Ukip - why are they gaining support?

[Bernie Gunther]

The fundamental contradiction between the very real concerns (economic etc) of a large part of the UKIP's base and their neo-liberal ideology combined with the interests of their backers, is going to get exposed at some point I think.

"What happens then?" becomes a very interesting question ...

 

[SpookyFrank]

And he still claims that this is some sort of coherent political position which everyone else here is too stupid to see, the cunts.

'There's no point me trying to explain myself because you're too stupid to understand' is classic Butchers. As is claiming to understand the working class as if they were some kind of single gestalt entity that can be herded in one direction or another by the judicious application of small electric shocks and sugary treats.

 

[SpookyFrank]

The fundamental contradiction between the very real concerns (economic etc) of a large part of the UKIP's base and their neo-liberal ideology combined with the interests of their backers, is going to get exposed at some point I think.

"What happens then?" becomes a very interesting question ...

You would think the same would be true of the mainstream parties but they seem to have been getting away with it for decades.

 

[chilango]

andysays I'm not going to speak on behalf of butchersapron (he can do that himself should he choose to) but as another poster who has argued that (albeit more lukewarmly) that the UKIP vote is not entirely negative, that it does represent some potential positives and thus (at least part of me) can be pleased with their results, I feel obliged to respond.

I am coming from the following perspective:

1/ the Left as we understand it has lost, and to carry on regardless compounds this defeat.

2/ the status quo as represented by the main parties is "a bad thing" and means continuing, relentless attacks on the w/c.

3/ The UKIP vote (at this moment) is not going to lead to an (no doubt anti w/c) govt, but will weaken the stays quo and cause already existing fractures within capital and the ruling class to widen.

4) a mass expression of disaffection with the status quo at the ballot box is "a good thing" even if the vehicle isn't.

None of this adds up to support for the politics of UKIP but rather a (qualified) sense of optimism about some of the causes, and effects, of the UKIP vote coupled with a desire to recognise how/why an anti-UKIP stance that defends the status quo is counter-productive.

 

[killer b]

4) a mass expression of disaffection with the status quo at the ballot box is "a good thing" even if the vehicle isn't.

further, any attempt to harness this disaffection can only be successful if you try to understand it's roots.

 

[SpookyFrank]

andysays I'm not going to speak on behalf of butchersapron (he can do that himself should he choose to) but as another poster who has argued that (albeit more lukewarmly) that the UKIP vote is not entirely negative, that it does represent some potential positives and thus (at least part of me) can be pleased with their results, I feel obliged to respond.

I am coming from the following perspective:

1/ the Left as we understand it has lost, and to carry on regardless compounds this defeat.

2/ the status quo as represented by the main parties is "a bad thing" and means continuing, relentless attacks on the w/c.

3/ The UKIP vote (at this moment) is not going to lead to an (no doubt anti w/c) govt, but will weaken the stays quo and cause already existing fractures within capital and the ruling class to widen.

4) a mass expression of disaffection with the status quo at the ballot box is "a good thing" even if the vehicle isn't.

None of this adds up to support for the politics of UKIP but rather a (qualified) sense of optimism about some if the causes, and effects, of the UKIP coupled with a desire to recognise how/why an anti-UKIP stance that defends the status quo is counter-productive.

I wouldn't say this result is a good thing, but I don't think it's the end of the world. If anything I'm glad we've had this election for people to get voting UKIP out of their systems, and that UKIP's new elected representatives have a whole year to fuck up in a variety of entertaining ways and quite possibly cripple the whole party in the process.

I also doubt their appeal will last once they are forced to actually tell people what their policies are and are no longer able to simply tell labour constituencies one thing and tory constituencies another.

 

[emanymton]

andysays I'm not going to speak on behalf of butchersapron (he can do that himself should he choose to) but as another poster who has argued that (albeit more lukewarmly) that the UKIP vote is not entirely negative, that it does represent some potential positives and thus (at least part of me) can be pleased with their results, I feel obliged to respond.

I am coming from the following perspective:

1/ the Left as we understand it has lost, and to carry on regardless compounds this defeat.

