jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 7,054 
|
Post by jamie on Sept 6, 2022 21:12:52 GMT
That’s a fair guess at the system. I’m not sure whether the Left Alliance would be a significant force. We’ve had various left-of-Labour parties spring up over the decades and none of them had any real, durable support in the population at large. A lot of that space, particularly in the last couple of decades, would be taken up by the Greens. I imagine the Social Democrats would be (or would have been) pro-EU but it wouldn’t be one of their core beliefs and support would be less fervent with the loss of socially liberal activists to their left and right. Relatedly, the Social Democrats would be a more working class, union dominated party than Labour is these days, but I don’t think they’d go full workerite in the style of the Danish Social Democrats.
I’m less certain on the parties of the right, but I suspect we’d end up with 2 enduring right wing parties rather than the 3 listed. A pragmatic ‘one nation’ style party of government seems likely to have inherited the Conservative Party mantle, while a more socially conservative, eurosceptic, free market style party seems likely from the 1970s onwards. There’s also the potential of a very statist right leaning party emerging, depending on the space other parties leave open. I doubt there’d be a ‘Free Democrats’ party, at least permanently, as the vaguely ‘socially liberal, fiscally conservative’ vote isn’t that big and most potential voters would be comfortable enough voting for the other 2 right wing parties or the Progressives (which I think would end up fairly Orange Booker given the Greens would eat into the left-liberal activists).
|
|
|
|
Post by freefair on Sept 6, 2022 21:13:48 GMT
I suspect under this scenario there would still be a Labour Party retaining the vast majority of the current party's "only bother with politics on GE day" vote alongside the working-class union voters/activists. The politically engaged educated middle-class vote would likely form some kind of red-green or left-alliance party but it would be quite small. The Labour Party without their influence might be more conservative on immigration and crime but I'm not sure. That said, if the UK were to have adopted PR at any point in its history I'm not sure 1918 is the most likely date which must surely make a difference That would be the Social Democrats in my scenario in which the centrist liberals, progressive eco-social justice left & hardline socialist left all leave. Their name doesn't matter that much, Imagine they were still named Labour if you will! I forsee them being the Old Labour Right plus the Brownite wing of New Labour, with a bit of Blue Labour mixed in (hello Lord Glasman!) |
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Sept 6, 2022 21:44:38 GMT
I suspect under this scenario there would still be a Labour Party retaining the vast majority of the current party's "only bother with politics on GE day" vote alongside the working-class union voters/activists. The politically engaged educated middle-class vote would likely form some kind of red-green or left-alliance party but it would be quite small. The Labour Party without their influence might be more conservative on immigration and crime but I'm not sure. That said, if the UK were to have adopted PR at any point in its history I'm not sure 1918 is the most likely date which must surely make a difference That would be the Social Democrats in my scenario in which the centrist liberals, progressive eco-social justice left & hardline socialist left all leave. Their name doesn't matter that much, Imagine they were still named Labour if you will! I forsee them being the Old Labour Right plus the Brownite wing of New Labour, with a bit of Blue Labour mixed in (hello Lord Glasman!) the irony being the real Social Democrats were a split from the labour party |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2022 21:46:54 GMT
I suspect under this scenario there would still be a Labour Party retaining the vast majority of the current party's "only bother with politics on GE day" vote alongside the working-class union voters/activists. The politically engaged educated middle-class vote would likely form some kind of red-green or left-alliance party but it would be quite small. The Labour Party without their influence might be more conservative on immigration and crime but I'm not sure. That said, if the UK were to have adopted PR at any point in its history I'm not sure 1918 is the most likely date which must surely make a difference the problem is as a member of this politically educated middle-class (though maybe I'm a minority) I can't see myself opting for red green alliance over the labour party. I can see people leaving who are perhaps more FBPE/progressive alliance people who seem to support Labour atm out of some hope the party will enter government and reverse brexit. They seem the increasingly growing tribe in the Labour party who have the least amount of tribal loyalty. The Labour party seem to be an extension of the Lib Dems and Greens from their POV To be honest I was thinking more of the young Corbynista types, although like you I would put myself in the educated middle-class lefty bracket and would still opt for Labour over anything else. As for the second paragraph, when I used to attend Stroud/Cheltenham/Gloucestershire/Britain for Europe meetings there would always be loads of people stand up and proudly say "I was never political before brexit". These people saw a LabLib coalition as their route to stopping brexit and many even joined Labour and are still member. It is these people who are the driving force behind calls for a progressive alliance because as you say they see LabLibGreen as a big amorphous blob. They mostly use Labour as a flag of convenience and have no actual loyalty to the party |
