In the last decade there have been two Green surges. The first, in early 2015, saw party membership swell by tens of thousands in response to a grassroots social media campaign. With UKIP then hogging all the "minor party" interest as far as headline writers were concerned and Labour in Milquetoast mode, the huge bump in support was a diffuse and inchoate protest against poisonous politics. In 2019, after having been diminished by Corbynism the Greens surged again. In the EU elections the UK was forced to participate in, the Greens increased its MEP count to seven with 1.8m votes, beating the Tories into fourth place with 1.8m votes (12%) - the party's best result since it came third in the same elections in 1989. And now, arguably, the Greens are experiencing a third surge and one that might establish them as a force to be reckoned with.
Traditionally the Greens have been characterised as a petit bourgeois party by the left, even if their programme in the 2020s is more radical and pro-worker than what Keir Starmer will put in the next Labour manifesto. But while there are understandable reasons to reject Labour - and I don't blame anyone on the left who does - what appears to be fuelling Green growth in elections is collapsing support for the Conservatives. Over the last year, it's mostly Tory seats that have tumbled to the Greens. Only a smattering of Labour and Liberal Democrat seats were among the scalps the party wracked up in this year's local elections.
The argument long made on here is about a fundamental shift toward immaterial labour in working class and middle class occupations. That is the central concern for increasing numbers of working age people is the production of social production: the interrelated production of social relationships, education, information, subjectivities, and care in the context of an economy dominated by the buying and selling of services. This has had profound consequences on the practical consciousness of class tending toward socially liberal values. Sociality, the ability to be comfortable with diversity, of interacting, relating, and empathising with people as they are found is an everyday virtue - despite the best efforts of the government at trying to reverse this increasingly powerful consensus. This helps explain the stark age splits revealed in surveys of voting behaviour and values. The younger one is, the more likely their education and career has socialised them into the spontaneously tolerant outlook of immaterial labour. Of course, socialised workers are not an unvariegated mass. Profession and occupation, inherited class position and property ownership, the experiences of gender, race/ethnicity, sexuality, disability, age, location, the privatisation of leisure combine and recombine in multiples of shifting identities. For all that, instead of being all over the place they - the totality of working age people - tend toward an anti-Tory politics. Even in the 2019 general election, the nadir of Corbyn's leadership, Labour were still the most popular party among working age people.
Therefore, as Keir Starmer moves Labour away from social liberalism and, crucially, the interests of the socialised worker the party will face significant difficulties. This, as argued here plenty times, is unlikely to manifest before the general election but once in office there's no reason why the Greens (and the Liberal Democrats) shouldn't benefit from an alienation of Labour's support from the party. There will be plenty of flashpoints, and the Tories have so thoroughly salted the ground that their being the beneficiary of anti-Labour opposition among this group of voters is not very likely. But this is the future. The Greens as a party with a radical programme with a strong pro-worker, pro-trade union spine are doing well now at the Tories' expense in formerly safe Conservative districts. How might this be explained, and does it mean the Greens can look forward to more gains from this quarter?
Looking at council by-elections so far this year, there has been profit from tactical voting. In parliamentary by-elections Labour and the Lib Dems have reaped the rewards, while at local level the Greens are surging as never before. But why are they benefiting now? A lot has to do with the fracturing of the Tory voter coalition. While pensioner power that put the Tories in office and sustained them there, over the last decade the party has been able to win over just enough working age people to win their majorities. These are, disproportionately, small business owners, older workers, homeowners/mortgage holders and layers of professional-managerial people. In previous decades, before the growing reliance on retirees, these were the bedrock of Tory support and while some are still in the Tory van, these last few years they have kissed goodbye to mortgage holders and their support has eroded significantly among the professional-managerial cadres. It's not difficult to work out why. Unlike their public sector counterparts who more or less stuck with Labour from the Blair-Brown years to the present, constant attacks on professional occupations and a traducing of expertise generally, married to Conservatives behaving badly has sullied the party's reputation. Among the managerial caste - mainly in business - the disastrous consequences of Brexit, the lack of regulatory certainty from government, the state's increasing decrepitude, and complete failure to do anything about the country's deep-seated problems is shying them away.
