Majorities have group identities just like minorities, and that's fine.
Majorities have group identities just like minorities, and that’s fine
UKIP now has its second MP in the form of Mark Reckless, whose decision to defect has albeit reduced his majority from 9,953 in 2010 to 2,920.
So what should the Labour Party – and the left more broadly – take from UKIP’s latest triumph?
Labour really do look out of touch
Labour held the Rochester and Strood seat until 2010; yet four years later the party has seemingly surrendered the seat without a fight. Emily Thornberry also managed to snatch some of the ignominy of defeat from the Conservatives by tweeting a photo which appeared to express shock at the sight of an England flag draped from a bedroom window.
It’s easy to put this down to an innocent misjudgement on the Labour frontbencher’s part, but there are a not insignificant number of people on the left – people who I agree with about most things – who really do view the sight of a British or English flag (for some reason the flags of other countries don’t count) with unadulterated horror.
This helps to explain why UKIP’s line about a ‘metropolitan elite’ is so effective. Most people view the flying of an England flag as a relatively harmless affair, even if they don’t much go in for flags themselves. Yet many liberals view flag-flying as a form of coded racism. Patriotism is supposed to be irrational and intelligent people are meant to transcend or sneer at it, or something like that. In reality most people aren’t raging nationalists, but nor are they terrified of any expression of national sentiment. Majorities have group identities just like minorities, and that’s fine.
UKIP must be pinned down
As Dave Osler wrote earlier today, ‘The more concretely we paint UKIP as a pointless third-rate Thatcher tribute band, the more effective it will prove’. UKIP can’t pose as libertarians yet oppose same-sex marriage and support tougher border controls. Nor can the party claim to represent the interests of working class voters while intimating that it might privatise the NHS given half a chance. You can’t have a dish of fried snowballs and you can’t have reheated Thatcherism with socialist characteristics.
If UKIP continues to win over disgruntled Tories who dislike the liberal direction of society that’s one thing, but Labour and the wider left ought to draw attention to UKIP’s Thatcherite and privatising bent. The so-called ‘left behind voters’ may have concerns about immigration, but they also have concerns about jobs and whether there will be an NHS in 10 years time.
There is plenty of scope for social justice here – the meat and drink of a politician like Ed Miliband. Unlike their leader Nigel Farage, UKIP voters are bothered about things like economic inequality; and however much UKIP politicians like Paul Nuttall MEP play up their left-leaning economic credentials, the party is led by an unapologetic heir of Thatcher. It’s time to capitalise on that.
Listen to the sensible voices on immigration
By that I mean neither the anti-immigrant obsessives nor the open border liberals (although I wouldn’t wish to compare the two in terms of sentiment). The think tank British Future released some excellent research this week showing that a majority of the public sit neither at the rejectionist pole nor the ultra-liberal one. Most people don’t want to pull up the drawbridge but nor are they comfortable with the high level of immigration Britain currently has; they want something in between.
The research also rejected the crude assumption that racial prejudice is the cause of most if not all opposition to immigration. When respondents were asked to choose which of a list of attributes was most important to being British, half said respecting people’s right to freedom of speech was the most important thing; 46 per cent said respect for the law; and 41 per cent said speaking English. Only six per cent chose ‘being white’.
This is hugely encouraging. It also indicates that, beyond a small proportion of obsessives, the ‘bigot’ explanation for worries about immigration is well wide of the mark. Neither open nor closed borders but something in between: centre-left politicians can work with this.
James Bloodworth is the editor of Left Foot Forward. Follow him on Twitter
41 Responses to “What the left should take from Rochester and Strood”
Ricayboy
Is it not though?
Leon Wolfeson
You might see it that way.
Ricayboy
The fact is that the English cross of St George has only come into relatively widespread use since the 1990s. Before that all far-right organisations tended to use the British Union Flag. If you see pictures of the National Front marching they nearly always used the Union flag. The English Defence League are Unionists and use the Union Flag as much as the English flag. I would put it to you that all contemoprary ‘right wing’ groups, the BNP, Britain First etc. are far more wedded to ‘Britishness’ and the British flag than any sense of Englishness.
As for the British flag, it is widely known as the ‘Butchers Apron’ in Scotland, Wales and Ireland. The so-called British flag is not appreciated and used equally in all parts of the United Kingdom and there are many people (though not all) in the other home nations who would not touch it with a barge pole.
The British flag was the flag used widely in the British Empire and is a controversial symbol in many former colonies. The English flag has never really been hi-jacked by any group despite what certain people keep telling us. The problem is that while they are happy for the Scots to be Scottish and the Welsh to be Welsh they want all the English to maintain a British identity and to see Englishness as racist and exclusive. I am for a healthy, celebratory, inclusive English identity and a positive use of the English flag.
Guest
The English flag is exclusionary of the British (which I consider myself), as far as I’m concerned, and your dislike for the British flag shows that you seem to hold that view.
Oh, some sports events etc. there might be good reason to fly it, but the English flag is beloved of the far right today for good reason. Your denials of that are telling – inclusive is the last thing it is, and your unintentional self-description is apt.
Ricayboy
Is the Scottish flag exclusionary of the British? Or the Welsh one?
Why the heck should the English flag be considered any more exclusive than those others? It is available for all English people of all backgrounds to use just as the British flag is.
Why should I use a flag that is largely neglected in vast swathes of what is supposedly my country? Why should I use a flag which symbolises a British elite that is seeking to expunge an ancient nation and replace it with a bogus British identity that is really Englishness by any other name anyway?
The Scots and Welsh are proud of their identities and I along with some 70% of people in England consider myself English first and foremost. I will only support the Union as long as it serves the needs of the English nation.
Even the most ardent unionist in Scotland is a proud Scot. It puzzles me why some English people are wedded to a ‘British only’ identity. Look how close Scotland came to leaving the Union.
As I took pains to explain above, the English flag is used less frequently than the Union Flag by right-wing groups. The way to stop it being supposedly associated with any particular political stance is to use it everywhere on all occassions.
If we want the Union to survive we need to give England the same rights to identity and representation as the other home nations, otherwise Britishness is a farce and the Union will surely disintegrate.