|
|
|
Post by freefair on Sept 6, 2022 21:49:56 GMT
That’s a fair guess at the system. I’m not sure whether the Left Alliance would be a significant force. We’ve had various left-of-Labour parties spring up over the decades and none of them had any real, durable support in the population at large. A lot of that space, particularly in the last couple of decades, would be taken up by the Greens. I imagine the Social Democrats would be (or would have been) pro-EU but it wouldn’t be one of their core beliefs and support would be less fervent with the loss of socially liberal activists to their left and right. Relatedly, the Social Democrats would be a more working class, union dominated party than Labour is these days, but I don’t think they’d go full workerite in the style of the Danish Social Democrats. I’m less certain on the parties of the right, but I suspect we’d end up with 2 enduring right wing parties rather than the 3 listed. A pragmatic ‘one nation’ style party of government seems likely to have inherited the Conservative Party mantle, while a more socially conservative, eurosceptic, free market style party seems likely from the 1970s onwards. There’s also the potential of a very statist right leaning party emerging, depending on the space other parties leave open. I doubt there’d be a ‘Free Democrats’ party, at least permanently, as the vaguely ‘socially liberal, fiscally conservative’ vote isn’t that big and most potential voters would be comfortable enough voting for the other 2 right wing parties or the Progressives (which I think would end up fairly Orange Booker given the Greens would eat into the left-liberal activists). Great analysis! I just typed 2 highly articulate paragraphs in response & then accidentally closed the page(!) so I'll summise in shorthand. Left Alliance= Permanent minority party (4%-12%) Progressives electorate=70% left of centre 30% right of centre PopDems= compassionate internationalist moderate social conservatives FreeDems= socially moderate overall, part conservative (tough on violent crime, illegal migration, Atlanticist FP), part liberal (SSM, soft drug decrim, sex work legalisation, pro-labour migration), part vulgar libertarian (free speech, drivers & smokers rights) UniPats= economically opportunistic populists, manifesto of welfare chauvinism+ tax cuts. |
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Sept 6, 2022 21:57:29 GMT
I suspect under this scenario there would still be a Labour Party retaining the vast majority of the current party's "only bother with politics on GE day" vote alongside the working-class union voters/activists. The politically engaged educated middle-class vote would likely form some kind of red-green or left-alliance party but it would be quite small. The Labour Party without their influence might be more conservative on immigration and crime but I'm not sure. That said, if the UK were to have adopted PR at any point in its history I'm not sure 1918 is the most likely date which must surely make a difference That would be the Social Democrats in my scenario in which the centrist liberals, progressive eco-social justice left & hardline socialist left all leave. Their name doesn't matter that much, Imagine they were still named Labour if you will! I forsee them being the Old Labour Right plus the Brownite wing of New Labour, with a bit of Blue Labour mixed in (hello Lord Glasman!) interesting you chose Burnham as leader who I wouldn't describe as any one of the groups at any point in his career. He started off on the Blairite wing of New Labour. Drifted left in opposition before a brief stand to the right of Miliband until he continued left and now he's joined the corbynites in the new Enough is Enough group |
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Sept 6, 2022 22:02:08 GMT
From studies I've seen around 10% of the voting public would vote for a left wing party and similar number for a new Labour (separate to labour) party.
But as has already been said the loyalty to the labour brand stymies any actual traction for any alternatives
|
|
|
|
Post by freefair on Sept 6, 2022 22:26:39 GMT
Basically, in terms of the overton window or political compass, & with vaugely comparable Dutch major parties noted
LA= Economic Left shifters (SP)
GR= Cultural Left shifters (GreenLeft)
FD= Economic Right shifters (VVD/JA21)
UP= Cultural Right shifters (PVV/FvD)
SD= Consensus Labour (PvdA)
Prg= Consensus Liberals (D66)
PD= Consensus Conservatives (CDA)
Don't think there would be room for a DENK, Animal Rights Party or Religiously Traditional parties in the UK Parliament if there was a threshold.
