British society today is less divided, less ideological; there are no deep rifts in the public mind on basic policy issues or on values or on control; therefore politics is about personality, and winning elections is about mood music. So runs the familiar argument. As far as it goes, it has some validity.
Here’s an alternative angle: all life on earth is programmed for survival and dominance. Everything that really matters is therefore seen through the lens of “what difference will it make for me and my family?” It sometimes feels as if politics has gone pleasantly to sleep, but that can’t be right. If politics matters then it must be about survival and dominance, it must be a never-ending battle.
Maybe politics is no longer the medium for things that really matter? In a world of technocrats, have all the real decisions moved to another level? Certainly with interactive media there has been a huge growth of consumer power, and people are less subject to top-down government. But the politicians still have one basic power: To take something from us and give us something back.
They take some of our freedoms, and give back protections. They take some of our money, and they give back services. They command resources, and they redistribute them. How they do this is vitally important. Rely on an inefficient health service, and you’re more likely to die. Send your kids to a failing school, and you slash their chances of thriving. Politics creates our environment in a very basic, life-and-death way.
I might have said that it’s ‘the government’ which has that job, and ‘politics’ is just a playground argument raging around it. But you cannot separate government from politics, you cannot disentangle the decision from the argument.
So why is it that politics seems so trivial when it is fundamental to our struggle to survive and prosper? Perhaps we’ve simply overcome divisions and entered a new era of consensus? During a recent visit to Copenhagen, I found it hard to fight the impression that life had pretty much been ‘solved’. Everything worked so well, everyone seemed so happy. You could hardly tell we were in the middle of an election campaign.
But of course, that ‘solution’ is an illusion. In reality, fear and greed are as powerful as ever. Fear of immigration, for example, fear that outsiders will undermine the Scandinavian bliss. Or take what happened in March in the very expensive, very cool neighbourhood I was visiting: heavy, violent rioting, the kind with rock-throwing, car-burning, tear gas and over five hundred arrests. It was all about a Christian congregation reclaiming a building which for decades had been occupied by squatters.
Consensus becomes strained and threatens to break. Someone wants something, someone else doesn’t want to give it up. Politics is the struggle to sort it out. Yes, this is obvious, but sometimes we forget that under the pleasant surface there are tensions that can rip it all apart.
Last week saw the launch of the London Policy Institute, founded by James Morris. It may not sound like exciting news, but we badly need it. London is a city of seething energy and creativity, and it’s also riven with problems. The London establishment, however, is content to parrot consensus. You would think that every question has only one answer, and that’s Ken’s. You would think that on every issue, everyone agrees. On policing, on poverty, on transport, it’s always the same: pay more, get less. Someone has to say something different.
The LPI was launched with a YouGov poll, mainly on policy, but also showing that Boris is a mere six points behind in the mayoral race. Not bad, for someone I was chiding last week as being too slow getting started. Maybe this means I’m wrong, it really is only about personality: Ken v Boris, what fun. Politics is over.
I don’t see it that way. It’s still, and always will be, a struggle for people to survive and prosper, and that struggle will always mean there are real fights that will break out, real battles to be won and lost. Consensus larded with personality will not be enough. The fact that Boris, without even starting, is only six points behind can be read two ways: that he’s just such a lovable chap, or that people are giving up on Ken. I think it’s the second that matters. People want and deserve a genuine policy alternative. Politics is still a matter of life and death.
Stephan Shakespeare, having lived in Copenhagen I understand what you mean about the 'hyggelig'(cosy) lifestyle. The standard of living in Denmark is very high and the is a cosmopolitan, even a bohemian atmosphere about the place. Denmark is very much a country where they expect you to conform, little things like lighting a candle before a meal, Sweden is similar, except that the Swedes exercize conformity by expecting everyone to take their shoes off before entering the apartment.
However these staid nations are only contented on the surface. There is an undercurrent of 'Edge' growing as they tackle the problems of immigration, particularly places like Malmo, which is struggling to cope with waves of immigrants. Sweden is beoming a less tolerant nation with each passing year and its political landscape will surely reflect that in the coming years.
The recent elections in Denmark, which I was able to follow closely on the internet having learnt the lingo, returned Anders Foge Rassmussen to office, yet he didn't deserve to be re-elected, but what appeared to be serious opposition from the Social Democrats and their highly photogenic leader Helle Thorning-Schmidt collapsed at the last minute as voters baulked at the idea of even more welfare and a more lax immgration policy. The fact is Anders Foge Rassmussen won because there was no serious opposition, but the day is surely coming when cosy Danish society will have to address its problems and that may open the door to a different type of politics. The era of cosy is coming to an end in Scandinavia.
Posted by: Tony Makara | November 19, 2007 at 10:57 AM
While we are on the subject of Danish politics, here is Gordon Brown's letter of support for Helle Thorning-Schmidt's rather left-leaning Social Democrats. I think this is interesting because Tony Blair always very much favoured Anders Foge Rassmussen, her centerist opponent. The two were very pally over the Iraq war. Does this shift in support show that Gordon Brown is considerably to the left of Tony Blair?
Gordon Brown
11. november 2007 - kl. 15:17
Dear Helle
I am writing as Leader of the British Labour Party to send you my good wishes on the eve of the parliamentary election.
We consider our friends in the Danish Social Democratic Party to be close allies, and the British Labour Party has learned much from you. It is through cooperation, particularly within our own political family, that we respond best to the many challenges that we face both on a domestic and international level. I hope very much that this cooperation between our two parties continues and strengthens in the coming months.
Best wishes for the 13 November.
Rt. Hon. Gordon Brown MP
Leader of the Labour Party
Posted by: Tony Makara | November 19, 2007 at 02:38 PM