国产热热热精品,亚洲视频久久】日韩,三级婷婷在线久久,99人妻精品视频,精品九热人人肉肉在线,AV东京热一区二区,91po在线视频观看,久久激情宗合,青青草黄色手机视频

Global EditionASIA 中文雙語(yǔ)Fran?ais
Opinion
Home / Opinion / From the Press

National identity trumped a call for change in Britain

By Tom Fowdy | cgtn | Updated: 2019-12-14 13:47
Share
Share - WeChat

Most polls accurately predicted the outcome of the 2019 General Election. It was only the skepticism of some voters and the optimism of others that failed to take them seriously. Only two years ago, the Labour Party led by Jeremy Corbyn had achieved a surprise upset over Theresa May wiping out the Conservative Prime Minister's majority. It heralded a decisive message that the party's left leaning manifesto and ideology were, contrary to criticism, electable in the eyes of the public.

Given this backdrop, hopes for Thursday's vote were extremely high. In the United Kingdom, "#youthquake" was trending on Twitter in the belief that young voters were about to come out in droves and sweep away Boris Johnson. Despite all the indicators suggesting otherwise, few Jeremy Corbyn enthusiasts seriously believed that their party was going to be defeated: They eagerly expected to once again defy the odds.

Then 10:00 p.m. came and faces turned sour. A BBC exit poll revealed that the Labour Party had defied expectations, but for the wrong reasons. Corbyn's party would be heading not for a hung parliament or advance in seats, but for its worst result in over 80 years, which reduced its seats to a rump of 203.

As the night emerged, this reality set in as "Labour heartland" seats in the North of England, consisting of working class post-industrial communities, flipped from red to blue. A number of safe Labour seats who had either never elected a Conservative MP in 80 years, or for that matter ever, opted for Boris Johnson's party.

Labour supporters appear to be in a state of disbelief. They cannot understand why working class people have rejected what they deem working class policies, and instead opted for what they would describe as the upper class, elitist Boris Johnson. The answer is not one of class, but national identity, which begins by noting its ambiguous, soft remain Brexit position as a huge part of the problem.

Labour had indecisively shifted to remain over the past year and pledged a second referendum. It believed that it could avert a serious emphasis on the biggest question pressing over Britain's future by a making radical appeal to change. In 2017 it did this and worked, but the party endorsed leave.

The circumstances were different. Back then Theresa May's campaign was disastrous and the Brexit process had not yet begun. Here, Boris Johnson with the firm message of "get Brexit done" did not make the same mistakes. He set the narrative and held on to it.

Thus came Labour's strategic mistake. Most areas in Northern England had voted for Brexit decisively, and their position simply did not connect with their patriotic sentiment, an issue also further rooted in the "metropolitan" framing of the party's leadership. In many aspects, Corbyn is disconnected with Northern working class culture.

This led to a near 20 percent fall in their vote share across working class constituencies, with a great deal of votes being leaked to Nigel Farage's Brexit Party and some to the Conservatives.

In this case, what Labour failed to account for is that in British politics, history shows when a popular appeal for radical change is squared up against a solid appeal for patriotism and national identity, the latter triumphs every time by a huge margin. The election mirrors that of 1983, where Margaret Thatcher having decisively won the Falklands War and championed British revivalism competed against the left wing manifesto of Labour's Michael Foot, scored a convincing Conservative victory.

What these lessons demonstrate to us is that identity is a powerful force in politics, which should not be underestimated, and that in many cases, opting for national sentiment and belonging will easily defeat what's considered a rational option.

Undoubtedly, there is a good case to argue that Labour was not defeated because simply they were "too left wing" – as many of their policies including re-nationalisation, healthcare and investment continue to be overwhelmingly popular across the board. A more competent leader more in touch with the North has a good chance of winning in future.

It was Labour's inability to connect with the issue of national identity and their underestimation of Brexit as a huge appendage that paved the way for many core voters turning against the party.

Labour heartland communities have experienced ideological change, while the demise of industry and trade unionism has weakened "class solidarity" politics and is being hallowed out by a new nationalism, as we have also seen in the United States. As a result, Boris Johnson made a more decisive appeal than Corbyn, and won accordingly.

Most Viewed in 24 Hours
Top
BACK TO THE TOP
English
Copyright 1994 - . All rights reserved. The content (including but not limited to text, photo, multimedia information, etc) published in this site belongs to China Daily Information Co (CDIC). Without written authorization from CDIC, such content shall not be republished or used in any form. Note: Browsers with 1024*768 or higher resolution are suggested for this site.
License for publishing multimedia online 0108263

Registration Number: 130349
FOLLOW US
庆安县| 视频| 淮安市| 泽州县| 翁牛特旗| 肇州县| 虎林市| 侯马市| 丰台区| 大港区| 天柱县| 芷江| 柏乡县| 马公市| 普安县| 巴东县| 博兴县| 呼伦贝尔市| 耒阳市| 通化市| 雷波县| 扬中市| 宾川县| 浦江县| 策勒县| 金门县| 留坝县| 武城县| 甘谷县| 龙井市| 鲁甸县| 乌审旗| 灵川县| 台中市| 抚州市| 仁怀市| 开鲁县| 罗山县| 吉木萨尔县| 莱阳市| 华阴市|