|
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 7,054
|
Post by jamie on Sept 6, 2022 23:05:25 GMT
Great analysis! I just typed 2 highly articulate paragraphs in response & then accidentally closed the page(!) so I'll summise in shorthand. Left Alliance= Permanent minority party (4%-12%) Progressives electorate=70% left of centre 30% right of centre PopDems= compassionate internationalist moderate social conservatives FreeDems= socially moderate overall, part conservative (tough on violent crime, illegal migration, Atlanticist FP), part liberal (SSM, soft drug decrim, sex work legalisation, pro-labour migration), part vulgar libertarian (free speech, drivers & smokers rights) UniPats= economically opportunistic populists, manifesto of welfare chauvinism+ tax cuts. I suspect the Popular Democrats would start off fairly moderate (particularly if it was the continuity Conservative Party), but in recent decades would have moved somewhat to the right because of vote seeking, genuine ideological change, and demands from its more right wing coalition/support party. i don’t think the United Patriots would be that economically populist in anything but the most right wing sense (abolish green taxes and the like). Such a party wouldn’t have existed until well after WW2, and the anti-immigration/EU sentiment that brings it into existence was IRL very much the domain of the Thatcherites/UKIP which means it would have ended up low tax/low spend. |
|
|
|
Post by freefair on Sept 6, 2022 23:20:20 GMT
I suspect the Popular Democrats would start off fairly moderate (particularly if it was the continuity Conservative Party), but in recent decades would have moved somewhat to the right because of vote seeking, genuine ideological change, and demands from its more right wing coalition/support party. i don’t think the United Patriots would be that economically populist in anything but the most right wing sense (abolish green taxes and the like). Such a party wouldn’t have existed until well after WW2, and the anti-immigration/EU sentiment that brings it into existence was IRL very much the domain of the Thatcherites/UKIP which means it would have ended up low tax/low spend. PDs are a close analog to the CDU & would as an EPP & Centrist Democrat Intl party self conciously see itself as an anchor of the respectable centre-right in the One Nation Tory & Christian Democratic traditions, I don't know how far they really would have moved left or right over time although of course there would still be relatively centrist & more ideological wings of the party & politics itself shits with the overton window. They'd always be more pro-welfare & pro-EU than the FDs & less secular & neoliberal. UPs would definitely have started off on the economic right & perhaps the isolationist/America sceptical/Imperial nostalgist foreign policy right, perhaps being founded by Enoch Powell himself after expulsion from the Tories/PDs in 1968? Over time, especially in the last 20 years they would have spotted the opportunity to win over disaffected socially conservative centre-left working class/blue collar voters & pensioners by becoming ideologically less small state/free market, though with that still being a loud & significant enough faction for them to always demand some tax cuts. |
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Sept 6, 2022 23:33:54 GMT
Basically, in terms of the overton window or political compass, & with vaugely comparable Dutch major parties noted LA= Economic Left shifters (SP) GR= Cultural Left shifters (GreenLeft) FD= Economic Right shifters (VVD/JA21) UP= Cultural Right shifters (PVV/FvD) SD= Consensus Labour (PvdA) Prg= Consensus Liberals (D66) PD= Consensus Conservatives (CDA) Don't think there would be room for a DENK, Animal Rights Party or Religiously Traditional parties in the UK Parliament if there was a threshold. I was under the impression that D66 were like a centre left liberal party. Red Dems ala 2005. Rather than comparable to the contemporary liberals |
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Sept 6, 2022 23:40:46 GMT
The interesting thing about the Dutch comparison and this conversation is as mentioned above the complete collapse of Dutch Labor. There are obvious reasons for this. However, if we did have PR and people were able to vote for other progressives in the 'progressive alliance' would be interesting to see the impact of that. We have seen Greens benefit in Scotland and London
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,029
|
Post by Sibboleth on Sept 7, 2022 9:03:29 GMT
The interesting thing about the Dutch comparison and this conversation is as mentioned above the complete collapse of Dutch Labor. The PvdA collapsed because they went into government with the VVD and no alterations to the very-wing economic and social policies of the government were subsequently apparent as there were none. This completely destroyed the party's credibility, a collapse that was especially dramatic as it was always an institutional party - very much a product of Dutch postwar corporatism with an electoral base that was never as strongly tied to labour market and other demographic patterns as in most other Northern European social democratic parties - that people voted for for essentially pragmatic reasons rather than one with a strong emotional appeal to particular sections of the electorate. |
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Sept 7, 2022 9:28:30 GMT
The interesting thing about the Dutch comparison and this conversation is as mentioned above the complete collapse of Dutch Labor. The PvdA collapsed because they went into government with the VVD and no alterations to the very-wing economic and social policies of the government were subsequently apparent as there were none. This completely destroyed the party's credibility, a collapse that was especially dramatic as it was always an institutional party - very much a product of Dutch postwar corporatism with an electoral base that was never as strongly tied to labour market and other demographic patterns as in most other Northern European social democratic parties - that people voted for for essentially pragmatic reasons rather than one with a strong emotional appeal to particular sections of the electorate. There probably wasn't any other realistic outcome after the 2012 election there though. Or to put it another way, the inconclusive mess that was the 2012 Dutch election is a very good argument against PR. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Sept 7, 2022 9:45:02 GMT
