I spent an hour yesterday afternoon watching C-SPAN's feed of live BBC coverage of the UK general election. I was generally pleased by the results. I'm glad that Labour was returned to power with a diminished majority, especially if that majority was interpreted as a consequence of Prime Minister Blair's decision to join in the Iraq invasion two years ago. I'm happy the Liberal Democrats did well, and happy that though the Conservatives gained seats, they did not substantially improve on their percentage of the vote. The improved showing of the Greens was also happy news.
Though he's a windbag and a scoundrel, I'm pleased with George Galloway's win for the Respect Party. All healthy political systems need self-important demagogues who, despite their liabilities, will regularly and emphatically speak truth to power. (It's why I'm so fond of Maxine Waters.) I loved the transcript of the interview the BBC's Jeremy Paxman did with Galloway; it's clear that it was the former who was genuinely rude.
As I've mentioned before, my brother, sisters, and I all hold dual US/UK citizenship. My brother and one sister live in England; my other sister and I are in California. Though I am not eligible to vote in Britain, I follow its politics closely. Comparing last night's result to November's great disappointment, I am struck once again by how much further to the left the UK remains compared to America. I'd be lying if I said I weren't envious.
I'm not interested, at least not in the foreseeable future, in joining my brother and sister in becoming an expat in the UK. I'm deeply American in my thinking, and I have a deep attachment to California's climate. As much as I love England, all of that intense green-ness seems unnatural to me. I like my natural beauty to come in muted tones, browns and grays and subtle greens. I love mountains, too, and what pass for mountains in England are what folks here in the San Gabriels would refer to as speed-bumps. But for all its myriad shortcomings, the ruling Labour party retains at least a sense of responsibility for the poor and an appreciation for diverse lifestyles -- something that I see sorely lacking in the dominant party in my own country.
But they don't have tenure in English universities, and that is a bit of a bother. I think I'll stay here in the smog, the heat, the congestion and fight the good fight (as I tell myself that I do) just a bit longer.
Hugo,
How is it you have dual citizenship? Where you born in th UK?
Posted by: Teri | May 06, 2005 at 10:05 AM
I get it through my Austrian-born, English-raised father.
Posted by: Hugo | May 06, 2005 at 10:12 AM
I dunno, I understand your logic re: Galloway, but I wonder if his scoundrel factor is high enough to render questionable his gadfly value.
Posted by: djw | May 06, 2005 at 11:54 AM
Mildly disappointed that there wasn't a Respect candidate in my constituency, I voted Green. On the whole, I'm as pleased as I could have expected with the outcome of the elections. It's good that the main swing was from Lab to Lib Dems, even if the Tories were often the electoral beneficiaries. More importantly, it looks like the electorate have made up Charles's Kennedy's mind for him in positioning the Lib Dems firmly to the left of Labour. The votes that put them over the top in marginal constituencies, were cast from the left, with the intention of punishing Blair for the war in particular. It looks like that message has really come across.
It will be interesting watching what Galloway does in parliament. As a Labour rebel, he never had to toe the party line, but now that he's the head of his own party, he will. That will mean, to a large extent, representing the views of the SWP. I'm delighted and intrigued.
Posted by: Pip | May 06, 2005 at 02:18 PM
Well, as I say on my weblog, at least we've got Guildford back.
Posted by: John | May 06, 2005 at 02:33 PM
As much as I was and am vehemently opposed to the war, I have major reservations about Respect, as it basically amounts to a coalition of the Socialist Workers Party and The Muslim Association of Great Britain - neither of whom are organisations I'd want in government - the SWP because I've never been convinced by their politics or methods and the MAGB because I instinctively distrust political organisations with such a narrow religious agenda - despite my being a christian, I'd be highly unlikely to vote for an expressedly christian party (though I'd happily vote for a christian or muslim who got to their position in a more standard party...)
Galloway himself is an interesting one - the fawning over Saddam back in the early 90s has never been explained to my satisfaction... scary stuff to say to a genocidal maniac. But his opposition to the war was marvellous, and he made a great figurehead for the anti-war movement.
As for the rest of the election, I'm really really sick of the first past the post system. I chose this time to vote with my conscience, not tactically, and voted green, as their manifesto was closest to my own thoughts. A tory got in in my area, which was sad, but we had a tory before, so not as tragic as if say a Lib-Dem had lost the seat...
Nice to read the thoughts of a non-native, Hugo - thanks!
Steve
Posted by: Steve | May 06, 2005 at 04:44 PM
Steve, that's what I thought, until we changed to Mixed Member Proportional instead. Some of the alternatives are a great deal worse.
Posted by: John | May 06, 2005 at 10:27 PM
Oh, and George Galloway is a moron, who exploited racial tension and anti-Semitism. His campaign was inexcusable. If I lived in Bethnal Green and Bow, I would have assuredly, for the first and last time, voted Labour.
Posted by: John | May 06, 2005 at 10:32 PM
In order to "speak truth to power" it's necessary to start with simply speaking the truth. I don't think Mr Galloway qualifies.
I don't think much of Maxine Waters either.
Posted by: Chris Jones | May 07, 2005 at 06:43 PM
George Galloway and truth? Unlikely!
I'm about as far left in terms of party politics as we get in this country, being a revolutionary socialist, a term also claimed by many SWP members and Galloway supporters. They represent everything wrong with the left of this country, from their active support of violent Islamist insurgency in Iraq and refusal to condemn suicide bombers killing Iraqi civilians (anything against the occupation must be good right?) to their appeal to racial tensions and communalist politics in order to win votes. If nothing else, Bethnal Green and Bow has lost a committed MP and gained one with the second worst parliamentary record (next to Tony Blair); at the worst, I fear community relations have been set back years.
I voted Labour. I'm not proud, but I feel there was little alternative; a Lib Dem protest vote, the choice of many of my peers and those with similar political leanings, seemed to me like a display of self-indulgence. Morals and principles are important to me, but it's not my future I'm risking to register some limited "protest"; it's that of people much worse off than me financially and in terms of opportunity, who have seen significant improvements to their quality of life under Labour, would suffer under the Tories.
Posted by: ms. b. | May 08, 2005 at 03:25 AM
I find George Galloway very creepy. He used to be my MP back when I lived in Glasgow, although I never knew much about him till he sued one of the newspapers for saying he was in the pay of Saddam Hussein. I haven't done any research on Respect, but I hear they're pretty homophobic and anti-women in some ways.
I voted Lib Dem. It was a close thing - I would have voted Labour had my area been much more marginal, but in the end I couldn't bring myself to vote them. Some of their policies are just too horrendous. I'd like to see the Lib Dems in Opposition.
As for tenure at English universities, you can get permanent lectureships, which I guess amount to the same thing?
Posted by: The Birdwoman | May 08, 2005 at 07:02 AM
I'm desappointed you're so dismissive of our mountains. Has no one ever told you that it's not size that's important? ;o)
I broadly agree with you about the election results, though the Lib Dems could have done much better. The campaign was more than a tad lacklustre. As I'm pondering it all this afternoon, the results look like a defeat for everyone.
Posted by: Richard Hall | May 08, 2005 at 08:13 AM
Birdwoman, here's an article that argues that permanent lectureships and tenure aren't the same thing at all:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3860/is_199907/ai_n8876592
Posted by: Hugo | May 08, 2005 at 12:47 PM
Interesting. I knew that doing postdocs was hideously insecure (hence the career change), but I thought that lectureships had a bit more clout.
Posted by: The Birdwoman | May 09, 2005 at 12:55 PM