Skip to main content

British poll ritual of two UK parties 'failing to provide' genuine alternative

By Bhabani Shankar Nayak* 

British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, currently considered one of the most unpopular political figures in the UK, has announced that the next general election will be held on July 4, 2024. According to a YouGov Westminster Voting Intention survey conducted on May 30, the Labour Party holds a 25% lead over the Conservative Party. 
Should these percentages translate into actual votes on July 4, the unpopular Prime Minister is likely to be replaced by the most unpopular opposition leader Sir Keir Starmer. 
Both Sunak and Starmer are representatives of two sides of the same ideological spectrum, which prioritises the interests of the wealthy, large corporations, and both British and international elites, often at the expense of the working class. This has led to significant disillusionment among voters, who feel that neither party genuinely addresses their concerns and needs.
The dominance of these two parties in British politics has undermined the conditions necessary for the deepening of democracy and the implementation of robust welfare policies. 
Leadership within both the Conservative and Labour parties is committed to policies that ultimately weaken the working masses, exacerbating exploitative working conditions and socio-economic inequalities. It often appears as though these two parties are in a contest to see who can be more ruthless in their treatment of the populace.
Once upon a time, the Labour Party played a historic role in shaping progressive welfare policies, institutions, and laws such as the Equal Pay Act, the Minimum Wage, and key health and education policies, including the establishment of the National Health Service (NHS). These contributions significantly advanced social justice and improved the lives of countless individuals. 
However, the current Labour Party seems to be undermining its own legacy. By adopting policies and stances that echo those of the Conservative Party (the Tories), it risks dismantling the very achievements that once defined it. 
This shift raises concerns among supporters who believe the party is straying from its foundational principles of equality, fairness, and social welfare. The current trajectory of the Labour Party under Sir Keir Starmer's leadership has raised significant concerns about its adherence to traditional Labour values.
Ideologically, the Labour Party has traditionally been a broad church, encompassing a wide range of perspectives and beliefs. This diversity has included social democrats, democratic socialists, leftists, trade unionists, more centrist members and liberals who advocate for market-friendly policies within a minimalist framework of social justice. 
This ideological plurality has been both a strength and a challenge for the party, allowing it to appeal to a broad spectrum of voters while also navigating internal tensions. 
However, Sir Keir Starmer-led Labour Party is moving into a reactionary political landscape sans labour values. From day one of his leadership, he has been busy suspending progressive, left-wing, trade unionist, and democratic leaders within the party, as if he is on a mission to cleanse the Labour Party of its progressive character.
Similarly, the Conservative Party is dedicated to maintaining its political tradition, which prioritizes the interests of British elites, large corporations, and businesses. The political ethos within the Conservative Party extends support to the ideology of white supremacists under the guise of national interests and conservative British cultural values, thereby perpetuating a system of political patronage. 
Labour Party seems to be undermining its own legacy by adopting policies that echo those of the Conservatives
This alignment with white supremacist ideals not only undermines the principles of equality and inclusivity but also exacerbates societal divisions and tensions in 21st century Britain. 
These two parties in British politics bear striking similarities in their policies, ideological commitments, and interactions with the populace. Both the Conservative Party and the Labour Party share commonalities in their approaches to governance, often aligning on key issues such as economic strategy, social welfare, and foreign policy. 
Their ideological foundations, while distinct in certain aspects, frequently converge on matters of corporate interests branded as national importance.
The electoral rituals of democracy, orchestrated by these two parties, fail to provide a genuine alternative for the common people. The forthcoming general election on July 4 merely perpetuates a cycle wherein an unpopular ruling party and its leadership are replaced by an equally unpopular opposition party and its leadership. 
This recurring pattern underscores the disillusionment felt by many citizens who perceive little substantive difference between the policies and priorities of the incumbent government and the opposition. Despite the democratic façade of electoral choice, the fundamental interests of ordinary people often remain marginalised amidst the political theatre enacted by these parties in Britain.
The mere act of alternating power between two unpopular entities does little to address the systemic issues and challenges facing society. Instead, it reinforces a sense of political inertia and cynicism, eroding trust in the democratic process itself. In such a climate, the need for genuine alternatives and transformative leadership becomes increasingly evident. 
Citizens deserve more than a superficial exchange of power; they deserve meaningful representation and policies that genuinely reflect their interests and aspirations. Until such alternatives emerge, the electoral rituals orchestrated by the dominant parties will continue to ring hollow for many disenfranchised voters. 
However, the result of the forthcoming general election is crucial as it will determine the direction of the UK's political landscape amidst ongoing economic, political challenges and social issues. 
Many are calling for a shift towards policies that more directly benefit the broader population, rather than maintaining the status quo that favours the elites.

Will the British electoral irony offer any alternatives?

