Lib Dem Voice has polled our members-only forum to discover what Lib Dem members think of various political issues, the Coalition, and the performance of key party figures. Almost 600 party members responded to this set of questions – thank you – in a supplementary poll ran just before the party conference.
How do Lib Dem members think of their own political identity? I asked this question in April 2011, when the Coalition was less than a year old. With less than a year of the Coalition left, I thought it was time to revisit it.
60% social liberals, 29% economic liberals; 64% pragmatists, 16% ideologues
We asked… Please tick any or all of the descriptions below that you would be happy for someone else to use to describe you: (Comparisons with April 2011 in brackets.)
-
90% (+3) – Liberal
73% (+13) – Internationalist
72% (+7) – Progressive
64% (+9) – Pragmatic
60% (-4) – Social liberal
59% (+7) – Reformer
49% (+4) – Centre-left
45% (+1) – Civil libertarian
47% (+3) – Radical
47% (+6) – Green
34% (=) – Social democrat
33% (=) – Moderate
33% (+3) – Moderniser
30% (+5) – Keynesian
29% (-6) – Economic liberal
25% (-2) – Centrist
16% (-4) – Ideological
15% (-6) – Libertarian
13% (-1) – Free marketeer
10% (+1) – Centre-right
9% (-7) – Mainstream
1% – None of these
0% – Don’t know
This is the kind of debate which can to easily become bogged-down in semantics, with some phrases (eg, economic liberalism, social democrat) loaded with historical baggage not always inferred by those using the descriptors of themselves. Nonetheless, there are some interesting findings here.
First, let’s look at the two terms with greatest currency at the moment to describe the different ‘left/right’ wings of the party. Six-in-10 Lib Dem members identify themselves as ‘social liberals’ (‘left’), twice as many as the 29% who self-identify as ‘economic liberals’ (‘right’) — though, interestingly, both labels have declined a little in popularity since 2011. However, centre-left (49%) is a much more popular self-descriptor than centre-right (10%).
What there’s no evidence for in this survey is the party membership ‘lurching to the right’, as is sometimes commonly assumed must have happened during the course of this parliament as Lib Dem membership declined by one-third. As we didn’t ask the question before the Coalition was formed, it’s impossible to know what an equivalent survey in 2009 would have shown (and of course our surveys are self-selecting, not a random sample). But it’s certainly not obvious looking at this data that the notion all those members who’ve left in the past four years were from the party’s liberal-left is sustainable. If that had been the case then you’d expect to see the proportions swing away from ‘social liberal’ towards ‘economic liberal’, but they don’t.
The biggest increase in self-identification is with being ‘internationalist’, up from 60% in 2011 to 73% today. That’s not surprising, and presumably is a reaction against the rise of Ukip and the prominence attached to anti-European / anti-immigration views in particular in the right-wing newspapers (ie, almost all mass market newspapers). Also increased significantly is identification with being ‘pragmatic’ — up from 55% to 64% — a sign perhaps that members are increasingly comfortable with the modus operandi of being in coalition.
And (as I mused in 2011) interesting to ponder what such a survey of the party 27 years ago, when we were the SDP/Liberal Alliance, would have shown: my guess is fewer than 90% of party members would have been happy to call themselves ‘liberal’, and more than 34% would have self-identified as ‘social democrat’. That latter descriptor appears to have more or less replaced by the term, ‘progressive’, which 72% of members willingly ascribe to themselves.
We then asked: How would you describe your own politics?
Almost 500 of you responded with your own free text description. Here’s the collective Wordle of how Lib Dem members describe ourselves:
* Stephen was Editor (and Co-Editor) of Liberal Democrat Voice from 2007 to 2015, and writes at The Collected Stephen Tall.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Did The Archers get George Grundy's sentence right?
The attitudes of Britain's ethnic minority population - The Week in Polls
Alex Salmond 1954-2024
Where's the Labour candidate?
Labour's first 100 days - unravelling the spin
A West End Halloween event! #dundeewestend
Michael BG
Martin Gray
Hywel
Peter Martin
Steve Trevethan
38 Comments
My fellow Lib Dems may wish to know of a paper I heard at the PSA conference in Cardiff two years ago, on the term “progressive”. A poll conducted for that research found that twice as many voters described Jeremy Clarkson as “progressive” as George Galloway; their historical research found it had been used by virtually all the parties, and had also been used to sell soap.
60% social liberals yet your party is led by economic liberals. There’s either a dearth of democracy in the Lib Dems or members are in complete denial about what’s happening to the party.
