Despite major shifts in the position of older people in British society during the first half of the twentieth century, accounts of the emergence of retirement pensions have ignored the role of old age pressure groups, preferring arguments which emphasise structured dependency rather than human agency. By contrast, this paper examines the political campaigns mounted by two groups – one claiming to speak on behalf of older people, the other composed of older people themselves. The failure of both groups to influence major policy decisions relates not to the passivity or ‘silent suffering’ of older people, or to ‘generational equity’ criteria which privileged younger, unemployed workers, but to the inadequacies of their different styles of campaigning. While the National Conference, in the decade after 1916, focused their moral invective around notions of thrift which failed to arouse or articulate the needs of all but the most ‘respectable aged Britishers’, the uncompromising, combative approach of the National Federation during the critical years leading up to the Beveridge legislation incurred the disdain of policymakers. In the intervening years, trade union activity was underlain by mixed motives. While the historical specificity of the movements and debates that are discussed is significant, the generationally specific lifetime experiences of the older people in question to some extent determined their character.