C1: supervisory, clerical; junior managerial, administrative or professional
C2: skilled manual worker
D: semi-skilled and unskilled manual worker
E: state pensioner, casual worker.
This scheme is perfectly appropriate for market research but not for politics. These classifications are useful when studying consumption habits, but they have nothing much to do with class. The consumption patterns of self-employed window-cleaners and of employed window-cleaners are very similar, their voting patterns and interests are not. These weaknesses in the system, might allow for the apparent reduction in the influence of class-affected voting patterns. Despite this, it can also be argued that it doesn’t matter which box you put people into as long as their class characteristics are understood.
Traditionally, class is seen in occupational terms. Those in manual jobs - the working class- are expected to vote Labour, whilst those in non-manual jobs - the middle and upper classes- tend to vote Conservative. A sign that class is mattering less to voters can be seen in the election results since 1945. Between 1945 and 1970, a majority of people belonged to the working class. Using this traditional theory, Labour would have been in government constantly since then. As this was not the case, either a large number of the working class did not vote or there was a large element of cross-party voting, where more manual workers did not vote labour than non-manual workers did not vote conservative. It is also possible that both occurred. Since the war, Britain has undergone a period of Embourgeoisement. Rising pay levels and living standards have caused the attitudes of the better-off manual workers to become more like those of the middle class. They are therefore more likely to vote conservative. This is one way of accounting for the flaws with the traditional class system.
Research conducted in the 1950's and 60's in both Britain and the USA, suggests that out of all the factors that might determine a person's voting behaviour, social class was the by far the most accurate predictor. This became known as the Class alignment theory. This was all very well for the period of 1945 to 1970, but since 1970, there has been increasing evidence of the opposite trend occurring. Many political scientists began to claim that we were in a time of class dealignment. It was also proposed that labour's share of the vote has been shrinking because the working class has been shrinking. It is probable that that former statement made the reduction of labour's popularity due to the latter statement, more noticeable than it would have otherwise have been. In fact, the changing middle class structure and the increase in non-manual jobs was a contributing factor to class dealignment, so the two above theories are inter-linked as both contributed to a climate of electoral volatility after 1970.
In response to this shift in voter attitudes, the parties have shifted, bring certain generalisations into question. The traditional class system as mentioned above is no longer relevant. Instead of the their former left of centre position, labour is now more of a centre party, drawing support from across the political spectrum instead of solely from the traditional working class. Labour's share of the votes rose in the AB and C1 sections and fell among the manual workers. The opposite is true for the Conservatives.
Since 1983, when Neil Kinnock became leader of the Labour party, they have sought to transform their image. This policy proved to be a stunning success and was most clearly symbolised under Tony Blair, with the re-branding of the party as 'New labour'. Blair continued Kinnock's ideas and discarded many of old Labour's more left wing policies such as nationalisation. While Labour was moving to a more central position, the conservatives were also on the move. Their decision to focus their election campaign on Europe and asylum, issues that traditionally matter most to the less well-educated (working class) is a sign that they are not wholly focussed around middle class concerns. Labour, instead of being a working-class party, seems on course to become a 'catch all' party. With these recent shifts in the party positions, there is less variation between the policies of labour and the conservatives and many people have begun to doubt whether it is worth voting at all. It appears that many voters have altered their voting behaviour, not because class matters less but rather because the choices on offer from the parties have changed.
The relationship between class and vote was at an all time low in 1997 and declined further in 2001. A debate has arisen about whether this is a long-term decline, but the support of the 2001 election results suggests that it might be. It is evident that the relationship between class and voting patterns has altered greatly since the Second World War, but the class system itself has undergone substantial changes so it is not, perhaps surprising. In the past few years, the primary approach to voting has declined and more people are relying on the recency approach to determine whom they vote for. This leads to much more fickle voting as it relies on the personality of the leader, the image of the party and issue preference. It places less stress on the long-term factors such as class and age. I think that of these long-term factors, class remains the most important and influential, but overall, the long-term factors are becoming less important and therefore class is not the single most important factor affecting voting behaviour in Britain.
