When Jim Morrison wanted a name for his band in 1965, he turned to the title of a book from eleven years earlier by the writer Aldous Huxley “The Doors of perception” which itself owed itself to al line in a poem by William Blake “The Marriage of Heaven and Hell”.
Being away in the wilds of Northern Norway for the past fortnight, where it is so heavenly at times you might think you were hallucinating, amongst an overload of nature I have been pondering the nature of perception in politics – and of politics.
It is always interesting to step away from the front row, stand back, observe from afar, and literally change perspective. I even left being an Editor behind, with ConHome in Oliver Dean’s capable hands, and just enjoyed the site, as a reader.
But you never quite go on holiday in politics. Despite the annual news story – regardless of who and what party is in Downing Street – “why on earth is X on holiday when Y is happening” when X is whoever is PM, and Y is whatever is top of the news agenda that day.
It’s a tedious trend as we all need a holiday to recharge and in fact “step back a bit”. However I was using mine to look at our politics as if it wasn’t my job, my entire working experience, but how those with sometimes far better things to be doing, see it.
This was all thrown a bit out of kilter on my return to ‘Blighty’ by the unreality of walking onto a Hollywood film set. I know, right?
To cut a long story short (which I hope the filmmakers do) they are shooting a small part of a Beatles biopic in my street, and my first day back home meant living inside a very large film set. Yesterday the cars parked were a very valuable collection of 1960’s period vehicles, including a very nice Aston Martin I was sorely tempted to hijack but for the 24 hour security and the barriers placed at both ends of the street.
We all know most of the British electorate do not view politics in the same way a nerd like me does, or indeed you if you are reading this. The majority only pay passing attention to it, whoever is up or down, leading polls or falling behind. Every four or five years they’ll look again in greater depth, but many people with a vote don’t pay that much attention to those who want them.
I left just as a new Prime Minister took over the office. Literally in Andy Burnham’s case.
It is no great analysis but important to start by stating all politics is about crafting perceptions. It’s obviously about a lot of other things, but if, quite rightly, saying stuff that sounds good but in reality, and delivery, is less than the promise then the overwhelming perception is of a class of people that can’t be trusted, who, at best, are naive dreamers and at worst, liars.
I found a lot of PM Burnham’s ‘early work’ suffused with perception creation. He’s lightyears ahead of his predecessor in terms of connecting with people, and selling a narrative, that sounds reasonable and seems positive, but then that wouldn’t have been hard. How quickly we have gratefully moved on from the grey monotone of the adenoidal previous overlord. But I think The Conservatives are right to push the line, the problem isn’t Starmer or Burnham, it’s Labour.
His grand devolution plans so far may in reality be a greater centralisation, they constrain the very people he claims to want to free up. He talks the talk on prisoner release and tackling small boats but the reality seems at odds with that talk.
Apparently according to the Times, his ‘Number 10 social media experts’ – a phrase I find hard to fully get my head around – have told him to be less blokey, and ‘man in a pub’ like. I for one would like him to stop using social media as a substitute for just fielding proper questions from the press, but that too is a criticism one could level at a lot of Prime Ministers, Boris a notable example.
I don’t care where his dog is going to live or what he calls a form of bread roll. Do you?
However he wants to create a perception of hope, that he has an answer to the problems the country faces. I don’t think he has, that his economic model is as fundamentally flawed as Reeves’, and Starmer’s was, but given he’s still in the “it’s early days” period of excuses, he’s making the most of the benefit of the doubt. That perception he has created, is working in the polls.
This of course is in contrast to the undisguisable trend in Reform’s polling. Yes, we’ll come to the Tories in a moment, but say what you like as a Reform supporter, the trend is right there in front of you, apart from Clacton, the numbers are not as great as you constantly claimed they would be,
I haven’t changed my view that the Clacton by election is a farcical waste of time, will change nothing – the former MP will be the new MP and all investigations that MPs can expect will simply continue – but more was a tactical mistake. Their usual general summer offensive, which no doubt of it that are usually good at, has been isolated to one small pocket.
At least Clacton may benefit from all the Reform visitors coming to campaign.
The new illegal migration policy is a subject I’ll get into deeper next week, but is all about perception. The starting point, and this is as much on me as the Conservative party, is we tried to stop the boats and we didn’t. We stopped a hell of a lot as it happens, but nobody cares about them if you still have hundreds of over loaded ‘boats’ that get through.
The plan reform announced is a fantasy, that has so many obstacles it might be a training course for the Royal Marines they say they’ll order to carry it out. Don’t confuse obstacles with excuses. Obstacles to solutions exist in the same form whoever is given the chance to tackle them, excuses change with the weather. You don’t remove those obstacles by sounding tough. We’ve had people who liked to sound tough, and they had no better success,
I can’t help thinking the entire project is predicated on the assumption, probably correct, that there is a body of voters who privately would be perfectly at ease if in the process of ‘defending the Channel’ a few migrants were casualties. I mean it would suggest a deterrent of sorts – not that the risk of death has put off thousands of these mainly young men – but it makes a macabre kind of sense. I just can’t buy into that, or that the solution is telling the French, the Navy and your opponents that they ‘just aren’t tough enough or don’t want to solve it enough’ is actually going to work. Indeed I know it doesn’t.
The ‘policy’ is all about vibe, and creating a perception. In reality they will not ‘solve this in weeks’ – and I know they know it.
Still the Conservatives have had their own perception problems.
Does going out to bat for a convicted neo-Nazi to be able to stand as a councillor – we’ve lost many a good one in the country to a toxified brand, so candidates aren’t in short supply – really help a brand that is still trying to shed a toxicity problem?
For what it’s worth, having spoken to him, at some length I think Joshua Bonehill-Paine is seriously contrite about the indefensible things he did, for which he was jailed and served his sentence, and does work to stop others doing the same. John Profumo ended his career as a politician but spent many more years working tirelessly for charity. I don’t think perpetual punishment is a good thing, second chances do and should exist. He also knows he will never have to stop apologising and addressing his vile past actions. But given he’s now withdrawn his candidacy I wonder whether defending her decision to allow him to stand was the best use of Kemi Badenoch’s time.
My real concern was it created a perception above that of the obvious. The risk is making a bold defence of someone some still find completely unacceptable, looks odd when that someone has spent a year very publicly supportive of you as an individual on social media. It looks like making an exception, in the way Corbyn would often excuse his own supporters if they were good socialists and had his back, for much lower level but similar toned misdemeanours.
My perceptions from afar leave me feeling we could do with less performative politics and try and actually get detail and delivery – hard I know for any party not in government, but still possible. The latter is promised for Conference season, and August is always a lousy time for it, after all most of us take some form of holiday.