Why Promise of Political ‘Change’ Often Refers To The Past, Not The Future

‘Change’ in politics is a handy word that politicians tend to cling to like leeches to get the attention, support and the votes, especially from the doubters and discontented in society. Note the names of the right-wing parties: ‘Reform’ and ‘Restore’. No matter how well the UK might be doing, the current status quo is not acceptable to them. They have to ‘reform’ or ‘restore’ things back to a bygone age. Everything has to fit their vision of the country. However, one contradiction of the notion of ‘change’ is that many people still perceive it as 'business as usual’ with some fringe additions that won’t alter their lives too much, because, deep down, we all dislike genuine change until we can see the benefits from it. 

The other contradiction is that one cannot use the old mindsets of some politicians, like Nigel Farage who yearn for the divisive past, to bring about change, because real change has no precedence and no history. It is new, often untried and bottomless. It also needs much belief, faith, action and, above all, determination, to bring it into being. It follows that one cannot appreciate real change while still doing things the same old way. Change needs tons of optimism, especially in the ealry days, to make its impact.  

It means that no party advocating change, can keep their eye on the opposition or any other party, like the way Labour has been copying Reform. If a party’s supporters are busy watching the antics of the opposition, they have no hope of winning new voters because that is a negative act which does not build anything. It simply destroys hopes and dreams by reducing the options available. When we beat ourselves up with the actions of others we get sucked into their way of doing things, gradually losing sight of our goal, while we become preoccupied with theirs.

Change is always a scary thing. It is about leaving our little comfort zones and heading into uncharted seas. But worrying, fretting, and watching the opposition won't deliver the change either. It will merely keep that party hanging perilously on to the shore to be beaten even more by the very people it fears. Most of all, this demonstrates the party’s lack of faith and belief in its own leadership and the change it yearns for, hence why Keir Starmer’s position is in some jeopardy. He has spent so much time copying Reform’s divisive rhetoric and policies, Labour has lost its own identity and aims in the process.

Political parties vying for power and promising the public real ‘change’ can be compared to an interview situation. When we go for a job interview we do not sit and talk about how much better, or worse, the other candidates are; we won't watch what they are doing, or focus on their dirty tricks. We simply emphasise our strengths and why we are BEST for the job, and leave it to the interviewers (in this case, the voting public) to make up their own minds. Political appeal is no different. 

If one party is only interested in imitating another, or focusing on their bad deeds, it is not  progressing its own objectives. Instead it would have been eaten up with the politics of conflict and attrition, the same old politics of yesteryear, which leaves little room for genuine change. Worst still, the party will remove its own focus, expanding the oxygen of publicity for the opposition, while keeping them continually in the spotlight. 

Voters in Makerfield's by-election need to ask themselves, before they vote, which of the candidates is offering genuine change that does not hark back to a wishful, divisive past; a change that does not take them for granted, and will actually make their life quality much better than it has been; and, above all, a change that will build on the unifying achievements of this great island so far to make the future even more pleasant and satisfying - a change that you can actually see and experience, because things will be different in the most beneficial ways.

Image by Gemini