2/ the status quo as represented by the main parties is "a bad thing" and means continuing, relentless attacks on the w/c.

3/ The UKIP vote (at this moment) is not going to lead to an (no doubt anti w/c) govt, but will weaken the stays quo and cause already existing fractures within capital and the ruling class to widen.

4) a mass expression of disaffection with the status quo at the ballot box is "a good thing" even if the vehicle isn't.

None of this adds up to support for the politics of UKIP but rather a (qualified) sense of optimism about some of the causes, and effects, of the UKIP vote coupled with a desire to recognise how/why an anti-UKIP stance that defends the status quo is counter-productive.

I would be much more cautious than yourself or butchers in saying that the Ukip vote is a positive thing, I think I would prefer to say that it is reflective of the problems maintaining the existing status quo and will deepen the problems for the established parties. What some people seem to be losing sight of is that to a certain extent, it doesn't matter what Ukip's policies are as they are no where near being in a position to put them in practice. What they can do is cause problems for the established parties who's policies are daily destroying lives.

 

[butchersapron]

All this nonsense because andy made a mistake the other week. Of course, andy, in his brief sojourn here has been unable to a) grasp where i'm coming from politically b) grasp when i'm looking to wind up the isolated moralists such as himself (and the thread he's picked those quotes from are a brilliant example) so c) he doesn't know how to respond to someone who rejects his mixture of bland trot-lite blatherings (not in a group yourself then andy) and desire to to bear moral witness to the horror of UKIP, never again comrades, never again.

Right, those whose interest in the far-right, populism and so on extends back longer than the tory papers and the pro-status quo elements of the left telling them to go attack UKIP, would be able to tell you that over the years, i've consistently argued that a healthy showing by UKIP in the general election would block the possibility of the tories being able to form a majority govt - even without the nailed on mass defection of lib-dem - this latter is what would effectively push labour over the line of being able to form a majority govt themselves.

In this sense, i really would like UKIP to do rather well. The best outcome would be governmental deadlock, no one able to form a majority govt or successive majority govts failing - that's because the real directing power behind the pressure on immigration is capital and the state - not bloody UKIP (and i see no understanding of the role that immigration and the management of immigration via the state plays for capital in any of your hand-wringing ) whereas the destroy UKIP, destroy it now approach means two things - one working class people can either shut up and go back to the main parties, after all these and their racist state policies are the only legitimate parties, or they can go unrepresented electorally (given their lack of connection with and support for left parties).

There is another potential result of a good UKIP vote in relation to these outcomes though and that's a loosening of the ties between the w/c and the main parties and between formal political activity among the w/c and non-involvement. Now, without an independent pro-working class organisation and activity, this loosening and this pull into activity will mean nothing whatsoever - it will die or be swallowed up by the existing parties (probably through a talent spotting exercise/sponsored mobility - exactly as i saw happen after the poll tax campaign died down). To bolster the mainstream parties credibility, to boost their legitimacy, at a time when they are facing precisely a crisis of their political reproduction is a sin - but that is exactly what you and many others have offered with your lack of understanding of why people are turning to UKIP and what it represents, what opportunities it opens up and what it requires those of us who have worked towards that pro-working class independence need to make sure happens. That would require a bit of dialectical thinking rather than simple look at me i'm on the right side. And it would require serious politics and analysis.

I think the elephant in the room here might be a social disconnection from the sort of w/c people who are now moving towards supporting UKIP (whether temporarily or permanently) on the part of those doing the exposing, doing the shouting, doing the lack of understanding, doing the brush-offs. Hence we see on one hand the ha ha you old failures, capital state and politics has fucked you over, ha ha and on the other, are you being fucked over by capital, state and politicians, then join our group and fightback. There is no common language at all in this situation, no way to communicate experience, reasoning, reflection, no way to do anything but misunderstand and follow up the misunderstanding with condemnation or outright rejection. Herd them back into the mainstream parties or good riddance to bad rubbish let them rot in their own filth.

