The Tories Broaden Their Base
In these turbulent times for conservatives, it’s refreshing to see a return to traditionalism. Last week, British Conservative leader David Cameron attended a gay pride event and apologized for his party’s previous hostility to homosexuals. As a result of this return to Tory pragmatism and rejection of ideological rigidity, the party is expected to win the gay vote at the next election – an astonishing reversal of fortune.
In particular, he apologized for an infamous (and now repealed) Thatcher-era piece of legislation, known as Section 28, which banned local councils from promoting homosexuality as anything other than abnormal. He acknowledged the obvious truth that it had poisoned relations between the Conservatives and gay people: “I’m sorry for Section 28. We got it wrong. It was an emotional issue. We have got to move on and we have moved on.”
Contrary to the claims of some right-wing critics, Cameron is staying true to his party’s history. Just as the GOP has formed new coalitions, crafted new policies and modified its identity to reflect changing times, the Conservative Party has always been concerned with gaining and holding power. It has not sought to represent an immutable set of conservative principles or to memorialize Churchill or Thatcher, any more than the Republican Party exists solely to preserve Reagan’s legacy.
In the broad sweep of history, Cameron’s outreach to same-sex couples isn’t particularly shocking. Reinvention is a long-standing Tory tradition. Consider, for instance, Disraeli’s extension of the franchise to working-class men in the 19th Century. For introducing such a reform that nobody would find objectionable now, this great Tory statesman was attacked by his party’s right-wing for, in the words of the Marquess of Salisbury, a “political betrayal which has no parallel in our Parliamentary annals.” And, as Cameron pointed out at the gay pride event, “The Conservatives had the first woman prime minister and we are bound to have the first black prime minister and the first gay prime minister.”
Unlike today’s GOP, whose leaders seem uncomfortable with the concept of evolution, Cameron knows that defeated parties must adapt or die. When he became leader in December 2005, the Tories were flatlining in the polls, in third place among under 35s, and out of favor with women, minorities, urbanites, educated voters, and just about the whole of the north of the country. An infamous piece of polling revealed that otherwise popular policies would suddenly lose their appeal if presented as Conservative proposals! Do any Republicans recognize this scenario?
Cameron understood that it was his duty to change this, if only because democratic politics requires two sane and functioning parties capable of engaging with each other and the electorate. He knew that his party had to demonstrate, unambiguously and unceasingly, that it had changed its attitude, tone and priorities. This meant less focus on “core issues” like tax cuts and immigration, and more disquisitions on social responsibility, climate change, health care, education, inequality, and, yes, gay rights.
Politically, it’s worked. Almost immediately after embarking on this traditionalist agenda of ruthlessly pursuing power, the Tories rose in the polls, and now enjoy massive leads over the government. Indeed, their resurgence has sent shockwaves through the other parties. Labour fumes impotently while the social consensus it helped create is completely co-opted by the Conservatives. Meanwhile, the Liberal Democrats, who had serious aspirations of becoming the second-largest party, have been wonderfully destabilized by Cameron’s moderate social agenda, environmentalism, and defense of civil liberties.
The poll showing Tory support among gays is no aberration, either. In his first conference speech as party leader, Cameron argued that all marriages are special, including same-sex unions. He promoted two openly gay MPs to his Shadow Cabinet, has pushed for talented gay candidates to run for office next year, and argues for tax breaks for gay couples in civil partnerships. This makes sense in a country that, like America, has become more accepting of gay equality, and will continue to move in such a direction.
But it’s not just a case of cynical vote-grabbing. Cameron’s sympathetic approach to gay people is consistent with his idea of a connected society, in which social beings find meaning and identity through relationships. This leads to the flourishing of institutions that stand between individuals and the state, of which the most important is marriage. So instead of stigmatizing a group on the basis of its sexuality, he is reinforcing his vision of a British society that no longer centralizes power, but recognizes institutions as the engines of diversity, belonging, expression, and shared knowledge and history.
More broadly, and paradoxically, shifting the public’s traditional perception of the Tories allows the party to articulate traditional conservative policies. It is a subtlety that eludes many on the right. It’s easy to forget that the party is officially committed to cutting taxes and welfare, restricting immigration, building more prisons, taking back power from the EU, dumping Labour’s flagship human rights legislation, abandoning multiculturalism, and giving local communities more control over schools and policing. Only now that the public are convinced of the Tories’ moderation and decency are they willing to give a fair hearing to these ideas.
Cameron’s successful courting of the “pink” vote illustrates that social change represents an opportunity for political leadership, rather than an excuse for nostalgia, resentment, and alienation. Far from being a radical modernizer, he is more properly seen as a traditionalist who knows that his party’s objective is not to flatter its base, but to broaden its appeal and advance a center-right agenda. His very first challenge to the Tories during his leadership campaign should reverberate in the minds of every Republican in the next election cycle: “Some say that we should move to the right. I say that will turn us into a fringe party, never able to challenge for government again. I don’t want to let that happen to this party – do you?”