Tailor-made for Keir Starmer's Labour, you might think. And polls looking at the intentions of 2019 Tory voters find about 10% of those who won't be supporting Rishi Sunak this time are going for Labour. Lower numbers are transferring to the Lib Dems ad the Greens, with don't know/won't vote by far the largest group. But the local council elections and by-elections showing occasional eviscerations of the Tories at the Greens' hands, how might a party well to the left of Labour be intersecting with a not-very-left electorate? Tactical voting only goes far, especially where the Greens have not previously been a factor in the places they've won. The more cynical might alight on how local parties campaign. Particularly where NIMBYism takes hold, such as Green opposition to solar farms for example. But neither by themselves can explain the generalised advance we're seeing at local government level.
There seem to be a few other processes going on. The first is the Greens' big selling point: environmentalism. The big scare the Greens gave the main parties in the 1989 European Community elections ensured "the green house effect" and other environmental concerns were forever paid lip service to subsequently. But repeated Tory stupidities over fossil fuels and refusal to take the climate crisis seriously is seeing the party being abandoned in droves in the county shires where the conservationist tendencies of former Tory support is now transferring to the party most serious about the issue. Second, the Greens are 'nice'. By that, I mean they're at a remove from the knockabout of politics. The party hasn't been embroiled in corruption or pushed divisive politics, and are therefore "untainted". When Conservatism is synonymous with amoral politics and immoral behaviour, the Greens are a clean option. And lastly, they're not Labour. Party antipathy is as powerful a push factor as party identification is in pulling the votes in. For former Tory voters shopping around for an alternative, Reform are too crude and too much like what they're revolting against. The Lib Dems are the usual protest outlet, but are embroiled in the Westminster circus which is so off-putting these days. Which leaves the Greens as the default option, and one many are prepared to support because even if they're "lefty" they can't do much damage on the borough or district council. Their environmental credibility, their political cleanliness, and their coming from a low base endears them to a swathe of loyal Tory support fed up with the status quo but for whom Labour is a step too far.
Between now and the next election, there's no reason to believe this dynamic won't continue eating into the Tory local government base. But success here will bring the Greens some difficulties. Can their party sustain a coalition comprising former Tories from the shires and the younger, more proletarianised, urbanised, and radical socialised workers? With Labour in government, while the Tories in opposition would remain repugnant for most working age people might some of the former Tories attracted to the Greens now return to the fold in the unlikely event of the party's next leader not being a right winger determined to head the party into the wilderness? These are all problems for the future. In as much there are certainties in politics, here are a couple: the Greens will continue to build before the election. And after, though there will be tensions between the two sources of the party's support Starmer's authoritarian and managerial politics will open the gate to an historic opportunity.
Image Credit
19 comments:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/green-party-adam-ramsay-councillors-local-elections-2023/
I am on the left and will likely vote Green. Always had been Labour.
I am becoming increasingly tempted to vote Green. In normal circumstances the constituency I live in is very safe Tory, so my vote has no practical effect (Mid Derbyshire).
Phil, you are very good at analysing the class forces that inform Tory behaviour. Forgive me if I have missed it, but I have missed a similar analysis of Labour - you seem to be centring on the personal failings of Starmer. Could you point me in the right direction?
I will probably switch to the Greens after voting Labour for 40 years.
I don’t have that much time for the Green Party, but at least they recognise the reality of the impending crisis caused by global heating.
Labour seems quite happy to postpone and/or water down any effective net zero policies or wider environmental actions.
The Starmer/Blair project marks the end of the Labour Party I have backed all my life; they have left me nothing to support so I might as well vote Green.
The Greens are already all but guaranteed a significant share of the former Labour vote in the GE. Probably no seats, but it seems likely that they will devour Labour's majorities.
Whereas the Tories' base seem far more inclined than any others to hold their nose and vote for the closest thing to the status quo in elections that really matter. So I can't really see the Greens' surge in the shires translating into taking any Tory seats in Westminster either, and the Greens would be deluded to pursue Tory votes.
Former Tory voters who can't bring themselves to vote Tory again this time will mostly just stay at home, I think. And the anti-Tory vote will be split two or three ways in a lot of places.
Thesis of this piece is that greens won in Tory areas because of demographic change rather than winning over Tory voters
«Thesis of this piece is that greens won in Tory areas because of demographic change rather than winning over Tory voters»
That seems inaccurate, consider:
* “Their environmental credibility, their political cleanliness, and their coming from a low base endears them to a swathe of loyal Tory support fed up with the status quo but for whom Labour is a step too far.”
* “Between now and the next election, there's no reason to believe this dynamic won't continue eating into the Tory local government base. But success here will bring the Greens some difficulties. Can their party sustain a coalition comprising former Tories from the shires and the younger, more proletarianised, urbanised, and radical socialised workers?”
