[Politics] Peak UKIP

[davywavy]

Well, it’s over. You can all come out from under the bedclothes now.

If my various pro-European Union chums are to be believed, the EU is a harmless and benign talking shop which has minimal influence over the member states or their legislation. If this is actually true then really I don’t see what the fuss is about as all that’s happened is a bunch of ranty fruitcakes have been shipped off to Brussels into an environment where they can’t really do much harm. Assuming it’s true, that is.

Anyway, we won’t know the outcome of yesterday’s election until after the weekend, but judging by the audience reaction everyone expects UKIP to have done really well. Certainly they'll do a lot better in the Euro elections than they did in the local/council elections, which was well enough. The big question, in terms of UK politics, is whether they came first and beat Labour into second place. Everyone knows the European elections are a sideshow and treats them as a protest vote, but if Labour can’t win a protest vote against a government they tell us is unpopular then it’s game over for them in 2015. The results of the European elections will be a powerful predictor of the UK general election next year in the sense that if UKIP won then the next UK government will be Conservative or a Conservative/Libdem coalition. If they didn’t then the game is still open for Labour.

My friends list has grown increasingly shrill over the last week as it’s become increasingly clear that UKIP can expect to do well, and the anger and dismay over this has been something to behold. I’ve seen a lot of people expressing complete incomprehension over the rise of UKIP, and so I thought I’d briefly tackle that. *

In 1944, Friedrich Hayek predicted in The Road to Serfdom that a combination of generous welfare and open migration would inevitably lead to a rise in nationalistic politics, as welfare in one place would automatically be more generous than standard of living in another; this would lead to economic migration which would result in people being outcompeted for employment opportunities. Resentment would grow and populist nationalism would become a political force to be reckoned with. At risk of blowing my own trumpet, I said this was what was happening five years ago after the last European elections and now we’re here. It’s not like I didn’t warn you.

What we’re seeing here began as a dislike of the supranational and undemocratic nature of the European Union, and has become a representation of the cry of inchoate rage from people who’ve been outcompeted and left behind by globalisation. As this has moved beyond the original issue for UKIP, what was a single-issue pressure group with an eye on global trade has had to come up with all kinds of fairly rubbish but populist policies (A sovereign wealth fund. I ask you. Pfft.) which have attracted a whole very wide selection of people who see a rapid rise of a protest vote as an opportunity to grind their personal axe whether the party actually want that axe grinding or not
.
Because that’s the question which everyone who doesn’t seem to understand why UKIP have done well fails to answer. If someone is anti-EU, or anti-gay marriage, or has been outcompeted by global economic forces, or whatever, who the heck are they supposed to vote for?** None of the Conservatives, Libdems or Labour offer these people what they want. If you’re sat there going on about “But why are they voting for the nasty racists”, it’s because nobody else is offering them anything. Jeez. It’s not rocket science. Either a third of the population are nasty racists or they’re so hacked off, angry and desperate and contemptuous of the other parties (yes, that includes you, Greens***) that they’ll monkeywrench to spite you.

However, I mention above that this is peak UKIP, and it is. This is their high water mark and their support will fall away from now on. The Guardian noted the other day that economically speaking UKIP is increasingly a left-wing party and that, coupled with it’s increasingly ranty nature and Dave’s pledge of an in/out referendum in the next parliament, will see enough anti-EU people and disaffected Conservatives return to the fold to see Dave back in at the next election, I reckon. What will be left behind will be the rump of true believers, plus the disaffected old Labour supporters and angry folk who made up the million voters of the BNP at the last European elections.****

So there you are. You can stop worrying now. A third of the population aren't nasty racists or anything of the sort, and that sort of accusation achieves nothing but another point in UKIPs polls. Instead, a third of the population have what seem to them legitimate concerns and no outlet for those concerns in any other party - and as I said back in 2009: if you're interested in your favourite party winning anything any time soon, you might want to consider doing something about that.



*One thing which sometimes happens when I write this sort of post trying to work through why political or economic stuff which some people find unpleasant or offensive happens is that someone pops out of the woodwork and goes “Aha! So you support [thing I’ve tried to talk through]”. If that’s you could you just not bother commenting, please? It’ll save us both time as I’ve precisely zero interest in getting into that.

**This is a serious question. If you think people who voted for UKIP are stupid for doing so, who do they think they should vote for if they want the things I've listed?

