Voters suffering most severely from forms of economic oppression, and who share fundamental left-wing values, are not voting for Labour and are definitely not voting for one of the parties to the left of Labour.
Voters suffering most severely from forms of economic oppression, and who share fundamental left-wing values, are not voting for Labour and are definitely not voting for one of the parties to the left of Labour
I am going to indulge in a little navel-gazing to argue that we – if anyone even wants to be part of the ‘we’ of the left anymore – need to take a break from blabbering at each other, and ask why our attempts to communicate are such a dismal failure.
The bedroom tax is bad. Raar! Angry! Me! Furious! Today’s left produces an endless stream of tweets, updates, comments and blogposts opining perspectives that, give or take the odd sub-clause, most of its audience already agrees with. Pat on the back! Yeah! It’s outrageous! Morons!
Meanwhile, many of the voters bearing the full weight of economic inequality blame Romanian immigrants and amble off to vote UKIP.
That this marks a catastrophic failure on the part of the left was demonstrated by research quoted in the Guardian a few months ago. It found that 71 per cent of UKIP voters agree with left-wing statements such as ‘the government should redistribute income’ and ‘ordinary people do not get their fair share of the national wealth’.
This was a significantly higher proportion than Conservative (43 per cent) or Lib Dem (65 per cent) voters, and not far behind Labour (81 per cent). Further research found that of the 10 most UKIP-friendly seats in the country, eight are Labour.
So what’s happened? Why are we finding it so hard to reach an audience beyond our own social and digital circles?
Could it be a consequence of what the film-maker Adam Curtis and novelist Michel Houllebecq identified about the movements of the sixties: that they were never really about social justice, they were about individual self-expression, and so not only did they feed quite naturally into the rise of marketing and Thatcherism, but they also created a culture whereby one’s politics are primarily an aspect of the identity you don each day and swish around on the stage of the world?
In a cultural context such as this, it is entirely logical that collective engagement should be relegated to second-place behind simply airing one’s views and splashing around in the warm pool of your own impassioned outrage.
Or, linked but a little different, is it that the left’s struggles have shifted from the grounds of class to focus on sexuality and gender – understandably tempting territory for the middle-class radical, allowing them to feel personally involved and oppressed and so to indulge their own narcissism?
These are of course vital struggles for many. But their inherent appeal has an unfortunate consequence. Those experiencing greater economic than gender-based oppression end up being left behind, forgotten about, and most of all alienated from a left of bloggers, artists, cartoonists and tattooists who spend half the time banging on about their own sex lives, shaving habits, and taste in arthouse cinema.
Or is the old left right after all, and it’s all the fault of New Labour?
To a large extent we’re still reliant on Labour to, bee-like, convey our arguments across the whole of the country. But Miliband’s party of career politicians has no convincing narrative to explain why people find themselves in dead-ends of economic deprivation, let alone any substantive policies that might get them moving again.
Whatever balance of these and other factors is the cause, it has happened, and we should acknowledge it. The left is losing the argument. Voters suffering most severely from forms of economic oppression, and who share fundamental left-wing values, are not voting for Labour and are definitely not voting for one of the parties to the left of Labour.
Most are not blaming flows of international capital for the housing crisis. They’re not blaming inadequate worker compensation for their long hours, poor quality of life and reliance on in-work benefits. They’re not blaming the slashing of subsidised legal aid for their precarious employment situation.
No, as UKIP’s continuing journey up the polls demonstrates, they’re blaming Romanian immigrants and benefit cheats. And the left is failing to counter these arguments.
Perhaps instead of churning out more contempt-laden copy on the latest UKIP blunder or eccentric policy proposal, we should turn our touchscreens to discussing how we can communicate more effectively with those suffering most acutely from the inequities of our economic system.
Toby Hill is a London-based journalist and writer
176 Responses to “The rise of UKIP marks a failure of the left”
Guest
If you voted against the war, you can’t speak out against the coalition, since they are not as bad as IS. Bear that in mind.
Guest
“Most people”.
No, most people don’t outright hate data which goes against their views as you do. And of course you’re a warrior for your rich, as you benefit AND try and smash the doors shut on the poor.
You are the one trying to make the poor lose out, as you directly attack British democracy, and spew hate at anyone not just like you.
A dark skin is not a threat.
sarntcrip
wrong ukips blame jonny foreigner policy is a failure of our society to see the right wing non dom owned mediais bigoted and short sightedthse right wingers from big business import cheap labour and thenmake political capital gainst them
it is employers not foreigners who are setting low wany english worker in the shoes of those, ofteneastern europeans wuld do exactly the same, they know they would which is what frustrates them instead of turnining their bile on wealthy business people paying sub minimum wage rates it’s easier to blame the eaey target so those who cannot be bothered to think the issue through just don’t
most english /british people want to live in peace with their neighbour as by and large they have for well over half a century why target business owners when an easier target foreigners are their to blame
in spite of all the publicity ukip have only crept past 12%and more people are realising the tired career poiticians farage criticises are the very ones he could not wait to recruit the city spiv with the smart patter is fooling fewer people the lie of labour support moving their way is exposed
UKIP IF YOU WANT TO THE REST OF US ARE WIDE AWAKE ENSURING THE UKIP BRAND OF FASCISM DOES NOT GAIN CREDIBILITY
Guest
Can you please cite these studies you cite as immigation being “good” for economy because there are numerous other studies, HoL Select Committee wrote a report, with the report in Library of the House that states the exact oppposite. And there are others to support this fact – that there are no real economic benefit to mass immigration as implemented by Labour since 1997. You and your crew – work on the mantra – repeat a lie ofter enough and people believe it.
robertcp
I agree about Labour changing the narrative in 1945-51 and Thatcher doing the same after 1979.