Cross-post: 'My four general election predictions'



This post was first published on 2nd April on The Condition of the Left in England blog which is written by Samuel Fawcett, Deputy Editor of the Young Fabians’ ‘Anticipations’ publication.


‘Soothsaying is not really my thing normally – which is why it’s rather nice to have a go at it. But, as for who is going to win the election and by how much, I can only repeat a version of the general consensus from the geeks who study the daily polls. They say we will either have a Labour minority government or a Conservative minority government, or another coalition – Labour-Lib Dems, Conservative-Lib Dems or Conservative-DUP. I see no reason to doubt this.

Nevertheless, there are a few things that are perhaps worth saying which have not been covered extensively already.

1. The next Parliament will be one of rancour and increasing anti-politics mood.

Narrow majorities, coalitions and minority governments generally make for feverish politics. That the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition has endured and remained stable over the past five years is remarkable, but I can’t see that happening again this time, whoever forms the government and under what arrangement. That is, unless the mathematics delivers more or less the same result, but this is unlikely since both the Tories and Lib Dems look set to lose seats.

The mathematics will make each Parliamentary vote a potential battle for whichever government we end up with. For Labour I think this would be particularly problematic, especially if it is relying on Scottish Nationalist support. The media noise will be intense, with any weaknesses and/or controversial proposals feasted upon. It won’t be pretty, and the sense that our politics isn’t working will become even greater than it is now. Many people, especially on the left, will see this as a problem with our democracy but it will be better seen as a problem with the main parties themselves, neither of which makes sense as an entity like they used to.

2. But nothing major will happen in party political terms.

I’ve been pondering over the possibility that our politics may go back to the 18th Century sort of system in which floating groups of factions make fleeting alliances to form governments. This would be logical if only if it wasn’t for our political system and the age of mass democracy in which you need access to a lot of voters to get anywhere. Factions within parties rely on their party machines for organisation and funding; breaking away is a big risk which not many will take. It is only realistic when there is somewhere else to go, as with Douglas Carswell and Mark Reckless jumping over to UKIP. I can’t see any Labour MPs jumping off anywhere, whether to the Greens or to UKIP or a socialist party (unless the exceptional circumstances detailed below transpire). I also can’t see any more Tories moving to UKIP because…

3. UKIP will fail to make much headway, but could a split follow?

The UKIP brand has become toxic due to constant media attention on the nutcases and racists that the party has been attracting. I actually have a little sympathy for them, since it is inevitable that any party standing against continuing mass immigration (which is perfectly reasonable in itself) will attract racists and idiots, especially from a right wing base. Kippers are not all loonies, but enough are, and the media has seized on that.

So in places without strong local organisation to counter the bad publicity and reassure the decent majority of voters, UKIP will fall down and fail to make much headway. The party’s supporters make a lot of their expectations of becoming the opposition to Labour in Labour’s northern heartlands. However, to follow this through in the next few years, they would have to become another party, a lot less Shire Tory – or else arrange an amicable split between left-leaning north and right-leaning south. Things could start to get interesting if this happens, but will they be brave enough to go ahead? If they don’t do something their party will surely ebb away.

4. The ‘Green surge’ will die a death – and they will blame the media

A YouGov poll for The Sun now has the Green Party down on 4%, having previously gone up as far as double figures. This was inevitable as the party and its hapless leader Natalie Bennett finally started to get a bit of exposure in the media. At first this benefitted them as an unknown force claiming to offer a clear alternative. But scrutiny and exposure are bad for the Greens. Bennett is so bad she makes you feel sorry for her, but the party’s policy positions are perhaps even worse. They seem almost set out to deter everyday voters: from abolishing the armed forces to loads more immigration and loads more public spending. They seem most interested in pleasing their core vote – a quite particular band of people – rather than reaching out to a broader base of support, and they will suffer for it.

At 4% the Greens can’t go much lower, but I certainly don’t see them rising back very far. One question is if they are doing any better in their target seats, and though admittedly I am no expert about these I just can’t see it happening for them. To break through in a first-past-the-post system you need to be clever, well-organised and project a good image: none of which applies. Caroline Lucas will probably retain her seat in Brighton because incumbency matters, she is likeable and intelligent, and folk there will likely gather around her as one of their MPs. But that will likely be it.

So the #GreenSurge boasts of Green supporters will be dashed in the election. Having fought a comfort zone campaign, they will then retreat even further into those comfort zones afterwards, blaming the media when they should be looking at themselves.

You may ask why I am so bothered about the Greens. I am a Labour member, but a decent, coherent, centre-left pro-environment and pro-nature party would actually be my most natural home in politics. The Greens need a complete change in direction to become anything like that, and given that they’ve attracted in all sorts of far left types in recent times, there is little hope of this change happening. I find this very disappointing.’


For more on not-dissimilar themes, see The Labour Party and other party politics page.

Comments

Post a Comment

All comments, however critical, will be accepted as long as they are not personal and/or abusive.

Popular posts from this blog

Schopenhauer on Hegel: "A flat-headed, insipid, nauseating, illiterate charlatan."

There's nothing like a good insult or two, and if you're looking for insults in philosophy, you need look no further than Arthur Schopenhauer's comments on his German contemporary, the much more popular and successful Friedrich Hegel.  Schopenhauer suggested as a motto of Hegel’s philosophy some words of Shakespeare: ‘s uch stuff as madmen tongue and brain not’. He added : " Hegel, installed from above, by the powers that be, as the certified Great Philosopher, was a flat-headed, insipid, nauseating, illiterate charlatan, who reached the pinnacle of audacity in scribbling together and dishing up the craziest mystifying nonsense. This nonsense has been noisily proclaimed as immortal wisdom by mercenary followers and readily accepted as such by all fools, who thus joined into as perfect a chorus of admiration as had ever been heard before. The extensive field of spiritual influence with which Hegel was furnished by those in power has enabled him to ac...
Read more

Why Islamists and feminists avoid confronting each other

Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of our system of diversity is the way feminists and Islamists avoid directly confronting each other. Their ideologies are utterly opposed to each other, but within the system they are allies, so maintain distance and attack others. We can see this in how feminists resolutely avoid picking up on specifically Islamic-related instances of actual misogyny and discrimination in action. They nearly always stick to generalities and abstractions about the world or society as a whole, as Fawcett Society chief executive Sam Smethers does in telling Owen Jones that , “We have a very misogynistic culture in the UK.” In this version of reality, there is a single culture – or at least all the cultures we have come from the same root - and it is ‘very misogynistic’. This is the ‘patriarchy’ theory that is remarkably popular in the upper echelons of the liberal-left, just as it is among young feminists coming out of their Gender Studies courses at universit...
Read more

Immigration: our public debate misses the main point

Our public debate on immigration in Britain almost always focuses entirely on money and thereby misses the main point, a point that our political-media class finds difficult to deal with and that many regard as almost illegitimate. This is how people feel . It is emblematic of the state of democracy in Britain that any sort of negative opinions about immigration routinely get shouted down and lambasted as ‘wrong’ by the siren voices of people and institutions, most of which are on the supposedly ‘liberal-left’ side of politics. It is particularly disturbing the way that anyone who talks about negative effects of immigration is routinely attacked (often by hordes of lefty people on Twitter) as ‘racist’. These voices have a huge and in my view poisonous impact on the debate, forcing anyone who wants to make some nuanced points about immigration and identity into defending themselves against charges of racism, which is well established as one of the the worst offences one...
Read more