From time to time on this site there has been reference to the limited usefulness of left and right in terms of describing political parties and the boundaries between them – including Roz Savage’s recent piece. In a less fluid political landscape I can remember the Huddersfield West Liberal MP wrestling with this in the 1960s. One of the curious features of left/right models is that parties find it easier to use the tags to describe their opponents than to define themselves. So what alternative labels are there? Are progressive and conservative any use? The former tends to be more slippery than the latter. What “no change” means is usually easier to recognise than what “change” means because you cannot discuss serious social and political change without facing the question “what sort of change?” Is ”progressive” somewhat susceptible to Lewis Carroll’s Humpty Dumpty doctrine: “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean”?
In the aftermath of the Gorton and Denton by-election I want to have a go at seeing if “non-conservative” can help us. It seems to me that the Greens managed to defeat two conservative political entities – Farage’s party and the part of the Labour Party that is in government. Reform UK may or may not be seen as a replacement for the Conservative Party. What the billionaires do with their donations will be a factor. My hunch is that the story will not be like that of the Ulster Unionists who were caught up in a process of parties being replaced in turn by slightly more extremist parties until power finally came to rest with the DUP. There is a chance that what is left of the present Conservative Party could end up with some sort of deal with whatever Reform looks like when Farage’s dictatorial style leads to his own demise.