[Politics] The Liberal Democrats
Dec. 17th, 2010 10:39 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
davywavyThere was a point, about a year ago, when the Liberal Democratic Party were the hippest, most jivingest party in the country. Bouyed by Nick Clegg's failure to make a complete tit of himself on national television, LibDem supporters were jubilant, opinion polls briefly put them in second place in the election, and "I agree with Nick" was a catchphrase for, oooh, the best part of a week.
Speaking personally, I've never really considered voting for the LibDems. I always thought they had some really good ideas, but they also had far too many policies which read like they'd been written by someone who'd been kicked in the head by a horse - and it looked like most of the electorate agreed with me, because come the election they'd slipped back to their usual third place. It's arguable that the defection of the Eurosceptic wing of the Conservative partty to UKIP had a greater effect upon the outcome of the last election* than did any agreeing with Nick, but thanks to the vagaries of the electoral system we ended up with a Liberal Party in government for the first time in as long as anyone who is young enough to still have all their marbles can remember.
Since then, I've been generally impressed by how the coalition has worked out. I didn't vote for either of the parties involved, but overall I've come to the conclusion that of all the possible outcomes of the election they've turned out to be probably the least worst. George Osborne's economic shortcomings have been bolstered by David Laws and Danny Alexander telling him what to do, whilst the more 'kicked-in-the-head-by-a-horse' LibDem policies have been curtailed by David Cameron laughing until he cries every time they're mentioned. Moreover, the LibDems have got several policies through which most certainly wouldn't have happened under a solely Conservative majority - the raising of the tax threshold to 10k (which is a brilliant policy and will do more to get people into work and out of the poverty trap than Labour managed in 13 years and with all the tax credits you can eat. I'm hoping the economics of raising it to 14k will be in place before the next election), and the ending of the detention of migrant children, for example. Additionally, they've got a shot at their dream of electoral reform.
Despite their successes, the outright rejection of the LibDems by their voters has been impressive to watch. If I'd been a LibDem supporter before the last election, I'd be pretty much delighted at this stage of procedings but it appears I'm missing something about the Liberal Democrat Supporter mindset - and it's what I'm missing that I want to explore. Y'see, I'm generally an optimistic, glass-half-full sort of chap and I find that the world goes my way so rarely that I'm delighted when it does. The outrage from Libdems that their party hasn't been able to acheive their ideal world in eight months flat as part of a compromise government just leaves me baffled, and I'm starting to wonder what the average Liberal Democrat actually wants...
Nick Clegg once said something to the effect that the Libdems weren't a party of government, but their role was to act as the conscience of government and that comment makes me wonder if the LibDems (or their supporters) really ever wanted to get into power, with all the compromises and failures which being in power entails. As I didn't vote for either of the two current governmental parties, I'm aware of the smug self-satisfaction which comes from being able to believe anything I like whilst never having to engage with the consequences of seeing those beliefs enacted or challenged - and I'm kinda coming to the conclusion that the LibDems were the party for people who wanted to feel like that.
It's all really blown up over the pledges, signed by many Libdem candidates, to oppose university tuition fees. Pledges which, in the event, many of those who are now MPs have been unable to keep, to their obvious distress. Higher tuition fees have been coming ever since Polytechnics were allowed to start pretending to be universities in the early 1990s, Tony Blair decided that anyone can go to university no matter how thick they are and finally Gordon Brown getting the economy alone in the changing rooms and saying it had a real purty mouth. It really strikes me that blaming the Libdems for having to break that promise is like being angry that someone who promised to buy you a pint turned up at the pub having been mugged and their wallet stolen. Like Vince Cable wearily said - he's having to live in the real world now.
But this is a serious question to all my Libdem-supporting pals out there. What are the Liberal democrats? Or what did you think they were? Are you a political party, with politics being 'the art of the possible', with all the the grubby compromise that entails? Or were you just the biggest pressure group in the country all along who happened to get unlucky and find yourselves in over your heads when it came down to it? You've got more of your policies enacted in coalition than you otherwise ever would in a million years - why aren't you happy? What were you expecting to happen? What would you like to have happened?
