Has Covid changed your political allegience?

[bramling]

But you miss the point about one issue parties - they will never form a government, but they spook the establishment enough to change their tune. As I said in my earlier post, UKIP was not going to be a serious governing party, but it enabled a large section of the populstion to sufficiently nudge the Tories into commiting to an EU referendum.

Reform are the equivalent of that for those who want the country to move on from COVID now.

Yes no one can say UKIP and Nigel Farage were unsuccessful. The EU referendum came about because the Conservatives were at the point where they were seriously bothered about the impact of UKIP votes.

The difference at the moment is that there isn’t a general election imminent, and Covid is a shorter term concept compared to leaving the EU. However both these factors aren’t set in stone - the longer this drags on the sooner the next general election is, and the more some of these Covid consequences become long-term.

In the absence of other options I’m not sure Reform is a bad choice. What other choice is there?

 

[py_megapixel]

In the absence of other options I’m not sure Reform is a bad choice. What other choice is there?

Spoil the ballotpaper

 

[bramling]

Spoil the ballotpaper

Sounds okay in practice, but what does this achieve in practice? Essentially forgotten after the night.

 

[greyman42]

The difference at the moment is that there isn’t a general election imminent, and Covid is a shorter term concept compared to leaving the EU.

I think that the actions of all the parties during Covid are not going to be easily forgotten come the election.

 

[py_megapixel]

Sounds okay in practice, but what does this achieve in practice? Essentially forgotten after the night.

I feel that it gives some weight to have voted against the party with whom I am unhappy, as opposed to not voting at all.

Admittedly it's more of an alternative to not voting than anything else.

 

[bramling]

I feel that it gives some weight to have voted against the party with whom I am unhappy, as opposed to not voting at all.

Admittedly it's more of an alternative to not voting than anything else.

Completely agree it’s preferable to not voting at all. I’m not convinced it’s better than voting for a suitable party though. The question is whether we are prepared to stick all the eggs in one basket and go as far as voting for a fringe party.

I’m not sure there’s a right or wrong answer, however I think things are sufficiently serious that this issue is now domineering enough that I’d certainly go as far as voting on this issue above all others.

 

[NorthKent1989]

But Labour are not proposing any restrictions in excess of those the Tories have proposed. I suspect some lessons from last summer have been quietly learned.

Clearly they haven’t learned enough since they’re most likely going to vote in vaccine passports.

 

[quantinghome]

Clearly they haven’t learned enough since they’re most likely going to vote in vaccine passports.

I presume "vaccine passports" is now the pejorative term of choice for doing a LFT before you go to a large event (and for which you're exempt if you have been vaccinated). Isn't this exactly the sort of thing that 'living with Covid' entails, as the virus transitions from pandemic to being endemic?

 

[MikeWM]

I presume "vaccine passports" is now the pejorative term of choice for doing a LFT before you go to a large event (and for which you're exempt if you have been vaccinated).

Given they were precisely 'vaccine passports' in the Plan B documents, and this 'doing an LFT with exemption for vaccinated' is dancing on the head of a pin to give a description which has emerged simply over the last 24 hours to try to placate Tory backbenchers, then that seems important.

Would you prefer 'government permission papers?' Because that's what they actually are.

Isn't this exactly the sort of thing that 'living with Covid' entails, as the virus transitions from pandemic to being endemic?

By introducing a 'papers please' society? That's not 'living with Covid', that's 'destroying our way of life with Covid as an excuse'.

 

[quantinghome]

'destroying our way of life'.

You know when pro-lockdown types get accused of crying wolf?

I appreciate this is a genuinely-held concern of yours and others. But surely you appreciate that you're at one tail of the bell-curve in terms of public opinion. Which is fine. And actually, I think it's important to have people with that level of sensitivity to individual liberty. My concern is that by generating so much noise at this point, do you not risk the majority of people becoming desensitised to your warnings if major, long-term, restrictions are imposed?

 

[MikeWM]

You know when pro-lockdown types get accused of crying wolf?

What do you call a society where you have to continually obtain and show government permission to do ordinary things that previously we could do freely?

I call that 'destroying our way of life', yes, without apology. That's not the way we do things in this country.

I appreciate this is a genuinely-held concern of yours and others. But surely you appreciate that you're at one tail of the bell-curve in terms of public opinion. Which is fine. And actually, I think it's important to have people with that level of sensitivity to individual liberty. My concern is that by generating so much noise at this point, do you not risk the majority of people becoming desensitised to your warnings if major, long-term, restrictions are imposed?

