Is 2019 the new 1983?

[Soph0571]

Is Brexit the new Falklands? Both are significant external factors that impact significantly on voter behaviour.

Is Corbyn’s new manifesto the Foot manifesto? Corbyn’s manifesto is the most radical since Foots ‘longest suicide note in history’.

Is Boris the new Maggie? Widely despised and disliked, but using the external factor of Brexit, the way Maggie used the Falklands to get across the line?

I think there are some substantial if maybe shallow similarities… of course this is a different century and elections are run very differently and the demographics in the country have changed significantly, so I am not sure how much the similarities actually mean. Still, I thought it interesting.

[mwooldri]

1. In a lot of ways I believe Corbyn is this generations Foot.

Their political stances are very similar. Both joined the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND). Both campaigned for withdrawal from the European Economic Community. Both campaigned for higher taxes on the rich, and both campaigned in renationalising certain industries.

The 1983 Labour party manifesto was described as the "longest suicide note in history".

However there are a lot of differences too. The Falkland Islands / Malvinas conflict had actually helped Margaret Thatcher a lot in public standing. The UK generally were supportive of the mission, and the outcome was generally received positively.

There has also been no major spinoff political party from either the Conservative Party or the Labour Party that resulted in a third force commanding a lead in the opinion polls (yes, Change UK / The Independent Group came about, but they gained zero significant traction).

There is also no major military conflict that is engaging the UK at this time. There is a civil and cultural conflict that is called Brexit, and it has split the country right in the middle.

I have no idea on what the potential outcome of this election will be. If the election is 99% Brexit it really doesn't help Labour whose official position on Brexit is similar to the hokey pokey. But when the main players are a reincarnated Worzel Gummidge versus a softer Alan B'stard ... it confuses the heck out of me that there are plenty of people who would actually vote for Alan B'stard.

[LeftishBrit]

2. Hope not, but who knows

There are several differences. Foot was not politically savvy or media-friendly, but he was intelligent, which Corbyn isn't. Maggie was obnoxious and had very damaging policies, but she was competent and honest (within her own rather appalling worldview), which Boris isn't. The Falklands war was directly started by a foreign leader, though the British first risked this through unpreparedness and then treated it as a glorious opportunity for jingoism. Brexit is entirely self-inflicted. There was no Internet or social media then; and this makes a huge difference to how politics are run.

[T_i_B]

3. I'm too young to remember Michael Foot

But I do know that Jeremy Corbyn has what can only be described as limited appeal.

As much as Thatcher did a lot of bad things, it's an insult to compare Boris Johnson to her. Johnson does unfortunately have a talent for telling people what they want to hear, even if it's totally untrue. The central Tory message of "get Brexit done" is an utterly false promise and he's not being held to account properly on his dishonest campaign.