Churchill, UKIP and the Populists

With the traditional political process struggling for legitimacy due to the ongoing financial crisis, populism is rearing its head in opposition.

Its presence is most readily felt in the protest votes cast at elections. Parties such as UKIP are doing well by gathering protest votes (57% of those who voted UKIP are unlikely to do so again; Ashcroft, 2013). The dangers of these populist protests at the ballot box are best highlighted by the contrast between the nationwide anti-cuts protests and the policies of the party that protest votes where cast for: not only are UKIP pro-cuts, but in their manifesto they include a cut to the top rate of tax to 31% (down from 45%), and the raising of tax on everyone else (over the personal income threshold) up to that 31% margin  (Randall, 2013).

These populist protests tend to be the voice of anger and frustration - but that alone is merely the asking of a question, a cry for help with problems unaddressed. What tends to move those movements forward is the emergence of groups willing to offer easy, and often insubstantial, promises to provide a solution. And those solutions often involve abolishing the bureaucratic complexities of the modern world in favour of a simpler time.

In such situations, particularly with the political right, it is not uncommon for those promises to come with visions of reclaiming a better past - but those visions are just romantic revisionism. Looking at history through the lives of aristocrats - with their estates and ballrooms; their wealth, splendour and accomplishments - can evidently give history the appearance of an age of romanticism and extravagance being slowly drowned in mediocrity.

But these beliefs in a 'better time', and other such sentiments, are evidently untrue.

The work of Professor Hans Rosling, reviewed in BBC4's Joy of Stats (2010), shows that humanity, far from falling, has in fact been engaged in a slow struggle to overcome the conditions that feudal and aristocratic society wrapped in chains around us. The opening up of movement and freedom, brought on by freer trade and greater interactions between diverse peoples dragged humanity towards a better world.

Then came the twentieth century. Welfare, spurred on in Britain by philanthropic projects like the poor reports of Rowntree and Booth, began to address the age old social ailments and injustices that had been escalated by the dawn of industrialism, or that had simply replaced the evils that went before. Rowntree's work astonished Britain in its day, dismissing the same myths that Professor Rosling's statistics do now, and elicited from Churchill (Marr, 2009) the response that:

'For my own part, I see little glory in an Empire which can rule the waves and is unable to flush its sewers.'

So if the myths used to harness the support of populist outcries are unlikely to produce the solutions promised, then what are they likely to offer? Let us turn once more to Churchill (Jenkins. 2001):

'We know perfectly well what to expect - a party of great vested interests, banded together in a formidable confederation, corruption at home, aggression to cover it up abroad, the trickery of tariff juggles, the tyranny of a party machine, sentiment by the bucketful, patriotism by the imperial pint... dear food for the million, cheap labour for the millionaire.'

Anti-establishment movements are essential in creating proper checks on the power of any organised body with the power to affect our world. But indiscriminately lashing out at the complexities associated to the newer, bureaucratic political world, misses the point.

Tearing down the structures put up as guards against corruption and poverty will only serve to give room for those evils once more. The barriers that populist parties, like UKIP, wish to see thrown down were not constructed as annoyances. We need better regulations - based on a solid understanding of the purposes behind them - and to make those regulations we have more efficient. We do not need to take bulldozers to them indiscriminately.

When delving into political matters, vigilance against our own passions and reactions is always necessary, lest in our anger we lash out at barriers without understanding, and find them to have been safeguards against the re-emergence of old evils all along.

==========

References:
==========
+ David Randall's 'Special Report: What voters should know about Ukip'; in The Independent; 3 March 2013.

+ UKIP Manifesto; April 2010; from UKIP.org, manifesto section.

+ Ashcroft's 'Lord Ashcroft: Here's why Eastleigh voted the way it did'; on conservativehome.blogs; 1 March 2013. Also covered by The Guardian, 1 March 2013.

+ Hans Rosling's 'The Joy of Stats'; on BBC4; 7 December 2010. See an excerpt here.

