On reflection, Would ‘Progressive Alliance’s’ actually work?

Previously I wrote an article that speaks of encouraging political parties who were left of the Conservative party to form a progressive alliance in opposition to oust the incumbent government at the next election whether that’s in 2023 or 2024 the first widely expected Johnson will call an early election if things are looking good for the Conservative to secure them a fifth term in office. With time gone by of writing the previous article two by-elections, few local and national and mayoral elections have happened with Starmer making a few sets. Little ground has been gained for the Labour leader in the polls and with losing the Hartlepool by-election.

Starmer’s message is now ‘Stronger Together’ the same two word tag line that Hillary Clinton used to oppose the populist right wing candidate Donald Trump of course became the 45th President, twice impeached one term president. For some like Clinton did, Starmer seems stale stagnant and if a formal progressive alliance it would be choosing between the lesser of two candidates which would be lacking motivation and simplifying the outcome as voting for the ‘Not Another term for Boris Johnson and The Conservative party’. That worked for Joe Biden in america but the state of the two nations politics is incompatible as we are a nation of a plural party system and not a presidential one. People vote for many reasons, but people, the masses won’t suffice for being the reason to vote for one is to get the other out. Not if in Scotland the Scottish National Party grows its strength or splinters to independent Scotland. If Johnson manages to ‘level up’ the north and plays to the Johnsonite conservatism that isn’t classic Thatcherite neoliberalism the Northern erstwhile ‘Red Wall’ may remain blue.

With the Liberal Democrat’s in the south of England in Conservative heartlands has hopes of building a yellow road to victory paving over the blue sea that’s been southern England for most of Britain’s democratic history. To get a so called progressive alliance you’d have to expect parties such as the Liberal Democrat’s, Green Party & Labour Party shaking hands on an agreement would mean sacrificing much of what their members and theirselves want to get hands to shake is merely impossible. Whilst Clive Lewis and Sian Berry, both democratic socialist politicians who both make a case for a progressive alliance, both from different parties but Lewis and even Berry thinks different from some of the broader party of local party organisations, grassroots members and party activists won’t allow. Yes there is sense in the argument to have a United opposition in Parliament, in this Parliament with a Labour Party who’s leadership doesn’t support electoral reform, it won’t happen.

On reflection, the why is now obvious, with the term ‘progressive’ being a broad term which there will be through values, policy and ideas different means to interpret the same meaning to one word. To assume that this would work would be simplifying politics, which has done political discourse damage in the era of Brexit becoming polarising and divisive, media political commentariat and party politics obsessives don’t realise that people often it’s a either or situation or a vote that seems to be instructed in away that doesn’t treat them as equals and attempts to project emotions the voter doesn’t mutually feel.

Politics first and foremost a non binary concept, where not everyone accepting an identity that is either right left or centre and being labelled as so inaccurately describes many voters political and ideological leanings. Human thinking isn’t able to be pinned on linear line or pinned in a two dimensional means when there’s various means of what measures a persons politics whether view on economy, social issues of persons human rights and identity, nationalism or internationalism … things that considered how complex the factors are wouldn’t be possible to visualise in the means we do these days only through third dimensional means. The current measures of a persons politics is insular and constricted, no wonder with Brexit, 2017 Snap Election, 2016 Presidential Election, 2019 General Election and recent smaller elections the pollsters got public opinion wrong and don’t match public opinion. We now met with Political Science working behind peoples opinion and politics in practice which would for political parties scupper any practical chances of making a progressive alliance to work at a point of political reallignment.

After the Liberal Democrat’s electoral victory in the Chesham and Amersham by-election Ben Walker for the New Statesman wrote on this matter. Summing up how working to beat one party would fail even in state of politics realigned and people who may not identify under linear political umbrella terms of left and right for those who are partisan, dogmatic and tribal how do they look above the paraphet of their own to vote for an other with the largest party, the Labour Party has expressed that it’s a party which would repeat mistakes of the past with branding the Conservative party the ‘nasty party’ with hardline corbynite democratic socialists who would happily wear a ‘never kiss a Tory badge’ would happily paint the Conservative party as a vile hideous party with their voters. Ridiculing the Conservative voter base or Labour parties old voter base isn’t how you get votes it’s how you turn people bitterly against you. Persuasion can’t be met with cultural and social conflicts and hostility or calling your own voters ‘Tories’ and having and expressing emotion of the Thatcherite era if you lived or didn’t live through it, to be progressive must mean moving on from the past and painting a visual and accessible picture of how you’re going to improve and peoples lives is how to persuade people don’t vote for what they don’t want and not just to get something they didn’t hate, that unless your political stance and direction is innately regressive isn’t how you win votes or get people to turn out for you.

