Main Edition
US
FR
June 25, 2020 - 11:54am
Was the 2019 general election really the great realignment it’s been cracked up to be?
Yes, is the answer — and there’s plenty of proof in a new report from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation by Matthew Goodwin and Oliver Heath.
The headline finding is that “for the first time in recorded history” the Conservatives did better than Labour among people on low incomes. Indeed, the Tory lead over Labour among these voters was 15 percentage points. And that’s not the strangest part:
What UnHerd writers like Paul Embery warned would happen did indeed happen.
Also worth noting is that the shift in working class support was not an exclusively regional matter — i.e. it wasn’t confined to the Red Wall areas in the North and Midlands. As the report states, “the Conservatives made gains among low-income voters all across the country” — including London and the South East.
Obviously, in terms of seats we saw the most dramatic results were along the Red Wall — but, in part, that’s because there was less of an offsetting move of high income voters away from the Conservatives in these areas compared to the nation as a whole.
Despite their overall triumph, the Tories lost support among high income voters — especially to the Lib Dems who saw their vote share in this group increase from 13.2% (in 2017) to 18.9%.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThis was certainly the election in which this evolution was made concrete in terms of votes. But in reality Labour has been the party of the rich since Blair became leader. The problem is that it always takes most people around 20 years to wake up to any form of reality. And the amount of damage done during those 20 years – in any time and at any place – is often as massive as it is irreversible.
The interesting question is why. Policies that addressed income disparity more strongly than Blair were rejected in 1988, 92, 2010 and 15.
Labour just weren’t trusted to deliver and personally I don’t think people cared much about inequality in any of those elections or at least that was not the deciding factor. Btw it was the 87 election.
A lot of people assume that achieving equality is the aim of the working classes. Equality is certainly what Labour seem to consider a major issue. Most working class people are more aspirational than that. They don’t want handouts, just hand-ups. They want to be able to succeed and do well and, with luck, become rich!
Exactly. I play football with a bunch of guys. Many of them are progressive-liberal middle-class types with ‘creative’ jobs who vote to the left. The only one who was completely anti-Corbyn was the working class builder guy, who simply wanted to be free to work hard and work his way up.
“They want to be able to succeed and do well and, with luck, become rich!”
That’s the point: the opportunity to do that is reduced when resources accumulate at the very top and in London. Deindustrialisation and deunionisation held back people’s aspirations.
Thanks. Yes, ’87. You’re right! But that’s what I meant: Why didn’t voters care? And which voters did or didn’t care? Because that’s why Labour had to move as far as Blair did in being “high-income-friendly” to get elected.
Interesting. Politics seems to be consolidating around the global-national nexus with the working class tending to support the national approach along with the Conservative middle and upper classes. Meanwhile, the Liberal and the Socialist middle classes and the new money class seem to prefer the global approach, especially regarding issues like the human growth crisis.
It’s like our politics has realigned to create national resilience and global resilience in the face our human growth crisis.
Hopefully we will work something out.
🌸🌺
From what I’ve seen, age is a much bigger factor than class. Maybe related to the different interests of those who have already accumulated fixed assets/income (property/pensions) and those who still prioritise the opportunity to develop their own income and assets?
Different experiences. Those in the 60s and older remember the treachery of selling the EEC as a trading organisation as a bigger and more influential alternative to EFTA.
Fine, but that’s also got nothing to do with class. Age is the big dividing line.
A simpler explanation could be that this was the Brexit vote, and that Leavers voted for Brexit and Remainers voted against. It was a one-issue election, and once that issue is finally settled, we’ll be back to business as usual.
It looks like only 3% actually switched from Labour to Conservative though. Mind you, this analysis only looks at 2017 and 2019, and to an extent both were “Brexit elections”, whereas the underlying trend is much longer. But no data on that in this blog post.
Yes indeed, who can forget that dreadful toad Edward Heath? He couldn’t even manage to attend proper elocution lessons, but was quite happy to deceive us all.
E. Powell prescient as ever, correctly predicted that Brexit would be a bitter conflict with “no quarter asked and none given”.
How right he was.
This explains why The Times has gone all in for its support of Kier and the Labour Party. They want someone that will help their readers and supporters the best.
They do not want or need the poorer people.
They will connect with the public sector workers, the middle class city dwellers.. the left wing.
Sums up many of The Times readers of today.
I have a theory about this but haven’t done any research to back it up yet. My theory is that we’ve switched from politics that is primarily economically driven to politics that is primarily socially. So most liberal urban high income earners are less likely to vote Tory and traditionalist workers are less likely vote Labour.
I’m guessing this is driven partially by social media and partially because economically almost everyone below upper middle class feels (rightly or wrongly) screwed over compared to their parents.
