Today, no matter who you are, where you come from or what supermarket you do your weekly shop at, one’s political views will always be strictly defined in a generalised stereotype. Your father works in a bank and you went to a private school? Obviously you’re a Tory. Your grandfather spent his working years in the mines and was a Union member? Step right into the Labour camp. You’re not really sure what you believe in, but you believe in freedom (whatever that entails) and absolute tolerance for all stripes of society- you’re a Liberal Democrat. Why must it be so that politics operates in such a straitjacket? Why can’t you believe in the importance of free-markets and believe in the importance of a regulated energy market? Is it not possible to take aspects from different ‘ideologies’ when working out where you stand? I realise I’m asking many questions, so I’ll now get to the point.
Political discourse in this country would be much more healthy if one could actually agree with a policy not espoused by their favoured party. The LD’s want to raise the personal tax allowance to £12,500- a great idea. Those from across the political divide should support it and not play party politics. Labour wants to freeze energy prices so as to save millions from fuel poverty- another good idea. Are there any Conservatives out there that can wriggle free from their ideological straitjackets and come on board with this policy? I thought not. Until we escape from this misery of party political sniping, where consensus is a dirty word, then we’ll be stuck in an endless cycle of ideological diatribe and political decay. This article doesn’t promise any answers to this conundrum.
I’ll finish with a little tidbit on New Labour. Please read on (if anybody’s reading, even if you’re a diehard Blue). The general New Labour consensus was that ideology should not matter. Ideology was what held the Labour party back for so long. Extreme left-wing policies just did not resonate with enough of the electorate to prove viable in any sense. Blair thus abolished Clause IV, and dragged the party to the centre of the political spectrum. David Blunkett’s- a dyed-in-the wool Blairite- political ethos dictated that ideology did not matter as long as government could deliver the best/most efficient services and opportunity to all. Let us call this pragmatism. If only our politicians of today even knew what this word meant.
So, forget ideology. It is not the be-all-and-end-all. Politics should be about marrying social justice with the most efficient, free-market economy possible. It should be about aspiration and helping those who are most in need. And yes (cliche alert), it is about hope and not fear. Everyone should feel as if they live in a country that will give them the best opportunity to get on in life. Who really cares about ideology.
