To paraphrase Machiavelli, "For the Prince/Tyrant to stay in power, he must reward those who support him and weaken those who oppose him." In modern democratic language this would be "Maintain your core vote".
When historians look back at governments, they always focus upon what those governments achieved, what lasting legacy they left as a result of their time in power. Some governments are more memorable than others. I cannot help thinking that unless something dramatic changes in the next two years, the current government is not likely to leave much of a legacy beyond being a memorable coalition that muddled along during a severe economic depression.
The fundamental issue is that I cannot look at any of the government policies and think that they will help much. The language has been very much of austerity and surely successfully fixing or breaking the economy would leave a memorable legacy? In reality, I can only feel that the current period of government will be remembered as one of retrenchment.
By this I mean that just about every policy implemented by this government feels like it is aimed at removing something from most people. Welfare benefits, retirement age, pensions, wages, employee rights, right to privacy and so on. All the policies seeking to address these fundamental issues seem to take something away from the population at large. By unpleasant coincidence, many of these retrenchments benefit large corporations who have lobbied government or made political donations. While this may benefit a cosy elite, it does nothing to shore up the core vote or make the population want to re-elect a government that it thinks has taken so much away that was previously accepted as 'a right'. The equal marriage law is an exception and there are already hints that this surprising drive for this law by the Conservative is a desperate attempt to counter this perception, even at the cost of core party support.
No wonder the 'swivel eyed loons' are so strident, they themselves must feel the general frustration and while they may have some ideological affinity with the policies designed to pare back the state, they can also all too easily see that the few are making uncomfortable decisions not to the benefit of the many. Those politicians making the decisions benefit in the short to medium term, but those that come after them will suffer the consequences as seen by the rapid increase in voter disenfranchisement.
The coalition government is breaking one of Machiavelli's key rules, shore up your support and undermine your opponents. Labour know how to obey this rule and recent history shows that they will do this even at the cost of good government policies. Helping lobbyists and big businesses will not get the coalition votes, but then they will be in the money anyway so why should they care? Unlike the Princes and tyrants of Machiavelli's time, being toppled from power in a democratic society is unlikely to be fatal. It is a bit like those chief executive contracts, you get a golden handout from being kicked out rather than suffering some form of punishment. What a shame Ministers cannot be motivated by long term share options!
Friday 24 May 2013
Thursday 16 May 2013
Desperate denial
Recent political news have devoted countless column inches to the perceived rise in UKIP. Following this, it appears that the Conservative Party is in the process of imploding over Europe. For old fogies like me, this has very much a deja vu feeling as the Conservatives imploded over Europe in the last months of the Major Government, before Blair swept to power in 1997.
To date, the political reaction from all the mainstream political parties has been to blather on about how they need to reconnect with people and debunk UKIP's policies. If they believe this, they are in a desperate state of denial or do not want to publicly admit to knowing what is really going on. Some politicians are dropping pretty big hints that they know why UKIP are doing well, but they are staying 'on message' and talking about "engaging with people". I fear this approach is just kicking the problem to 2015 when a general election will make this issue someone else's problem. Sums up Government policy really!
So let's start with some basic political realities.
UKIP are a fringe party. This means that in terms of MPs and councillors, they are in the same category as the loony parties and the BNP/EDL or whatever they are called now. UKIP's policies are not as extreme as those parties, but it is not much more credible either. The voters know this. Debunking UKIP's more nutty policies is a waste of time because the voter is not interested in hearing it.
Also I do not consider the EU and immigration to be genuine voter issues. I am not saying the average voter is not concerned. What I am saying is that these topics are 'manufactured news'. They matter to the voter because the newspapers and politicians make it matter in order to promote their political viewpoints. In reality, ordinary people care about the economy, the NHS and social issues whether that be about social welfare, housing or crime.
So why are UKIP successful? They have no meaningful policies on those key issues.
UKIP are doing well because unlike all the mainstream parties, they are relatively honest both ideologically and in the way they approach politics. They have not made any promises that they have had to break and they are not tainted by the MP expenses scandal. Voters are turning to UKIP not because of their policies, but because the average voter is starting to hate the mainstream politician for their lies, broken promises and rampant corruption. This is a frightening concept for the big parties as it could signal a destruction in the political status quo that has been broadly prevalent in British politics for the last 70 years. In short, it threatens their cosy arrangement of pretending to represent the British electorate and pretending to offer a political choice at the ballot box.