I think you have to warn against dangers as you see them, if you think they are so fundamental and so wrong and are laying the foundations of a wholly different society from the one you want to live in.

Simply put:

- We know - from evidence all around the world - that these 'papers' will have zero effect on Covid
- We also know that there is no way the public would have accepted them except for the perceived threat due to Covid

So why are they being introduced? In most countries, around the world, pretty much simultaneously?

 

[NorthKent1989]

I presume "vaccine passports" is now the pejorative term of choice for doing a LFT before you go to a large event (and for which you're exempt if you have been vaccinated). Isn't this exactly the sort of thing that 'living with Covid' entails, as the virus transitions from pandemic to being endemic?

No, my idea of living with Covid is what it is, living with it with no tests, no passports, no lockdowns, no masks, no social distancing, just good, plain old fashioned normal like we do with a flu and cold

You know when pro-lockdown types get accused of crying wolf?

I appreciate this is a genuinely-held concern of yours and others. But surely you appreciate that you're at one tail of the bell-curve in terms of public opinion. Which is fine. And actually, I think it's important to have people with that level of sensitivity to individual liberty. My concern is that by generating so much noise at this point, do you not risk the majority of people becoming desensitised to your warnings if major, long-term, restrictions are imposed?

I think people have become desensitised to putting our lives on hold for what is becoming a minor respiratory virus with a 99% survival rate.

The difference between pro freedoms crying Wolf and pro restrictions crying Wolf is that the latter crowd has been wrong on most fronts

 

[35B]

But you miss the point about one issue parties - they will never form a government, but they spook the establishment enough to change their tune. As I said in my earlier post, UKIP was not going to be a serious governing party, but it enabled a large section of the populstion to sufficiently nudge the Tories into commiting to an EU referendum.

Reform are the equivalent of that for those who want the country to move on from COVID now.

And I obviously wasn't clear enough about my contempt for the constitutional vandalism that resulted from UKIP and Reform's concerted pressure on the Tory right to deliver Brexit. From I suspect a very different point on the political spectrum to @py_megapixel, I absolutely agree with him about the role of wisdom and expertise in the political system, as well as principle and belief. That pressure, coming through as "Get Brexit Done", led to a process where an arbitrary outcome (in that case, Brexit) mattered, regardless of any other consequences, or even what went into that outcome.

As someone who thinks that Michael Gove was right in his notorious comments on experts, and believes (in Churchill's words) that they should be "on tap, not on top", the dogmatic determination to implement a pre-determined answer, come hell or high water, concerns me. That the party in question is led by spivs and chancers, who've never run anything in their lives, should frighten us all - these are not serious politicians, but agitators and vandals.

 

[kristiang85]

And I obviously wasn't clear enough about my contempt for the constitutional vandalism that resulted from UKIP and Reform's concerted pressure on the Tory right to deliver Brexit. From I suspect a very different point on the political spectrum to @py_megapixel, I absolutely agree with him about the role of wisdom and expertise in the political system, as well as principle and belief. That pressure, coming through as "Get Brexit Done", led to a process where an arbitrary outcome (in that case, Brexit) mattered, regardless of any other consequences, or even what went into that outcome.

Overall I agree with you, but this change has happened in politics, and it is very much an industry of slogans and populism. My main reservations about ReformUK come from their Brexiteer background (I was a remainer), but they also seem to be the party with the most clout that has an anti-restriction and 'living with COVID' message, so right now - if there was an election tomorrow - my vote would go with them, as that is personally my most pressing issue right now.

You might say they have no strategy on healthcare, education or policing, but if we keep up the insanity of COVID measures for no apparent reason, then there will be no funds left for healthcare, education or policing...

As someone who thinks that Michael Gove was right in his notorious comments on experts, and believes (in Churchill's words) that they should be "on tap, not on top",

This seems rather at odds with many of your opinions on COVID restrictions on here, if I recall correctly, in terms of trusting the government experts.

 

[35B]

The difference between pro freedoms crying Wolf and pro restrictions crying Wolf is that the latter crowd has been wrong on most fronts

I'd have said that the pro-freedoms crying wolf have been wrong in principle on the nature of their complaint, which basic category error has invalidated their concerns about the long term implications of Covid restrictions. The obsession with identifying these restrictions with the Nazis and/or the CCP is a basic misrepresentation of the nature and intent of the governments that have introduced them - and I make that comment in full awareness of the extreme politics of some (e.g. Michie) who've been advising on them.