I suspect under this scenario there would still be a Labour Party retaining the vast majority of the current party's "only bother with politics on GE day" vote alongside the working-class union voters/activists. The politically engaged educated middle-class vote would likely form some kind of red-green or left-alliance party but it would be quite small. The Labour Party without their influence might be more conservative on immigration and crime but I'm not sure. That said, if the UK were to have adopted PR at any point in its history I'm not sure 1918 is the most likely date which must surely make a difference We were very close indeed in 1918. There was support for the principle all across the political spectrum. It failed to go through only because its advocates fell out over the exact mechanism to be adopted. |
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,029
|
Post by Sibboleth on Sept 7, 2022 9:52:24 GMT
There probably wasn't any other realistic outcome after the 2012 election there though. Or to put it another way, the inconclusive mess that was the 2012 Dutch election is a very good argument against PR. Well the issue isn't that the PvdA opted to go into coalition with the VVD (who they had been in government with before, of course) so much as the fact that in government they did not act in the way that their electorate assumed they would: rather than act as a moderating influence on Rutte, they acquiesced fully with everything and so failed to fulfill their traditional function in the Dutch political system, for which they were then punished. There are obvious parallels there with the LibDems here and also with Irish 'Labour', though neither were anything like as important as the PvdA had previously been so it isn't exact. |
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Sept 7, 2022 10:20:13 GMT
There probably wasn't any other realistic outcome after the 2012 election there though. Or to put it another way, the inconclusive mess that was the 2012 Dutch election is a very good argument against PR. Well the issue isn't that the PvdA opted to go into coalition with the VVD (who they had been in government with before, of course) so much as the fact that in government they did not act in the way that their electorate assumed they would: rather than act as a moderating influence on Rutte, they acquiesced fully with everything and so failed to fulfill their traditional function in the Dutch political system, for which they were then punished. There are obvious parallels there with the LibDems here and also with Irish 'Labour', though neither were anything like as important as the PvdA had previously been so it isn't exact. I think you are making a mistake in your characterisation of the VVD – the word "liberal" is a dirty word in the Netherlands, but there is no doubt that they are liberals and don't really resemble a right-wing party at all – they're more like Fianna Fail (which also breaks your Irish comparison). The circumstances at the time were that all Eurozone governments were forced to do pretty much the same thing, thanks to their having surrendered their economic policies to the Instability and Recession Pact – the anti-democratic things going on in Greece and Italy at the same time were truly shocking. I don't think you can really make ideological characterisations about the blame misattribution game that arose as part of the Eurozone crisis – in Ireland it was the Progressive Democrats of all people who seemed to get blamed for a problem that national politicians of all parties had put beyond their control. |
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Sept 7, 2022 10:40:50 GMT
The PvdA collapsed because they went into government with the VVD and no alterations to the very-wing economic and social policies of the government were subsequently apparent as there were none. This completely destroyed the party's credibility, a collapse that was especially dramatic as it was always an institutional party - very much a product of Dutch postwar corporatism with an electoral base that was never as strongly tied to labour market and other demographic patterns as in most other Northern European social democratic parties - that people voted for for essentially pragmatic reasons rather than one with a strong emotional appeal to particular sections of the electorate. There probably wasn't any other realistic outcome after the 2012 election there though. Or to put it another way, the inconclusive mess that was the 2012 Dutch election is a very good argument against PR. it certainly puts me off full PR. But a hybrid system could avoid such a situation |
|
|
|
Post by freefair on Sept 7, 2022 10:55:14 GMT
There probably wasn't any other realistic outcome after the 2012 election there though. Or to put it another way, the inconclusive mess that was the 2012 Dutch election is a very good argument against PR. it certainly puts me off full PR. But a hybrid system could avoid such a situation The Dutch have the most proportional electoral system known to man, no regional lists, no thresholds, no single member districts, just a seat for any party with over 0.667% of the popular vote. This certainly isn't the way it works in Sweden (which has 8 parties in its parliament, very close to what I suggest would make it here!) let alone Germany or New Zealand! |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Sept 7, 2022 10:58:48 GMT
it certainly puts me off full PR. But a hybrid system could avoid such a situation The Dutch have the most proportional electoral system known to man, no regional lists, no thresholds, no single member districts, just a seat for any party with over 0.667% of the popular vote. This isn't the way it works in Sweden (which has 8 parties in its parliament, very close to what I suggest would make it here!) let alone Germany or New Zealand! I don't think any advocates of electoral reform are suggesting we would go down the Dutch route |
|