+ Andrew Marr's 'The Making of Modern Britain'; Macmillan, 2009. [Buy Now]

+ Roy Jenkin's 'Churchill'; Pan Macmillan, 2001. [Buy Now]

- Some articles on the changing attitudes toward poverty in Edwardian Britain:
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/lesson29.htm
http://jadesmg.hubpages.com/hub/Changing-attitudes-towards-Poverty-in-Britian
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty,_A_Study_of_Town_Life

Black Mirror: The Dangers of Popular Discontent

The last episode of Charlie Brooker's second series of Black Mirror could not have been more perfectly timed. Its scornful assault on political populism fits the mood of the moment, as signor Beppe Grillo's Movimento 5 Stelle and UKIP in Eastleigh cashed in on popular protest votes.

But the discontent with popularity expressed in Black Mirror is not new to pop culture. In fact, our cultural output seems to treat popularity as outright dangerous.

In Chuck Palahniuk's Fight Club, we see a disaffected man become the voice for disaffected men when he inadvertently develops an alternate personality in order to escape from his life. As Tyler Durden he offers himself and his followers release from their frustrations, along with the opportunity to belong. As the eponymous fight club gains franchises and turns into a popular movement, its members, once the disenfranchised, have become a loyal and well-organised group, capable of powerful popular mobilisation in support of the cause.

Charlie Brooker's series two finale of Black Mirror runs with a similar theme. In The Waldo Moment, the protagonist creates a digital character, Waldo - a blue bear - who is used to ambush celebrities and politicians with insults and embarrassing questions while they are under the impression that they are being interviewed for a kid's TV show. When, due to the success of one particular ambush of a politician, the character is entered into a by-election, Waldo becomes a vehicle for popular discontent with politics that quickly goes viral.

In both of these works, the question is raised as to what the power created by popular movements might be used for; and in both works the answer takes us to a dark place. The disenfranchised, the disaffected, the dissatisfied; these people become the power base supporting leaders with deceptive or dangerous motives.

Those cultural fears, while presented in these works in extreme forms, do not require much imagination to translate into reality. We have an urge to belong. Fitting in with others is the safest strategy for surviving existence - and we will jealously defend those connections. But our need can also be wielded against us:

'the majority undertakes to supply a multitude of ready-made opinions for the use of individuals, who are thus relieved from the necessity of forming opinions of their own' (de Toqueville, 1840)

The popular and the persuasive offer us answers that require little more from us than our acquiescence. But supporting anything without a clear understanding of the reasons for them - and the evidence supporting them - means handing over a dangerous amount of power to those who benefit from your support.

As we shed the responsibility to analyse information and come to our own opinions, we also shed the personal power that comes with it. But neither responsibility, nor power, simply dissolve when we refuse them. Instead, the responsibility falls on others - and whether by our inaction or through institutions, we invest them with the power, on our behalf, to see those responsibilities done.

The increasing complexity of life is such that political representation is a necessity - but it is not one that should be taken lightly or ignored. When our vigilance wanes, and we lazily follow the crowd, popular support can become a very dangerous tool.

==========
References:
==========
+ Charlie Brooker's 'The Waldo Moment'; from Black Mirror Series 2, Episode 3; Channel 4; 25 February 2013.
+ Alexis de Toqueville 'Democracy in America'; Saunders and Otley; 1835-1840.

Elezioni Italiane 2013 - The Fallout

This is part three in a three part series covering the story behind, the campaign, and fallout from the 2013 Italian general election...

In the final run up to the 2013 Italian general election, with a polling blackout in effect, speculation found itself accompanied by plenty of controversy - and most of it surrounded signor Silvio Berlusconi. Yet, by the end of Monday night, even signor Berlusconi would find himself upstaged.

As polls officially opened for voting over Sunday and Monday, former premier signor Berlusconi was faced with accusations alleging he had broken the rules by campaigning past the deadline (BBC, 2013), and was confronted by topless feminist protesters at a polling station in Milan (The Guardian, 2013).

