Reaping what you sow, EU edition

[andrewducker]

There's a thing that political theorists refer to as "The Overton Window" -
the range of acceptable opinlooions in the whole set of possible opinions.
Politicians mostly propose opinions within that window, because they want
to be re-elected, but by talking ideas further towards their side of it
they can either widen the window or shift it in their direction.

And this is a problem that's happened to the left all over the place -
they've allowed the window to be dragged in a rightwards direction through
being afraid of a media that's largely owned by right-wing billionaires.
It's taken things like the Occupy movement to get people talking about more
left-wing ideas, and move that window a few millimetres leftwards.

And in a similar vein I blame Labour for the current situation where
vetoing our way towards the exit door of Europe has actually improved the
popularity of the Conservatives. Because when one side makes it a popular
selling point that "Europe is bad for Britain, with their silly regulations
and impositions." you have two choices - you can either come out and say
that Europe is actively good for us (and then sell that with positive
stories), or you can say "Yes, we agree that Europe has all sorts of
negatives, but we're fighting to make it suck a little less." - and by
going with the latter they yielded control of the conversation to the
Conservatives. You're saying that basically they're right, but you aren't
willing to do what's necessary to stick up for yourselves.*

Part of the problem being that it's been very handy for the UK to sign up
for things and then blame the EU for forcing us to do the very things we
agreed to. It allows politicians to do the right, but unpopular, thing
while avoiding responsibility for it in the eyes of the public. But
there's only so long you can play that game before you alienate everyone,
which is the situation we're now finding ourselves in.

What I'd like to see is a cogent case put forward _for_ our membership of
the EU. The kind of thing which a referendum would force people into. but
I doubt I'm going to get that.


*It's been a pattern for New Labour - to avoid fighting the tabloid
newpapers by standing up for things that they believe in (like, for
instance the welfare system, where they joined in the bashing of "the
workshy", while effectively doing covert good work on the side).

Comments

[gonzo21.livejournal.com]

Yeah. I was prepared to give Labour another chance under their new leadership. But they've totally failed to impress me one iota, so I'm back to considering them the same viscious cowardly stupid thuggish party that started two illegal wars and killed hundreds of thousands of innocent men women and children.

[alitheapipkin.livejournal.com]

This.

[gonzo21.livejournal.com]

There needed to be some sort of apology I think. A breaking with the past, and recognition of the very bad things they did in power under Tony. I mean, Blair made us all collectively responsible for innocents being tortured. Which. Still bothers me deeply.

Ach well. At least I can always vote for the Lib Dems. Oh. Wait.

[a-pawson.livejournal.com]

The problem is they are now in opposition, so they have no policies. If they have any, they will not talk about them and most definitely not put any sort of detail into them. It's unfortunately what opposition parties largely tend to do until we get close to an election. Rather the Labour party will be as quiet as possible for the next 3 years because a) the government is going to become unpopular due to the recession and b) it's not easy for them to criticise the government because they were in power when the recession kicked off.

It's a shame because I neither like nor dislike Ed Milliband, because I know very little about him and even less what about what he stands for. He obviously has an opportunity to take the party in a completely new direction from where Blair/Brown did, but it would be nice to know where he is coming from and intends to go to.

[gonzo21.livejournal.com]

And I really did think out of the potential candidates, he was the best. Seemed like he was the one who would take the party back towards the left. But the media seem to be down on him like a ton of bricks, and nothing he can do or say is right.

[alitheapipkin.livejournal.com]

The tabloids have fed people such a load of rubbish over EU rules and regulations that anyone is going to have a really tough time selling the general populace on the advantages. Which really sucks because they fund a lot of really great science and research is already getting screwed left, right and centre between funding cuts and new foreign workers restrictions.

[andrewducker]

They would have a tough time - but tabloids _will_ change track, if the public disagrees with them enough. And that means advertising campaigns, information out to schools, standing up in public and speaking your mind.

It's a long, painful process. But without it the tabloids just walk all over you.

[alitheapipkin.livejournal.com]

I wonder whether enough people have the stomach for the fight though :(

[undeadbydawn.livejournal.com]

I wonder how much longer tabloids will survive.

without the spoonfuls of shit, public opinion is less misinformed and people actually start to think for themselves.

[steer.livejournal.com]

Absolutely this - the same old EU lies get told again and again and again and believed again and again and again. The issue is that they're quite compelling lies -- the public has a hunger to believe in bureaucrats who make mad laws banning sausages and defining how straight cucumbers must be. That's a much better story than journalists making up such laws and people being stupid enough to believe them.

