UKIP voters: are they really such massive arseholes?
Those of you who don’t live in the UK might not be aware of what happened in our European Elections last week.
Well, the right-wing United Kingdom Independence Party won the most votes (and are providing the highest number of Euro MPs). Here’s the Guardian’s coverage of that, and, for balance, here’s the Telegraph’s.
There’s a general feeling amongst almost all my friends that UKIP is fascistic, racist, stupid, homophobic, bigoted, intolerant and a massive backwards step for the civilisation of our country. They (UKIP; not my friends) favour such policies as an ‘amicable divorce’ from the European Union; an end to the ‘mass, uncontrolled immigration’ that membership of the EU makes possible; an end to subsidies for renewable energy scenes and a concomitant support of fracking. Actually, I could continue listing them, but you could just read them all in more detail here.
I agree with those friends, but also wonder why so many people want to vote for a party that seems to possess so many of those attributes that we might dislike in a person. Apparently UKIP’s supporter base is mainly rural (a UKIP spokesman famously said last week that they do not do well in London because the people who live there are young, cultured and educated), so perhaps there’s a different mindset that comes with living in the less urbanised parts of the country. Perhaps the settlement of EU immigrants in those areas stands out more, and any event that happens in a smaller place is bound to have a larger effect. Is that why they fear immigrants being employed in positions that British people could otherwise take? Because it hits harder in their communities? But then doesn’t that pose a different question regarding the employability of people from different countries? If you live here you have to work here, and thus pay for housing, clothing, food etc. at British prices. So are immigrants happy to work more cheaply, and if so, what is a fair wage? We’re also richer in London, so the less well-off UKIP voter might well find that one ‘taken’ job leaves them in a much worse position in Rotherham than it does in the capital.
The other strange thing is that it doesn’t seem to matter what faux pas the UKIP politicians make; if anything such gaffes only seem to strengthen their position. When Nigel Farage makes comments about not wanting a Romanian family to come and live next door to him, do vast swathes of the country actually agree, leaving the rest of us to find such suggestions to be offensive? Is that linked to the rural fear? Perhaps some of this attitude comes from the older people who fear change and the pain of having to adapt to it.
What seems clear is that UKIP, like may parties before it, is catering for a viewpoint of many people, but a viewpoint that many other people find abhorrent (I imagine you’ll find similar differences of opinion on Labour vs Tory). But as a wise person once said, what you resist persists, and the urban opposition to UKIP might only succeed in strengthening the resolve of its supporters. If anyone out there really wants to reduce the influence of this party they might be better off having a chat with a UKIP voter, finding out why they’re so scared, and enrolling them in a more palatable alternative.
But then it’s so much easier and more fun to make snarky, indignant comments about how much you loathe UKIP to your UKIP-loathing friends.
The principle of free EU immigration as a bit like saying we can all live in each others houses.
I can live in someone else’s nice big luxurious mansion if I want. And the owner of the nice big luxurious mansion can choose to live in my pokey little flat if they want.
Seems fair. Except it benefits me more because I now get to live in a nice big luxurious mansion. While the owner of the nice big luxurious mansion has absolutely no desire to live in my pokey little flat.
Who will this piss off? Well, the people who live in the nice big luxurious mansion already, of course.
I wouldn’t call that racism, personally. The word racism is probably better reserved for, you know, racism.
I’m pro-immigration, btw, but I don’t think the UKIP voters are weird in wanting to protect their borders a little more. And nor should anyone else who has a fence around their garden.
In answer to your question Ben…they managed to elect the astonishingly ill-informed David Coburn.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUk069MFllM&feature=youtu.be
Good to hear the “I’m tired and have had no sleep” excuse being trotted out again.
@Anon: Yes, the immigration policy may not (entirely) be down to racism, but I think UKIP’s clear racism is down to their prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against people of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior.
The house thing is a good analogy on the immigration side of things, but some might counter that with the suggestion that when some live in luxurious mansions and others live in pokey flats, the flat dwellers might be the ones who are pissed off. What makes it that way? Perhaps the exploitation of the flat dwellers by the mansion dwellers and the corruption of the political process to allow them to continue to do so.
And @MG: It seems that things have come to a pretty pass when such a clearly inept man is voted into a position of power, but I’m still interested in what drives UKIP supporters beyond that stupidity to think that it’s a reasonable price to pay in order that we might also be represented by those who espouse feckless racism and arse-brained climate change denial.
But seriously, these people must be a bit dim or very pissed off, or both. And clearly they seem unable to find anything voteworthy in the alternatives, and that’s probably a bigger scandal. 66% of the population didn’t vote. Why not?
Great post Ben. I’m enjoying all the coverage on UKIP. Here’s an interesting point of view I read the other day.
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/local-election-results-2014-aav.html
Thanks. Yes, that blog is interesting.
I think most UKIP voters don’t vote for UKIP because of who they are. They vote for them for who they aren’t. They aren’t The Libs, the Labs or the Cons. That’s enough for a lot of people. People are fed up with the status quo (not the band of course, who are great) and want a change at any cost. It says a lot about the three main parties that people are prepared to vote for UKIP to teach them a lesson. People are fed up with watching the three main parties taking it in turns to stick their heads in the trough, while fucking things up. They can’t stand rich career politicians of all ideological hues with no experience of real life telling them what to do. The smug absolutism of the current bunch of useless shitheads that occupy both sides of the House of Commons has given us all a headache and we just want to see the look on their stupid little faces when they fear that the gravy train is coming to an end.
Anyone who thinks people vote for UKIP because they (the people) are anti immigrant is mistaken. They’re voting UKIP because they are anti Lib Lab and Con.
That’s what I think anyway. And why I voted UKIP.