***If you think the Greens offer this demographic anything you're mistaken. Sorry, but there you are.

****There’s a strong historical correlation between protectionist economics and state-sanctioned racism, which isn’t really surprising when you think about it.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

You should add that, whilst everyone is coasting along with enough to live their live as they like, they can believe in whichever party suits them without ever wondering if that party actually IS worth voting for. When recession hits and life gets tough long held faith is shaken. The party they have so long clung to as savior of the world does not stand scrutiny and they feel let down, disappointed , and that is one emotion human beings simply cannot handle. So they will look around for another and usually in their disgruntled states go for something which is as far outside their previous little world as they can find - especially if its NEW or new-ish. People need to believe somebody has the answers and for those who don't understand the complexity of the questions it can be very hard.
(I have said in the past if the Allies had lost the First world War we might not have had the Second)

[davywavy.livejournal.com]

That's a good point, and if you talk to certainly some UKIP voters (and SNP voters, in fact) on the internet they have the passionate intensity of the of convert, which will brook no disagreement I've had SNP supporters actively deleting comments which point out the flaws in their economic arguments - can't dispute what I say, so just wish it away instead.

[(Anonymous)]

To be fair though, you don't make points with actual factual backing. You make snarky remarks and expect readers to believe you without anything to back up your point. Such comments aren't worth responding too. Until you bring evidence to support your opinions, they aren't worth cluttering up feeds.

[davywavy.livejournal.com]

Hallo, anonymous UKIP supporter. Welcome aboard!

Feel free to ask questions on specifics if you'd like anything clarified.

[(Anonymous)]

And yet here you are.

[(Anonymous)]

Probably why promoting social cohesion and integration when the economy is doing well is a good idea, so when times are tough society is well enough glued together for people to not firebomb one another. Shame Tony thought hosing money at 'diversity' was a good idea. Paying people to not integrate has a predictable outcome.

[will-sample.livejournal.com]

I saw something the other day, about the profile of the 'surge UKIP' voter, that caught me a tad off-guard, on the surface, but that gels well to the concepts presented here-- the voters who are creating the surge are working class, male, and over 35 sorts, with limited education but with high rates of home ownership-- the sort of folks who feel economic competition most keenly as they try to finish building and executing a trade or working life against waves of more highly educated, lower waged immigrants, rather than the wage slave marginal immigrant class that is so often portrayed as fueling hate. Their motivation isn't racist--- its self-preservative, after a fashion.

[davywavy.livejournal.com]

That's exactly it. A high-mobility, globalised economy hugely benefits maybe 80% of the population, and you've got to understand that the remaining 20% really aren't going to be happy they're expected to just swallow that.

[janewilliams20.livejournal.com]

According to something I read this morning (but haven't yet had time to verify), even the UKIP think the people voting for them are dumb. Something about them not getting many votes in London, because it's hard for them to appeal to the educated?

[will-sample.livejournal.com]

Categorizing them as 'uneducated' or 'dumb' is a really bad way to look at it, to get an objective understanding of the situation of a UKIP voter.

They are uneducated, in that they don't have high degrees of technical or academic training-- which usually translate into greater economic opportunity. It doesn't mean they're inherently less intelligent than your average bear-- they are simply more susceptible to being deemed underqualified in a highly competitive labor market.

[will-sample.livejournal.com]

Under-educated, rather than un-educated, compared to their former level of economic prosperity.

A good number of them are the sorts of 'soft Labour' votes that went to Blair at the height of Cool Britania politics-- folks who enjoyed the benefits of a booming prosperity, who have struggled to sustain it in an increasingly competitive environment.

[drplokta]

They're not just uneducated in job skills; they're also uneducated in the politics and economics that affect their everyday lives.

[(Anonymous)]

Thank God they have clever people like you to think for them.

[drplokta]

Hey, it wasn't me who said that UKIP voters are uneducated (and also uncultured and old), it was UKIP themselves, in a startling display of honesty. I was merely adding a little detail.

[(Anonymous)]

Oh, that's okay then. As long as someone else threw the first stone. Carry on.

[zenicurean.livejournal.com]

Did the UKIP figure out how to actually vet its candidates for this election? Because the last time around it... let's say didn't quite seem as if they had spent all that much time on it.

[matgb]

They put more effort in this time. So, for example, one of my favourite local Cllrs was beaten into 3rd place by someone who's only once been convicted of electoral fraud and also convicted of something else. Fortunately, he didn't win, but he is on the exec of the local organisation (he was a Tory when he got the convictions).

Plus, everyone that's made racist, sexist or homophobic comments has been suspended or expelled. Didn't stop some of them getting elected anyway mind.

On the plus side, my local UKIP candidate (who was a Lib Dem and I was his election agent twice) split the local Independent vote so we've got rid of him, unfortunately it means a Tory Cllr, but at least he's human and talks to me.

[davywavy.livejournal.com]

I was listening to some of your activists from I think Kingston where your took a pasting, and they were startlingly whiney. Nick Clegg's fault, shouldn't have entered coalition, etc. I couldn't help but think that they probably voted for the deal when asked, and you do seem to have a sub current of supporters who want to say they did something, but never actually want to win.

