What is the point of the Labour party? Ctd

We continue the series about what is the point of the Labour party using as a source for our discussion an article from The Telegraph talking about labour in the UK.

The issues are eerily the same for both parties. Today we look at who potential Labour voters are now?

Who are the potential Labour voters now? We know some things for sure. The old hereditary heartland support – what used to be called the respectable working class – has fragmented and effectively disappeared. Much of it became aspirational in the New Labour sense: property-owning, car-driving, computer-using and, for all intents and purposes, middle class even if it was not professional by qualification or conditions of employment. These ex-working class voters were the ones who defected to the Tories in the 1980s and whom New Labour was designed to win back. (In the United States, such people are always referred to as middle class meaning “ordinary working people”, which leads to some confusion in Britain. When American politicians advocate “middle-class tax cuts”, they do not mean reducing taxes for the higher paid.) The repudiation of Blairism by Labour’s current leadership puts the party in a hopelessly unclear relationship to this hugely important constituency. Mr Miliband talking about the “squeezed middle” does not help: he defines this as the lowest end of what could conceivably be called “middle income” and makes it clear that anyone escaping that narrow range deserves no sympathy. What signal, as they say, does this send to the truly “aspirational” who were once happy to vote New Labour?

Then there are those who were left behind in the old communities which the more affluent had fled. They became an underclass for whom welfare-dependency replaced work as a way of life. Sometimes called “the disadvantaged” or “the deprived”, these were (or might have been in earlier generations) Labour supporters. But as often as not now they vote for no one, believing that they have little stake in the political process.

So the party may appeal to the country on their behalf but there is little to be gained (in the callous electoral sense) from soliciting active support from them directly. To make “fighting poverty” (or even the more unexceptionable “eliminating child poverty”) Labour’s raison d’etre would be a formula for attracting middle-class intellectuals but not a solution to the problem of reconstructing a natural constituency which trusted Labour to speak for its interests.

Phil Goff has borrowed “the squeezed middle” from Ed Miliband, and it appears that it resonates about as much as it does for Miliband. Basically like the UK, Labour in New Zealand has isolated themselves to the indigent, the ne’er-do-wells and the middle-class intellectuals with a smattering of wedge groups like gays. No wonder they are polling at 25%.


Do you want:

  • Ad-free access?
  • Access to our very popular daily crossword?
  • Access to daily sudoku?
  • Access to Incite Politics magazine articles?
  • Access to podcasts?
  • Access to political polls?

Our subscribers’ financial support is the reason why we have been able to offer our latest service; Audio blogs. 

Click Here  to support us and watch the number of services grow.

As much at home writing editorials as being the subject of them, Cam has won awards, including the Canon Media Award for his work on the Len Brown/Bevan Chuang story. When he’s not creating the news, he tends to be in it, with protagonists using the courts, media and social media to deliver financial as well as death threats.

They say that news is something that someone, somewhere, wants kept quiet. Cam Slater doesn’t do quiet and, as a result, he is a polarising, controversial but highly effective journalist who takes no prisoners.

He is fearless in his pursuit of a story.

Love him or loathe him, you can’t ignore him.

To read Cam’s previous articles click on his name in blue.

Tagged:
48%