And I obviously wasn't clear enough about my contempt for the constitutional vandalism that resulted from UKIP and Reform's concerted pressure on the Tory right to deliver Brexit. From I suspect a very different point on the political spectrum to @py_megapixel, I absolutely agree with him about the role of wisdom and expertise in the political system, as well as principle and belief. That pressure, coming through as "Get Brexit Done", led to a process where an arbitrary outcome (in that case, Brexit) mattered, regardless of any other consequences, or even what went into that outcome.

Overall I agree with you, but this change has happened in politics, and it is very much an industry of slogans and populism. My main reservations about ReformUK come from theri Breciteer background (I was a remainer), but they also seem to be the party with the most clout that has an anti-restriction and 'living with COVID' message, so right now - if there was an election tomorrow - my vote would go with them, as that is personally my most pressing issue right now.

You might say they have no strategy on healthcare, education or policing, but if we keep up the insanity of COVID measures for no apparent reason, then there will be no funds left for healthcare, education or policing...

Fair comment, but I don't think policy on Covid is that central to public policy - and nor should it be

As someone who thinks that Michael Gove was right in his notorious comments on experts, and believes (in Churchill's words) that they should be "on tap, not on top", the dogmatic determination to implement a pre-determined answer, come hell or high water, concerns me. That the party in question is led by spivs and chancers, who've never run anything in their lives, should frighten us all - these are not serious politicians, but agitators and vandals.

This seems rather at odds with many of your opinions on COVID restrictions on here, if I recall correctly.

Experts being on tap means listening to the advice of those experts, and taking it seriously. It doesn't mean following their advice slavishly. Had they done so, we would not have seen the easing of restrictions in July but instead a continuation of those restrictions through the summer - in the face of other, less well publicised, expert advice that allowing Covid to run through the summer would infect and kill fewer people.

Which takes me back to my profound mistrust of Reform. I don't trust that they'd listen to intelligent advice, and I don't trust that if the mood turned robustly towards restrictions, they wouldn't do a u-turn and follow the public mood.

They are like Boris Johnson, only without the principles, intelligence, or diligence.

 

[43066]

I would draw a distinction between objections to individual policies, and party allegiances. Especially when we're probably 3 years away from a General Election and it's entirely possible that neither of the two major UK party leaders would be around to fight that election.

I would also draw a distinction between the very strong feelings of some members of the forum, where opposition to Covid policies appears as a dominant feature of their political outlook, and the majority of the population, for whom those Covid policies are one of a number of factors that will influence their vote.

Certainly true re. the party leaders not necessarily sticking around. Albeit I suspect the analysis around which is most likely to go first has changed in recent weeks. I rather suspect Johnson’s strategy will be to go for an election as soon as a sustained Covid recovery is in evidence, win and then potentially plan an exit strategy for himself during the next Parliament, hand over to Sunak and ride off into the sunset (and the after dinner circuit).

I had reservations about Johnson but I suppose backed him in 2019 because Brexit was an important issue to me and it was clear he was the best shot of achieving something closer to it than some ghastly remaining-in-all-but-name fudge of the kind Teresa May was trying to cook up. That was probably still the right decision in hindsight. Covid came out of nowhere of course, but I think Johnson’s handling of it has utterly undone him and I’d honestly struggle to vote Tory with him at the helm. That analysis might well be different if we have Sunak or Javid leading at the next election. Sunak in particular seems charismatic and competent, albeit still relatively inexperienced.

In my case, as a natural "small c" conservative, the local Tories lost my vote due to the way that the local constituency party hounded out the then sitting MP during 2019, as part of the Brexiteers attempt to take over the party. My objection wasn't on policy grounds, but in connection with the mixture of petty minded nastiness that infected the decision, and my belief that MPs are elected to represent their constituents, not act as delegates for those constituents (or, more likely, a small but vocal faction of them). I dislike it when it appears in Labour (it's the view of what an MP is for that is particularly associated with the hard left), and I dislike it when it crops up elsewhere.

It’s interesting how Covid divides along almost exactly the same lines as Brexit did, but perhaps not surprising. If you’re the sort of small c conservative who has a libertarian bent, dislikes big government and interference in peoples’ private lives than its highly likely you will be vehemently opposed to Covid measures. Clearly if you were opposed to Brexit it’s a different analysis.

