The British Election - What Happened?

December 2019

I quoted in the Coloured Supplement last month from The Guardian Weekly edition of 15 November and its cover containing the following question:

Elections need fixing! Why isn't democracy giving clear answers anymore?

The lead article was by a Guardian and Observer International Affairs Commentator who provided two highlighted quotes. One was, "Many citizens are expressing doubts that democracy still serves their interests." The other was, "Protesters say the political elite is corrupt and demand a clear-out, with little idea of what comes next." All this was, of course, in the run-up to our General Election on 12 December. The answer to that basic question is that now democracy has given a very clear answer. It, therefore, serves people's interests and to that end is fit for purpose. It can, at least, still reflect the will of the (majority) of the people. So the UK has secured at least a government capable of governing as a result. That is not to say it will govern well. So we need to pray that it does. But many of us feared that there would be a "hung Parliament" resulting in a series of disparate coalitions where little could be decided. That is a very dangerous position to be in. In our progressively secular country that could have led to violence, rioting or even worse. So how we need to thank God that such a result did not occur!

The Facts

Let The Times newspaper state the basic facts. It did so under the headline Blue Dawn – Boris Johnson has won a historic victory that has redrawn the electoral map of Britain. Now he must show he can become a historic prime minister.

The word historic is often used to describe events that in reality are quickly forgotten. Thursday's Conservative election victory will not be one of them. This was an extraordinary result. A party that was seeking a fourth term in office having presided over a decade of austerity and a fall in living standards not only gained an extra 47 seats but secured a 78-strong majority. The Tories swept to victory in swathes of seats in what have long been regarded as Labour's impregnable northern heartlands.

But what really was going on? What really was behind the North's Labour attachment to Brexit and so now to the Conservatives? Yes, Jeremy Corbyn was a problem for many. However, John Waters, an Irish writer (so looking on from outside), writing about Brexit argued that it was supported as a protest vote of despair. For it was supported by …

… older voters; those who work hard but are not rich; those who continue to think and observe; those who read on paper; those who are free from the propagandist deluge of the BBC, Guardian, Facebook, Twitter etc. – all finally saying, 'Enough! No more!! Please, listen to what we are saying, please respect us and our lives and our thoughts also!

And Waters goes on to comment that those elites who live in big metropolitan cities, like London, who "become immune to the needs of the real world, now imagine themselves to represent the fruit of human society, when really they are the peel."

That is echoed in the book National Populism: The Revolt Against Liberal Democracy, a book by Roger Eatwell and Matthew Goodwin. This identifies four fundamentals driving the so-called "populist" wave around the world: one, distrust (of politicians); two, destruction (of nations, communities, and local cultures); three, deprivation (of a social context where local people can live good, economic and satisfying lives) and, four, de-alignment (so they are no longer attached to their old political parties).

And to be free of "the propagandist deluge" of the BBC and Guardian means much of the media is now being seen for what it promotes – "fake news". This is not in the sense of "lying" but of telling only one side of a story or one part of a story and also because of the bias of the broadcasters or journalists! Certainly the BBC is biased as to its world view and its morality. Ofcom's Diversity and equal opportunities in television report, published 18 September 2019, reveals bias in terms of staffing. For while in the UK population 67% are "religious", in the BBC it is only 37% that are "religious"; and while in the UK population only 2% are Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual (LGB), in the BBC it is 7% (and their target for 2020 is 8% being LGB). If people are finally saying, "Enough! No more!!" that is significant. For the BBC (the mouth-piece for elite dogmas) has shaped global plausibility structures and influenced the masses in the English speaking world, both by its UK services but also by its BBC World Service.

The Modern World

We are at a watershed in our nation and culture. The modern world has been shaped, since the 17th century, by the West and with a Christian world-view. And that Christian world-view came from three things: one, faith in the God of the Bible; two, tradition in terms of Biblical ethics both personally and politically; and, three, God-given human rationality as knowledge and technology were exploding.

But at the end of the 18th and century France and to a lesser extent Germany went rogue, deciding that human rationality was to be supreme and it was idolized (literally during the French Revolution). So God was left out of their Enlightenment (as this period of Western progress is often called). However, the English Enlightenment tradition acknowledged God. Even John Locke the great champion of toleration did not tolerate atheism, for he believed it was socially damaging (his liberalism had limits). And importantly the Methodist and the Evangelical Anglican spiritual revival were part of our English Enlightenment tradition, while the Puritan settlers' concern for liberty certainly were part of the American tradition.

Over the years these traditions have evolved. But for a range of reasons (including two World Wars) things came to a head in the second half of the 20th century. Since then an atheistic French tradition has been dominant with personal autonomy being the supreme value. So each person can decide what is right or wrong. However, after 50 years at last there is now a rejection of its social consequences. The majority of voters see our own nation disintegrating with, for example, 48% of children born outside marriage in England and Wales; food banks that are needed; an equalities dogma that cannot discriminate essential immigrants from potential terrorists; boys with their genitalia intact saying they are girls and using girls' toilets; and while our NHS budget is £129 billion a year, the costs of the break-down of our sexual and marital culture to the taxpayer and wider economy being probably £100 billion annually (Guy Brandon, The Relationships Foundation)!

Our Christian Calling

So Christians have now to be ready to argue for limits and a true liberalism. We have to argue for "the common good" in terms of public policy; and that invariably follows Christian ethics, and "the highest good" – trusting and obeying our heavenly Father from whom that common good derives and not least in matters of sex. That is central because the family has to be central in any society. Philosophers call it the first society. For if there is an institutional collapse of the biblical heterosexual monogamous lifelong married family, the whole collapses (as the West is beginning to experience, and ordinary people living ordinary lives know only too well).

Boris Johnson on his own will not be able to help recover the English Christian tradition, which the Queen is required to uphold. So our political structures need no reform. But Christian believers need to take a lead. The time is right. Our calling, surely, is now to pray and be bold, wherever God has put us, knowing as Jesus said, the way to true liberalism is to obey him:

If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth and the truth will set you free" (John 8.31-32).