Huh, itsa bit rich screaming about non UKIP politicians being rich careerists, when the hapless fascists that UKIP represent, are “led”by a drunken womaniser who has TO DATE trousered more than FOURMILLIONPOUNDS from the trough that he purports to hate so much.
Like everything else kipper…..the hypocrisy is nauseating !
Judging by the outside-London, over-60s I’ve spoken to recently, a lot of tactical voting for UKIP been going on in this election, intended to spook to Conservatives into a harder (but not UKIP’s extreme) line on Europe and immigration in time for the general election.
Some UKIPs are massive arseholes. The others are rubes who are being exploited by a load of self-interested, disingenuous motherfuckers who know how to push their nastier buttons.
What someone – anyone – needs to do is to stop making noise about understanding and addressing their concerns, and respectfully point out that their concerns are demonstrably bullshit. (No-one’s going to, of course.)
Immigration is snake oil; it’s a filibuster, a distraction. By any credible measures, it’s completely unimportant. As is Europe.
People like simple, emotive narratives, such as ‘those dirty gypsies want to live in your garden and eat your cat’.
They’re less keen to hear about the complicated and boring shortcomings of a socio-economic system which ultimately wants a select few of its mates to live in giant gold castles while everyone else has to work down their salt mines for nothing, until the planet finally has enough and burns or drowns us all.
Bob, immigration is one of the reasons why those people can live in giant gold castles whilst everyone has to work down their salt mines. The other is globalisation which is the migration of jobs.
How you can say that it and Europe (jeez!) are unimportant is just nuts.
Massive respect to you Ben, for having a nuanced view of things. I see so much lazy thinking on threads that it makes for a refreshing change.
the media giving UKIP such a platform didn’t help much.
they are basically the tories from 30 years ago. which is why people in their 60’s are voting for them.
in 1979 the conservatives ran a poster campaign in the midlands with the headline “want a nigger for a neighbour vote liberal or labour”.
those conservative values from the late 70’s early 80’s are what UKIP are feeding off. and it’s working.
They’ve also highlighted what modern politicians have forgotten. half a dozen policies and principles win elections. not a thousand ideas poorly thought through screamed at each other whilst you bicker.
@GL
Rabble rousing. Someone at UKIP Towers has decided that legalising hand-guns is a vote winner:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/10595087/Hand-guns-should-be-legalised-and-licensed-Nigel-Farage-has-said.html
I think we can expect Capital Punishment to be next on the agenda.
It’s pretty bleak stuff isn’t it?
Rickman.
You could have voted Green. That way you have a protest vote, help the environment, and don’t stir flames of nationalism.
That infamous poster campaign in the town of Smethwick, West Midlands was in 1964 not 1979.
The majority population of Smethwick today are of Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi origin.
Couple of points.
I’m not a UKIP voter. I’d just like to be impartial.
Also, I don’t think getting involved in the media hysterics helps with a debate.
Fracking isn’t a UKIP policy.
The idiot who said there’s an ‘educated elite was actually misquoting his party leader who said ‘more migrants live in cities’.
Farage didn’t say he wouldn’t like a Romanian family next door, he said he wouldn’t like a gang of Romanian men living next door. On the Cannel 4 news that night all the Romanians in the debate actually backed Farage. Go figure.
I think, there is a feeling that Britain is losing its identity. And many people in the country feel like that. It’s something we need to deal with.
Without an open debate I don’t think we can deal with it properly. Just because you want tighter border controls doesn’t make you a racist. Unless we let people talk about these issues without being hauled in front of the media and burned at the stake then we’ll push people into extreme places because that’s the only place they’re being heard.
GOUT_LEGS. Makes sense.
from a distance UKIP sound a lot like the Tea Party here. Angry, ill-informed and older but also well organized and motivated, hence their surprising/alarming electoral success. also david cameron and clegg are very far from inspiring. probably doesn’t help.
@anonymouse
I could have done but the Greeners have no chance of getting enough votes to put the shits up the Liberal Dems, the Tories and the Labours.
I blame apathetic kids. It’s revolutionary youth’s job to overthrow crappy governments. Instead, we’ve left it up to right-leaning pensioners.
@Rock an
The Green Party got more votes than the Lib Dems, and two more MEPs: they also topped the table on the ‘Vote For Policies’ site (http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/green-party-best-policies.html).
Definitely wouldn’t have been a wasted vote.
As a very left-leaning pensioner, obviously I’d rather cut off both hands (clearly this wouldn’t be the easiest manoeuvre) than vote UKIP. But what they have are soundbite, easy to understand policies. I know what they stand for, even if they’re all as mad as a bag of frogs. What I really can’t fathom is what the Conservatives, Lib Dems and Labour are about. They make up stuff on the back of fag packets (if they can find any) and hope that passes as political thinking. When it proves to be totally unworkable (quite a lot of the time) they simply abandon it. People (me) are tired of being told ‘we’re all in it together’ by a bunch of rich, over-privileged arseholes. Or a ragbag of racist tits. But the racist tits have a simple political platform that too man people are finding persuasive.
Or even ‘too many people’. Wouldn’t want to be accused of sexism.
@boot1947
The problem comes when people accuse them of being ‘mad’ rather than ‘assholes’.
Ben, it’s interesting that many people above think that UKIP have easy to grasp policies, which people can understand without giving it too much thought.
The majority of people couldn’t give a shit about politics, just like advertising. Don’t you think UKIP have just done what good brands do and have a USP/single minded proposition which which people can understand without paying too much attention.
Asking this as a Londoner who didn’t vote UKIP.
Interesting point. There could definitely be something in it.
Great: UKIP could teach Media London a thing or two about branding and single-minded propositions.
yeah, they definitely cut through the clutter with controversial ideas that stood for something and you can’t argue with the results. I smell IPA planning gold!
Grand Effy! (Is that a thing?)