This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/09/the-guardian-view-on-party-members-a-vital-voice-but-not-a-veto

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
The Guardian view on party members: a vital voice, but not a veto The Guardian view on party members: a vital voice, but not a veto
(2 months later)
President Richard Nixon famously invoked the support of “the great silent majority” of his fellow Americans, in defiance of protests against the Vietnam war. He was not the first or last politician to imagine that noisy opposition conceals a friendlier national mood. People prefer praise to criticism, so assume that the latter is exaggerated. But it is often true that the loudest voices are on the fringe and drown out a larger, more nuanced body of opinion.President Richard Nixon famously invoked the support of “the great silent majority” of his fellow Americans, in defiance of protests against the Vietnam war. He was not the first or last politician to imagine that noisy opposition conceals a friendlier national mood. People prefer praise to criticism, so assume that the latter is exaggerated. But it is often true that the loudest voices are on the fringe and drown out a larger, more nuanced body of opinion.
Last week’s local elections are a case in point. The fever of partisan spin has now died down and it seems there was no single message from the electorate. Neither Theresa May nor Jeremy Corbyn can claim to speak for a “silent majority”. Turnout was only 36%, which is normal for council ballots. But there is evidence elsewhere of an uptick in political participation. Data published last week by the House of Commons library show an overall increase in party membership in recent years. Labour’s rise is by far the biggest, with around 552,000 members, up from 388,000 in December 2015. The Liberal Democrats and Scottish Nationalists have grown over the same period. Ukip has shown the steepest decline, with 21,200 members now – around half of its 2015 total. The Conservatives are secretive with their data, but their current membership is estimated at around 124,000. That is a tiny pool that could, in the event of a Tory leadership contest before a general election, end up choosing Britain’s next prime minister.Last week’s local elections are a case in point. The fever of partisan spin has now died down and it seems there was no single message from the electorate. Neither Theresa May nor Jeremy Corbyn can claim to speak for a “silent majority”. Turnout was only 36%, which is normal for council ballots. But there is evidence elsewhere of an uptick in political participation. Data published last week by the House of Commons library show an overall increase in party membership in recent years. Labour’s rise is by far the biggest, with around 552,000 members, up from 388,000 in December 2015. The Liberal Democrats and Scottish Nationalists have grown over the same period. Ukip has shown the steepest decline, with 21,200 members now – around half of its 2015 total. The Conservatives are secretive with their data, but their current membership is estimated at around 124,000. That is a tiny pool that could, in the event of a Tory leadership contest before a general election, end up choosing Britain’s next prime minister.
Around 1.6% of the electorate are members of one of the three biggest parties in England, up from a historic low of 0.8% in 2013. Most people tune in to party messages only when big decisions must be made. Those who monitor every twist and turn in Westminster are unusual. Their priorities cannot be presumed to be universal.Around 1.6% of the electorate are members of one of the three biggest parties in England, up from a historic low of 0.8% in 2013. Most people tune in to party messages only when big decisions must be made. Those who monitor every twist and turn in Westminster are unusual. Their priorities cannot be presumed to be universal.
There is no doubt that the two recent referendums – on Scottish independence and EU membership – brought people out to vote who had previously felt disenfranchised. Mr Corbyn’s bid for the Labour leadership enthused a generation of young people whose voices had been ignored. Those effects are rightly celebrated as signs of renewed democratic engagement. There is also more subtlety and variety of motive behind those votes than is sometimes implied by common stereotypes of “Nats”, “Brexiteers” and “Corbynistas”.There is no doubt that the two recent referendums – on Scottish independence and EU membership – brought people out to vote who had previously felt disenfranchised. Mr Corbyn’s bid for the Labour leadership enthused a generation of young people whose voices had been ignored. Those effects are rightly celebrated as signs of renewed democratic engagement. There is also more subtlety and variety of motive behind those votes than is sometimes implied by common stereotypes of “Nats”, “Brexiteers” and “Corbynistas”.
Ballots give a snapshot of opinion, which can change. Election results must be honoured, but dissenting voices must also be heard. That ethos is currently endangered in the two biggest parties. On the Labour side, there is a tendency to forget that MPs represent all of their constituents, not just the ones who admire Mr Corbyn. MPs should respect local activists but are not obliged to obey them completely. On the Tory side, there is a habit of believing that MPs’ function is to enact Brexit, defined in the hardest possible terms, and that anything less is defiance of the people.Ballots give a snapshot of opinion, which can change. Election results must be honoured, but dissenting voices must also be heard. That ethos is currently endangered in the two biggest parties. On the Labour side, there is a tendency to forget that MPs represent all of their constituents, not just the ones who admire Mr Corbyn. MPs should respect local activists but are not obliged to obey them completely. On the Tory side, there is a habit of believing that MPs’ function is to enact Brexit, defined in the hardest possible terms, and that anything less is defiance of the people.
The reality is that majority opinion is fluid, and parties have patchwork coalitions of support. Some people are moved to become members, some routinely switch allegiance. Effective leaders do not seek comfort in the cheers of an ultra-loyal minority, nor do they pretend, like Nixon, that the silence of the majority indicates support. The will of the people is not contained in activist ardour or non-voting apathy, but in the spectrum the runs between them. It is a messy, complex thing, and anyone claiming exclusive, absolute knowledge of it has not understood what is involved in governing a democracy.The reality is that majority opinion is fluid, and parties have patchwork coalitions of support. Some people are moved to become members, some routinely switch allegiance. Effective leaders do not seek comfort in the cheers of an ultra-loyal minority, nor do they pretend, like Nixon, that the silence of the majority indicates support. The will of the people is not contained in activist ardour or non-voting apathy, but in the spectrum the runs between them. It is a messy, complex thing, and anyone claiming exclusive, absolute knowledge of it has not understood what is involved in governing a democracy.
PoliticsPolitics
OpinionOpinion
LabourLabour
ConservativesConservatives
Jeremy CorbynJeremy Corbyn
Liberal DemocratsLiberal Democrats
Scottish National party (SNP)Scottish National party (SNP)
UK Independence party (Ukip)UK Independence party (Ukip)
editorialseditorials
Share on FacebookShare on Facebook
Share on TwitterShare on Twitter
Share via EmailShare via Email
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn
Share on PinterestShare on Pinterest
Share on Google+
Share on WhatsAppShare on WhatsApp
Share on MessengerShare on Messenger
Reuse this contentReuse this content