In a protest against an out-of-touch political class, the British public have voted for a party led by someone whose class background is indistinguishable from Cameron’s or Clegg’s.
In this respect, UKIP’s success demonstrates not the weakness of the ruling class, but the exact opposite – its complete victory.
I don’t just mean this in the sense that political power is held in the hands of such a narrow group that the Dulwich-educated son of a stockbroker can present himself as an outsider.
What I mean is that, as Adam says, UKIP is not an anti-establishment party. For example:
- The demand for tougher border controls is a call for an increase in the power of the state.
- Whilst its possible that immigration control might be very slightly positive for low-wage workers, it would be bad for average wage-earners, and there are many better ways of improving the lot of unskilled workers.
- Hostility to gay marriage is fundamentally anti-liberty, as it asserts the power of the state to intervene in private relationships.
- The call for a flat rate 25% tax would be a big tax cut for the rich.
- Cutting employment regulations would worsen working conditions and job security for ordinary workers, without creating many jobs.
- The demand that welfare recipients do compulsory workfare and not buy cigarettes or alcohol would be a reduction in the welfare state safety net, to the detriment not just of actual recipients but also to those in insecure jobs who fear becoming jobless.
UKIP’s policies, then, do not challenge either the power of capital over worker or (what is a similar but distinct thing) the power of managerialists.
This is why I say their support represents the victory of the ruling class, because it demonstrates their complete power. I’m thinking here of Steven Lukes’ “third dimension” of power:
Is it not the supreme exercise of power to get another or others to have the desires you want them to have – that is, to secure their compliance by controlling their thoughts and desires?…Is it not the supreme and most insidious use of power to prevent people, to whatever degree, from having grievances by shaping their perceptions, cognitions and preferences in such a way that they accept their role in the existing order of things? (Power: a radical view, 2nd ed, p27, 28)
Give a gift subscription to the New Statesman this Christmas from just £49
It’s in this sense that the ruling class has triumphed. The discontent that people might reasonably feel against bankers, capitalists and managerialists has been diverted into a hostility towards immigrants and the three main parties, and to the benefit of yet another party with a managerialist and pro-capitalist ideology. In this way, even “protest” votes help sustain existing class and power structures.
Content from our partners
Related
