The Conservative Party may not survive the next decade intact: what about conservatism?
You don't need to like conservative politics to be concerned about what happens to it
Penny Mordaunt claims that everyone is a conservative - they just don’t know it. I can see an argument for the possibility that everyone has some conservative tendencies, depending on how you define them, but I’m far from convinced about the broader claim. The conservative instinct however - and it is an instinct or set of instincts before it is a political ideology - is firmly embedded in the socio-political culture of most countries. In the UK, that tradition has been historically and conventionally encapsulated in the Conservative Party. I find myself wondering whether, after the next election, it still will be.
The political right is a broader, fuzzier coalition than the left. The left, in all its flavours, tends to want similar things. There are huge variations in emphasis, radicalism vs pragmatism, preferred method of action and order of priorities, but the focus is usually on equality, collective effort, solidarity (not always using that word) and concern for/empowerment of those with the least. The right is a more contradictory cocktail. For shorthand, let us split that side of politics into three broad groups
Small-l liberal and communitarian moderates: people who are close to the centre of conventional politics, believe in competent and stable government rather than radical transformation, want a free society under the law, like traditions preserved but lightly imposed, and an orderly social arrangement where change can happen but evolves steadily and manageably. Not ideological about the size of the state or of state spending provided it does not go too far to either extreme or jeopardise social order or sound money.
Right-wing libertarians and capitalist ideologues: people who believe the state should be smaller, state spending on welfare and public services should be lower and that taxes should be kept to a minimum. They want the majority of the economy to be run privately and for profit, and see state control as an unwanted burden on freedom that should be minimalised as far as possible, including green measures and anti-pollution targets. They tend to believe in personal responsibility, welfare outside of genuine crisis to be something best managed by family or voluntary charity.
Traditionalist authoritarians and populist nationalists. Those who believe society is better when the state imposes, to one extent or another, national traditions and specific cultural norms. This may be directly, but may also be by removal of social support from those who do not conform. Wary of or hostile to immigration, especially of poorer people, and often keen on an official or informally standard religion for a country. Tend to speak in terms of national greatness, glory or safety. Favour military, police and strict law enforcement, can be open to intervening on courts or media if they do not act in ways favourable to their aims, especially when in power.
If the above descriptions don’t read as completely even-handed…..well, yes. Contrary to Ms Mordaunt’s view, it is a core part of my politics that I am no kind of political conservative. My economics are too green-left for groups 2 and 3, and my social and civic politics are too libertarian and rights-based for groups 1 and 3. Furthermore, the word conservative feels too guarded and closed for me to identify with it even on a semantic basis. Nevertheless, a sizeable chunk of this country and many others do like conservative ideas even if they don’t vote conservative.
In the 80s, 90s and 00s, though different factions were in dominance at different times, the UK Conservative Party could generally accommodate all three of these political headspaces at the same time. Since Brexit, though not necessarily because of it, a series of ever more serious cracks have started showing. If the Conservatives lose the next election - looking more and more likely at time of writing - there’s no guarantee that they’ll remain a coherent party with all three factions signed up.
The case for a likely split is simple enough. Reform UK is growing in electoral relevance, as a spoiling force if nothing else. As so often happens in the current climate, a party that makes libertarian free market noises quickly joins the traditionalist wing of the culture war on a flimsy and nationalistically partial notion of ‘freedom’. Conservative MPs from groups 2 and 3 are allegedly already being courted by the party. Changing parties in this way is generally - not always - electorally unwise in our constituency-based system, so I don’t anticipate more than a couple such defections before the election. After an election, especially one that knocks the Tories back to below 140 seats, the battle for the soul of the party will likely begin with boots on. If a group 1-inclined centrist leadership takes over, some defections to Reform in opposition is a distinct possibility. Conversely, if a group 2 or 3 leadership takes over, it is not impossible to see moderates defectors to an enlarged and emboldened Liberal Democrat parliamentary party, especially if they take a plethora of southern and south-westerly ‘blue wall’ seats. Defections depend very much on the makeup of the parliamentary party - a subject for a different post - but don’t underestimate the role of ambition, ego, personal loyalty or fallings out on either side of the equation.
The case against formalised splits is probably stronger. Firstly, our electoral system encourages big tent parties. Unlike - say - Germany, who have three parties of the right roughly aligned to the three categories above that can all do reasonably because of their mixed-member system, our elections rarely see splinter parties thrive. With a combined 18% or so of the vote, the Greens and Ukip - both established independent parties - got one MP each in 2015. Loyalty to one’s local Conservative Association - the constituency organisations that select candidates and fundraise - is also something of a tie that binds. Finally, though the three groupings set out above cover the broad range of the Conservative Party, there are many instances of cross-wiring. Groups 1 and 2 contain social liberals and social conservatives. All three groups have, to different extents, interventionists and isolationists in matters of military action. Some traditionalists in group 3 are staunch defenders of older or disabled people while being firmly against generous welfare for other groups.
Were I to guess, a few individuals on one flank or the other aside, the core of the Conservative Party will remain intact, but once in opposition the cracks will deepen, and possibly widen. Opposition gives a partly less to do, and after a long period in government, there is something of an adjustment period that can take years. The key thing may be when the new leader takes a position on an issue that causes fundamental division - an international issue perhaps. The Tories may wither, like the Canadian Prog Cons, and get chipped away by a tri-cornered pincer of red, gold and turquoise, but not get finished off.
Should those of us of a liberal or left persuasion await this tumult with glee? The Conservatives deserve a profound electoral thumping. They have harmed this country in ways that will take years, perhaps a decade, to repair, and a smidgeon of electoral schadenfreude is only human. Conservative instinct doesn’t need a party to be influential, and if the Tories become semi-permanently unviable, like the Liberals after the First World War, it will pop up in other places. Social conservatives may find their way into Labour and economic conservatives into the Liberal Democrats - both phenomena can already be seen in places where they are in competition for local government without much in the way of Conservative opposition. Those of us who oppose not only the Conservative party but conservatism itself should be careful what we wish for. This country will always have a party of the right, and it is better for stability and functional democracy if it takes a centre-right form in the image of Major, Cameron or May than if it remains Ukip with a royal blue - or turquoise - rosette. The Tories need real wilderness time, and the country needs them to have it. Let’s hope they use it to reflect. Whether they will is another matter.
Thank you for reading :)