[philmophlegm.livejournal.com]

It wasn't cucumbers, it was bananas. And although I have a feeling that particular regulation has now been repealed, it was absolutely true, whatever QI might have tried to tell you.

[andrewhickey.livejournal.com]

Sadly, after the AV experience, I don't think a referendum *would* force anyone to make a positive case.

[danieldwilliam.livejournal.com]

Agreed - a referendum wouldn't force anyone to make a postive case.

It might allow someone a platform to make that case. They may then chose to go down a road of "leaving the EU would destroy jobs" or "leaving the EU would allow the evil south of England Tories to destroy your region"

[feorag.livejournal.com]

Travelling around Europe as I get to do, one of the things I've noticed is that the UK always opts for the maximalist approach to any EU directive, taking it much further than is required, and then blames the EU for their own fuck up. It doesn't seem to matter which party is in power.

Don't trust referenda, they're too easily bought, and we all know full well that if put to a referendum, the population of the UK would vote enthusiastically for the death penalty for being Muslim.

[andrewducker]

Point taken on it not mattering which party is in power - I think the difference is that the Conservatives are (largely) quite blatant about being anti-EU, and Labour have seemed more in favour, and I'd like "the good guys" to stand up for the right thing. I don't expect the Conservatives to do the right thing :->

And yes, I don't trust referenda either. They make me twitch.

[danieldwilliam.livejournal.com]

Is your lack of trust for referenda a result of acute recent experience, a general distrust of them or a result of the UK's relative lack of experience of them and poor handling of them?

Or some other reason?

[danieldwilliam.livejournal.com]

A shrewd observation on the Labour Party's use of Overton's Window in the EU.

The EU is an excellent vehicle for getting necessary but unpalatable things done.

I wonder if party funding helps. Harder for a large company with a special interest to fund / bribe all the politicians in the EU.

[andrewducker]

Under the current voting system you tend to get people voting anti, rather than pro. So it's in any party's best interest to stick to whatever policies piss off the least people that might ever vote for them.

[danieldwilliam.livejournal.com]

but also they can feel free to do the maximum damage to those groups who are never going to vote for them.

*sigh*

[zz]

i'm always annoyed that there doesn't seem to be (in the mainstream news/political discussion) a conversation about *why* the EU does the things it does, and whether it needs to.

i also don't understand why the position is always a forced march forwards to ever further integration, and that any deviation from that, rolling anything back, or at least pause for very public reflection (i.e. not a few french+germans in a closed room) is somehow bad or misguided.

i also don't see the problem with two or even several tier EU integration, for anyone involved. it all just seems like a lot of self-defeating scare mongering and "if you're not with us you're against us" arrogance.

[tobyaw]

Media owned by right-wing billionaires? The biggest media company in the UK is the BBC, with its left-of-centre, pro-Europe, pro-public sector editorial line.

Newspapers, on the other hand, reflect rather than guide the view of their readers. And as the newspaper industry is in (perhaps terminal) decline, they are a relatively uninteresting part of the media landscape, apart from in a historical context of course.

[andrewducker]

Newspapers, on the other hand, reflect rather than guide the view of their readers

You _cannot_ be serious.,

And while, yes, they are in decline, they still produce a massive effect.

[tobyaw]

Newspapers don't sell if they don't tell their readers what their readers want to hear. To buy a paper every day, one has to agree with its editorial line (or really like its crossword).

When the Sun changed to support Labour, then switched back to the Tories, they followed the public mood. Their business is to sell papers, and they are good at it. They modify their product to make sure that it sells.

It is easy to stop buying a newspaper, and it is easy to switch to a different paper. Newspapers have no control over their readers.

[andrewducker]

Also, I'd like to see some instances of the BBC cheering for Europe. Because I don't remember seeing any articles calling for increased-integration.

[tobyaw]

Oh, but the BBC treats Euroscepticism with little respect, and tends to regard Eurosceptic or right-wing commentators and politicians as mad, bad, or both.

And this is reflected in the tone of its reporting. After Cameron's "veto" last week, the BBC news led with headlines about Britain being isolated in Europe (with the implication that it was a bad thing). A more balanced headline might have talked about independence or looking to Britain's interests, and a Eurosceptic line might have talked about safety or freedom from the Euro calamity.

The BBC doesn't seem to understand (or maybe doesn't care) that the British population are broadly Eurosceptic, and that the pro-Europearn consensus in Westminster is deeply unpopular.

I think the BBC's editorial line is the biggest influence on defining the "Overton window".