What, in other words, did you actually want in the first place - because I'm darned if I can figure it out from your reactions.
*There are twenty seats where the number of UKIP votes exceded the number of votes which would have swung them to the Conservatives. If Cameron hadn't gone back on his EU-referendum promise, I reckon we'd've had an outright Conservative majority.
Speaking personally, I've never really considered voting for the LibDems. I always thought they had some really good ideas, but they also had far too many policies which read like they'd been written by someone who'd been kicked in the head by a horse - and it looked like most of the electorate agreed with me, because come the election they'd slipped back to their usual third place. It's arguable that the defection of the Eurosceptic wing of the Conservative partty to UKIP had a greater effect upon the outcome of the last election* than did any agreeing with Nick, but thanks to the vagaries of the electoral system we ended up with a Liberal Party in government for the first time in as long as anyone who is young enough to still have all their marbles can remember.
Since then, I've been generally impressed by how the coalition has worked out. I didn't vote for either of the parties involved, but overall I've come to the conclusion that of all the possible outcomes of the election they've turned out to be probably the least worst. George Osborne's economic shortcomings have been bolstered by David Laws and Danny Alexander telling him what to do, whilst the more 'kicked-in-the-head-by-a-horse' LibDem policies have been curtailed by David Cameron laughing until he cries every time they're mentioned. Moreover, the LibDems have got several policies through which most certainly wouldn't have happened under a solely Conservative majority - the raising of the tax threshold to 10k (which is a brilliant policy and will do more to get people into work and out of the poverty trap than Labour managed in 13 years and with all the tax credits you can eat. I'm hoping the economics of raising it to 14k will be in place before the next election), and the ending of the detention of migrant children, for example. Additionally, they've got a shot at their dream of electoral reform.
Despite their successes, the outright rejection of the LibDems by their voters has been impressive to watch. If I'd been a LibDem supporter before the last election, I'd be pretty much delighted at this stage of procedings but it appears I'm missing something about the Liberal Democrat Supporter mindset - and it's what I'm missing that I want to explore. Y'see, I'm generally an optimistic, glass-half-full sort of chap and I find that the world goes my way so rarely that I'm delighted when it does. The outrage from Libdems that their party hasn't been able to acheive their ideal world in eight months flat as part of a compromise government just leaves me baffled, and I'm starting to wonder what the average Liberal Democrat actually wants...
Nick Clegg once said something to the effect that the Libdems weren't a party of government, but their role was to act as the conscience of government and that comment makes me wonder if the LibDems (or their supporters) really ever wanted to get into power, with all the compromises and failures which being in power entails. As I didn't vote for either of the two current governmental parties, I'm aware of the smug self-satisfaction which comes from being able to believe anything I like whilst never having to engage with the consequences of seeing those beliefs enacted or challenged - and I'm kinda coming to the conclusion that the LibDems were the party for people who wanted to feel like that.
It's all really blown up over the pledges, signed by many Libdem candidates, to oppose university tuition fees. Pledges which, in the event, many of those who are now MPs have been unable to keep, to their obvious distress. Higher tuition fees have been coming ever since Polytechnics were allowed to start pretending to be universities in the early 1990s, Tony Blair decided that anyone can go to university no matter how thick they are and finally Gordon Brown getting the economy alone in the changing rooms and saying it had a real purty mouth. It really strikes me that blaming the Libdems for having to break that promise is like being angry that someone who promised to buy you a pint turned up at the pub having been mugged and their wallet stolen. Like Vince Cable wearily said - he's having to live in the real world now.
But this is a serious question to all my Libdem-supporting pals out there. What are the Liberal democrats? Or what did you think they were? Are you a political party, with politics being 'the art of the possible', with all the the grubby compromise that entails? Or were you just the biggest pressure group in the country all along who happened to get unlucky and find yourselves in over your heads when it came down to it? You've got more of your policies enacted in coalition than you otherwise ever would in a million years - why aren't you happy? What were you expecting to happen? What would you like to have happened?
What, in other words, did you actually want in the first place - because I'm darned if I can figure it out from your reactions.
