I would agree with this statement, and would back it up by saying that in terms of geography of voters, there are clearly-defined places where each political party recieves a majority of votes, and this is a reflection on social class rather than geography dictating who a person votes for. One could argue that these positional electoral patterns change over time, or that they are just a manifestation of valence politics. In my opinion, it depends on the demographics of the specific area but also in a party's political stance-if you look at the Conservative governments terms in office up until they relinquished it to Labour in 1997, many of their policies were not suited to the working classes such as a reduced welfare-state for those who needed benefits and the disapproval of unions. Therefore they attracted a more middle-class voter....In general, those needing public services such as a public health service or a council house would vote Labour and people who provided those services would vote Conservative. The middle-classes can give a large proportion of their earnings to the government in taxes-so should the Conservatives get into power this would be a something they'd be conscious of, but equally, the Conservatives can offer, amongst other things, free markets and the reduction of unions, meaning the employers get more power in the work environment-again, this is an example of the parties being acutely aware of the different social classes and the benefits of each one, and the voters also being aware that the parties can offer them something in return for their votes.
There are evidently voters who vote for the party their parents or peers vote for, and those that vote for a party simply because they like their policies. The latter type of voter doesn't regard social class-this is where partisan dealignment comes into play-people will eventually switch to another party if it changes their policies or they consider themselves devoid of a social class-if a party's policies interest a large portion of the same demographical group, but not necessarily social class, then partisan dealignment will take place, for example people switching from largely voting Labour to voting BNP in the Barking and Dagenham constituency-ironically, these voters weren't targeted for their social class primarily but the fact that they were mainly white and British, and the working-class are often White British, thus partisan dealignment in terms of a specific social-class changing their voting pattern happened by default rather design. The reasons for dealignment are difficult to define-but changing social trends, as well as emergence of newer political parties, are part of the reason. In the current climate of an economic recession, a Labour government will always attract voters, and because the Nationalisation of major banks and the general economic restructuring that the Labour government has proposed is seen to benefit the people as a whole, but especially the working-classed who were struggling for money anyway, then economic situation and therefore social class is integral to whether the Labour party gets people voting for them. Geography indeed has an important role to play in social politics-in the 1980s when the recession hit, Northern industrial centres were hit hardest as manufacturing declined, and the South, which had more skilled workers, wasn't hit by the recession as hard has under-qualified Northern voters who relied on factories and suchlike as a source of employment-the working-classes were still prevalent in the 1980s and weren't treated well by the Thatcherite government, and this seems to be a grudge that has lasted 20 plus years later-because the working-classes were done a disservice by the Tory government under Thatcher in the 1980s, they probably don't want to vote Conservative even if they feel disillusioned by the New Labour government.
The Labour government, whilst latently appealing towards the working-classes, often emphasises that class is either redundant or non-existent. John Prescott said in 1997 “We are all middle-class now”, and Blair himself said at the Labour party conference in 1999, “the class war is over”. Whilst social class will never be abolished in a country like Britain, who has relied on it for hundreds of years, there is still a chance that class will largely not be acknowledged by people in Britain, and therefore the political parties will do the same. Whilst Conservatives continue to appeal to the more economically-stable members of British society, Labour, despite claiming not to acknowledge class, still clearly have the working-class voter as a core part of future success. Harriet Harman was quoted as saying that people are discriminated against for their social class more than they are their race or gender “
(2) 'We have made great progress on tackling inequality but we know that inequality doesn't just come from your gender, race, sexual orientation or disability. What overarches all of these is where you live, your family background, your wealth and social class'
So there is a rhetoric within the Labour party that the working-classes are core voters, and they strike a chord with the working-classes-the relationship is mutally-beneficial. The Conservatives do try to engage with the proleteriats, for example David Cameron visiting run-down areas, but it comes natural to Labour-the fact that the Conservative party are conscious that the working classes represent a large proportion of British society, and gaining their vote would be crucial, is indicative of how class is dictating not only how the voters vote but how the parties themselves operate.
To recap and conclude- the impact of social class on political choice isn't as evident as if was in the 70s and 80s, but that's partly down to the social classes slowly dissolving due to the recession and accessible education, plus the fact that the aristocracy don't have as much social standing as they once did. However, political cleavages still exist, such as the working-class and the BNP. Social class isn't the only determining factor in voting, and I don't think it was ever the sole determining factor; when you consider things like people who vote for whoever their parents voted for. People aren't as conscious of their class as maybe the parties would like them to be-they just vote for whoever's policies they like best-Labour's left wing socialist policies may appeal to someone who just also happens to come from a poorer background-social class doesn't dictate how people think or act. So yes-social class does have a big role in political voting, but more on the parties' side, when they are looking for new voters or swing voters, when they are looking for mass partisan dealignment-they'll choose people who they think will approve of their policies. As far as the voters themselves are concerned, they vote for the party who's politics are salient and will benefit both themselves and the British people as a whole. Political choice may never be determined by social class as much it once was, but the parties will be conscious of the needs of the people in a certain class and will draw their policies up as such.
1.) (Oxford Journals, Economic Geography Journal, 09/10/07)
2.) ((Harriet Harman, TUC meeting, September 2008)
