This is a guest post by James Tilley, a Professor of Politics at the University of Oxford, about his excellent new book with Sara Hobolt, Tribal Politics: How Brexit Divided Britain.
Very interesting. A general thought: do you think that the effects are especially strong because of the referendum? Would that be another reason to be opposed to direct democracy?
The UK struggles under the crushing weight of the Westminster accords, which focused on single member election ridings for the UK Parliament. So the UK has been dominated by two parties, both of which are adamant that no third party or change is possible. This domination of "other voices" has led to confusion, Brexit, and extremism by both major parties as other voices have no representation or participation in the UK Parliament. This archaic structure is mirrored in the US, with the abuse of gerrymandering compounding the problem. Meanwhile, in the US, more people register as unaffiliated, reflecting a distaste for the two major parties with their extremist policies and leaders. This problem is compounded in the US by the primary system in many states, that has low turnout, and two distasteful choices come November. Some other countries have addresses the unpopular two party system, by some hybrid arrangement involving some greater proportional representation of minor groups interests. There is a budding interest in open primaries, ranked choice voting, and some type of proportional representation system in the US. Generally, Democratic leaders oppose it and MAGA types denounce it. It's simply too much democracy!
I’ve always thought Brexit was the culmination of the footballification of our politics. Loyalty, overt display of whose side I’m on, hatred of the other, the cult of personality.
I’m probably guilty of a lot of this if not all but this hit home.
I think that the divide between the British elite class and other classes was there all along. Brexit came along to give the divide a focal point. But it did not create the divide out of thin air. I hope that the book acknowledges this.
Are you suggesting that elite classes went one way and the rest another on Brexit? I don't think that's right! (A sanity check: surely there are not par equal numbers of elites and non-elites?) Traditional classes, wealth strata, and geographic distinctions were all somewhat divided, albeit with correlations. I agree that there's essentially always been class division of one degree or another in Britain - arguably less nowadays than in the past.
Thanks for the thoughtful commentary. Is it my imagination, or was it possible once upon a time - say, 20 years ago - to sit around the table having a fairly relaxed discussion with people of differing views and then after a brief disagreement, move on without anyone being particularly upset? Perhaps this is rose-tinted, but as I remember it, everyone expected to go on being friends with political "opponents": it wasn't such a big deal.
Very interesting. A general thought: do you think that the effects are especially strong because of the referendum? Would that be another reason to be opposed to direct democracy?
The UK struggles under the crushing weight of the Westminster accords, which focused on single member election ridings for the UK Parliament. So the UK has been dominated by two parties, both of which are adamant that no third party or change is possible. This domination of "other voices" has led to confusion, Brexit, and extremism by both major parties as other voices have no representation or participation in the UK Parliament. This archaic structure is mirrored in the US, with the abuse of gerrymandering compounding the problem. Meanwhile, in the US, more people register as unaffiliated, reflecting a distaste for the two major parties with their extremist policies and leaders. This problem is compounded in the US by the primary system in many states, that has low turnout, and two distasteful choices come November. Some other countries have addresses the unpopular two party system, by some hybrid arrangement involving some greater proportional representation of minor groups interests. There is a budding interest in open primaries, ranked choice voting, and some type of proportional representation system in the US. Generally, Democratic leaders oppose it and MAGA types denounce it. It's simply too much democracy!
I’ve always thought Brexit was the culmination of the footballification of our politics. Loyalty, overt display of whose side I’m on, hatred of the other, the cult of personality.
I’m probably guilty of a lot of this if not all but this hit home.
Merci for sharing
I think that the divide between the British elite class and other classes was there all along. Brexit came along to give the divide a focal point. But it did not create the divide out of thin air. I hope that the book acknowledges this.
Are you suggesting that elite classes went one way and the rest another on Brexit? I don't think that's right! (A sanity check: surely there are not par equal numbers of elites and non-elites?) Traditional classes, wealth strata, and geographic distinctions were all somewhat divided, albeit with correlations. I agree that there's essentially always been class division of one degree or another in Britain - arguably less nowadays than in the past.
Thanks for the thoughtful commentary. Is it my imagination, or was it possible once upon a time - say, 20 years ago - to sit around the table having a fairly relaxed discussion with people of differing views and then after a brief disagreement, move on without anyone being particularly upset? Perhaps this is rose-tinted, but as I remember it, everyone expected to go on being friends with political "opponents": it wasn't such a big deal.