Patronising people with patriotism will not win 2020

Labour will need to win over the socially conservative voters of today in win in 2020 – but flag waving will not make up for a lack of credible policy on welfare and spending and a real understanding of the hardship faced by working people throughout the country.

Widely reported research by Jon Cruddas this week suggested that since 2005, voters that were sympathetic to more socially conservative ideas have been increasingly more likely to select UKIP over Labour on their ballot papers. For Cruddas and some commentators this week, Labour can win over these voters by appealing to their values on immigration, identity (the notion of ‘Englishness’) and social security.

This group of voters (referred to as ‘settlers’ in Cruddas’s research paper) are described as being more likely to read the Daily Mail, have a lower level of education, feel alienated from politics and be pessimistic about the future. People within this group are also less likely to come from black and minority ethnic communities and are more likely to be male. It is worth noting that for a party that seeks to empower those marginalised by society, the privileging of the policy priorities of white male voters may raise some concern.

Since 1973, the proportion of the UK that belongs within this ‘settler’ category has fallen by almost 50 per cent with a greater proportion of the UK fitting into the aspirational and optimistic ‘prospectors’ group or the post-materialistic ‘pioneers’. Although the proportion of those with more socially liberal views are growing within the UK, 29% of voters still fall within the alienated ‘settler’ category and are increasingly deciding to vote UKIP at the ballot box. Like UKIP, Labour could attempt to win over these voters with the false promise of simple solutions to complex problems – but doing so will only result in the propagation of a discourse that breeds alienation and disillusionment.

I spoke to Clive Lewis MP about the complexities of English national identity that have emerged as a result of privatisation. He argues that if these are left unexplored, we are likely to disaffect voters from the communities we are attempting to reach out to.

He said: “Any notion of national identity must take into account the fact it is constantly shifting – to see ‘Englishness’ as both virtually static and uniform across England is a mistake. Increasingly the concept of ‘Englishness’ is seen in the North as something related to London and the Home Counties. The institutions that once bound North and South, England, Wales and Scotland have been eroded these past 40 years. From publicly owned utilities and industries to the NHS – neoliberalism has shredded the bonds of our shared identity – national institutions that help define who we were as a nation. Why do you think MP post bags have been so full about plans for ‘dismantling the BBC’?”

I understand the need for Labour to speak for those within the UK who have patriotic values (indeed, as a Welsh man I would likely fall into this category myself, especially during the rugby); but to posit this as the strategy to engage with the disenfranchised working class is far more patronising than the oft-quoted Thornberry white van tweet. Rather than helping to paste over the cracks in Tory Britain with nostalgia and romantic idealism, we need to highlight these failures – placing stress on these areas of weakness with Labour solutions.

We need to learn to listen to those disillusioned with Labour and respond by providing these people with meaningful and legitimate opportunities to address the problems that they face. We need to inspire voters, and create opportunities for meaningful participation to address the alienation and pessimism that leads people turning to convenient untruths.

A Labour response to ‘socially conservative’ concerns about immigration, welfare spending and job security will not be solved with a rebranding exercises or vague promises to ‘control immigration’ (as we have already seen). But a clear approach to address job insecurity, housing shortages, low wages – accompanied by credible policy on welfare and spending can help address anxieties without further dividing communities. Voters are concerned about immigration because they are concerned that their families are not sufficiently supported by the society within which they live. Listening to and responding to these anxieties appropriately will allow us to develop a credible solution without resorting to vague, reactionary slogans and xenophobia.

Lewis added: “New institutions that can unite us and give us common cause are desperately needed. It is through such modern, 21st century, social democratic bonds – not out dated concepts of 19th century national identity that for vast swathes of our multi-cultural country mean little – that we can reforge a sense of shared national identity and civic pride.”

Not only does the Labour Party need to talk like those it represents – but it needs to begin recruiting more people from underrepresented communities to give them the opportunity to talk themselves about the issues that effect them. Hopefully then the proportion of voters that fall within this ’settlers’ category, driven by their feelings of alienation, will continue to fall.

The Tories didn’t win the last election because of the British flag in their logo – it was because they had a clear message that resonated with voters. Its about time Labour gave people something to vote for and believe in again.

Greg Dash is deputy editor of Antics, the Young Fabians magazine