Presumably the “lower educated” are measured by their academic success? If so, then opportunity to a decent education will come into sharp focus here. It’s not simply a binary choice for people of “shall i get a formal education or not.” And the lack of opportunity, in all areas of their life, will feature large in the feeling of increasing isolation and disenfranchisement that voters have from those in charge. To dismiss those “poorly educated” who voted for Trump as not knowing what they are voting for is sanctimonious and missing the point entirely. They know exactly what they are voting for and the sooner social democrats realise this, the less likely they are to lose future elections. It is exactly the same as 2016.
And this election had more parallels with 2016. The Democrats are entirely to blame for their failure. Harris thought that her “continuity” message would be enough, just like Cameron / Remain did. They were wrong. If a voter thinks their life is shit, then invent some bogeymen and tell them their problems would be fixed by some political unicorns that only your can pull out of the hat. It is much more attractive to being told that your shit life is as good as it gets. What is there to lose?
That’s precisely what Remain did throughout the campaign. They mocked those thick northerners for considering sovereignty and immigration as valid concerns, and did exactly what you’re criticising, (“sovverinty, innit” etc.)
I don’t think it is a falsehood - what you portray is rational people living in a perfect world, it doesn’t stand up to contact with the real world. Its a bit like economic theory - they have the concept of perfect economics where everyone acts the same way when presented with the same set of facts - thing is they don’t.
The real world has individuals who are intelligent and better educated who then adopt a sneering attitude to those less gifted or educated. It was apparent after the Brexit vote when people with genuine concerns were dismissed as thick racist little englanders by those who wanted to remain.
The last election that Tories one was no different, too many racist thickos voting for them because of Brexit.
I dont disagree, but when it comes to making decisions on the implications of your choices its not about academic qualifications, but about how informed you are. That is a choice we can all make.
I think the ‘disenfranchised’ message is over played though - because its the drum constantly beaten by the populist candidates - its the easy message to tell folks the reason life is shit is because traditional politic ignores them… and if that is all that us heard in the media then it falls on fruitful ground. Yes there is always some truth in the ‘gap’ between those making policy decisions and the electorate, but in mist cases this is not deliberate, but a simple consequence if government HAVING to focus on broader issues, not just local
This is over simplistic. Most ‘intelligent’ folks were not suggesting the ‘thicko’ Northerners were not entitled to have concerns, just that had they been in possession of more information and less Farage bullshit, they may have come to different conclusions… for example; Its not just the Northerners who have concerns over immigration. Its a valid issue for debate. But the facts remained that EU freedom of movement was not seeing UK ‘overwhelmed’ with migrants stealing our jobs and blocking our services… services that have becomes more fucked BECAUSE they no longer employ as many EU citizens etc… the facts are that immigrations was not the cause of many of the challenges attributed to it by those peddling this shit - because its takes hold very easily.
Yes, established parties can and do often take the electorate for granted, but us continuing to shout about ‘intelligensia’ and creating this as truism based on a minority of activity and certainly not be design, makes folk lose faith in democracy and drives them even further towards populist extremes
There is a paradox here. Of course having genuine concerns over immigration does not make you racist…. BUT When you see many vox pops of folks talking about being ‘overrun’ and other untruths which are simple repeated soundbites from the likes of Farage, or even that there was almost no significant outrage at his posters of long lines of darker skinned ‘asylum’ seekers (actually taken from real refugee camp) what conclusions do you draw?
if offered real information and data, many did simply not want to listen… because they believed the BS being peddled about ‘this data only coming from the ‘intelligensia/liberal elite’ who dont know what its like’
The only way you can truly educate (as we see with the very best teachers) is when there is a genuine desire to learn. If we keep banging the drum that that this is only for elitist wankers than how do we expect a society to evolve?
I am still waiting for any Brexit benefit by the way…)
Really ? It was everywhere. If i could be arsed, I am willing to bet that a trawl of the Brexit threads on here would elicit just that attitude (or are we suggesting that the denizens of this forum are not intelligent - which would be a fair shout)
So, you can only be “informed” if it agrees with whatever high minded things your little bubble thinks is right and proper? And things that might be more immediately relevant to others cannot be valid if they don’t fit into your little bubble because they are just not as “informed” as you are?
Not sure its fair to conclude that from what I have said… its not about WHAT side things fall on, but having and using the information in the first place… Everyones opinion on anythings is alway determined by what they have been exposed to and how they have interpreted it… my point is that too often this info is limited and/or withheld to support a particular politic
I’m going to be equally cheeky and claim that your argument infers that opinion based on subjective thinking is equally valid as that based on evidence/facts?
It might be someone’s right to hold any opinion, but if based on wrong information or lies (is politics afterall) and/or extensive propaganda, does not make it right.
To repeat the exmaple immigration is a key issue. But you and I both know, its not responsible for the economic challenges in parts of the UK. So suggesting we should not challenge such inaccuracies when its used to motivate how folks vote on key issues is wrong IMHO. If folks refuse to listen to facts, but lap up BS rhetoric from those who really should no better, then why cant they be called out on that?
So this has fuck all to do with what I consider important… its to do with encouraging more objective reasoning than subjective opinions based on incomplete or inaccurate information… (whatever the issue or whether I agree or not) how is that in anyway bad?
The irony is that both sides were reaching similar conclusions from different directions. Trump’s supporters were saying that if he wasn’t voted in it could only be because the polls were rigged. The liberals were saying that if it went against them it could only be because the electorate was too stupid to understand politics. Either way represents grotesque levels of patronisation.
So Trump gets in because he attracted the Migrants to vote for him - kind of the “we did it properly” where Biden just left the borders open.
He also got in because Biden (and Harris were not bothered about what Inflation was doing. People looked back 4 years ago and Trump managed the stuff that impacted on them, the workers.
Trump won not because the American people are dumb but because the Democrats were dumb. their messaging (what little Kamala did) ignored what was affecting the people.
Trump’s demeanour at every rally was of a person who knew he had already won (and not by revolution. Biden didn’t care about the workers, Harris was too close to Biden, basicallty the Democrats fucked up a free hit
I think we need to differentiate between dumb and dumberer…
Sorry but we do need to differentiate between dumb and ill informed.
Then if ill informed ask the question why folks dont fully engage and differentiate between facts and propaganda (from both sides)
Voting based on subjectively formed opinion is anyone’s right, but does skew the result towards those with biggest budgets and better campaigns as opposed to a fair reflection of objective opinion which is the the aim of democracy surely?
Will watch and see with interest on how any responses are reported in various sections of the media / social media. I suspect a lot of it will be predictable.