[matgb]

you do seem to have a sub current of supporters who want to say they did something, but never actually want to win.

I didn't mention it much, but I let my membership lapse in late 2011 and rejoined end of last year, mostly because I was fed up dealing with the idiots who were going around screaming the sky was falling and weren't expecting it—I said to Jennie at the Special Conference where both of us voted for the coalition that if we managed 10% in the polls by half way through the Parliament we'd be doing well. We were on about 12% in the reputable polls, ergo we were doing way better than expected. Vince warned it would be devastating in his speech.

No one bloody listenened, they're all wondering around now asking what they did wrong and blaming Clegg or, well, anything. Frustating, annoying and repetetive. I rejoined the day after our candidate selection, my new Parliamentary candidate is very much on the Liberal wing of the party and we get on well. We're doomed in the locals, but we can rebuild towards a council group that believes in stuff rather than wanting to simply run the council less badly than the other two.

[davywavy.livejournal.com]

Actually, I'm curious. I reckon you'll do better than most expect at the GE, and if you hold your heartlands you could well be kingmakers again.

Given the conservatives will probably win the popular vote, what's the plan? Your activists probably won't vote for that again, and I'm sure the possibility has need discussed/ planned for.

[matgb]

My guesstimate is a ballpark of about 18% of the vote, assuming Clegg can do well rather than fall on his face like he did against Farage (I mean, seriously, that performance was terrible and we all know he can do far better), and somewhere between 40 and 60 seats, lower than 40 is implausible given electoral maths, and there are a few gains that're likely that the media aren't even going to predict, especially if the Tories fall a bit.

I think the residual activists would vote for a coalition again if there's a decent enough deal, but it won't be the overwhelming yes the last one was—there were about 2000 reps at the last special conference, and I counted about 12 no votes, I'd guess no votes around 500, at most, probably less.

The people who get to vote at these things are people like me—the sort of activists who turn up at meetings, including large numbers of councillors used to doing deals and/or used to being the Opposition on a NOC council where the Tory and Labour groups have stitched things up.

The party has divisions, but it's not really a Left/Right split, the Liberals, whether leftish or rightish will vote for coalition because they're sane, and the centrist/Cllr wing will vote for it because they believe in governance, it's mostly the headbanging oppositionists and "my party has been taken over by 'insert-conspiracy-here' lunatics who're opposed". The sort that say, for example, that the Social Liberal Forum is designed to speak for all members of the party while at the same time bemoaning the existence of Orange Bookers, Thatcherites and anyone who's read a book on economics, including Keynes. The ones I especially love are the group that complain vociferously about the Orange Booker leadership and want a coup to install Vince Cable as leader, convenientlyforgetting he wrote a chapter of the OB and is distinctly dry on the deficit and similar economic issues.

[davywavy.livejournal.com]

I don't think you'll get as high as 18%, but I do think you'll be over 10. 12-15% seems very probable. Something like 50% of UKIP voters will move to the conservatives which will win them the popular vote - what I don't know is whether they'll have an absolute majority.

[davywavy.livejournal.com]

Actually, you might be able to help me with this one - do you have access to a line graph representation of UKIPs vote share (inc opinion polls) over the last few years? I've looked and can't find one.

[whiskeylover.livejournal.com]

That will be interesting- both the Tories and Labour have commented that they do not want a coalition, and suggested that they would rather try to run a minority government. I don't think that would be terribly efficient.

There is some talk about the Tories forming a coalition with UKIP, although I suspect that would be political suicide- even assuming that UKIP do end up getting some MPs at the GE, if the Tories go into coalition with them, they play into the hands of UKIP, because then conservatives will be able to vote UKIP on the understanding that they will form a coalition with the Tories, and move Tory policy closer to isolationism. As far as I can see, the Tories would stand to lose an awful lot, because it would basically turn UKIP into a valid conservative alternative (even if one ignores the gap in their respective social policies- on that note, I wouldn't even necessarily rule out a Lab-UKIP coalition).

The LibDems would possibly benefit from a stint in opposition to regroup, but I actually think they would be better off toughing it out, staying in government (if the option arises), and getting better at politics- i.e. actually being able to manage expectations and trumpet their successes better.

If the LibDems are in the position of being kingmakers again, they should keep their options open. I actually think the ConLD coalition didn't do all that badly, although it has estranged some of the more left-leaning LDs. That said, a coalition with Labour could also work (both are problematic. Continue the current coalition and we face the accusation that we are just Tories in disguise/enablers of a Conservative government, form a coalition with Labour, and we face the accusation of being unprincipled turncoats and opportunists who are just trying to cling on to power at all costs, and who are just cynically trying to win back estranged voters. Plus it might estrange the right-leaning LD members, while not winning back the left-leaning ones).