Well there’s absolututely nothing progressive about George Galloway…
@Tim Oliver:
” twice as many voters described Jeremy Clarkson as “progressive” as George Galloway”
despite them both having ‘interesting'(sic) attitudes to women, I am surprised that anyone would ever describe Jeremy Clarkson as George Galloway. 😉
Any chance of some analysis of the correlations? I realise it’d be a huge undertaking, unless there’s some handy software available to the LDV team, but I think it would be quite interesting.
For example, I identify as both an economic liberal and a social liberal. Many other economic liberals feel similarly (though my sense is that this identification has diminished somewhat thanks to the increasing identification of social liberalism with the Social Liberal Forum). I’d be interested in seeing this, and other overlaps, quantified.
It might also cast some light on some other results. For example, the score for “civil libertarian” seems a bit low for a party that puts such emphasis on civil liberties. Is it the word “libertarian” which is causing the issue? Do we just not consider it a useful label? Or is this something we care about that doesn’t always express itself in an identity? (I’m discounting the possibility that half of members just aren’t that bothered, though perhaps I shouldn’t!)
It’s always nice to see that “liberal” is doing well.
Looks like the Jeremy Browne fan club is never that big after all.
16% (-4) – Ideological
13% (-1) – Free marketeer
47% green
not bad, could be better…
Liberal
Pragmatic
Reformer
Civil libertarian
Radical
Keynesian
Economic liberal
Ideological
Libertarian
Free marketeer
Centre-right
All of the above mean something positive to me [and] values I am happy to subscribe to.
Would go for:
– Liberal
– Green
– Civil libertarian
– Radical
– Moderniser
– Pragmatic
– Libertarian
– Social liberal
– Economic liberal
– Reformer
Social Liberal and Internationalist are the only labels I need.
The ditching of “democratic” is compatible with support for remaining in the undemocratic EU.
Do these results suggest that at least 10% are in the wrong party?
War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength
Economic liberalism is social liberalism
@ Max – I presume you refer to the: “10% (+1) – Centre-right”
Let me play turnaround: are the Centre-left the people with problems?
“49% (+4) – Centre-left”
😉
Or the 10% who don’t call themselves liberal? 😉
Max Wilkinson 18th Oct ’14 – 3:30pm
Do these results suggest that at least 10% are in the wrong party?
Not sure, but it certainly seems to show that the hardline disciples of Orange Bookery are a small minority —
90% (+3) – Liberal
73% (+13) – Internationalist
72% (+7) – Progressive
60% (-4) – Social liberal
59% (+7) – Reformer
49% (+4) – Centre-left
45% (+1) – Civil libertarian
47% (+3) – Radical
47% (+6) – Green
34% (=) – Social democrat
13% (-1) – Free marketeer
Well I did this poll and frankly don’t recall exactly what set of buttons I selected although I’m pretty sure I didn’t say I was a libertarian or centre-right. It seemed to me that there were just too many things from which you could select. I can easily imagine that 10% of people simply failed to see the “Liberal” field.
But assuming (as seems fair) that this self selecting sample of 600 includes a higher than average number of committed activists then it is abundantly clear is that the current party leadership does not reflect the political views of the grassroots.
As if we needed to be reminded of that…
@ Conor – ah, quite right.
Yes. What Conor said.
The libertarian category should be split into libertarian left and libertarian right. If you’re a libertarian Lib Dem, is it informed by Murray Bookchin or Murray Rothbard?
It has to be green, egalitarian Liberal for me.
Also happy with preamble, radical, communitarian, internationalist and pro-free trade Liberal.
Guess this makes me a fairly typical left of centre, mainstream, pragmatic, Social Liberal.
I have my fingers crossed that my friend Simon Shaw does not descend on me for writing ‘left of centre’ but for additional clarification I mean that I am a pro-fairness, anti-envy, radical egalitarian Liberal who sees no need to reference this to the Labour Party, its alleged belief in, or insincere pursuit of such democratic left of centre beliefs).
I am unable to use the term ‘economic liberal’ while there is ANY confusion with this term also being associated with small state ideologs and corporate monopolies riding roughshod over individuals, communities and states.
Stephen Hesketh, I have been hoping to bump into you, you seem to represent the pragmatic centre-left and have always been welcoming to others. Logically I have no problems with the party being centre-left, the problem is I don’t seem to agree with centre-left policies very much. I can understand the philosophy, but then I think of the likes of the Guardian, the New Statesman and some of the more controversial politicians and move away from it.
Basically I want to say I don’t think there is a big difference between centrists like me and centre-leftists like you. I sometimes sound hostile, but I don’t mean to be hostile to the entire centre-left.
Am I allowed to say all of those, apart from Social Democrat (probably) as well as (obviously) None of these and Don’t know?
Or, putting it more simply: A Liberal.
