In all the furore of retrograde agenda-driven analysis and accusation that followed the local elections of May 3rd 2018, there doesn’t seem to be a single commentator or politician able to see the wood for the trees and call it like it is: an apt reflection of the thinking and the priorities of an electorate denied a voice in the media echo chambers and never asked to participate in the three-ring circus already over-filled with needy celebrity gate-keepers.
[talk about the echo chambers, the media + political machine + celebrity circus barkers with time to kill and no will to share billing]
[talk about the electorate and the culture of silence + a braying colourful totalitarianism that’s all the more effective for being a chaos of fame-needy limbs contorted in grabbing at the podium]
[the reality of the local election results: collapse of UKIP back into Tory and Labour voter base, thus their “gains”, more Labour seats up for grabs therefore more Labour gains, UKIP just as much Labour as Tory, Labour the party shocked out of liberalism by the harsh political reality that as much of their base went UKIP as the Tories, with the Lib Dems the constant undermining force in UK politics enabling an endless right wing. But with the demise of UKIP this isn’t to be mistaken for that issue not being the prime motivator in most people’s vote; it’s merely a demo of how successfully the Conservatives and Labour have been in regaining the lost voters by dint of their current pro-Brexit or anti-Remain policies.]
[Tories weakened by corruption and disdain and carpet-bagging and incoherent policy on Brexit – but this latter chimes with the reality of a core demographic: who cares about Europe enough to form mutually considerate policy when the real message needs to be ‘fuck the wogs’ and ‘get what we can’. So Tory absence of direct policy fits more closely with voter preference than is commonly understood.]
[Labour recovering from loss of the UKIP/leave-voting surprise core traditional voters but forced to shift entire policy to accommodate their return: a harsh political reality that may not sit well with Labour intelligentsia but remains consistent with a party ambitious of winning power in the current electoral climate of the UK .What else can they do? Stand against Brexit and let in the Tories, recharge UKIP and bleed more wasted votes to the LibDems? Then another term in opposition with even less influence on national policy. Or fudge but mostly stand against Remain and try to plot a “socialism in one nation” route to justify it, knowing this has brought back the UKIP losses with minimum protest voters going LibDem (or likely the same number of white privileged ‘floating’ voters).]
[LibDems had two chances since the start of the 21st century to make a difference to the British political world and restore their fortunes as a party of inclusive ideals: the AV referendum and the coalition with David Cameron. In both cases they failed so spectacularly as to doom the party to another century of partial-irrelevance, their only defining role the stubborn refusal to unite against the right wing haters and exploiters and thus across 650 first past the post seats ensure the minimum number of liberals get elected. Time and time again. The LibDem vanity project is no more than Conservative enabling, the coalition and the about-face on student finance actually the least harmful of their consequences; though still pretty fucking harmful.]
[UKIP is dead, long live UKIP. This agenda still defines the landscape of the electorate, however much the main parties might wish to move back to their traditional battlegrounds. What’s most depressing about the UKIP agenda is it IS, despite apologists trying to coerce this parochial prejudice into economic or disenfranchised motives, the embodiment of a schism at the heart of British identity (as it is, flavoured slightly differently, in all the western democracies): love thy neighbour versus love thy self thinking.
[define these oppositional modes of thinking]