What is interesting is I imagine looking at that graph that the current polling for Reform is probably dissatisfied Tories.

I’m sure that’s right. Albeit historically quite a few Labour voters backed them during their Brexit party iteration.

their other policies were a grab-bag of populism and authoritarianism

“Classic” UKIP (ie during the Farage era, before the unfortunate lurch to the right) was more about Libertarianism than authoritarianism, surely?

What is the alternative? What you seem to be suggesting is that the opinions of people who have absolutely no idea about the subject they're talking about should be treated with the same weight as people who for have been studying it for years. Yes, some experts are politically motivated, but so are most other members of the public, especially considering some people's propensity to believe anything they are told. At least someone who actually knows what they're talking about won't give up their ideas for some pseudo-scientific nonsense on Facebook; at least, you'd hope not.

The concern many people have is the current trend for “experts” to be given free reign in the media to espouse what amount to political value judgements dressed up as scientific fact, without being subjected to the kind of scrutiny we (quite rightly) expose politicians to. Susan Michie is one of the best examples of this, but there are others.

Is it? It seems to me that what mostly drove both of those things was stagnation, leading to the general population wanting something fresh to blame for the world's problems, encouraged by a healthy does of manufactured outrage from the tabloids - certainly not what I advocate.

Stagnation - both economic and political - is undoubtedly part of it. Beyond that you’d probably find the reasons people voted as they did are as broad as any loose political coalition. Taking Brexit for example, I voted leave primarily because I see the EU as a failed, self serving and deeply undemocratic political project which the U.K. joined under the misapprehension that it was an economic trading bloc rather than a one way ticket to a self proclaimed superstate with a commitment to “ever closer Union”. Others were clearly concerned about freedom of movement which has been a fairly disastrous policy for several EU countries.

A feeling of being left behind is also an issue for many: if you were a traditional Labour voter who is pro Brexit, not interested in identity politics, and wants to move on from Covid who would you vote for? At this juncture it’s almost certainly not the Tories, but unlikely to be Labour either.

 

[NorthKent1989]

The obsession with identifying these restrictions with the Nazis and/or the CCP is a basic misrepresentation of the nature and intent of the governments that have introduced them - and I make that comment in full awareness of the extreme politics of some (e.g. Michie) who've been advising on them.

Once you start othering people the government has gone full on authoritarian, so I think while the comparisons may be over exaggerated, these methods aren’t exactly bastions for a free and liberal society, and do fall more in line with a Nazi/CCP system.

 

[43066]

I presume "vaccine passports" is now the pejorative term of choice for doing a LFT before you go to a large event (and for which you're exempt if you have been vaccinated). Isn't this exactly the sort of thing that 'living with Covid' entails, as the virus transitions from pandemic to being endemic?

Or put yet another way: having to reveal to nightclub bouncers the kind of highly personal medical information that, pre Covid, would have been the preserve of the relationship of strict confidence between a patient and their doctors.

Living with it is abandoning testing and trusting the vaccines to do their job, said vaccines being offered on an optional basis.

 

[quantinghome]

“Classic” UKIP (ie during the Farage era, before the unfortunate lurch to the right) was more about Libertarianism than authoritarianism, surely?

Why do I think of Alan Partridge when I read the phrase "Classic UKIP"? Sorry, getting distracted

Anyway, I think it under Farage it probably depended on who you are, more specifically how long ago your ancestors arrived in Britain.

 

[43066]

Why do I think of Alan Partridge when I read the phrase "Classic UKIP"? Sorry, getting distracted

Ha! Yep that’s probably the image many have of them.

Anyway, I think it under Farage it probably depended on who you are, more specifically how long ago your ancestors arrived in Britain.

I think that’s a little unfair. It’s perfectly possible to be skeptical of the EU and free movement without being in any way racist - indeed many people from first or second generation immigrant backgrounds feel this way too.

To Farage’s credit he wanted nothing further to do with the party and swiftly severed ties with it once it lurched further to the right.

 

[Busaholic]

I'd have said that the pro-freedoms crying wolf have been wrong in principle on the nature of their complaint, which basic category error has invalidated their concerns about the long term implications of Covid restrictions. The obsession with identifying these restrictions with the Nazis and/or the CCP is a basic misrepresentation of the nature and intent of the governments that have introduced them - and I make that comment in full awareness of the extreme politics of some (e.g. Michie) who've been advising on them.

