From The Guardian: British politics is no longer as simple as left against right, according to research highlighted by senior Conservative and Labour strategists.
Traditionally loyal voters have never been more prepared to cross party lines, said Andrew Cooper, David Cameron’s former director of strategy, and Spencer Livermore, a Labour adviser on four election campaigns, who described how shifting attitudes have created new divisions in the UK.
“Open versus closed is becoming more and more significant,” said Lord Cooper, launching a report with polling that suggests it is easier to predict voting habits by how internationalist people are, whether they live in diverse communities, their feelings towards minorities and their age.
“It means that lots of people who once were good bets to be Conservative now turn out to be Labour. And people that pollsters might have predicted would be Labour are now Tories,” he said.
An analysis carried out by Cooper using the polling company Populus on behalf of the thinktank Global Future laid bare a stark divide between people aged 18 to 44 and those over 45, with a huge gap in attitudes to internationalism, multiculturalism and immigration.
An American infographic which seems to mostly do a really good job of summarising the differences between left-wing politics and right-wing politics.
Just two trans-Atlantic disclaimers:
- Usage of red and blue is the other way around in US politics.
- The “support” percentages are definitely US not UK figures!
#LeftVsRight #UnderstandingConservatism: An American infographic which seems to mostly do a really good job of…
Posted by Stop The Tories Channel on Wednesday, November 8, 2017
From The Learning Spy: Jonathan Haidt’s The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion proposes that there are six distinct foundations, or continuums, that act like ‘taste receptors’ on the moral tongue. They are:
- Care/harm: cherishing and protecting others.
- Fairness/cheating: rendering justice according to shared rules.
- Liberty/oppression: the loathing of tyranny.
- Loyalty/betrayal: standing with your group, family, nation.
- Authority/subversion: obeying tradition and legitimate authority.
- Sanctity/degradation: abhorrence for disgusting things, foods, actions.
He explains that those of us on the left tend to value the care/harm foundation most highly. We’re also moved by the liberty/oppression foundation and, in an incomplete way, the fairness/cheating foundation. We see it as morally right to care for others, protect the vulnerable from injustice and oppression, and to divide resources equitably. And, at least in terms of morality, that’s pretty much all we care about.
Those on the right meanwhile care about all six foundations. They see family values as a moral issue in the way those on left tend not to comprehend. Although they care about the care/harm foundation, they care mainly about protecting the groups to which they belong whereas liberals are more likely to care not just about people from different groups, but will also see animal welfare and the environment as moral issues. Of course some voters will have voted Conservative for venal, self-interested motives but not all. Working-class voters who decided in favour of the Tories are not stupid or selfish; they just care about different things. They get upset by ‘scroungers’ soaking up benefits and immigrants taking their jobs. They feel angry at what they see as wasteful public services supporting the idle, the feckless and the undeserving. They care about ‘our brave boys’ fighting foreign wars and they care – at least to some extent – about God’s views on marriage, homosexuality and abortion.
[Read full article on The Learning Spy…]
From the British Election Study: Political scientists have known for a long time that talking politics to family and friends makes a difference to how people vote. Bob Huckfeldt of University of California Davis pioneered the use of data on the political discussion networks of electors, and showed how voters took their political cues from those closest to them, especially immediate family. Although people may be more inclined to talk politics with people they already agree with, Huckfeldt and others have shown that these selection effects are actually rather small, as people form relationships for much better reasons than politics, and tend to talk politics with the people closest to them. Sharing similar opinions with a close political discussant can re-enforce existing preferences and behaviours and also insulate against other influences. Despite this, while politics discussion networks tend to display fairly high levels of agreement, they are rarely completely homogenous.
[Read full article on British Election Study website…]