive but refuse to attack
and actively resist efforts to quell the mutiny.
Now let's assume the Germans are less stupid and get wind of the mutiny. They take a risk and also go on the defensive, and move troops elsewhere.
The mutiny spreads to British troops, historically the mutiny at Étaples began in SEP1917. Let's assume that Haig and co, spooked by the problems with the French troops and aware of German troop movements, does something really stupid. Obviously Decisive Action is needed. Braithwaite will only be the first to die.
The New Zealanders are pissed off and when Healy is arrested they break him out. More MPs are sent and the 'scuffles' get bad, someone (an MP obviously) shoots into the crowd (this is historicaly BTW) and a riot starts. People are dead, mostly MPs. The troops arms themselves.
<stuff happens that I don't have the time to research in detail ATM>
The war ends. Some sort of negotiated peace, status quo ante bellum. There is massive unrest in Germany and France. The latter is heading for a revolution of its own.
British troops are still in camps ready to head home or to be demobilised. Rumours spread of British intervention in Russia, to aid the "Whites". This is wildly unpopular and the troops have a sense of victory after their 'victory' in the mutinies. The pace of demobilisation is slow, even slower than historically (and that lead to lots of problems) due to fears of revolution.
Trouble erupts all over the place; Purbright, Felixstowe, Shoreham, Kimmel Park, Calais, Le Havre, Aldershot, Biggin Hill, Blackpool, Bristol, Chatham, Dover, Fairlop, Folkestone, Grove Park, Kempton Park, Maidstone, Osterley Park, Park Royal, Shortlands, Southampton, Southwick, Westerham Hill and elsewhere.
The UK government is paralysed with fear; if the mutinous troops are allowed home and demobilised what will happen? But attempts to cowe or intimidate the troops fail and seemingly 'reliable' units, like the Guards, get involved. At home troops refuse to embark on trains and civilian workers, dockers and rail workers, get involved.
Socialist newspapers (e.g. the Workers' Weekly) start advocating soldiers and sailors councils and "If you must shoot, don't shoot the workers or each other". Prosecutions ofr sedition, seditious libel and incitement to mutiny result but fail when jurors refuse to convict.
Eventually the troops are demobilised en masse and shipped home.
The election of 1918 sees rather more communists, socialists and Labour MPs elected. In Ireland Sinn Féin gains a huge majority (probably the same as historically) and declares a Republic. The UKGov disagrees but has a bit of a problem doing anything, due to troop reliability and massive popular unrest at the idea. Various militias abound in Ireland, with some German support.
The also emerge in 'mainland' Britain, popularised by Pollard, Billing and, especially, Milner.
"I fear the time is very near at hand, when we will have to take some strong steps to stop the “rot” in this country, unless we wish to “follow Russia” into impotence & dissolution".
I'm sure people like Arrow will be involved.
Workers are busy demanding their rights and have lost faith in the ability of their 'betters' to govern. The failure of the war to, seemingly, achieve anything except millions dead and wounded, rankle with the ordinary people. Also the rest of the world senses British weakness and is interested.
The Matter of Ireland.
Most people who write about revolution in the period lack an understanding of the situation in Ireland. It is not comparable to the rest of Britain.
If, for example, you believe that the radicalisation of Irish politics after the Nine Days Insurrection (aka The Easter Rising) was due to the execution of the leadership of 'Sinn Féin' (I'm using the term loosely) then you are wrong, along with a lot of other people.
The main factor was the threatened imposition of conscription in 1917 which managed to unite just about everyone from the revolutionary fringe to the Church of Ireland in opposition. This lead to the 'German Plot' which was brilliantly used by Gay and Collins to decapitate the moderate leadership and place the radical, 'physical force Republicans' in control.
However most of the Irish revolutionaries are actually rather conservative, especially socially. There will not be a Communist state.
And historically the more radical elements of Irish Republicnism, e.g. Cumann na mBan, were sidelined after backing the anti-Treaty side in 1922.
Hopefully I'll have time to continue later.