The Winner Was None of The Above

In last week's local and regional elections, the big winner was “None of the above”, much as had been the case with the French Presidential elections, reflecting the fact that all of the options available provide no basis for enthusiastic support, even to the extent that any differences between them can be distinguished. The options amount to an offering of nationalism and liberalism in so far as Tories, Labour, SNP, Plaid, Sinn Fein, DUP are concerned, or else just liberalism and a pallid and opportunist opposition to Brexit nationalism by the Liberals and Greens. That was enough to enable these latter to make the biggest gains, as with the Alliance in Northern Ireland, and SNP in Scotland, but neither the Liberals nor Greens are going to form a government, and even thy have opportunistically dropped vocal opposition to Brexit.

As is normal with local elections, the actual turnout was appallingly low, at between 20-30%. This in itself, indicates the fact that the majority of voters decided not to support any of the parties. In large part its a reflection of the fact that voters realise that local councils have very little power, as that resides in Westminster. In addition, both Tories and Labour, have further diminished the role of local councils over the last 30 years, as a result of CCT, and the contracting out of council services such as housing.

In Scotland, however, turnout was 43%. The Tories were hammered, reflecting the fact that they are blamed for the increasing chaos and disaster that is Brexit, in a country that voted by a large majority against it. The SNP, which is seen as the main opponent of Brexit, and means of taking an independent Scotland back into the EU, was the main beneficiary, despite already being by far the largest party, and having been the ruling party for more than a decade. It gained 23 seats, (1.8%). Labour, despite its capitulation to English Nationalism, and Brexitism, along with its reversion to conservative social-democracy (neoliberalism) managed to get into second place, replacing the Tories, but that was worse than the performance of both Liberals and Greens, in terms of gains. Labour gained 19 seats (1.6%), whilst the Liberals gained 20 (1.7%), and Greens 16 (1.8). Given the low level of support for the Liberals and Greens, meaning they have little chance of forming the ruling group, those results are better than the actual numbers suggest.

But, that is also the point. These parties like the Greens and Liberals have a low level of support, not because they are seen as having no chance of winning, but because they offer no real alternative to the failed policies and ideas of the other main parties. They wouldn't become majority parties just because voters thought they could. Its not fear of a wasted vote that prevents them becoming majority parties, though it does prevent them getting higher votes than they do. The votes they pick up tend to be protest votes. On the one hand the Greens, having a slightly more radical, bourgeois economic agenda, draw away some Labour votes that object to Labour's liberal and nationalist agenda, whilst the Liberals, draw away some of that Labour vote that objects to its nationalist agenda, and is also able to draw votes from the Tories, in those middle class, professional strata that is also alienated by its Brexit agenda.

A similar pattern was seen in the Northern Ireland Assembly elections. Sinn Fein, like the SNP, is seen as pro-EU, and anti-Brexit, but its politics are both neo-liberal, and nationalist, just not English or British nationalist. It became the largest party, not because it gained a large amount of additional support, but because the very pro-Brexit, British nationalist DUP saw its vote shattered, as a result of the chaos and disaster of Brexit becoming ever more manifest in Northern Ireland. A large part of its loss of support, however, went to the even more pro-Brexit Traditional Unionist Voice. Whilst the DUP lost 6.7%, the TUV gained 5.1%. Outside this realignment of hard line Unionist votes, however, the biggest gains came for the anti-Brexit, pro-EU Alliance Party, which gained 4.5%.

This reflects the fact that the division between a backward looking, pro-Brexit, English nationalism, and a forward looking pro-EU social-democracy continues to dominate behaviour, as society remains divided between these two great class camps of a reactionary petty-bourgeoisie, and a progressive working-class and professional middle class. The latter, however, is divided, as is social-democracy itself into conservative and progressive social-democracy, the former happy to go along with a liberal agenda as the basis for opposition to Brexit, and support for the EU, whilst the latter sees EU membership on the current, liberal politics as also objectionable. It sees, Brexit as worse, and so only a lesser-evil, much as, in the French Presidential Elections Macron was simply a lesser-evil to Le Pen. Progressive social-democrats and socialists see a point in voting against Brexit, as a reactionary step backwards, but not voting uncritically for the EU on its current basis, as I set out at the time of the EU referendum, in calling for a Socialist Campaign for Europe.

