One interesting aspect of the EU referendum in the UK campaign is the manner in which it has divided both of the main political parties.
The tone of the debate has been characterised by populism, anger and misinformation. But beneath that, at a more fundamental level, it has revealed the re-orientation of party politics beyond traditional left/right divisions, underpinned by the class structures of post-war industrial society, and towards a politics defined by globalisation and the reaction to its consequences.
The last decade has seen the rise of an anti-globalist popular politics which transcends traditional party alignments. This is apparent across the developed world, with the rise in Europe of far right and populist left-wing parties mirrored in the current US presidential campaign by the popularity of anti-establishment candidates such as Trump and Sanders.
This politics addresses itself to the insecurity, de-politicisation and erosion of community and class identities which have resulted from neoliberal global economic policy orthodoxy since the 1970s. As a result, the traditional electoral constituencies and policy platforms of traditional parties are under stress. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the UK’s referendum on EU membership, which is causing these tensions to manifest themselves with a new urgency.
The left stresses re-establishing democratic local control over faceless corporations and global finance as well as wealth redistribution and the re-establishment of social safety nets. The right wing displaces the blame for insecurity, which is emblematic of ‘flexible’, globalised production and labour markets, onto migrants and stresses trade protectionism and nationalism ahead of taxation and active industrial and welfare policies.
The two have thus found common ground in opposition to the technocratic governance arrangements of the EU, albeit for different reasons. The left tends to stress the deflationary monetary policy of the ECB and Bundesbank, as well as its enthusiasm for trade liberalisation deals such as the TTIP agreement. The right stresses the ‘red tape’ and excessive regulation created by EU bureaucracy as well as the damaging effects of the free movement of labour on domestic wages and welfare.
Against this, an ‘establishment’ neoliberal politics continues to advocate ever-greater market discipline, legitimised through the promise of future growth and technological advance. The advocates tend to be supportive of the EU, recognising the benefits of access to a large integrated regulatory space, the beneficial effects of membership on FDI flows and trade, and the need for labour movement to fill skill gaps and provide cheap labour to boost competitiveness.
There are limits to this vision, both in terms of the hollowing out of democracy and the de-politicisation of economic policy which it implies, and also the erosion of real wages and employment security which it has wrought upon Europe’s traditional middle classes.
The EU referendum debate in the UK is crystallising these issues in intricate ways, which will likely resonate throughout European politics in the years to come.
In the second part of this article, “EU Referendum and the contradictions of Tory ideology,” I focus on how the campaign is impacting the governing Conservative Party.