Simon Shaw 18th Oct ’14 – 10:09pm
Good evening Simon 🙂
The problem which many of these terms is that there is no consensus as to their meaning. I saw no contradiction in defining myself as both a social liberal and an economic liberal because my perception of economic liberalism is rather different to, for instance, that of John Tilley. Indeed it is interesting that John Tilley pejoratively ascribes the term idiological to Jeremy Browne, whereas it is my perception that it is John Tilley who is the ideologe. Similarly I am happy to describe myself as a libertarian, because I reject the idea that being a libertarian automatically involves pursuing a policy to its extreme, and sometimes ultimately nonsensical, conclusion. For me it instead provides a useful jumping off point in considering an issue, as I imagine being green does for others.
Surely a basis for Liberalism is liberty and the fact that all are equal in the eyes of the Law? A basis of English Law is that one is free to do anything unless a law forbids it. I would suggest a basis for a democratic society is that every person is responsible for their actions and accountable for them and none are except from criticism. All votes must be of equal worth so constituencies must be of equal size. No person or organisation can reduce the liberty of others .
I would suggest that much Liberal thought until the 1960s was about in the pursuit of small government for the simple reason is that a larger the government becomes the more difficult it is to hold politicians and state employees accountable for their actions. If one looks at the size of the state before 1914 and the massive increase in size and secrecy since there are now two classes, the governing an governed. The fact that vast numbers of state employees were protected by Crown Immunity and even today cannot be fired without great cost means there is little accountability. The deaths at Mid Staffs Hospital and many others , means that with nobody being prosecuted , shows there is no accountability. The fact that Police can tazer a blind man or some one in diabetic coma on bus and not be prosecuted shows how many state employees are not held to account for their actions.
I would ask how close is the present LD to the Liberal /Whig Party of the 18 and 19C ?
One of the eternal problems of Liberals is their stubborn refusal to accept the meaning of many common political words as they are understood by most people! Hence some of the discussion here.
I’m sure that David Cameron, Ed Miliband, Boris Johnson and even Nigel Farage would use the top half-dozen to describe themselves, along with some of the other popular adjectives, so I am not convinced they are useful or distinctive for Lib Dems.
For me, the most interesting point is centre-left out scoring centrist and centre-right.
I’m a little disappointed that Green did not score higher
I’m also surprised that Keynesian scored so highly: what does that mean, exactly?
“I’m also surprised that Keynesian scored so highly: what does that mean, exactly?”
Those who quite like Milton Keynes.
Where exactly is this centre that you can be left or right of? Do you have to be consistently to the left of the dividing line on every issue to identify as centre left or can you sometimes stray over into the centre right? Doesn’t the centre line continually move as society becomes generally more progressive. And with each issue. Mainstream Tories mostly support gay marriage so on that issue where is the centre line? On immigration the average view has hardened, moved right, so again the centre line has moved. The labels are nonsense. I am generally to the left of most Tory positions, though not all, and generally to the right of most Labour positions though not all. I detest PFI and outsourcing of most public services as simply adding managerial layers and private profit that could be stripped out to lower costs. That’s left of Labour who promoted both in power. But I also believe strongly in a balanced budget as left by Ken Clarke, that you should not spend what you don’t earn and should avoid borrowing wherever possible. That’s to the right, mainstream Tory. So where do I sit in the spectrum?
I would like more state run and/or cooperative enterprises not less, so left. But no problem with them being in competition with private companies, so right. Manchester Airport is highly profitable and owner of Stansted, a highly successful commercial enterprise, yet 64.5% owned by the mostly Labour boroughs of Gtr Manchester so the profits come home. It is a fantastic model and God help the Government that tries to force privatise it. But is it left or right to back that model. I don’t know.
Tony Greaves’ point about what the various terms mean is spot on.
The only one I know with some certainty is ‘Liberal’. I imagine ‘social liberal’ to mean someone who believes that society or the state have no rights to interfere in how individuals live their lives. I am at a complete loss however to
imagine how ‘social democrat’ could be taken to be a synonym for
‘progressive’!
Graham Evans 18th Oct ’14 – 10:36pm
Graham, my memory is not what it was but I cannot remember ever defining “economic liberalism”. Your perception of the term may be different from mine. I use the accepted meanings of common political descriptions, what do you use?
Like Tony Greaves I am frustrated when people refuse to accept the meaning of many common political words as they are understood by most people.
Left and Right are political terms which are understood throughout the world and have been since 1789. Refusing to use these words as they are understood worldwide is like discussing football whilst refusing to use the word “goal”.
Of course there can be innovations, English is a living language. I do not pretend to know what the recently coined “360 degree Liberalism” means. Does anybody? Does it mean anything or was it just a gimmick by someone whose “race is now run”? Does it indicate that he was just running round in circles, chasing his own tail?
Egalitarian, communitarian, devolutionist, internationalist, constitutionalist democrat.