*There are twenty seats where the number of UKIP votes exceded the number of votes which would have swung them to the Conservatives. If Cameron hadn't gone back on his EU-referendum promise, I reckon we'd've had an outright Conservative majority.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-12-17 10:56 am (UTC)I love: "George Osborne's economic shortcomings have been bolstered by David Laws and Danny Alexander telling him what to do, whilst the more 'kicked-in-the-head-by-a-horse' LibDem policies have been curtailed by David Cameron laughing until he cries every time they're mentioned. "
As to why would anyone vote liberal, I was thinking about this the other day, as someone painted the Conservatives as the upperclass party, Labour as the Working class party and the liberals as the middle class party. I thought how shockly stupid this was. Its extremely undesirable to divide polotics along the lines of class. its also simply not true, because the lines are so blurred. But then I though, I could see why they said it. Isn't there a comedy sketch about this with 3 men all lined up talking rubbish?
no subject
Date: 2010-12-17 11:54 am (UTC)The day democracy became EU-scepticism was the day we should've left.
no subject
Date: 2010-12-17 12:02 pm (UTC)I reluctantly conceed for some really important stuff the question: "Should this recomendation from Parliment be adopted?" should be asked. In principle though, representatives who have time to look at this things property are great. Means I don't need to worry about any of it.
And can worry about more important things. Like how much snow is there.
no subject
Date: 2010-12-17 12:06 pm (UTC)The problem with being an idealist party is that a lot of your supporters are also idealists. Instead of thinking 'gosh, what would it have been like if Clegg wasn't involved?', a lot of supporters are throwing their toys out of the pram over broken pledges. Don't get me wrong, I think its bad that those MPs who signed the pledge didn't at least abstain from voting, but I think those who are declaring the LibDems to be 'Tories in disguise' or 'selling their soul for seats in parliament' are pretty juvenile in their arguments.
This has not been helped by Nick Clegg, who is left in a very painful position. I have no doubt that he could turn some of that pre-election charm on and deflect all manner of aggression away from the Lib-Dems and onto the Conservatives, but that would of course lead to the coalition falling to bits and the country getting royally shafted. Instead, he's being used as the man in the firing line, trying to explain that 'yes, we said we'd get you a pony for christmas, but we can't afford it'.
I can honestly see Clegg trying to make himself a scapegoat, taking as much of the flack as possible on his own back and then resigning in a hail of 'sorry' once electoral reform gets through so that the Lib Dems can pretend 'now we've got rid of him, things will be different'.
IMHO the LibDems are making the difficult transition from the heady world of Liberal idealism to the more difficult task of applied liberal values. when you aren't in charge you can change the world tomorrow, when you are in charge you have to start at day 1.
no subject
Date: 2010-12-17 12:06 pm (UTC)however I am rather baffled at the scale of the cuts. Did labour really fuck things up THAT much? Or is it 'the enconomy'? Or what. I don't understand politics well enough to know whether the previous party were a bunch of idiots or this coalition is majorly over reacting.
I'm glad it's not me having to sort out the mess. Happy to be a pleb rather than someone in power here.
no subject
Date: 2010-12-17 12:22 pm (UTC)In answer to your question
Date: 2010-12-17 12:23 pm (UTC)One of the few members of the old government who came out with any dignity at all was Alastair Darling, who as chancellor took to hiding money from Brown (as PM) because otherwise he'd've spent it and made the situation worse.
no subject
Date: 2010-12-17 12:46 pm (UTC)But the toy-throwing? It's been staggering. I'm amazed by just how divorced from reality so many LibDem voters appear to have been over what is actually achievable within the quite narrow confines of government.
no subject
Date: 2010-12-17 12:57 pm (UTC)"the raising of the tax threshold to 10k (which is a brilliant policy and will do more to get people into work and out of the poverty trap than Labour managed in 13 years and with all the tax credits you can eat."
Sorry, but I don't believe you this time.
Date: 2010-12-17 12:59 pm (UTC)Re: Sorry, but I don't believe you this time.
Date: 2010-12-17 01:06 pm (UTC)Re: Sorry, but I don't believe you this time.
