Exploiting The Gap?

The Liberal Democrat party has seen a surge in new members and I am one of them. Will it stick or is it a blip? I joined the party – my first ever – when May called the snap election last year. My first experience of the party was watching the internal amount of squabbles and disorganisation. When challenged there is always an excuse for everything.

The Conservatives seem to be intent on destroying themselves as a ruling party, along with the entire country, by their incredibly vain, naive and arrogant handling of the Brexit process. This means that there is a fair chance that Corbyn, his Marxist chums, with the heavies in the slavishly sycophantic Momentum crew, to ensure compliance (Animal Farm anyone?), could well take power in the foreseeable future.

Some believe that as a population we need to suffer the financial recklessness of the Marxist’s money-tree to jolt us back into common sense. Those with no real life commercial experience, nor memory of the Corbynomics approach to government cannot understand why so many of us are terrified at the thought.

This doesn’t mean I want the Tories. I want a proper Liberal Democrat government. Although, I am a realist, because at this stage in the life of the party, when it ought to be poised to exploit the gap that is opening it is still irrevocably divided.

The impression I have as a politically engaged individual is that the party contains two distinct, any many iterations thereof, ideological groupings of either economically driven so called orange Bookers or the socialist style Lib Dems s who don’t agree with Labour but strike me that they’d be much happier in that type of ideological environment. The party is riven by differing ideologies. We share common views regarding the outcome of many things but it all falls apart when we discuss how to achieve them.

It is an admirable intellectual concept that we can and should all co-exist in this big group that is neither one thing nor the other. For the party is the place for thinkers: those that ask why, are comfortable with a greater degree of cognitive dissonance than many. However, it is more like a political social club where the main topic is debating, much satisfaction is derived from differences and occasionally fiddling with the levers of power.

This is the rub. There is a difference between this approach – many iterations over many years but all ultimately seeing Liberalism consigned to the side-lines in Westminster – and building a party with The aim of being elected into national government and being able to make a meaningful contribution ought to be the over-riding obsession. I still believe that some people are incapable of making the compromises that getting into power entails. It is all well and good to stick rigidly to finely honed, incredibly well developed, after much democratic debate, etc.  ideas but they absolutely ensure a side-line position. Politics is the art of the compromise.

The party made it into a coalition recently and instead of uniting behind this and using the presence of Clegg and co. as the thin end of the wedge ,the party decided to turn in on itself and bemoan the compromises made and then vilify the then leaders. In many quarters of the party you’ll still go a long way tutting about the coalition.

Whether it is the faction driven by a more hard-nosed economic approach or the socialists in the party, someone (both) need to go their own way. If the socialists split away I’d wish them luck and if the ‘Orange Bookers’ did so then that would be a good thing too.

Nonetheless, until the party can face outwards and focus on winning elections  – something that is impossible in the current state – I see no point in being part of it when renewal rolls around. The party today simply doesn’t do simplicity.