recentpopularlog in

exclusion

« earlier   
A long thread about my own personal experiences during this election dealing with my Labour voting family deciding to out themselves as casual racists by voting Tory / Brexit Party in traditional Labour "Red Wall" heartlands
A long thread about my own personal experiences during this election dealing with my Labour voting family deciding to out themselves as casual racists by voting Tory / Brexit Party in traditional Labour "Red Wall" heartlands
UK  politics  generalElection  ge2019  LabourParty  deindustrialisation  decline  jobs  exclusion  blame  immigration  racism  Brexit  media  misinformation  FarageNigel  JohnsonBoris 
december 2019 by petej
We must learn to talk to leave voters without falling into the Clinton trap | Nesrine Malik | Opinion | The Guardian
A similar difficulty has haunted liberal discussions of voters who chose leave in the 2016 EU referendum. It became impossible to talk honestly about the complicated motivations for that vote. If its words were too strong – if anyone suggested that racism or xenophobia played a part – this was seized on as classic smug, elite contempt. “A slur on 17.4 million people”, Mark Francois called it, when Will Self said one didn’t “have to be a racist or an antisemite to vote for Brexit. It’s just that every racist and antisemite in the country did.”

Remainers and Labour supporters were constantly accused of losing the argument because they were condescending to voters. Any suggestion that a vote for Brexit or Boris Johnson might express darker motivations than simply admiring the Tory manifesto is always met with a gloating snarl: no wonder you lost.

So the real business of understanding what kind of resentments may motivate some of these votes – and, more seriously, how politicians and the tabloid press play on those fears – gets lost in a different scuffle about the right way to address these voters. And here we are, three years on: a Conservative party and prime minister with a history of racism and Islamophobia have just achieved the biggest majority since 1987, and we still don’t know how to talk to, or about, those who voted for such a party and such a man.

This is the Clinton trap – the trap of “some, not all”. Any question about some of the preferences on display gets cynically collapsed into an attack on all voters – even when the “some” is explicit. Francois’ comic spluttering about a slur on 17.4 million people is a classic of the genre. There are many reasons one might vote for a party that has been endorsed by Tommy Robinson and Katie Hopkins. But it is not wild to assume that for some, xenophobia might be one of those reasons.

Above all, it is a losing game to pretend that these qualities do not exist and aren’t being weaponised by the right, while trying to quietly and discreetly appeal to them. That way lies the dismal hedge of the Ed Miliband years, putting “Controls on immigration” on a mug and hoping it will slake voters’ appetite for some comforting nativism. There is a balance that can be struck between calling voters names and crudely pandering to them.

One defining feature of a populist political climate is a feigned preciousness about the motivations of voters. They are always pristine and unimpeachable, especially when the voters in question are “left behind” or authentically working class – a class that never seems to include black or brown people. En masse, these voters are seen to express a “will of the people”, which must not be questioned or challenged, only passively accepted.
UK  politics  generalElection  ge2019  LabourParty  Brexit  Leave  racism  xenophobia  ClintonHillary  USA  deplorables  Trumpism  populism  exclusion  resentment  willOfThePeople  dctagged  dc:creator=MalikNesrine 
december 2019 by petej

Copy this bookmark:





to read