The exit polls, taken as voters leave polling stations, initially suggested a relatively comfortable victory was in store for signor Pier Luigi Bersani's centre-left 'Italia. Bene Comune' coalition. However, the first official data releases suggested that signor Berlusconi's centre-right group had in fact closed the gap completely, setting up a narrow race for both the senate and the house (Hooper & Davies, 2013).

As the results trickled in, it slowly became clear that the outcome would be inconclusive.

No group had been able to establish complete control of the Italian parliament: signor Bersani's Partito Democratico secured a majority in the lower house, and signor Berlusconi's campaign, that had dominated media coverage, had only managed to snatch the centre-right Il Popolo della Liberta enough seats to deny signor Bersani control of the senate.

However, the real surprise was this battle being eclipsed by the party in third place - though the second largest independent party in parliament - the Movimento 5 Stelle, led by signor Beppe Grillo. The group had pushed an anti-establishment politics that gathered steam throughout the campaign and were looking sure to pass the outgoing premier signor Mario Monti for third place.

Yet when the dust settled, the party, more familiar to rallies on Italian piazzas, had outmatched even the most favourable estimates to secure 26% of the popular vote for the house and 24% for the senate.

With the peculiarities of the Italian electoral system helping only to create a stalemate - the centre-left majority in the house being insufficient to form a stable government, since the senate carries the same powers but is beyond their control and so able to block any action taken;

...and with signor Monti's group, potential allies to the centre-left, unable to secure more than 11% and a very few seats - though the former premier himself is said to be satisfied with the result (La Repubblica, 2013);

...the power over the forming of a stable government rests in the hands of signor Grillo's group: the champions of anti-establishment politics now find themselves to be the kingmakers in the heart of parliament.

Fears are now apparent of stalemate, indecision, rising debt and repeat elections - that this election has merely produced an unworkable stalemate that will create more yet instability and another election in just a few short months (Hewitt, 2013).

So now the work starts - first of all to pick apart this result. What can be stressed with most certainty is that the electorate offered a profound no vote. No to what is seen as EU imposed austerity has, as shown by the the strength of both Il Popolo della Liberta (anti-tax and anti-austerity) and Movimento 5 Stelle (anti-austerity and anti-establishment) in this new parliament and the poor turnout for signor Monti, and no to the establishment.

But there has also been no alternative accepted. The people have said no to the establishment and no to austerity, but not enough were convinced by the moderate alternatives proposed by signor Bersani and the Partito Democratico.

In a frantic, populist charge, signor Grillo's Movimento 5 Stelle have broken into the Italian political system and found themselves right in the middle of matters. In the coming days and weeks its newly elected members will play a key role in finding a resolution to the present stalemate - something that some analysts see as far from impossible (Lees, 2013). If they can navigate through that, then they will find themselves in a key role to shape a new alternative to present to the people of Italy, to the people of Europe and to the financial markets jittering around the world.

Populism stole the show on Monday night. But getting that foot in the door was only half of the job. Now comes the long, hard, and unpopular push for reform.

==========

References:
==========
+ BBC's 'Italy votes in election seen as key for economic recovery'; 24 February 2013.

+ The Guardian's 'Topless Femen activists attempt to confront Silvio Berlusconi as he votes in Italian elections - video'; 24 February 2013.

+ John Hooper & Lizzy Davies' 'Italy election neck-and-neck between Berlusconi's right and Bersani's left'; in The Guardian; 25 February 2013.

+ Results rundown from La Repubblica: for the Senate and the House...
...and also, on Wikipedia.

+ La Repubblica's 'Elezioni 2013, Monti: "Sono soddisfatto"'; 25 February 2013.

+ Gavin Hewitt's 'Analysis'; in BBC's 'Italy election: Results point to impasse'; 25 February 2013.

+ Kevin Lees' 'Where Italy goes from today’s elections: a look at four potential outcomes'; on Suffragio.org; 25 February 2013.