As it is, I would say that it should be decided on the basis of policies and negotiations. Personally I still can't quite see Milliband as PM and would be in favour of a continuation of the ConLD coalition.

[drplokta]

What people should do is simple: they should educate themselves to the point where they understand that it is futile at best or destructive at worst to want these things, because the collateral damage from even attempting to achieve them would be much worse than whatever problem it is that they perceive. They won't, of course, but that's what they should do. What the serious political leaders should do is to help with the self-education process rather than pretending that UKIP have a point in an attempt to woo away their voters.

[davywavy.livejournal.com]

And, in their turn, a lot of people should learn to stop accusing those they disagree with of being irrational/stupid/racist simply because they disagree.

The thing is, the world isn't interested in what I think should happen so I content myself with trying to understand what will happen.

[matrixmann]

Considering this is not the first time people go on a protest vote and this is not the first time people try to find hail in the right wing sector, you wonder why they still keep doing this over and over. It's not like this political sector ever did anything different than the faces you went for before.
Seriously, stupidity of mankind is infinite, as well as their forgetfulness, but sometimes you wonder who repeats this circle.
Talking to people, hearing their stories, you hear them aim for a more leftist attitude - at least that's what you can categorize their claims in which they wanted to have realized -, and then they leave their signs on the voting paper at the right sector?
This is like a scissor which makes no sense.
And considering that powers from abroad can finance and support a coup in the Ukraine, finance several other opposition blocks and coups throughout the world against anyone they don't prefer or even build up a Cuban version of twitter just to cause commotion in that country... you get thoughts like it wouldn't be impossible to install an invisible hand in Europe which keeps watching out that never anyone who would do something radically different gets into power to do something different.

[davywavy.livejournal.com]

UKIP are less and less a right-wing party. Their economic offering is increasingly left wing, which is why they're attracting former Labour voters and have identified target seats in left wing constituencies for the next election.

Dunno about Germany, but in the UK we tend to have right-wing governments and left-wing protest movements (Tony Blair excepted).

[matrixmann]

Hm, I'm not good with politics on the Island (hope that doesn't sound insulting), but if they come from such a base, I'd always keep my senses awake.
At least the pinciple goes for here: What receives a good resonance among people, is going to be copied. Original right-wingers try to appear leftist (or at least have a few left methods and thoughts) in trying to gain someone for them. But the original substance remains the same, listening carefully you realize that, at the latest it is going to be revealed the next time the wind turns and they try to jump on another train.
So that experience should be taken in mind. I wouldn't guess original right-wingers to be different in other countries.

[(Anonymous)]

Would it be reasonable to assume that when you spaek of right and left wing you mean:

Right wing - in favour of increased economic liberty

Left wing - in favour of increased civil liberty?

[matrixmann]

When I speak of "right wing", I call "all that is farer on the right than conservatives".
When I speak of "left wing", I usually call "all that is farer on the left than so-called "social democrats" ".

[(Anonymous)]

Which doesn't really define 'left' and 'right'

I like the Nolan chart, because it defines them both in positive terms.

[matrixmann]

It does define experience with left and right, based on where I live and what I get to hear about foreign countries.
If you don't like it, bad luck.

[(Anonymous)]

Less, 'don't like' more 'don't understand'

As Alex Moulton said, 'if you understand a thing, you can explain it.'

I'd hope you can explain your own opinions...

[matrixmann]

I explained what I had to explain.
If you're not content with it, it's not my business.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm disappointed to learn you don't think your inability to explain your thoughts is your concern. Your teachers must've cried themselves to sleep.

[hairyears.livejournal.com]

Right now, the important thing about UKIP is that they split the conservative vote.

That's important in Eastleigh, a seat where the majority of the electorate are conservative and they haven't had a Conservative MP for twenty years. Six of the last seven elections have been won by Lib Dems, by a margin smaller than the turnout for UKIP, the BNP, the Freedom Party or whatever hobby-horse fringe party James Goldsmith bankrolled in the 90's...

...You get the picture. Next year, it'll be repeated in every constituency where the 'Kippers put up a candidate - with Labour as the beneficiaries.

[(Anonymous)]

Perhaps. Or maybe dave will raise his game.

Oh what am I saying. PM ed milliband on 31% of the vote. Hail to the chief.

[gnommi.livejournal.com]

My basic view on UK political parites is "take off and nuke the site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure".
My (admittedly probably not very mainstream but fairly numerous and influential) social circle really have NO OPTIONS. There is no party who even slightly represent us.
I almost voted Romans.Ave! in the locals - almost not even joking.
Every time any of us do the "which party should you really vote for" survey things, we always come out Green, but there are quite a few total deal breakers in Green policy (er, as in, have any of them ever studied science?). So that doesn't leave a lot.

[davywavy.livejournal.com]

Yes, the greens not understanding either science or economics is a deal-breaker for me as well.