I thought this data, just issued by Ipsos Mori, was interesting enough to share.
The lack of regard for the Tories is staggering, but the figures for Reform are almost as notable. Parties on the right-wing fringes of UK politics are clearly not popular right now.
That said, Labour only just about staggers into net popularity, with the Greens closest behind.
The idea that politics is not engaging with the British public is the winner here.
Given the importance of political issues, the idea that politics must do better is overwhelming. I cannot see this happening until neoliberalism is consigned to the bin.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Coming to a cinema near you, just when you thought it was safe: “Neo-liberalism – the Zombie Non-Dead that walk the earth” – watch the mad scientist von-Hayek & his side-kick Broon as they unleash on the world yet another wave of neo-lib-zombies, all mumbling markets, markets, markets, privatising everything in their path, terrorising citizens and making a utopian hell on earth.
The rise in zombie films seems to parallel the rise of the neo-libtards, I wonder if they are connected? Consigned to the bin? need a big enough natural disaster or some such for that to happen. The EU is packed to the rafters with market fundamentalists/neo-libs – all supported by an imbecilic press & ditto in the UK.
The problem is that the neoliberal way of doing things, has become the default way of doing things, the common sense way of doing things. Any deviation requires justification but it itself requires no justification.
I had the pleasure, if it can be called that, of speaking to the local Labour candidate on my door step last night. I asked why Labour had not pledged to nationalise the water companies, the railways, the post office etc. and he came out with the usual “no money” excuse.
So I asked “How about paying for them with 30 year bonds, like the Attlee government did?” He just stared at me for a few seconds as if I were an alien just arrived from Mars and with no attempt to answer my question came out with what sounded like a memorised speech about Starmer’s six pledges. When I tried to engage him further he became visibly irritated, said he had more doors to knock on and left.
He seemed to know nothing of his own party’s history, and seemed not to know that anything other than neoliberalism had ever been tried or had ever worked. It was almost as if, for him, history started in the Thatcher era. It is this way if thinking that we are up against.
I suspect he is typical
I think that’s a bit unfair.
I and my fellow Labour Party canvassers can’t be expected to be experts on everything that might come up in the doorstep, especially from constituents who are particularly well informed on a particular topic. The other night I was challenged with “Gordon Brown destroying pensions” and “selling off all the gold” (reasons for now not voting Labour), as well as being asked Labour policy on setting up a domiciliary care home.
The Labour canvassers I’ve been with are all well-meaning and pushing hard for a change of government, and many of us do have misgivings of the type expressed on these pages.
What we’re all aware of is that the Labour Party is bigger than any one person and that its core values are shared by the majority of its members, and hopefully by many others on 4th July.
But not knowing does not help
@Mr Chaffinch. It is certainly true that one would not expect a Labour candidate or canvasser to know all the arcane details of policy implementation. However the assumption that there is not enough money for much needed social change is not an arcane detail. Indeed very little of the Labour manifesto makes much sense without this assumption. It could be thought of as a fundamental tenet of Labour’s economic theory. What do Labour party members talk about when they get together? Don’t they discuss such issues? If they are not prepared to defend such a fundamental issue then why not?
Thanks
Mr Chaffinch,
The problem is that Labour Core Values seemingly incorporate neoliberal assumptions that the role of the state should be reduced, that the state has no money and cannot afford to intervene effectively , and that all state agencies are useless, self serving and not fit for purpose; and should make way for the private sector, who know best.
This may be the politics of deception designed to confuse opponents but all the signs are that Rachel Reeves and Wes Streeting really believe it.
Here’s a link to the post with the original graphic, where it is a little better to read.
https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/negativity-towards-sunak-and-conservatives-rises-highest-level-parliament-3-5-say-party-having-bad
A smidge of good news in that graphic is that the left’s figures have been improving during the campaign and the right’s are getting worse.
@ Richard – with respect, I agree, but one can’t know everything
and
@ Mr Hurley, ditto with respect, the concept of there being enough money to do anything a nation with it’s own currency wants to is a pretty arcane and indeed heretical concept on the average doorstep, regardless of the views of LP members.
One can (as I have) skirt the issue (as it’s not LP policy) by stating that the UK has “found” the money to fund expensive projects it wants to (Trident, HS2), or has to (financial crash bailout, Brexit stabilisers, Covid support, pension fund security after the Truss/Kwarteng mini budget), but, for the majority of the electorate, Modern Monetary Theory = Magic Money Tree = Other People’s Money = the Tax Payer = Me, a message that is reinforced on a daily basis by pretty much all the popular media outlets and think tanks (I’m looking at you IFS)
So, please, let’s give LP canvassers a break – many for whom John Oliver’s badger analogy speaks volumes
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/article/2024/jun/24/john-oliver-last-week-tonight-uk-election
@Roger – these may be core values of some of those in senior LP positions, but not I would argue of the majority of LP members, many of whom are frustrated by the current direction of travel. It should be noted that LP trajectory has changed dramatically in response to leadership changes, and likely to do so in future
This debate rather begs the question: better the badgers you know?
The picture you conjure up, Mr Chaffinch, is of party with a leadership whose core values differ from those of the membership; indeed with a membership much of which may be only vaguely aware of what these values are. The leadership, however, is quite content to allow these members to be its public representatives.
A more honest leadership would say to its representatives “These are our core values, these are what, above all, you need to defend.” Presumably the Labour party has some sort of training for canvassers; what do they tell them?
The leadership, however, relies on the membership wishing to get rid of the badger and feeling that they need the leadership if they are to do so.
This reminds me of the 2nd century BCE political philosopher, Han Feizi’s parable of the Fox and the Tiger:
One day the Fox came across the Tiger fast asleep and gently nudged him awake. The Tiger still half asleep said “You are lucky I’m not hungry; if I were, I would eat you.” “Oh!”, said the Fox, “You will get into terrible trouble if you do that! Don’t you know that the gods have ordained that I should be the ruler of all the animals and that even the fiercest of them should run away in fear. But walk with me through the valleys and mountains, observe that what I say is true, and when you recognise me as the ruler of all the animals I will forgive your impiety.”
So the Tiger walked with the Fox through the valleys and mountains and observed that even the fiercest of animals ran away in fear. At this point the Tiger began to fear the Fox and became his most trusted servant.
You, Mr Chaffinch and the membership of the Labour party, are the Tiger; you don’t need the your leadership to chase the Badger away; you can do it all by yourselves. When all is said and done, what is the point of chasing the Badger out of the house, if you simultaneously let the Fox in?