With all the red lights flashing at the state of the UK’s democracy, I’ve seen it said we shouldn’t assume the next general election will even happen. The issue, though, isn’t whether an election will happen (it will). It’s whether it will be free and fair (it won’t). THREAD
The UK isn't about to become a totalitarian state. But it’s well on the way to becoming a sham democracy. And elections are essential to a sham democracy. They allow it to claim international legitimacy. And they reassure a sleeping public that they still have their freedom.
But scratch below the surface and things are bleak. Voter suppression. A neutered electoral commission to be brought under government control. Public money withheld from constituencies that don’t vote Tory. Personal data used to target susceptible voters with blatant lies.
And yet many people seem to believe that the mere holding of an election or referendum is all that matters. That those things alone constitute democracy. The very word “democracy” has been weaponised.
Never mind ruling by executive fiat. Never mind closing down parliament. Never mind going to excruciating lengths to avoid scrutiny. Never mind attacking all the institutions whose role is to hold you to account. "We've had an election ergo we live in a healthy democracy".
Many in the Conservative Party are encouraging this way of thinking. In response to recent scandals, I’ve heard Dominic Raab and Daniel Hannan, among others, say that if the public don’t like it they can vote the Government out.
Their meaning is clear. Once elected, a Government should be entitled to do what it wants without limit or challenge, and it is only the electorate - at the next election - which has the right to hold it to account.
A good reason, you might say, to make it harder for other parties to win an election.
When your reasoning is this warped, opposition, scrutiny and debate, holding the powerful to account, all the things that are the very essence of liberal democracy, are seen as anti-democratic. The poles are inverted.
It's an authoritarian position, revealed time and again in the things Tory MPs such as @joymorrissey say on social media, often before rushing to press delete, as she did yesterday. Being elected means you can do no wrong, and being unelected means you have no legitimacy.
Since the Brexit vote, many people have fallen for this. And even if they haven’t, if their preference is for permanent or entrenched Conservative power, they are unlikely to do too much to challenge it.
So no, we are not about to see general elections come to an end. But there is a danger that the mere fact of their taking place will be seen as evidence that the UK has a healthy democracy.
Together, of course, with a referendum held half a decade ago, in which the vote of a minority of the population was used as a mandate for a full-scale revolution.
As a further thought, who’s to say that if the devolved governments continue to be formed by parties opposed to the Tories, or to the Union, they won’t also one day be deemed "undemocratic?"
You can pick up hints in the utterings of some politicians and commentators, with their not-so-subtle messages that the success of the SNP in Scotland means democracy isn’t working.
People, you begin to suspect, for whom the preservation of the Union is more important than the preservation of democracy.
It’s not too great a leap of imagination to envisage these people calling one day for the dissolution of the devolved parliaments.
After all, rather than try to convince people of the merits of the Union in a post-Brexit, authoritarian UK, easier just to remove the institution that gives voice to the counter-arguments.
Especially if you can persuade yourself that you’re doing it all in the name of democracy. Your own, special kind of democracy.
Yesterday's result gives me hope that the Tories will yet go down in flames. But I'm still not confident. And you can be assured they will continue to undermine democracy across the UK, at all levels, if that's what they deem necessary to hold on to power. ENDS
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I find this @Daily_Record quote from an unnamed Labour Party source amazing not only in its contempt for devolution, but in the brazenness with which it expresses that contempt.
Yes, of course, under the UK system, Wesminster's elective dictatorships have the legal power to do what they want.
But, if this were driven purely by the need to improve systems, the quote would read something like this:
'Whoever is in power in Westminster and Holyrood, our systems of governance need to work as effectively as possible for the Scottish people, and this legislation seeks to improve that".
Not very convincing maybe but at least - on the face of it - driven by democratic instincts.
Next time English football thugs smash up a Spanish bar, I’d like to ask Matthew Goodwin if it’s because they have legitimate concerns.
THREAD
Next time English football thugs get into a running battle with the German police, I’d like to ask Isabel Oakeshott if it’s because they’re not being listened to.
Next time English football thugs trash a Dutch city centre, I’d like to ask Kemi Badenoch if it’s because ordinary people are having cultural Marxism forced on them by the liberal elite.
There's something very unpleasant, on the eve of an election, about saying what Starmer said today on SM/CU, knowing it will distress millions who will nonetheless feel obliged to vote for him.
Passive aggression at the very least.
But more like bullying.
Taunting.
THREAD
In this piece for @BylinesScotland yesterday about the pressing need for electoral reform, I wrote that I was desperate for Starmer to win in the way "I'd be desperate to take a cold bath if the only choice was an acid one".
But honestly, I am already so fed up with a party which habitually relies on a system it has no intention of changing while crowing at people who don't like it: "So what are you going to do? Vote Tory?"
You can almost see the thumb in front of the nose.
Much as I idolise Ian, it’s a classic illustration of the mindset of many progressives towards the SNP that in a single tweet he can both acknowledge the damage of Brexit and imply that Westminster bears no responsibility for anything that’s gone wrong in Scotland. THREAD
I often sense the inner conflict when, having acknowledged the positive noises on immigration (the polar opposite of populist) coming from the SNP and Plaid Cymru, they need to remind themselves it’s nasty Nats they’ve been complimenting and say something dismissive too.
None of this is to exonerate the SNP. Of course they will always blame someone else and fail to acknowledge their own shortcomings. As will the Labour government in Wales. As will Labour shadow ministers in London. As will any political party anywhere.
When, like me, you've been an unquestioning Unionist for most of your life and then started to have severe doubts in the post-Brexit years, you begin to see things you didn't see before. It's hard to overstate the (negative) subliminal effect of this imagery. THREAD
You may not be 100% sold on the case of independence, you may indeed have doubts about it on multiple levels. But you understand the aspiration, because the very people who should be trying to make you "believe in Britain" all too often end up pushing you away again.
It's not that such imagery is representative of the views of most Unionists - God help us if that were the case. But it's certainly indicative of the mindset of far too many people - in government, in the media and elsewhere - who hold the levers of power in the UK.
Given Labour's description of a youth mobility scheme with the EU as "synonymous with free movement", I've made a list of 25 other things that might come into that category so we can avoid wasting their time and let them get on with the business of serious opposition (thread):