I find Farage to be an enjoyable political figure to watch, but he preaches a very old and dangerous message. In the past that message would have been to blame the jews/blacks/gays/other religions/other nations for the problems being experienced by the population at large. Unfortunately such tricks remain as popular now as they did then, only the topic now is Europe and immigration. I have yet to hear a single coherent argument or economic case for how the UK would be better off pissing into the European tent from outside rather than going inside that tent and settling things the old fashioned way! The funny part is that the Germans are deeply frustrated because they see the UK as a potentially valuable ally for implementing much needed reform of the EU. Instead they just get lots of incoherent shouting and mixed messages. A bit like 1939 then...
In short, if the coalition government thinks that focussing on the EU and immigration is going to help them, they are in for a nasty shock at the next election. As was the case in 1997, the electorate were desperate to get rid of a corrupt political elite. Blair and Labour capitalised on this desire then, but with the Labour brand now firmly linked with that corruption that the electorate hated so much, what will happen in 2015? I fear that the current trend towards populist electioneering (as practised by UKIP) is only set to increase and so the political battleground will be fought over issues relating to the EU, immigration and the economy. The electorate will hate it, but will they hate it enough to do something unpredictable?
My prediction is not in 2015, but by 2020 things will get serious and probably messy.
To date, the political reaction from all the mainstream political parties has been to blather on about how they need to reconnect with people and debunk UKIP's policies. If they believe this, they are in a desperate state of denial or do not want to publicly admit to knowing what is really going on. Some politicians are dropping pretty big hints that they know why UKIP are doing well, but they are staying 'on message' and talking about "engaging with people". I fear this approach is just kicking the problem to 2015 when a general election will make this issue someone else's problem. Sums up Government policy really!
So let's start with some basic political realities.
UKIP are a fringe party. This means that in terms of MPs and councillors, they are in the same category as the loony parties and the BNP/EDL or whatever they are called now. UKIP's policies are not as extreme as those parties, but it is not much more credible either. The voters know this. Debunking UKIP's more nutty policies is a waste of time because the voter is not interested in hearing it.
Also I do not consider the EU and immigration to be genuine voter issues. I am not saying the average voter is not concerned. What I am saying is that these topics are 'manufactured news'. They matter to the voter because the newspapers and politicians make it matter in order to promote their political viewpoints. In reality, ordinary people care about the economy, the NHS and social issues whether that be about social welfare, housing or crime.
So why are UKIP successful? They have no meaningful policies on those key issues.
UKIP are doing well because unlike all the mainstream parties, they are relatively honest both ideologically and in the way they approach politics. They have not made any promises that they have had to break and they are not tainted by the MP expenses scandal. Voters are turning to UKIP not because of their policies, but because the average voter is starting to hate the mainstream politician for their lies, broken promises and rampant corruption. This is a frightening concept for the big parties as it could signal a destruction in the political status quo that has been broadly prevalent in British politics for the last 70 years. In short, it threatens their cosy arrangement of pretending to represent the British electorate and pretending to offer a political choice at the ballot box.
I find Farage to be an enjoyable political figure to watch, but he preaches a very old and dangerous message. In the past that message would have been to blame the jews/blacks/gays/other religions/other nations for the problems being experienced by the population at large. Unfortunately such tricks remain as popular now as they did then, only the topic now is Europe and immigration. I have yet to hear a single coherent argument or economic case for how the UK would be better off pissing into the European tent from outside rather than going inside that tent and settling things the old fashioned way! The funny part is that the Germans are deeply frustrated because they see the UK as a potentially valuable ally for implementing much needed reform of the EU. Instead they just get lots of incoherent shouting and mixed messages. A bit like 1939 then...
In short, if the coalition government thinks that focussing on the EU and immigration is going to help them, they are in for a nasty shock at the next election. As was the case in 1997, the electorate were desperate to get rid of a corrupt political elite. Blair and Labour capitalised on this desire then, but with the Labour brand now firmly linked with that corruption that the electorate hated so much, what will happen in 2015? I fear that the current trend towards populist electioneering (as practised by UKIP) is only set to increase and so the political battleground will be fought over issues relating to the EU, immigration and the economy. The electorate will hate it, but will they hate it enough to do something unpredictable?
My prediction is not in 2015, but by 2020 things will get serious and probably messy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)