Onto europe - the eu is a neo-liberal austerity machine, it needs smashing. One way to expose its internal conflicts and to block its operations (its attacks on the working class) and both highlight and erode its legitimacy is to fracture the individuals capital/state compacts to stay in the eu and to put mass pressure on them to do something they will fight tooth and nail to avoid. This again, as above opens up the prospects of a) a battle between the mass of the population and state/capital within individual states b) capital and politics within those states and c) the eu and the people of the individual states. They get this in the countries where the eu is imposing austerity - they understand this, this is why they love farage in Greece, because they see the damage this clown can help inflict on the wider neo-liberal project, the doors he can unwittingly open. Again, hinging on the development of independent class organisation - nationally and nationally.

But, when we have the aforementioned people bearing moral witness arguing that to attack the eu is to support war and death (when what they really mean is that they have refused at the first jump) we have people who are trying to damp down the very idea of opposing austerity by any means other than the rhetorical or those the state and capital deem legitimate. This is where that sort of liberalism is actively damaging right now. These become the voices of the opposition to austerity, the voices of fucking everything, as they always are. The deciding factor of the limits of what political activity can be what aims it may have, what forms it may take. The eu is the opium of these people, and the challenge that UKIPs growth offers to them is something i am very much enjoying unfold.

What sort of evidence do you have of me giving up on pro-working class politics andy? What problems do you have in discriminating between description of what is going on and endorsement of what is going on? Between attempting to find a way to articulate a politics that actually treats UKIP supporters as real life people with real life experiences, interests and thoughts and so as part of a collective that is constantly shifting its view as its experiences etc change and one that endorses the current conclusions of those experiences and reflection? Why are you lot always on the wrong side of this? This one sided black and white, a or b, ridiculous puffed up semi-hidden bottleless vanguardism - bottleless because you never explicitly say you're vanguardist, in fact you never formally recognise that you are vanguardist, it's just the been the background music so long that you no longer even hear it.

Seriously, all this because you made a bit of a arse of yourself over farage saying/not saying something.

These UKIP tantrums on here are a great example of the potential fracturing i mention above btw

 

[Pickman's model]

there's a rather interesting article about ukip and the traditional parties - "And it’s good night Vienna. How (not) to deal with the populist radical right: The Conservatives, UKIP and some lessons from the heartland" - http://www.palgrave-journals.com/bp/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/bp20147a.html

 

[DairyQueen]

butchersapron - I agree with your post, although winning a seat in Scotland is a turd (there are other parties there that have a realistic chance of election). There is a deeper problem that you describe and that voters clearly cannot connect to (at least explicitly) the overriding root of the problem, as you describe it...

the EU is a neo-liberal austerity machine, it needs smashing.

These are never the terms in which people disparage against the EU. Indeed, often the argument is formulated in terms that state the EU is not neoliberal enough; we spend too much on 'lazy southern European countries', we don't need regulation (or basic food safety standards), etc. So, when the EU 'reforms', it will be on incredibly right-wing, reactionary terms; stop migration from poor to rich countries, stop regional development funding. Although, Pickman's model posts a good source that the manner in which the Conservatives and Labour are now chasing UKIP votes is hilarious, effectively alienating their real core vote; the centre ground. There is some dangers in this, particularly in the short-term ("temporary border controls" are being debated already).

Overall, though, UKIP is just a spoiler, for disaffected Tories, and they will always remain so. Overall, the left do not need to worry about them too much (maybe some should even vote for them at the next GE in specific seats where they might win). Hopefully, UKIP can make some ground in the next GE and take a couple of seats. At that point the Tories could lurch to the right, which could be pretty suicidal. The first-past-the-post system is designed to stop parties like UKIP becoming a serious threat, so that might be a big ask.

 

[Obnoxiousness]

UKIP (a right wing nationalist party) are gaining support... and regardless of how or why, it is a fucking awful situation; not limited to Britain it seems, because the French have also voted up their FN party.

Cameron seems committed to "sorting out" Europe prior to a referendum and the son of Ralph the Trotskyist is more concerned about "sorting out" his alfresco eating habits than getting his arse into gear.

