66 online
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 14 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
Exclusive to OpEd News:
OpEdNews Op Eds    H3'ed 12/21/15

How the Conservatives won the UK 2015 General Election

By       (Page 1 of 3 pages)   No comments
Follow Me on Twitter     Message Peter Kellow
Become a Fan
  (4 fans)

Watching one or two political roundups of the year 2015, the event that kept coming up was the Tory win in the General Election. Hardly surprising. With that victory went wipe out for the LibDems, success in Westminster for the Scottish Nationalist Party and the demise of Ed Milliband and Labour.

It was reiterated that "no one", but no one, foresaw the Tory majority. Not only that, the mystery remains as to how it happened. Factors cited included the unelectability of Ed to leading the country or the electorate being fearful of a coalition of Labour and the SNP.

George Osborne - ruthless unstoppable strategist
George Osborne - ruthless unstoppable strategist
(Image by Daily Telegraph London England)
  Details   DMCA

These may have been enough to account for the lack of success by Labour but no one put their finger on the reason why the Tories succeeded in gaining a fairly workable majority.

Your humble correspondent at the Newsletter did, regular readers will recall, predict the Tory victory in Newsletter No 145 of the 4th of April , five weeks before the election took place when I wrote

"The most likely outcome is a Conservative Party with either a majority or near majority"

Nick Robinson, BBC politician correspondent, clearly missed out by not reading this newsletter, reporting the day after the election that -

"No pollsters, no pundits, no political leaders saw it coming. Even David Cameron, himself did not see it coming. This was a day no one expected. No one could take it in."

Having had seven months to reflect on the result, none of the highly paid pundits have been able to figure it out. They are still thrashing around. Much like the causes of the First World War (which I explained in Newsletter No 137 Sunday 09 November 2014 ), it is an historical event without explanation. It represents an inevitable lacuna in our historical knowledge.

Well, the true mystery is in how people, who spend their lives observing and analysing political events, can miss the factor that guaranteed a Conservative majority.

In addition this was not something that arose by chance - that was caused by Harold Macmillan's "events, dear boy, events". It resulted from a deliberately engineered policy to divide the nation and leave a significant percentage of voters fearful of change. These voters saw how Tory policies had benefited them and sought protection for their gains by voting for the Conservatives.

The Tory strategy for dismissing their coalition partners and continuing in government alone began almost soon as they gained power in 2010. George Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer (Finance Minister) was probably the brains behind it, as David Cameron has shown himself to be rather inept at times. But once Osborne spelt it out to Cameron, it must have appealed immediately to all his Tory instincts. The path was set.

The policy was obscured to a degree by the constant preoccupation of all parties and commentators on the cuts being made to government services and spending.

But to the beneficiaries it was obvious what was happening.

The government in 2010 was faced with a truly dreadful situation -- a declining economy, a large government deficit and a lot of unemployment. Orthodox economics was no help in addressing these problems for its solutions for such eventualities are always the same -- we need to liberalise the market, cut government expenditure and just wait and see with fingers crossed.

But governments and central banks have long since discarded orthodox economics as being of any help in achieving their aims. They haven't told the economists themselves, or the universities that teach economics, and so these fools just continue spouting the same misguided rubbish.

Their theories are completely unable to account for the events visibly before them, but this failure has been evident in various different ways for 200 years. It has never persuaded them re-evaluate their theories before. It is certainly not going to do so now.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

Rate It | View Ratings

Peter Kellow Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Peter Kellow Writer
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Follow Me on Twitter     Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

The Markets. The Markets. Who Are These "Markets" We Are So Beholden To?

The Unspoken Truth about Cyprus

Why Trump Might Still Win -- If the Vote is not Rigged

Two US Marines Deaths Caused by British Royalist Propaganda Exercise

British Student Loans -- The Giant Scam That Robs The Nation

Weapons of Mass Financial Inequality

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend