It’s a frightening time in politics. Divisive issues increasingly pit the public against one another and as we look to America, we see politics moving in a direction where opposing factions are unwilling to speak to each other.
As young people, we have come to expect chaos and polarisation in politics. The Brexit referendum, partygate controversy and short-lived Truss premiership have been the political backdrop as we’ve come of age. However, our parents’ generation seems to reminisce about a time when politics was stable, mundane even. There’s a longing to return to this era of consensus politics where vicious ideological battles are seemingly absent from mainstream politics.
In the 90s, a wave of optimism swept through the West, in the post-Soviet world Labour politicians touted a “New Politics”. Issues would be solved by calm dialogue and bitter ideological divisions resigned to the past. Blair dismissed political conflicts as irrelevant, winning a landslide victory under his slogan: “What counts is what works”. He presented himself as an almost apolitical figure, distancing himself from Labour’s socialist roots. Although the next 10 years were relatively orderly and slow-moving, consensus politics slowly degraded democracy and arguably led to later turbulence.
Democracy requires division. In society, it is inevitable that various groups have competing interests which aren’t mutually compatible. As such, parties must be ideological in order to enthuse the public and relate to their desires. Tribalism cannot be eradicated and by suppressing conflict, New Labour caused it to resurface more ferociously than before. Without partisan politics, critics also warned that Britain risked becoming a “post-democratic” state where elections merely rearranged the same governing elites. Instead, a healthy government relies on new ideas and debates provided by competitive elections – rather than just competent officials.
The era of consensus politics was flawed; it marginalised non-centrist perspectives and consequently lowered turnout at elections. By ignoring society’s factional nature, it was unable to enrich democracy. Today, the many ideological divisions in society signal that democracy is alive and well in the sense that people are engaging with political debates. However, politics has changed significantly with the advent of social media, growing distrust in government and rising economic hardships. Currently, political polarisation is more vicious and populist than before and it is no wonder people fondly recall the age of consensus politics.
This is a scary and abnormal time. However, consensus politics is clearly not the solution for our polarised political culture. We must acknowledge that disagreement is vital for democracy and strive for a political world which appreciates the wide spectrum of views in any society.
Simultaneously, our current climate of false news, prejudice and vitriol is just as dangerous to politics as an artificial consensus. We must fight the worst aspects of polarisation that encourage us to disregard our opponents’ opinions and avoid conversation. Importantly, sustaining an effective, healthy democracy relies on respect: between parties, for facts, towards our political institutions and fellow citizens.