Which explains I presume why the Labour Party stormed to victory in Surrey and Hampshire and lost seats in Newham and Tower Hamlets. I would suggest a rather more sophisticated analysis is necessary
I do not think Keir Starmer has much chance if he continues like this. I do not know anyone from the Labour Shadow cabinet. So far I find him very wanting and I am wondering what his politics actually are.
I hope he’s left of centre!
This article is why UnHerd is my #1 login every morning. Interesting, educational, insightful, well-thought-out. Thanks!
So…? It seems to me with decades experience of watching politics underlying this change will change nothing. In a few years we will be bombarded with who was at fault for the Corona virus? Who was responsible for at least 25,000 more death than necessary? Why the innumerable enquires still taking place, about to take place haven’t reached the right solution. That is Dominic Cummings is to blame or/and Boris Johnson and of course the evil Tories …and so on. Obviously the BBC already know this and will keep ramming down our throats. Labour of course are above all this. Pity their amazing solutions to all our problems can’t happen until they are in power. Hay ho! Same old, same old. Sad that a brave effort could easily be made to create a better system. Me?… I start by reducing the number of MP’s and Lords down to 100 each. My only wish is, I last a little longer to see if a system change will be made. Please don’t ask me to hold my breath.
Strewth, that was a brave post! The moral dimension of obesity, quite possibly the thorniest topic of the modern era, and in the end really quite Zen. You tread a fine line between personal morality and general moralising – I salute you.
This makes a lot of sense – For sure reproduction has to be the Prime Objective for survival of any species and that is why they all like sex so much and organise their entire existance around it at such a deep level it does not feel that this is so – For us the wars that make sudden changes are likely been less effective in actually changing us than the steady universal choices in sexual selection to the extent of apparent absorption of races and cultures seen in our history and relics confirming the same in pre history – The female has the greater investment in sexual activity and so it is likely her choice dominates the direction of the species except where a culture prohibits her choice and the way this is done can be a souce of excess frustrated males and this can be used to control them towards a violence promoted to end the frustration – It does feel like there is greater risk of a serious war than for many years and the above article is a convincing description of what is likely one of the underlying driving forces towards it?
I have puzzled over the term “InCel” (Involuntary Celibacy ). Is it just me?, or is the term a misnomer from the outset?. Personally, I have little doubt that most men and women ( subject to non-heterosexual persuasions of course, and perhaps monks?) would not chose to be celibate voluntarily. So, although I accept Mary’s precept (at face value) for the Vikings, Indians and Chinese “competition” issue for fewer women, it’s not the same dilemma symptoms in the UK, but perhaps the same resulting problem. ‘Twas ever thus. Boys and girls who are attractive, rich and/or bold get the prize(s)….. more often…..but not exclusively, the rest of us have to (had to) work harder at it, and ultimately even a rich handsome jerk will likely be spurned. Isn’t “InCel” just a name for those who do not have the “winning” attributes, and are angry because , unlike everything else in modern Western society, sex not handed to them on a plate?. I also know that the Incel scenario does lead to more “VolNonHets” (Voluntary-Non-Hetero’s), which in modern society is now….. well…. something to have “pride” in. Incidentally, In Middle-East states (e.g. UAE & Saudi etc) the huge intake of young asian working males outstrips females by massive % points, and this leads to male / male relationships, which, one must suppose, was not the “voluntary” option they chose when they applied for the job. Just saying’…….. not all Gays are born Gay…….but “VolGay”, or is it “InGay”?. …… and does it matter?
Modern studies of the Vikings, including genetic analysis, contradict the traditional children’s-book portrayal: in general the Vikings were after land to settle, and brought their own wives and families with them.
Harrington may well have a point as regard male surpluses in general. But there are hopeful signs. My own unscientific and anecdotal studies indicate that as the educational level and earning potential of women rise, girl babies are becoming the preferred sex in the Far East. A South Korean student friend told me: ‘My grandmother was disappointed I was a girl. But my mother was pleased.’ The surplus-male problem may yet sort itself.
Now, I am confused! Where are this morning’s comments!?
It’s good that the author is highlighting the terrible effects of carb-heavy eating, because this message is still not widely known and/or widely accepted. I too have a metabolism that, as is the case for a majority of people, does not effectively process the high amount of carbs present in the modern western diet. Would that I had been given this information back in my 30’s; I would have understood why I craved pasta and could have moderated carb intake and not have developed Type II. Now my best option is to restrict carbs to those that come from vegetables, period. Very difficult to maintain over time. I don’t have the author’s experience, though, or share his opinion that this epidemic of metabolic-syndrome related obesity is mainly caused by material over-abundance and a sort of moral failing related to greed. For one thing, many people who have this condition don’t overindulge in sugar or expensive snacks. You don’t have to overeat calorie-wise to develop a problem, if your diet is heavy on processed carbs. This widespread obesity is
better explained by the fact that we were told for the past 50 years to eliminate fat from our daily diets and concentrate on “healthy” grains. Even today–even with blood work that demonstrates great improvement in all categories including lipid profile–my physicians are not on particularly on board with the idea that I don’t avoid fat in my diet.
