Is there a new Political Divide?
The drive to Divide
I recently read an article from the Economist
suggesting that there was a new Political divide. No longer of the right and
left; democracy vs communism; but rather a new divide of what the writer of the
article referred to as wall builders and wall breakers. In this the writer suggested that the two sides pitted against each
other were based on the idea essentially of migration. Whether they wanted
freedom of movement and migration – based on openness or a more Xenophobic
approach of keeping those who we fear out and aiming to develop a stronger
internal economy. This post aims to delve deeper into whether this idea has any
real substance and whether or not it is here to stay.
A
wall to build or to be broken?
Across the globe there seems to be an ever more reoccurring
phenomenon. A rise of right wing leaders coming out with ultra nationalist
slogans against migration and globalisation. The likes of Trump, Farage and Le
pen seem to be gaining more popularity as time goes on. Hungary and Poland have
elected ultranationalist governments, with Poland being one of the areas
notably leading the rise of Neo-Nazism. ‘The world is a threatening place’ to
these leaders and they promise to keep these threats out. Threats of new immigrants, higher diversity and unknown effects on
domestic economies. This scare game however, does seem to be working. Britain
has left the EU, with the migrant crisis being the main talking point of the
June 2016 referendum. Donald Trump is the Republican nominee, and the battle
for Presidency seems to look much tighter than almost everyone though it would
be.
So why has this rise occurred?
The
reasons may be different for each nation but for Trump it seems much clearer.
The republican party was in a state of disarray. As Jacobs had written in the
Guardian article – The Rise of Donald Trump, the republicans
could not simply defeat Obama. The only way to win would be to change the set
up of the party – enter Trump. By blaming the old republican politicians, who
as Jacobs puts “won’t do everything perfect and won’t commit to burning down
the village”, the republican party were not electable. The grassroots of the
party would demand one thing, the politicians could not deliver, due to previous
ties. This in turn allowed Trump, a rank outsider to bulldoze party
conventions. His speeches appealed to the Southern republican base, bringing
out old divides within communities, and allowed to him to progress to where we
now see him today. In his fight for presidency it is now the straight talking property
mogul vs the White House Politician in Hillary Clinton. Likewise, the rise of
UKIP is due to similar reasons. A lack of effort from the Labour leaders to
help the base of their party, allowed Farage and his ‘brand of blaming’ to
scoop up those disavowed in the labour heartlands. People across the globe just
seem to be fed up with the same brand of politician. Even if they do not talk
sense, the appeal of someone saying something ‘different’ seems to be very
appealing, and even electable.
Credit: The Guardian
Globalisation vs Anti
Now obviously in
any political divide there has to be an opposition. In the case of Trump and
Farage it is the push for every more globalisation. An ambassador for this
could certainly be Justin Trudeau, the Canadian Prime minister. A centre-left
wing, pro immigration, and pro diversity leader. He accepted 25,000 refugees
from the Syrian migrant crisis, is pro-gay marriage, and has a multi-gender and
multicultural cabinet. Certainly the opposite of what most would expect a
Farage/Trump government to look like; and certainly someone to champion the
globalisation approach. However along with this, Trudeau inherits the CETA and
NAFTA trade agreements. CETA has been labelled a model for Britain post Brexit,
as Canada has access, albeit limited, into the single market. Both trade pacts (CETA
and NAFTA), allow movement of goods and services but not capital and
importantly people.
Trudeau in his
general policy may look to allow movement of people but certainly for the
Theresa May, a policy that allows trade and commerce whilst keeping people out
would be ideal. Keeping those Tories who could disaffect to UKIP whilst also
maintaining economic power. However, to most this would be far too idealistic. Getting
any real power within European trade would have to be accompanied by the freedom
of movement. If not France may secede the European Union, with Le Pen’s National
Front leading that charge. If that occurs losing two of the big three EU
nations could lead to collapse, with Germany being the only economy to prop up
the rest of the failing EU states. Trudeau’s approach may not work in the
current climate of EU politics, however if Canada prospers in the next few
years his ever more globalisation aim would certainly set an example to the
rest of the world, against the right wing nationalist front.
All doom and Gloom?
That said, for
Britain post Brexit, the liberal would feel hard done by. University educated
and voting to remain, these people could almost feel betrayed by the rest of
the country. Turning her back on diversity and the spirit of the commonwealth into
a darker closed Britain. Or is it? According to the LSE research this may be
misplaced.
Credit: The Economist 1
According to the
research, London may be the reason diversity shan’t fall in the UK. As the
Economist depicts London in almost unparallelled in terms of diversity compared
to the rest of Europe. A mix of all nationalities it allows Britain’s fertility
rate to increase. Many of these migrants are now pinned to Britain with 27% of
mothers being immigrants. Children within the schooling systems act as the
glue, whilst as people get richer they move out to different parts of the country
and no longer just the big cities of the UK. A rising immigrant population, in
terms of those born to immigrant parents, would mean that future generations
will be even more diverse in generations to come, despite the Brexit vote. That
said the article also says that the ‘UKIP cohort’ of the older generations will
age out to be replaced by this more diverse Britain. However, I’m quite unsure
about this claim, with still a good percentage of the population in the UK
voting to leave despite being younger than the retirement age. For the attitude
to really change, labour must win back the support of their base support;
otherwise the blame game will continue.
The Drive to Divide
Overall there
definitely seems to be a different divide in politics, Trudeau vs Trump if you
will. Whether it is here to stay is a different question. For Britain it is up
to the Labour party to band together to get back those who feel betrayed. In
Europe centrists have banded together in Netherlands and Sweden to keep out the
nationalists, and in France the same could be repeated. In the United States
however this seems to be the only opportunity for the nationalists to win. As
of the 17th of August the New York Times put Clinton ahead by seven
points. Come November that could be closer. However, a Clinton win, and as
tough stance in Britain from Germany could spell an end to the nationalist
movement as fast as it came about. The
next few months could become very key in terms of how the political divide
shapes up, with the November US election being the key date. Watch this space.
YK student blogs
Sources:
·
The
Economist – The New Political Divide http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21702750-farewell-left-versus-right-contest-matters-now-open-against-closed-new
·
The
Economist – The Canadian Model for Trade Deals http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2016/06/economist-explains-26
·
The
Guardian – Rise of Donald Tump https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/apr/02/donald-trump-battle-for-the-soul-republican-party
· Telegraph - Welcome to the new political order: the rise of Ukip and the
split of Labour (Juliet Samuel) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2016/06/24/welcome-to-the-new-political-order-the-rise-of-ukip-and-the-spli/
· Economist - The appeal of Donald Trump http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2016/08/some-choice
· The Economist – Britain’s unparallelled diversity http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21702338-liberals-fear-their-country-will-become-less-tolerant-place-future-bright-britains
· The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/polls.html?_r=0