The UK is fucked.

 

[Buckaroo]

Noticed that Clegg, Cameron and Milliband all seemed to be using anti-greying hair shit or dye or something. No grey hairs. Not Farage, maybe he got the grey vote?

 

[Pickman's model]

Noticed that Clegg, Cameron and Milliband all seemed to be using anti-greying hair shit or dye or something. No grey hairs. Not Farage, maybe he got the grey vote?

he prefers to spend the money on beer

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

UKIP (a right wing nationalist party) are gaining support... and regardless of how or why, it is a fucking awful situation; not limited to Britain it seems, because the French have also voted up their FN party.

Cameron seems committed to "sorting out" Europe prior to a referendum and the son of Ralph the Trotskyist is more concerned about "sorting out" his alfresco eating habits than getting his arse into gear.

The UK is fucked.

Ralph wasn't a trot.

 

[Obnoxiousness]

Ralph wasn't a trot.

I stand corrected.

Marxist then.

 

[steeplejack]

Alan Sked- "Nigel Farage is a dimwitted racist"

quite an interesting article, actually. But early in the Guardianista's responses in the comments below:

"Sked is UKIP's Anton Drexler"

 

[Brainaddict]

I am coming from the following perspective:

1/ the Left as we understand it has lost, and to carry on regardless compounds this defeat.

2/ the status quo as represented by the main parties is "a bad thing" and means continuing, relentless attacks on the w/c.

3/ The UKIP vote (at this moment) is not going to lead to an (no doubt anti w/c) govt, but will weaken the stays quo and cause already existing fractures within capital and the ruling class to widen.

4) a mass expression of disaffection with the status quo at the ballot box is "a good thing" even if the vehicle isn't.

None of this adds up to support for the politics of UKIP but rather a (qualified) sense of optimism about some of the causes, and effects, of the UKIP vote coupled with a desire to recognise how/why an anti-UKIP stance that defends the status quo is counter-productive.

1. Agreed (though I'm not sure we'd agree on to what extent the loss was a bad thing, on the long historical view)

2. Agree the status quo is 'a bad thing' but I don't see UKIP as any less representative of it than the three main parties, who after all are but a cog in the status quo- Farage would happily be another. He won't win anyway, but his strength will simply help the main parties spot the chinks in their armour and repair them.

3. Voting for UKIP therefore won't weaken the status quo (and I'm not sure it's intended to by voters - see below). As for fractures within capital and the ruling class, on the evidence of 2007/2008 no one in the UK would know what the hell to do with them if they tripped on a fracture. Why be optimistic about fractures in capital when there's no-one (or no-one organised) to take advantage of them?

4. A mass expression of disaffection with the three main parties is not necessarily a mass disaffection with the status quo, it might just be disaffection with one cog in the status quo which they would like to work better. I can't say I know for sure what people were trying to express with their votes - lots of different stuff I imagine. But if there was deep dissatisfaction with 'the status quo' (as distinct from 'I really wish someone would give me a job' type of dissatisfaction) I think we'd see a bit more 'turmoil' than the rise of UKIP.

 

[DotCommunist]

I think we have in terms of rioting, non engagement with the electoral process and daily reports of the latest policy failures

under the Blairdom there was turmoil, there was crap policy making and anger there of.

but this lot seem to have managed to get 20 years worth of anger into one 5 year term.

 

[Brainaddict]

I think we have in terms of rioting, non engagement with the electoral process and daily reports of the latest policy failures

under the Blairdom there was turmoil, there was crap policy making and anger there of.

but this lot seem to have managed to get 20 years worth of anger into one 5 year term.

Yes, I imagine a lot of people will vote labour at the next election as a result. And a lot of them will vote UKIP. I just don't see any nascent radicalism in it as some of you seem to.

Meanwhile the 3 parties' idea of repairing the chinks in their armour will be a move towards more xenophobic rhetoric. None of them will actually pull out of the EU will they? So they can only posture. They'll be posturing more right wing. Then UKIP/Farage will fuck up, and they'll hoover back up all the votes they lost. The increased xenophobia will probably be here to stay though.