It always used to be accepted that comparison to the Nazis in relation to something someone felt peeved about was an acceptance on their part that they knew they'd lost the argument before it had even begun, and there was a general acceptance such people were best ignored (difficult now with social media of course.) I've been curating these things over the last few years, since well before the Referendum on Brexit, and the first supposedly serious person advancing the Nazi jibe in what I'd call respectable media was Dr David Starkey having a hissy fit in his usual style over Nicola Sturgeon: she instantly grew in my estimation, though I'm no Nationalist, Scottish or otherwise.

 

[Purple Orange]

With a lead for Reform UK (at the time of posting), it points to how unrepresentative RailUK is of the wider electorate.

 

[Eyersey468]

My feelings exactly

And mine

 

[Purple Orange]

I presume "vaccine passports" is now the pejorative term of choice for doing a LFT before you go to a large event (and for which you're exempt if you have been vaccinated). Isn't this exactly the sort of thing that 'living with Covid' entails, as the virus transitions from pandemic to being endemic?

This. The analogy I heard on LBC today was that using a Vaccine pass to enter a large event, is a bit like needing a bank account to withdraw money. If you forget to get your vaccine pass, you don’t get access. If you forget your bank card, you don’t get access to money. If you are not vaccinated, take a test and get a pass if you’re negative. If you test positive, isolate. Basically if this allows us to function as a society, then this is what we should do.

 

[MikeWM]

This. The analogy I heard on LBC today was that using a Vaccine pass to enter a large event, is a bit like needing a bank account to withdraw money. If you forget to get your vaccine pass, you don’t get access. If you forget your bank card, you don’t get access to money. If you are not vaccinated, take a test and get a pass if you’re negative. If you test positive, isolate. Basically if this allows us to function as a society, then this is what we should do.

The pro-'papers please' side of these debates seem to have a stock of the most rubbish analogies to try to justify their position. I remember one of the main arguments used to jusfify Blair's ID cards was 'well, everyone has a Tesco clubcard, its just like that'.

Society functioned perfectly well before without this sort of gatekeeping, and it doesn't need it now.

 

[Purple Orange]

The pro-'papers please' side of these debates seem to have a stock of the most rubbish analogies to try to justify their position. I remember one of the main arguments used to jusfify Blair's ID cards was 'well, everyone has a Tesco clubcard, its just like that'.

Society functioned perfectly well before without this sort of gatekeeping, and it doesn't need it now.

This is nothing like the ID card situation.

 

[MikeWM]

This is nothing like the ID card situation.

I agree, it is even worse.

 

[LOL The Irony]

The analogy I heard on LBC today was that using a Vaccine pass to enter a large event, is a bit like needing a bank account to withdraw money. If you forget to get your vaccine pass, you don’t get access. If you forget your bank card, you don’t get access to money.

This analogy is wrong. You don't need a bank account to withdraw and (theoretically) earn money. The way vaccine passports will eventually be used is in a "papers please" society, which is not a society I want to live in.

Basically if this allows us to function as a society, then this is what we should do.

If assisting in the rounding up of those the state deem to be undesirable allows us to function as a society, then this is what we should do.

This is nothing like the ID card situation.

Yes it is. If you're opposed to vaccine passports (why we even need them domestically, I will never know), it's a choice of go against your morals or have your freedoms severely restricted. The same would happen in a society with mandatory ID.

 

[43066]

This. The analogy I heard on LBC today was that using a Vaccine pass to enter a large event, is a bit like needing a bank account to withdraw money. If you forget to get your vaccine pass, you don’t get access. If you forget your bank card, you don’t get access to money. If you are not vaccinated, take a test and get a pass if you’re negative. If you test positive, isolate. Basically if this allows us to function as a society, then this is what we should do.

What an utterly ludicrous analogy. What other personal information should you have to give to nightclub bouncers? Sexual history, HIV status?

We don’t need this kind of thing to function as a society. We need to move away from the obsession with endless testing, accept that the virus is now endemic, and get back to life as normal.

 

[seagull]

Scary, how easily some wish to give away freedoms that were hard won by sacrifice and blood shed throughout many centuries, not to mention the contentedness displayed at the creation of a three-tier society (the 'do as we say not do'' group, the 'vaccinated' group, and the 'unvaccinated' group).
Critical thinking and analysis seems to be in seriously short supply in the Western world.

And back on topic: I don't believe any party would get my vote as I don't believe any party gives a stuff about the average employed worker, sadly.