There is no question that the votes of the UK Independence Party (UKIP) in the British Euro-elections were a dramatic result for that party. Votes of between 12% (London and South East constituencies) to 26% (East Midlands) are unprecedented for any non-mainstream party in any type of British election, especially an election with such large constituencies. 

Many commentators make the point that this vote will almost certainly be much smaller at a general election; as everyone knows UKIP cannot form the government. Most of the voters who previously voted for the Conservatives – a big majority of UKIP supporters are habitual Tory voters – will go back to their traditional party, especially as Conservative leader Howard will harden his anti-EU rhetoric. The political map cannot be recast in one Euro-election, as previously witnessed by the 15% won by the Greens in the 1988 Euro-elections, a score they never repeated. The Euro-elections are the ideal ground for UKIP, almost a single-issue referendum. 

Nonetheless, the UKIP vote is highly significant, and those on the left who dismiss it are burying their heads in the sand. It says something very important about the state of British society, and about the state of British politics. Schematically we could sum it up like this:- 

• There is a secular attrition of the vote of the major parties, and a dispersal of party support. Labour and the Conservatives are in historic decline. The dispersal of political support is disguised by the ‘first past the post’ electoral system which always punishes minority parties.
• The political dispersal takes the form of a polarisation between reactionary and progressive camps, with the UKIP and BNOP in the former, and the Greens (partially) and Respect (fully) in the former (and of course the SSP in Scotland).
• This polarisation (outside Scotland) is very uneven – much stronger to the right than to the left.

UKIP is the crystallisation of deeply reactionary right-wing trends, which have deep bases of support in England, and are organised on the key themes of the reactionary right – hostility to immigrants and asylum seekers, and hostility to the European Union. In Britain hostility to the EU is overwhelmingly right-wing. In future referenda and elections the organised left will have to factor in  that anti-EU voices from the left will get lost in the tidal wave of anti-EU xenophobia.  

These reactionary tendencies have led to a resurgence of English nationalism, represented by the hundreds of thousands of English flags, (the Cross of St George replacing the bloody Butcher’s Apron, the ‘Union Jack’), flown from cars, pubs and houses during football matches featuring England. This is not a neutral phenomenon but part of  the culture of white, male-dominated, bone-headed English racism and xenophobia – a culture deeply hostile to multiculturalism and ethnic diversity. 

Politically the UKIP is a reactionary, petty-bourgeois populist party. Its programme is a typical petty-bourgeois mélange, as demonstrated by its ‘five basic freedoms’ – ‘freedom’ from crime, overcrowding (black people and other ‘outsiders’), the European Union, bureaucratic politicians and (of course) political correctness. However it appeals to sections of the petty-bourgeoisie, and a smaller number of workers, whose ideas are basically Thatcherite. You can’t understand UKIP without Margaret Thatcher, Norman Tebbit, the Sun and the Daily Mail – the whole apparatus of ideological Thatcherism. In one sense it could be seen as a ‘public faction’ of the Tory party, one that could be largely recuperated. At the same time it can be seen as the political analogue of the Pym Fortuyn list in the Netherlands, or a section of the Front National in France. It can be explained by a simple equation: UKIP+ the fascist BNP = Le Pen and the Front National. However, for the present this is not an alliance which can be consummated because of the history of the Second World War – anything which smells of fascism is finished in the UK. But note: note for the moment. When the votes are analysed in geographical detail, they are sure to reveal that some areas with strong UKIP votes were also areas with strong BNP votes – for example the London/Essex/ Hertfordshire border, an all-white bastion of the petty bourgeoisie and privileged sections of the working class, where BNP councillors were elected in Loughton and Chesunt. [This area is part of the ‘Eastern’ constituency where the UKIP won 17% of the vote overall]. 

The British economy under two decades of neoliberalism has had winners and losers. Most of all it has created a permanent atmosphere of insecurity. Losers include sections of the poorer working class on the ‘sink’ estates, but also sections of the ‘traditional’ petty-bourgeoisie. It has also enriched newer sections of the bourgeoisie in service industries, including financial services, and this sector of the population is a bastion of racist reaction. 

This kind of polarisation, so heavily to the right, is unthinkable without the social and political changes brought on by decades of neoliberalism, in the first place the defeats of the organised working class. Important centres of the organised working class have been socially dispersed, and – decisively – the level of unionisation drastically reduced. A fundamental turnaround in the British political situation will not occur until working class combativity and organisation is on the up again. 

Anti-immigrant and anti-EU themes have been massively promoted by the popular bourgeois right-wing press, almost universally tied to US capital. Conservatives and reactionaries of every type have understood that playing these xenophobic and racist cards offered the best chance of defeating Labour at the next election. (For the bourgeoisie itself of course the idea of withdrawing from the EU is ridiculous;  Tory leader Howard will have a difficult path to tread, to appease his MPs and popular base on the one hand, but sot appear irresponsible to big business on the other). 

Blair and the Labour Party have been completely incapable of fighting tide of racism and xenophobia, mainly because it has been a central promoter and contributor to the wave. Labour has run scared on both asylum and Europe and has fuelled the anti-immigrant hysteria by defining asylum seekers as a ‘problem’. Only the far left, sections of the workers movement, anti-racist campaigns and the immigrant communities themselves have been prepared to stand up to the tide of xenophobia. 

Ironically, it is clear that the Iraq war has been a key factor in destabilising support for Blair, a destabilisation which has made it easier for the UKIP to advance. UKIP has made the biggest electoral advances, but they are not the only ones who made steps forward. Respect, the unity coalition, achieved some very good votes in the London Assembly and mayoral elections, including 15% in one the (very large) London constituencies – and beating both the Greens and the BNP in the London mayoral elections. Respect’s impact was not maximised however because: a) It was formed very late and suffered from lack of name recognition b) There was an almost total media blackout, with everybody getting publicity, including the crackpot Christian People’s Alliance, except Respect. This is a democratic scandal, added to which many voters never got the respect postal material c) The complicated voting system and the lack of explanatory material in Asian languages meant that many thousands, maybe tens of thousands, of Respect votes were disqualified because of errors on the ballot paper. But the votes have put Respect on the map: it will not be so easy to ignore it again. 

By contrast, UKIP was able to utilise its media stars, former TV presenter Robert Kilroy-Silk, film star Joan Collins, and lesser personalities like TV cricket commentator Geoff Boycott (convicted of battering his girlfriend – by a French court!) to get millions of pounds worth of free publicity. 

The June 10^th elections and their outcome is a wake-up call for the left, and all democratic and anti-racist forces. It tells us what we already knew, but  in a graphic way.  

Britain is home to a growing multiculturalism and anti-racist culture, especially in the major cities and amongst the young. But this confronts deep wells of reactionary xenophobia and racism, amongst all classes of society – a racism and xenophobia which always goes hand-in-hand with deep-rooted sexism and homophobia, and is based on Britain’s imperial past, and decked out with imperial myths reinforced by those of  the second world war -  of an island people, undefeated, superior to all others, but friendly to our ‘kith and kin’ in the (white) ex-colonial lands like Australia and Canada, and of course the United States. The UKIP result will embolden this reactionary culture, but also dynamise the forces which confront it.

Phil Hearse