 

[DotCommunist]

faranges stated aim is to win enough seats next year to be a credible force that makes the big two (whover gets majority) have the EU referendum

 

[brogdale]

From the Tele...I'm not sure of their methodology, but it looks like a useful map of UKIP success...

Areas where there are high numbers of Ukip-leaning voters are coloured shades of purple. The marginal seats in which its impact will be crucial are outlined in black

Provincial would seem to be a fair descriptor.

 

[redsquirrel]

They aren't the govt you know. They aren't even going to be in the next govt. The people doing all the things you hate are the mainstream parties. It's not UKIP.

Precisely, this is (one of the reasons) why this anti-UKIP thing is so stupid. They aren't one of the parties that have spent the last 30+ years attacking people, dismantling the welfare state, bringing in the racist immigration policies. And as you say they won't after 2015 (or even 2020).

Wasting your time, energy and effort attacking them is completely pointless all it amounts to in real terms is to prop up the established parties.

 

[treelover]

According to The Times front page article UKIP are going to focus/concentrate on L/P voting areas in future with their conference being held in Doncaster, Ed's seat.

what is his end game here, is he going to target 'benefit scroungers' who the W/C are supposed to hate, the bankers, the rich, will he offer to nationalise the railways, what offers will he make, and if he does, won't his libertarian wing, a large component(including Tim Akers) baulk at all this?

 

[SpineyNorman]

Those are exactly the kinds of areas where their leaflets have been about more council housing, protection of benefits, anti-bedroom tax, etc. Taking a line against benefits would hurt them and they really don't need to do it IMO

 

[weepiper]

From the Tele...I'm not sure of their methodology, but it looks like a useful map of UKIP success...

Provincial would seem to be a fair descriptor.

Same picture in Scotland. Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen, Dundee they got 10% or below. It was only in more rural areas like the Borders, Moray, Dumfries and Galloway, Shetland, Orkney and the Highlands they got 12%-13.6%

 

[DotCommunist]

given the unified anti-benefits line of the major parties they'd do well to tap into the resentment at the major parties 'pay the taxes, don't get the benefits'. The larger parties have gone beyond just doing that safety net down, they actually want it destroyed and nobody is thick enough to see otherwise. UKIP would play well by promising british benefits for british taxpayers.

However I don't think they will play that one yet. They have a scant year to go, bouyed up on the back of a populist euro vote and faced with an electorate that despises all of them more or less.

The thing between now and the GE is for falanges mob to just not shit the bed in any significant way.

 

[SpineyNorman]

given the unified anti-benefits line of the major parties they'd do well to tap into the resentment at the major parties 'pay the taxes, don't get the benefits'. The larger parties have gone beyond just doing that safety net down, they actually want it destroyed and nobody is thick enough to see otherwise. UKIP would play well by promising british benefits for british taxpayers.

However I don't think they will play that one yet. They have a scant year to go, bouyed up on the back of a populist euro vote and faced with an electorate that despises all of them more or less.

The thing between now and the GE is for falanges mob to just not shit the bed in any significant way.

They already are on the estates round here.

 

[Dogsauce]

The 40 UKIP target seats:

Fingers crossed for coastal erosion getting a bit of a shift on.

 

[Ax^]

still a tory voter protest


still trying to find a fuck to give

 

[Dogsauce]

I'd caution about seeing a rise in UKIP vote in labour areas as being 'UKIP taking w/c votes' - places like Rotherham are not some conglomerate of former pit villages and nothing else, there's still a fairly large chunk of rural an relatively well-off areas that have traditionally voted Tory. Taking 30% in these areas doesn't necessarily indicate a direct transition from labour voting block, rather that the anti-labour opposition had a new flag to rally under and some motivation to go out and vote (I haven't looked at the figures, but I'd expect that the Tory vote has dropped in these seats). Trad labour voters may simply have stayed at home, as the party has moved away from their interests, and Miliband trying to respond to UKIP's themes may move them even further away.