There is no reason for socialists, or progressive social-democrats to vote for Liberals or Greens, simply as a protest at Labour's reactionary nationalism and liberalism. For one thing, the liberalism of the Liberals and Greens is no better than that of Labour, and we have the potential to change the position of Labour, through the labour movement, in a way we do not with the Liberals or Greens, as 2015, and the election of Corbyn as Leader demonstrated, even if that turned out badly. But, its clear that many Labour voters, and progressive social-democrats, and socialists, whether they live in cities and metropolitan areas, or in the decaying urban areas, where a sizeable petty-bourgeoisie of the self-employed developed, from the 1980's onwards, and aligned with an atomised and backward lumpen proletariat to support Brexit, have decided to rebel against Labour, by supporting these other liberal parties, or else by simply staying home.

That is why Labour did badly in Scotland, and why it has failed to make any headway in England. The Tories, as predicted, did badly, but mostly they lost seats in the professional middle class seats, where it was the Liberals not Labour that benefited. Labour's gains in England were less than modest, gaining only 22 seats, whereas the Liberals gained 194, and the Greens 63. Having disgraced itself by rushing headlong into English nationalism, and support for Brexit, Labour as could have been predicted, failed to make any headway in winning in those old urban areas, in which support for the Tories and English nationalism is solidly based upon a large, reactionary petty-bourgeoisie, and lumpen proletariat.

The subjectivism and idealism of Labour's, bourgeois strategists fails to distinguish the class nature of that support, seeing only the lack of affluence and position of that large petty-bourgeois mass, as equating to the lower economic socio-economic classes. It fails to identify, the class nature of that petty-bourgeoisie, as determined by its relation to the means of production, and effect of that upon its class consciousness. If they did, they would recognise its reactionary nature, and the fact that it is never going to be attracted to Labour. Labour will always appear to it as being a second best option when it comes to meeting its requirements, for a bonfire of regulations, such as those represented by the EU, and a diminution of the power of organised Labour.

That reactionary petty-bourgeoisie is far more hostile to the labour movement that provides the social base of Labour, than is even the bourgeoisie, for the reasons that Lenin set out in attacking the petty-bourgeois ideology of the Narodniks. It is far less able to cope with regulation, or higher wages, or better conditions, for any workers it seeks to employ, than is large-scale capital. It is why, the “anti-capitalism”, of this petty-bourgeoisie, however it may be phrased in radical tones, is itself always reactionary. So long as the Tories represent that reactionary strata, Labour will never make significant inroads into it, even were that desirable, which given the reactionary politics it entails, it is not. To the extent that the Tories move away from it, then those votes will go to the BNP/UKIP and so on, not to Labour, or else, as for a long period, when those parties were unable to obtain more than protest votes, it will simply be reflected in sullen apathy.

The fact, that Labour failed to make any headway in the decayed urban areas, of what has been termed the former “red wall”, is not a result of the Tories having won over Labour voters, on the basis of Brexitism, and reactionary nationalism. It is the result of Tories having mobilised the votes of the sullen, apathetic, petty-bourgeoisie, and lumpen elements who previously would have voted for the BNP, or else would have sat on their hands, knowing those minority parties had no chance. The Tories won, because having done so, and bolstered their core vote, Labour tried to move opportunistically on to that territory, and so, in the process lost a large part of its own core vote, that opposed Brexit. It went to the Liberals, and Greens, or itself, now, simply sat at home. The most obvious illustration was Spring 2019, when 60% of Labour members, let alone voters, voted for the Liberals and Greens, in protest at the pro-Brexit direction that Corbyn was again taking the party in.

In fact, Starmer and Labour's bourgeois strategists are even behind the curve when it comes to assessing sentiment in those former red-wall areas. Whilst I proudly wear my “Don't Blame Me, I Voted Remain” T-shirt, as I go for my daily run around what was a Brexit voting area, in 2015, I come across no one, who wants to even admit to having voted for Brexit, as the disaster from it continues to unfold. The same was true of Channel4 News when it spoke to elderly voters in Wakefield recently. Only one of them admitted to voting for Brexit, and she said that they hadn't known all the facts, and that she would not do so, now. In fact, in every poll since the referendum, there has been a majority against Brexit, which makes it hard to know, why Labour persists in trying to appease a reactionary minority, as though it were the key to obtaining a majority!