My reading of that is that the Greens will be a protest vote for a minority of affluent-but-woke Conservative voters, and for a minority of poor-and-fed-up Labour voters.
But the most interesting point the article makes is implicit:
* Between 1997 and 2010 the LibDems collected a large part of the ex-Conservative protest vote, while the ex-Labour anti-Blair voters largely stopped voting. After 2010 the ex-Conservative protest vote went instead largely to UKIP.
* The switch of some Conservative voters to the LibDems was politics as usual, just a shift of some seats, not an existential threat to the Conservatives, but the Conservative leaders were terrified of UKIP even if UKIP did not win a single FPTP seat.
* The reason is simple: the LibDem vote is very concentrated in a few areas, so they can make the Conservative lose only so many seats, but the UKIP vote was quite diffused, so while they could not get any FPTP seats they could have made lost many to the Conservatives by putting them in second place behind Labour or the LibDems.
* With respect to New Labour the Greens are like UKIP for the Conservatives: while the LibDems are unlikely to take many seats from New Labour, the Greens can still take zero seats but ensure that New Labour loses many by putting New Labour behind the Conservatives or the LibDems
This would in a rational world ensure that just as the Conservatives moved to the right of UKIP to protect their right-wing seats, New Labour would move to the left of the the Greens to protect their left-wing seats.
But I would guess this will never happen because I reckon that the first priority for the New Labour leaders is to ensure that thatcherism wins, even if it is not their own party that wins, so they won't move to the left of the Green just to win seats.
That would be a betrayal of the principle “we are all thatcherites now” and New Labour is a party of principle (just that one :->).
«But the most interesting point the article makes is implicit: [...] With respect to New Labour the Greens are like UKIP for the Conservatives»
That point I now see was made more explicitly by an "Anonymous":
“The Greens are already all but guaranteed a significant share of the former Labour vote in the GE. Probably no seats, but it seems likely that they will devour Labour's majorities.”
A couple of thoughts about prospects for the UK economy...
First, I expect to see a big fall in share prices on the London stock market. This is due to something famously called the “hemline indicator” which was developed by an economic analyst who saw the length of women's skirts as a predictor of the stock market. If skirt lengths shortened, the stock market would go higher. If they lengthened, the stock market would fall.
Over this summer I have noticed that women in Wisbech town centre are wearing dresses with longer hemlines with most being below the knee. Whilst this could be down to the inclement weather we've been having over the summer, I still think that hemlines are getting longer and this indicates that share prices will fall sometime soon.
So it is time to move one's money from the stock market into cash in the bank. Conformation of the coming stock market crash will be evident at this autumn's fashion weeks in both London and Paris, where will we will see women on the catwalks wearing dresses with longer hemlines which go below the knee or even down to the ankle.
Second, house prices continue to fall. In July the House Price Index (HPI) on RightMove fell by £7000, the biggest fall since pre-pandemic highs in August 2019. The HPI is a measure of average prices listed on RightMove. Unlike the Nationwide HPI, the RightMove HPI doesn't reflect the average price actually paid by buyers. Nationwide's HPI is therefore a lot lower than RightMove's
However, RightMove's HPI does give an indication of the direction of travel for house prices which are in free-fall as sellers finally catch on that they have to reduce their selling price in order to get a sale. The number of properties on the market is rapidly increasing due to people downsizing to be able to afford their mortgage payments given that mortgage rates have increased by 3 percent.
At the same time, buy-to-let landlords continue to exit the market in large numbers. With higher paid workers wages increasing at 7.9 percent, the Bank of England's monetary committee will raise interest rates by a quarter or even a half of one percent at it's September meeting. Further rate rises to 6 percent can be expected by the end of the year as the Bank of England engineers a recession.
The Bank of England expects inflation to fall in 2024 with the deflation expected in 2025. As the late Robert C Beckman, who predicted that house prices would one day crash, famously remarked: “Any government in power when house prices fall in a big way, will stand little chance at the next general election.” Falling house prices will be the final nail in the coffin of the Tory government.
Some people may say that the Tory government will do something to prop up the housing market, just like George Osborne did in the run-up to the 2015 general election. However, whilst governments are powerful, market forces are even more powerful. So we should expect a house price crash over the next twelve months with all its revolutionary implications.
John Smithee
Cambridgeshire
Not on the left but will vote Green for first time as I don't think Labour can make a difference anymore. And at least I know what I am voting for.
