Alternative Editorial: Neither Neutral Nor Partisan
Illustration by Pablo Delcan, first published by Politico Magazine
In our last editorial we floated the idea – obvious to some – that, as far as the media is concerned, the General Election 2019 is being fought on what we call the 2% terms. By this we mean dictated by the mainstream political discourse, arising from the 2% of people who are members of political parties.
In what is still a two-party system, the Labour Party frames it as a L v R issue, emphasising the role of the state in protecting the many rather than the few. The Conservatives make it a Brexit v Remain issue, ostensibly about delivering on the Britain’s democratic mandate to leave Europe. They are supported on this by the main centre party The Lib Dems who have committed to reversing that mandate, without further ado.
Under those headlines come the issues traditionally captured by policy departments – economy, environment, health, welfare, immigration, crime. For example, here is how the London Broadcasting Company (LBC) outlined them in 2017 which notably misses the environment. It will be interesting to see how much that has changed in such mainstream media outlets this coming week after the main party 2019 manifestoes are published.
There is also a set of shadow agendas – meaning issues that are not yet fully on the agenda of any one party, but are lurking and might enter into the mainstream political discourse over the next few weeks. Amongst these are the question of democracy itself – such as the campaign for a Citizens Assembly on Constitutional Reform (UpToUs). Another might be media accountability and the role of social media, including fake news.
Only the Green Party– with just one seat in Parliament – makes the environment the number one issue. Although, possibly due to the rising evidence that the public is waking up to the climate emergency, the other parties put it in their top three. As I said above, we write this before the publication of the official party manifestoes, coming this week.
Polling the people is one way to get beyond the mainstream headlines and push the envelope. But it can just as easily be a way to measure how successful the mainstream media has been in shaping public preferences. If the people are hearing day in, day out, that Brexit is what matters, why expect the viewers to disagree? In other words, should we be led by polls as evidence of what really matters for our future? And if not, where does our agency lie?
Since our inception, The Alternative UK has not been partisan. Our intention with repeating ad infinitum that 98% of people are not members of political parties is to open the ground for a new kind of politics that is not defined by the current political party culture and structure. Nor shaped and sustained by the growth economy that Westminster continues to endorse.
This new politics arises from people who are waking up to their own agency in shaping the future, largely at the local and cosmo-local (meaning not restricted to place but still community-driven) level.
There are distinctions within this category also, between those that appear as independents in protest against the mainstream, wanting to make a national impact – UKIP started out this way. And those that appear as independents as a means to unite the people in their community, operating beneath the traditional political radar. People centred politics.
These latter groups are often driven by the goal of resilience in the face of austerity and climate emergency. Or, if they are more privileged (having more time, capital or natural resources), by ambitious visions of flourishing well beyond what the mainstream media champions. Our experience of groups like this is that they are very clear about their own strategies for progress, but tend to distrust party politics. There is some partnership with the local councils, but little reliance on them.
It would be understandable if those who are already more invested in a new politics than the old, decided to eschew the General Election. “If this political system does not represent me, I cannot be partisan”. Russell Brand took this line in the run up to the 2015 election when he actively recommended that people don’t vote. He thought at the time that de-legitimising Westminster would have a positive effect: that the politicians would listen and change their ways.
However just moments before the election, he suddenly saw that what he had done was hand his power to someone else. When his own supporters were looking for direction on how to use their vote, there were plenty on hand to advise them, often in ways that Brand would abhor. In a panic he came out as a Labour supporter, only to meet the opprobrium of the press even further.
While he can now revise his actions in hind-sight, with a huge media profile, how much soft-power did Brand squander at the time? Could he have helped Labour to a very different outcome?
It’s often a shock to find out that binary opposition to any kind of established power, reinforces that power. To be pitted against your enemy is to give your enemy a platform and the ‘oxygen of publicity’. For example, during the Irish ‘troubles’, the UK government asked the media to stop giving the IRA too many headlines.
On the other hand, to ignore the establishment altogether, preferring to have your own conversations and no engagement with power, is to relinquish your own. As the famous quote goes, Goldman Sachs doesn’t care what you think about anything. Or take Karl Rove’s response to the concept of ‘reality based politics’.
To be neutral at a moment when power is in transition is like a caged lion refusing to eat at feeding time. Just don’t complain, when you’re hungry, that the other lions ate the food.
Instead, the trick seems to be how to use the situation to gain your own ends. Can we maximise our own agenda within the limits offered? For those who understand that this has to be a climate election, it would mean examining the climate policies of each party, reviewing them and making it clear which are the best. Although the parties have yet to publish their fully costed manifestoes, the BBC has made a preliminary stab here (select country, all parties and environment).
As we know, our first past the post voting system does not mean that a simple vote for the Green Party in every case will lead to a Green government. In almost all constituencies, a vote for Green will be a wasted vote as the main parties make it a two horse race on their terms. The challenge now is to make it clear for ever voter, which is the most green friendly vote that can winin their constituency.
Given that 85% of the voters are now experiencing climate anxiety, helping people to compare the party stances on climate emergecy will be vital. If this was done in a very public way, it could even cause a race to the top for green policies. Though let’s watch out for empty, uncosted promises.
In an age of protest and waking up to the failure of the old politics, this is what new political agency looks like. Not being overwhelmed by media narratives on behalf of business as usual. Holding your nerve, stepping up and taking well founded clear actions in every moment.
