The ideology embraced by a political party is
perhaps the single most important factor in determining the policies
that party promotes. All parties have an ideological outlook — whether
its members are conscious of it or not — and that outlook is positioned
somewhere along the left-right spectrum. And, no, Bermuda is not an
exception.
The Progressive Labour Party was
founded as a party of labour and has been a critical agent for social
reform over almost 50 years. Over the decades, some of the strident
“progressive” policies such as income tax and nationalisation have given
way to the practicality of electoral politics and the party has moved
toward, yet does not occupy, the political centre. Ideologically, the
PLP is left of centre on Bermuda’s political spectrum and could rightly
be labelled a liberal party.
A new political
party, the One Bermuda Alliance occupies the same ideological space as
the now marginalised United Bermuda Party. They are cut from the same
cloth. The OBA tends to place greater emphasis on addressing business
needs since business growth is seen as the engine for the growth of the
country and therefore the betterment of people. Their agenda for
governance would sit comfortably alongside that of the Conservative
Party in the UK and is rightly placed right of the ideological centre.
There
are striking parallels between the political battle around ideology and
elections in Bermuda and what is going on in the US presidential
campaign. Consider the issue of debt, the recession and budget deficits —
no doubt critical issues for the election campaigns.
The
Obama administration has implemented a number of decisions designed to
inject money into the economy to prevent a further contraction, to help
support those in need and to help provide for economic stimulus. During
his tenure the US debt has increased significantly as these policies
were set in motion. This is directly paralleled with economic programme
Premier Cox has adopted.
The Romney campaign
has excoriated President Obama for a massive increase in debt levels
over the past four years and for growing budget deficits, which he has
labelled irresponsible and indicative of mismanagement. He has pledged
to significantly reduce debt levels and get to a balanced budget over
two terms. The OBA has adopted a similar approach here.
.
None of
this is surprising given the ideological dispositions of the respective
parties. What is surprising is that political parties would hold to
positions based on ideology when substantive bodies of research and
analysis point to it being wrong-headed.
On
the issue of debt, for example, the New York Times wrote yesterday in an
editorial that the Eurostat Euro Indicators statistics released on
Monday “provide objective support for what has been clear to just about
everyone except pro-austerity German officials and deficit-crazed
Republican politicians. Namely, deep government budget cuts at a time of
economic weakness are counterproductive, complicating, if not ruining,
the chances for economic growth.”
The power
of ideology is such that it shapes a party’s ethos and it shapes its
policies. At times, ideological purity will be sacrificed in the pursuit
of electoral gains; and this can be done without moving away from core
principles. Everyone has a way of seeing the world and they tend to
support political parties that they find common cause with. A good
friend of mine recently posed the following question: “If Barack Obama
was Bermudian, which party would he vote for?” My answer: “That’s a
question about ideology.”