The British electoral irony, characterised by the cyclic exchange of power between unpopular parties, may indeed present opportunities for alternative voices to emerge. While the dominant parties may seem entrenched in their positions of influence, historical precedents demonstrate that shifts in political landscapes can occur, often catalysed by grassroots movements, new political parties, or charismatic leaders. 
In recent years, people have witnessed the rise of smaller progressive parties, green politics and independent candidates challenging the status quo, offering alternative visions and policies that resonate with disenchanted voters. 
These movements, although initially marginalised, can gradually gain momentum, reshaping the political discourse and forcing established parties to adapt or risk irrelevance.
Moreover, societal changes and evolving public attitudes can create fertile ground for new ideas and progressive ideologies to take root in the expansion of working-class politics. Issues such as climate change, social inequality, and technological innovation have the potential to galvanise diverse coalitions and mobilise support for unconventional political platforms. 
Ultimately, the British electoral system, despite its limitations and paradoxes, remains dynamic and responsive to changing realities. While entrenched interests may resist change, the inherent unpredictability of politics means that genuine alternatives can emerge from unexpected quarters, offering hope for a more inclusive and representative democracy despite its current irony.
---
*University of Glasgow, UK

Comments

TRENDING

70,000 migrants, sold on Canadian dream, face uncertain future: Canada reinvents the xenophobic wheel

By Saurav Sarkar*  Bikram Singh is running out of time on his post-study work visa in Canada. Singh is one of about 70,000 migrants who were sold on the Canadian dream of eventually making the country their home but now face an uncertain future with their work permits set to expire by December 2024. They came from places like India, China, and the Philippines, and sold their land and belongings in their home countries, took out loans, or made other enormous commitments to get themselves to Canada.

Kerala government data implicates the Covid vaccines for excess deaths

By Bhaskaran Raman*  On 03 Dec 2024, Mr Unnikrishnan of the Indian Express had written an article titled: “Kerala govt data busts vaccine death myth; no rise in mortality post-Covid”. It claims “no significant change in the death rate in the 35-44 age group between 2019 and 2023”. However, the claim is obviously wrong, even to a casual observer, as per the same data which the article presents, as explained below.

PM-JUGA: Support to states and gram sabhas for the FRA implementation and preparation and execution of CFR management plan

By Dr. Manohar Chauhan*  (Over the period, under 275(1), Ministry of Tribal Affairs has provided fund to the states for FRA implementation. Besides, some states like Odisha, Chhattisgarh and Maharashtra allocated special fund for FRA implementation. Now PM-JUDA under “Dharti Aaba Janjatiya Gram Utkarsh Abhiyan(DAJGUA) lunched by Prime Minister on 2nd October 2024 will not only be the major source of funding from MoTA to the States/UTs, but also will be the major support to the Gram sabha for the preparation and execution of CFR management Plan).

Operation Kagar represents Indian state's intensified attempt to extinguish Maoism: Resistance continues

By Harsh Thakor Operation Kagar represents the Indian state's intensified attempt to extinguish Maoism, which claims to embody the struggles and aspirations of Adivasis. Criminalized by the state, the Maoists have been portrayed as a threat, with Operation Kagar deploying strategies that jeopardize their activities. This operation weaves together economic, cultural, and political motives, allegedly with drone attacks on Adivasi homes.

How Amit Shah's statement on Ambedkar reflects frustration of those uncomfortable with Dalit assertion, empowerment

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat*  Dr. B.R. Ambedkar remains the liberator and emancipator of India’s oppressed communities. However, attempts to box him between two Brahmanical political parties betray a superficial and self-serving understanding of his legacy. The statement by Union Home Minister Amit Shah in the Rajya Sabha was highly objectionable, reflecting the frustration of those uncomfortable with Dalit assertion and empowerment.

This book delves deep into Maoism's historical, social, and political dimensions in India

By Harsh Thakor*  "Storming the Gates of Heaven" by Amit Bhattacharya is a comprehensive study of the Indian Maoist movement. Bhattacharya examines the movement's evolution, drawing from numerous sources and showcasing his unwavering support for Charu Mazumdar's path and practice. The book, published in 2016, delves deeply into the movement's historical, social, and political dimensions.

Ideological assault on dargah of Sufi Saint Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti will disturb pluralistic legacy: Modi told

Counterview Desk Letter to the Prime Minister about "a matter of the utmost concern affecting our country's social fabric": *** We are a group of independent citizens who over the past few years have made efforts to improve the deteriorating communal relations in the country. It is abundantly clear that over the last decade relations between communities, particularly Hindus and Muslims, and to an extent Christians are extremely strained leaving these latter two communities in extreme anxiety and insecurity.

Defeat of martial law: Has the decisive moment for change come in South Korea?

By Steven Lee  Late at night on December 3, soldiers stormed into South Korea’s National Assembly in armored vehicles and combat helicopters. Assembly staff desperately blocked their assault with fire extinguishers and barricades. South Korea’s President Yoon Suk Yeol had just declared martial law to “ eliminate ‘anti-state’ forces .”