Date: 2010-12-17 01:09 pm (UTC)C'mon dude, a Labour party memeber wanting lower taxes is like an anti-globalisation campaigner with a Starbucks loyalty card in their wallet. You can't have it both ways, attractive though it is.
Re: Sorry, but I don't believe you this time.
Date: 2010-12-17 01:13 pm (UTC)I mean, that was the whole point of the post about the Libdems, so yeah.
Re: Sorry, but I don't believe you this time.
Date: 2010-12-17 01:19 pm (UTC)Labour have preferred to tax and distribute through benefits, although even Brown has always been keen to merge the benefit and taxation systems - but then haven't all governments (this one certainly).
Tax credits can be seen as an attempt to effectively lower low-rate tax payers marginal rates - I think that's a little bureaucratic, and would prefer lower rates of income tax. However, it is complicated - and as such can't wholly dismiss the previous governments attempts to bet the poverty trap. the problem with the current government is the economy and a lack of growth in employment - I just don't think the private sector will be able to pick up the slack, when public sector jobs are being shed.
Re: Sorry, but I don't believe you this time.
Date: 2010-12-17 01:23 pm (UTC)Lower tax or some groups, and higher for others.
Re the globalisation analogy - globalisation isn't one thing, the idea is contested (narrative - if you like) - and you can certainly support some aspects but not others.
no subject
Date: 2010-12-17 01:26 pm (UTC)So yeah, I wasn't expecting much, and I've been slightly disappointed in some cases, and pleasantly surprised in others.
Re: Sorry, but I don't believe you this time.
Date: 2010-12-17 01:27 pm (UTC)I'm always impressed by just how right he was in that particular prediction.
the problem with the current government is the economy and a lack of growth in employment
I love the way you neatly trip past how that problem might have arisen, and where the lion's share of respinsibility might lie :D
Re: Sorry, but I don't believe you this time.
Date: 2010-12-17 01:32 pm (UTC)It's a grand feeling, isn't it?
Re: Sorry, but I don't believe you this time.
Date: 2010-12-17 01:35 pm (UTC)Re the economic problem, I think global crisis is the phrase you should be looking for. If anything Uk unemployment and growth currently isn't that bad compared to US or EU, and that's probably down to the expansionary policies of the previous gov. We shall see how far the current coalitions austerity agenda takes us down a hole.
Re: Sorry, but I don't believe you this time.
Date: 2010-12-17 01:37 pm (UTC)You say you are a still a card carrying member of the Labour Party.
Why?
Re: Sorry, but I don't believe you this time.
Date: 2010-12-17 01:38 pm (UTC)Re: Sorry, but I don't believe you this time.
Date: 2010-12-17 01:39 pm (UTC)Would I be correct in guessing that you haven't looked too hard into the causes of the crash? Bear in mind I was predicting it in May 2005 based solely on what Brown had done, you might glance a little closer to home.
Re: Sorry, but I don't believe you this time.
Date: 2010-12-17 01:40 pm (UTC)Re: Sorry, but I don't believe you this time.
Date: 2010-12-17 01:49 pm (UTC)I've always been a Labour supporter, however I'm not sure how partisan I am I've voted Lib Dem and actually quite like elements of the coalition, particularly on civil liberties, big society/localism (although I can't stand Eric Pickles and Shapps).
Why I'm still a card carrying member - stubbornness :) to some extent I remember the 80's and carry some of those associated prejudices against the Tories, but positively I think the Labour movement and Party is the best vehicle for the causes that I rank highly : employment work place rights being one of them (the minimum wage is for me is one of the best most humane thing the previous admin did).
What I really support are traditions that exist within the the Labour Party: the co-op, civil liberties (al a Roy Jenkins). I think the Labour Party should look at some of its older mutual traditions - I think EdM is doing that, to some extent.
If I was my current age in th early 80s I would have found it difficult to stay with the Labour Party, and would have probably joined the SDP.
There are also traditions within the party
Re: Sorry, but I don't believe you this time.
Date: 2010-12-17 01:51 pm (UTC)