My obesity, diabetes, diet and weight loss story mirrors the author’s. I am also becoming convinced, through some casual research, that sugar contributes in a big way to cancer, which I have suffered. It is notable, to me anyway, that glucose is what is injected into me before CT scans looking for cancer. The glucose somehow excites the cancer making it easier to find, like excited lids in a candy store. The tough part of avoiding sugar is finding out where it is; it is an ingredient in almost everything, including some table salt here in Canada.
As a bicyclist that was one of the most charming and enlightening articles I could imagine.
“I stand and rejoice every time I see a woman ride by on a wheel ” the picture of free, untrammelled womanhood.” That is so beautiful that I am seriously considering taking the mortal risk of saying that to the next woke female cyclist I ride past.
Looks like only about 3% of low income voters switched from Labour to Conservative between 2017 and 2019. How many of those were liberal centrists repulsed by Corbyn and how many socially conservative Lexit-voters?
Also, a lot depends on where you define “low” and “high” income. And ignoring age doesn’t tell us much. Are the low income switchers disproportionately pensioners?
The obvious follow on question is, is this across all groups? Traditionally Labour was seen as the party of the working class. Then the wc plus minority groups, then the middle class.
Are those wc people transferring their allegiance to the Conservatives doing so at a similar rate and which groups? Chinese, Indian and in a lesser way Jewish voters have a good proportion of Tory voters historically. Has the picture changed much?
The obvious follow on question is, is this across all groups? Traditionally Labour was seen as the party of the working class. Then the wc plus minority groups, then the middle class.
Are those wc people transferring their allegiance to the Conservatives doing so at a similar rate and which groups? Some minority groups historically have had a good proportion of Tory voters. Has the picture changed much?
Well the EU was keen to buy the Young Votes with loads of pro EU freebies paid for from UK taxes.
A great article and well researched – interesting to consider more local observations on the inter racial blockages to the drive of women to choose to the mate or men to compete. How do behaviours of Indian, Pakistani & others and Afro/Caribbean men shape the potential rising “Incel” issue in the UK.
Indian and Pakistani men in the UK may suffer similar male/female deficiencies as in their home countries and many are “encouraged” to find a bride back home and bring them here – in fact many families in India and Pakistan pay to get their daughters married to a UK based husband. Some men rebel against this and find a white bride but the level of mixed race marriages is not as high as with Afro Caribbean and English white for example.
Further the UK Afro/carribean community has a much higher level of Father Absence than other BAME sections of our community and often children through more than one female without marriage; how easy is for black females try and improve their pool options outside the black community?
Do Pakistani young men see white women as potential wives or potential sex abuse targets?
Do white women/men see inter racial marriages/partnerships as real options or do they prefer to be Incel?
The lack of fluidity it between race and religion does not help at all
“an excess of young men hanging around full of machismo”
Well, I don’t think we have much to worry about today on that account.
That is a point which has perhaps been recognised by another traditional solution, not mentioned in this article and uncommon in northern Europe since the Protestant Reformation: Monasticism.
In countries with few resources, the self-sufficient, low-consumption and celibate life of monastic communities can take large numbers of young males out of the breeding pool at very low cost to the community, whilst giving monks revered status for their spirituality and purity of thought. The disciplined diurnal cycle of scriptural study, prayer or meditation, hard work, and preparation for events in the annual cycle of festivities all ensure that the minds and bodies of monks are occupied almost constantly.
Maybe there is a role for religion in the modern world after all, despite the tendency for the corruption of the priest which has been the focus of discussion in recent years. Perhaps poor young men should be encouraged to head for a monastery up a mountain instead of a barracks, but would an InCel be a better person in a cell? The Berserkers were celibate, monastic, disciplined and extraordinarily violent Vikings – who would not be revealed BTW in any genetic study due to survivor bias. And what of the Spartans? There’s nowt so queer as folk (and they were so encouraged).
I spotted the traffic police out in force a couple of days ago, setting up a speed trap. One of them said “doing it because drivers appear to have forgotten how to drive after 3 months lock-down, and more cyclists are being killed”….I replied that I doubted the first bit, but here’s 3 points for you to consider;-
1; Any Muppet can get on a bike and use the highway without a test, tax, insurance, lights or brains.
2; Drivers are so terrified of getting points from you lot that they spend more time looking at the speedo instead of keeping aware of their surroundings and hazards. .. incl cyclists, who often have no road sense whatsoever.
3; The speed limits in built up areas are inconsistent that drivers have to concentrate on whether they are allowed at 20, 30 or 40mph. Cyclists can go at whatever speed they like.
His reply?…..” we’re just here to enforce the law”. so. just another sheep in Policeman clothing.
I say Test, Tax & insure . Save Lives