Personal Blogs

Much will no doubt be written today about whether the blue team or the red team did better in yesterday's local elections.

That, however, is just a distraction from the real issue. Does it really make any difference whether the blue team or the red team does better? No, it doesn't. All 3 main political parties, for all the attempts they make to spin the differences among them, are basically in agreement on most things.

All 3 main parties agree that, in the balance of power between the state and citizens, the presumption should be heavily in favour of the state. Oh sure, the Lib Dems had some fine words in their manifesto about civil liberties, but now they're in government they are totally supporting the other 2 parties in their continual erosion of them.

But, I hear you cry, they have totally different policies on the economy, don't they? Bollocks they do. All 3 parties believe strongly in running the economy primarily for the benefit of big businesses, the power machinery of the state, and other vested interests. Any differences between them are just more spin: a narrative that it seems to suit all parties to perpetuate. In reality, you'd be hard pressed to put a fag paper between the different economic policies.

No, the real story is the turnout. According to the latest figures from the BBC (and this may change slightly once all the votes are in, but it won't change much), the turnout is just 32%.

Or to put it another way, over two thirds of the electorate couldn't be bothered to get off their arses and vote.

That, dear reader, is the real story here.

Why was the turnout so low? I don't know the answer to that. I do hope someone is going to do some good quality research to find out. The two main reasons one could speculate about is that voters are just lazy, or maybe they think their vote doesn't make any difference.

Either way, it's pretty shocking.

It seems to me (and I should point out that this is just an impression I get, and is not backed by evidence) that there is a dominant narrative that says that the way our 3 main parties behave is just the way politics has to be. According to that narrative, if you don't like the blue flavour of it, vote for the red flavour, and if you don't like either, vote for the yellow flavour. But don't even think about voting for something different, because that's not allowed.

It's "The wrong lizard" politics.

And here's the thing. I'm guessing that many of those 68% of the electorate who didn't bother to vote actually don't like the way the 3 main parties do things. It just never occurs to them that there is an alternative.

If even just half of them didn't like the 3 main parties, turned up to vote, and voted for the Green party, UKIP, an independent candidate, or some other non-mainstream candidate, just think what it would do to the political landscape.

But they don't. Politicians from the 3 main parties have managed to create a narrative that says that the 3 of them have an inalienable right to rule the country and there's nothing the rest of us can do about it.

They have been very successful in doing that. Less than 5% of the electorate voted for anyone other than one of the 3 main parties. I suspect a large part of the reason for this is that those who are disillusioned with mainstream politicians just stay at home.

You will hear politicians say how terrible it is that the turnout is so low. But I don't believe for a minute that they mean it. A low turnout means that their narrative is winning. A low turnout keeps the same old politicians in power.