John Smithee wrote,
"The number of properties on the market is rapidly increasing due to people downsizing to be able to afford their mortgage payments given that mortgage rates have increased by 3 percent."
Mortgage rates rose by 3 percentage points, not 3 percent. With earlier mortgage rates being below 3%, the actual increase is over 100%, i.e. 3/3 x 100.
On the general point, wherever the Greens get into government, local or national, they are a disaster for workers. New Labour is bad, and its politics are not even social-democratic any longer, just petty-bourgeois nationalism and jingoism. It doesn't even represent the interests of the ruling-class, but of that reactionary small business class that pushed through Brexit, but that is also why if Labour win the election, Starmer will have to change course, or will get the push for an actual Blairite to step in to protect the interests of the global ruling class.
I too can understand why many Labour voters will not vote Labour, but for Marxists, the task remains to work inside the labour movement, not go off on childish adventures that amount to throwing out your dummy. A sustained wave of industrial struggle is underway that requires a political direction and solution. LP members should turn out to that struggle, and draw new layers of workers back into the party, on that basis.
The problem is the Green's policies look good when sloganeering, but are a disaster in practice. Virtue signalling about environmentalism is great until you tell people they're going to have to pay a lot more for a much lower standard of living. Take the opposition to nuclear energy, it's ideologically pure and plays well with some, but the scientific and economic basis of the opposition is very shaky, and if they stick to it rules out pragmatic solutions to lower carbon energy. Ultimately if they do get a taste of power they'll have to deal with the cost benefit analysis of their policies or revealed preferences will very quickly do them in. There is a reason why groups like XR and Just Stop Oil stick to stunts that punch down on working class people; finding actual solutions is hard, much easier to virtue signal and claim it's someone else's job to actually find a workable solution.
Kamo is right.
If you genuinely believe in the 'climate crisis', in that human generation of warming gases is causing an existential crisis for humanity, then nuclear is pretty much the obvious and only answer. It's proven technology, and works 24/365.
Needless to say the greens oppose this. They have a single issue campaign and understand nothing about the science and technology behind it. They are just not a serious political movement.
I see several heads popping up to preach about "the workers", as if it's generally understood who "the workers" even are in 2023.
Yet our host blogger has written much about how and why the establishment parties and all of their wonks seem to be completely adrift from the reality of the working class today.
As for the greens and nuclear power, the same heads may be greatly overestimating how much it matters. The UK doesn't have a healthy fleet of trustworthy, cost-effective nuke stations that a capricious radical government can mothball on a whim tomorrow. Nuke-wise, the damage is done, the horse has left the barn, the greens had nothing to do with it, and plenty of voters know that they can safely ignore whatever the greens profess to think about nuclear. They will perhaps be much more interested in what the greens have to say about other areas in which the establishment parties don't feel a need to offer anything.
Anon @ 21:44 25/08/23
'I see several heads popping up to preach about "the workers", as if it's generally understood who "the workers" even are in 2023.'
Those who do not own, nor are in any position of control with respect to, means of production, and who must sell their labour power to survive - the same as ever.
@David Parry
Yes, and who are they exactly - where, how many, how old, doing what, with what outlook; and what would they want from a government, if the option was on the ballot?
Also, not owning or controlling means of production doesn't necessarily mean worker - there is a huge class of petty rentiers here at the arse end of Thatcherism. So being forced to sell labour power to survive is still an essential part of the definition, and might be sufficient all by itself.
“T To understand this phenomenon, we have to look at how Britain is changing. Everywhere I spoke to people involved in Green successes, I asked them about new housing in their wards since the last election. And all of them confirmed new estates had been built, and that their canvass data and sampling from ballot boxes at the counts showed much of their vote had come from the people – often young families moving out of cities – who had moved into them.”
“J Just as parts of the north of England went blue in 2019 partly because most of the young people had left, so parts of the south are going red, yellow or green partly because that’s where they’ve headed.”
I think Phil is pretty spot on with this article. My view is that after a calamitous local election result in Brighton the Greens could lose in Brighton. I don’t think they will win in Bristol either. But they ( ok :we) might win in the ‘ Green hedge’ seats of Suffolk and Herefordshire.
Just as importantly there is the very real possibility that the party might soon be bankrupt .
Yep the trans rights / women’s rights argument is now having a possible material impact.
But it won’t be mentioned at all in any campaign where soft Tory votes can be won.
Draw your own political conclusions.
Post a Comment