Who decides an election?

3 posts / 0 new
Last post
Scallywag
Offline
Joined: 24-03-14
Dec 13 2019 14:56
Who decides an election?

Is it simply people voting that decide who wins an election or are there other mechanisms of power at play which ensures that the capitalists get who they want?

I think I have unconsciously held that view that there is which is partly why I don't vote cause I don't think my individual vote will make any difference at all.

That is obviously conspiratorial though and I know most of us on here aren't too concerned about elections and think Labour are as bad as the tories anyway, but i am just wondering why millions of people would vote torrie anyway. Are the majority of people on the UK racist and hate immigrants, the poor sick and disabled?

baboon
Offline
Joined: 29-07-05
Dec 13 2019 20:53

I think that generally speaking the bourgeoisie of the major powers, during most of the latter half of the twentieth century, got the teams into power that they wanted. There were some slip-ups but mainly the ruling class selected the appropriate political party to help manage the affairs of state. During this whole period the class struggle was a major concern of the state and, again in all the major democratic powers, it honed its response accordingly within the democratic process.

It takes something of an effort on behalf of the ruling class to mobilise its forces in this way but it has the added benefit to all of its elements of mobilising the population, and the working class particularly, behind phoney alternatives and the national interest. I read somewhere that in GB, about 60-80,000 votes in particular areas secured an overall majority. You just have know where to maximise the effect.

I think that the tendency to the decay and fragmentation of capitalism - a process accelerated by the "new world order" of 1989, that's also been accompanied by the further strengthening of state repression - have made it more difficult for the bourgeoisie to control the game and the deepening economic crisis mean that all political parties have little to offer except greater misery and exploitation. At this stage of the game, the working class and its struggles are not in the face of the bourgeoisie. Rather it's being wound up to vote as atomised individuals where they vote for anyone on a whim.

The election result is depressing but equally depressing would have been a Lab/Libdem/SNP coalition or an outright Corbyn victory Specifically for the British ruling class this is probably the best result they could have but it's always the bourgeoisie that wins elections.

Owentiffie
Offline
Joined: 20-02-19
Jan 2 2020 10:26
Quote:
"..it's always the bourgeoisie that wins elections."

Well, that sucks, but horribly true.