Might answer to Liberal as a summary of the above, but suspicious of its potential to become in the usage of some an ideological strait-jacket.
I might therefore be also termed ‘pragmatist’.
Probably a lot more left-of-centre than right-of-centre, but when the centre keeps shifting about, why try to define it?
Interesting poll results and discussion.
I’m surprised that the poll doesn’t evidence more of a ‘lurch to the right’ as anecdotally many social liberal / centre left people have left the Party while a larger proportion of new members are economic liberal / centre right. I can think of a couple of questions that might offer explanations for this.
Firstly, how many new members have found the LDV members’ area and respond to the polls? I think year joined is one of the questions, so it would be interesting to know how well new members since 2011 are represented compared to the Party’s membership as a whole. Certainly the LDV comments are dominated by longterm members (and Labour trolls).
Secondly, there is clearly still some confusion over the use of these terms. Given the amount of discussion about different viewpoints within the Party, have the remaining social liberals hardened in our likelihood to describe ourselves in that way?
johnmc
Here is a definition of Social Liberalism
http://www.socialliberal.net/2009/02/12/what-is-social-liberalism/
There are clear trends or messages from the poll, although I agree that there are some terms that are vaguer than others. The top 4 don’t really say much about people’s views within the internal debate about party direction. I would expect these to apply to all sides and most members anyway. Although I don’t think “progressive” has ever really been attributed to the right wing of politics. It tends to be used to indicate reform and social justice. But we can pass it by as this can be disputed.
The next two identities that fit into the debates are Social Liberal (60%) and Centre-Left (49%). Reformer could mean almost anything. I agree that the term Social Liberal can be misunderstood by some, but I’m pretty sure that the bulk of those responding will be aware of the Social Liberal v Economic Liberal debate in the party and would know which side, if any, they tend towards. Either way, half the responders chose centre left. I would guess that virtually all of those also voted for Social Liberal. The remaining 10% being some who see the term as meaning something else or who think that Social Liberalism is more a centrist belief.
It’s interesting that 49% is also about the same number who in a past poll were unhappy with Nick’s leadership of the party.
The next significant term is Social Democrat, with a third of people identifying with it. Another centre left term.
Economic Liberal, Centrist and centre-right are all way down in the rankings. This suggests that the party is largely full of people with centre-left beliefs, with a more centrist or centre right sections of about half the size. The conclusion? We are generally a centrist party with a strong centre left pull. Centre, centre left?
As a centre left social liberal, green and civil libertarian I very much welcome the results of this survey.
It is always the case that there is an element of subjectivity when we choose these labels for ourselves. We may well attach different meanings to them and this is something that will never be fully resolved.
What pleases me about this survey is that given the general election results we clearly need to change as a party. If the new leader of the party wants the party to shift to a more centre left position, this survey shows that he will not need to worry about fighting the party in order to do that.
There is little interest in the electorate for the economic liberalism of essentially the right, to be supported by the Liberal Democrats. It is territory so close to, or identical to the Tories, that there seems little point in offering something so difficult to differentiate from what is usually owned by the natural party of government.
While economic liberalism was a progressive force against Tory landowners in bringing low cost corn into 19th Century Britain to make bread affordable to the workers, in the modern context it is seen as rolling over to big corporations and exposing UK workers to low cost foreign competition. It is also too closely associated with Thatcherism, climbing inequalities in wealth and the loss of UK industries.
It would take something like a Centre Right think tank to define a case for economic liberalism outside of the Tories, but this would drift over the heads of 95% of the electorate who would wonder what the point of that was and that if they agreed with it, they would almost certainly just vote Tory anyway.
The German Free Democrats were the big, obvious exponents of economic liberalism in Europe and their support gradually fell in recent general elections until they lost their place in successive coalitions, recently squeaking just under the 5% threshold for representation in the Bundestag. The centre right Christian Democrats ( Heath/Heseltine esque) benefitted from their demise.
I once asked a German Taxi driver what he thought of the Free Democracts and he answered with a succinctly boiled down: “they are for the rich people”
After the coalition, The LibDems lost the bulk of their immediate support, as were seen to be too close to the Tories and to be not worthy recipients of progressive support.
For the fightback to succeed, The LibDems have to realise that their focus has to be as a progressive party, socially and economically, but one which offers freedom and internationalism, as well as fairness, without being tied to interest groups or class and tribal conflict. There is no future as a “me too” rider on Tory coat tails.
The Tories are too broad and superficially flexible, too well dug in and too poisonous to be associated with and when the largest minority of the electorate eventually get fed up with them, there has to be a clear economic alternative available.
If the LibDems no longer use their Social & Liberal Democrats title, they ought to act more like that and be prepared to revive it should sensible end Labour MP’s come knocking.