What Walker noted in his article was the Liberal Democrat’s are open to nuance and find Labour a party stuck in their ways and has proven overly confident and not always eye to eye on major political issues and though Labour favouring first past the post a system that works against them to upscale som sort of political alliance beyond one seat would seen as moving mountains to make seismic changes and wouldn’t likely to lead to a new coalition government with some Green and Labour voters largely still have a bitter and sour taste of the Liberal Democrat’s and Conservatives coalition between 2010–2015. It would be a giant leap of faith for Liberal Democrat’s and Green Party members and voters to vote Liberal Democrat’s as would be for conservatives to vote for Labour or the Greens the Liberal Democrat’s can be difference between voting Conservative or abstentions at the ballot. Voters don’t think to vote tactically or use the same set of rational that ‘progressives’ in the twitter-sphere would like the population to use, and why would you if that meant voting for a party you disagree with its morals, principles and values. Like with Brexit and the campaign for a Peoples vote people don’t want to be lectured to vote for a certain party, especially if the ‘progressive alliance’ movement is more of a student educated more young, metropolitan and politically active voter. The lecture which doesn’t open up debate and for most people who vote have far many things on their plate to listen intently to the case for progressive alliance as did in the electoral reform referendum in 2011.

The argument for a Progressive alliance had in a discussion with the Liberal Democrat MP Murina Wilson said to Huffington Post’s Common People Podcast that ‘soft Conservative voters who will vote Liberal Democrat’s but not Labour if the Liberal Democrat’s Stood down for the Labour Party’ whilst denouncing the party owns any voters or votes.

Hardly unsurprising that learning a Progressive alliance wouldn’t work when the Labour Party have spoken as the second party in British politics that it’s broad church is the ‘progressive alliance’ Daniel Chair of Putney Labour wrote in the Labour List a news source for views from in side the Labour Party camp and mutterings of party politics. He spoke on the history of Conservative and Liberal Democrat’s coalition that saw a period of austerity that the Conservative party has managed to move on from attracting support from the red wall seats but Liberal Democrat’s still remained scarred from. Daniel Shearer bitterly twisting the collaborative work of London Assembly members of Greens, Conservatives & Liberal Democrat’s which has been labelled and branded a ‘regressive coalition’. Later on claiming that even with Starmer unlikely to be the next government as a party with a working majority that ‘coalition’s don’t work’ claiming that would be a barrier to radical Labour policies and have succeeded under First Past the Post but only with four leaders taking the party to Downing Street, following an election with Blair being seen as New Labour, a legacy of Thatcherite politics. Confidence overly inflated when, Do people want a Labour Party or need a Labour government? Seems often the Labour politicians need a Labour government more than the people speaking also in defence of First Past the Post, the primary policy that for the Green Party and Liberal Democrat’s, electoral reform would be the purpose of a ‘progressive alliance’. Many more fretting with Peter Keller, pollster expert writing for the New European that a ‘progressive alliance’ would see electoral reform as not a good idea to end Conservative rule as would kill of the Labour Party which would conserve the status quo of two party politics. The Labour Party could lose out because of there no longer under a proportional representation electoral representation be able to rely on the wasted vote and safe seats to secure seats in the commons losing out to parties with stronger messaging. Neither fair or democratic.

we shouldn’t be scrambling for the safest option good democracies should deliver surprises, people should have the power to decide where political parties exist or go bust. As a liberal democracies and in progressive liberal democratic nation we mustn’t require people to sacrifice their values to get a new government that’s not healthy politics we must practice having a free and fair elections that like free markets, will let people decide where their vote goes not lecturing people how to vote. With knowing it will never happen and it isn’t healthy competitive democracy why I revised my position on ‘progressive alliances’ after all the Labour Party of today isn’t one I’d vote for nor the Green Party, I want to have a open choice come the next election where to cross my vote and not vote for a candidate just to get the other out; saying from a safe Labour seat.