Many people, to some degree “wear their heart on their sleeve”, clearly signalling a tribal allegiance to the observer (wearing an old school tie or a football shirt, for example). In politics, such allegiances tend not to be so overt, at least not until election time’s rosettes.
However, even that loyalty has lately been eroded in favour of “smart” tactical voting, marking a cross in favour of candidates not of one’s tribe.
During this year’s campaign, the leaders of both Conservatives and Labour were referred to as “socialists”, which may have confused the tribal on all sides. Reform’s Richard Tice called Conservative Rishi Sunak “a socialist”; and Labour’s leader Keir Starmer self-described as the same, whilst crafting a manifesto analysed as being closest to Tory Ted Heath’s of 1974. Few other than the extreme right could detect socialist tendencies in ultra-capitalist Sunak; and few of the socialist left of Labour would include Starmer among their number.
Is capitalism king?
Another badge which could equally be worn by both Sunak and Starmer and by others of contrasting tribes is “capitalist”. To some, this is anathema; the very opposite of how they see themselves. The reality is that, whatever the stated ethos of any party, it and its proponents have to operate within a capitalist world.
That this ideology is a political failure on grounds that it serves only a minority, depriving even those who have least, has not prevented capitalism from coming to dominate global economics and politics, driven by the absurd wealth and greed of its principal beneficiaries. Nominally communist States like China or Vietnam; liberal markets like the USA and Europe or even more blatant Middle Eastern autocracies, all are in thrall to those who command the greatest wealth, not only in the nation but globally.
We live in a capitalist world, like it or acknowledge it or not. The days when communism or socialism could propose an alternative model for society surely disappeared with the huge cohesive workforces of the Industrial Age and in light of the failures of those experiments which have been attempted.
Those of the Left who would still insist on wearing the badges of socialism, communism or anarchy would need to change the very basis of global economics for their more communitarian values to be more than wishful thinking.
Ideology or electoral victory?
How much does political tribalism matter? To some, loyalty to tribal purity seems more important than electoral success. This may in part be rooted in the extraordinarily “broad church” of both major parties. For many, it is hard to accept all of the policies and positions of the big tent, so they prefer adherence to their ideological faction or to narrower minor parties, none of which can do very much beyond fragmenting any potential majority, with obvious consequences, as history can show.
The assets, supply chains and media on which all States rely have been largely sequestered by those with extreme wealth: individuals, corporations and oligarchs, whose interest is solely to increase their own share of it.
This is not a club one can easily join but to which we are all subservient, no matter how unwillingly. Even politically, arch-capitalists have power through that wealth and tend towards autocratic behaviour. They may tolerate democracy as a means to pacify the masses who merely service that wealth, clinging to democracy in our chosen tribes in a pretence of some control over how our society is run.
Those of “the Right” pandering to the agenda of the powerful in anticipation of some crumbs from their table in vain hopes of joining the club; those of “the Left” demanding that there be more evening out of the inequities of luck, heredity and life chances.
Are political labels really necessary?
Perhaps political labels are too simplistic, too rigid. They need not be permanent tattoos nor mandates for particular behaviours. Political philosophies may be seen as moral imperatives by adherents but leaders and voters alike must see and surely should respect the diversity of political views within the wider electorate and avoid narrow, bigoted loyalty.
All should be realistic, rather than fantasists about some impossible Utopia. The recent elections in both UK and France have shown how important it can be NOT to act rigidly along party lines but to be prepared to think and act for the greater good.
People of all views need to co-exist today and every day in any country given over for the foreseeable future to capitalism.
Whilst we still hold on to democracy we can make efforts to elect those who advocate a form of capitalism which incorporates elements of other -isms: socialism, liberalism, anarchism, environmentalism; which values human rights, concern for the planet and its other occupants; respects people as humans not units and allocates more fairly the nation’s wealth and opportunities.
We have learned to live in a pluralist society when it comes to ethnic and social tribes like race, religion, sexuality and interests so why not politics? We may like to belong to a particular tribe but we all belong to the same society.
The previous governing party seemed to have forgotten this truth, leading it to tribal excesses which have eventually been rejected. The new government seems prepared to challenge tribalism in favour of pragmatism.
Let us welcome that change for we cannot change the whole world.
CLICK HERE TO DONATE TO OUR CROWDFUNDER
HELP US BECOME STRONGER SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO DELIVER POWERFUL CITIZEN JOURNALISM!
.jpg){kind=link}
