To what extent does sociological evidence
To what extent does sociological evidence and arguments support the claim that there has been a realignment of voting behaviour in Britain?For there to have been a realignment of voting behaviour in Britain there must first have been a dealignment. According to Butler and Stokes there was a predictable pattern of voting up until the 1970's which was characterised by strong partisan alignment and the fact that Britain was a two party system. Partisan alignment is linked to class alignment. The majority of the electorate identified with one party; typically, working class with Labour and middle class with Conservative. Because there were two main classes then it was inevitable that there would be two dominant parties which represent them. This rigid alliance with either one party or the other depending on your class was supported by Crewe. He found that, in the 1964 election, 62% of non-manual workers voted Conservative while 64% of manual workers voted Labour. This shows that there was not much dealignment in voting behaviour before the 1970's.From 1974 onwards there were changes in the pattern of voting. The influence of class on voting behaviour seemed to be declining, there was a rise in the amount of deviant voters, Bri
However, the working class are still present and voting Labour, along with the middle class, so it seems that there has not been a realignment of voting behaviour. Because of the changing class structure parties were having to change so as to represent the majority of the electorate so that they could gain the majority of the votes. Instead he defined class in terms of economic interest. He said that, when deciding how to vote, people weighed up the advantages and disadvantages of each party, choosing the one which was most likely to benefit them in terms of policy. A person was more likely to vote for the party which seemed to represent their own ideals. However, studies by Heath suggest that class is still an important factor when it comes to voting behaviour. If Heath was correct saying that the working class was declining as a group, then it made more sense to be seen as a party which represents the middle classes. This can be seen to be similar to class based voting because people vote for the party which represents them and their class, not just the one which offers them the best policies, as shown by Himmelweit. This was expanded on by Himmelweit who made a comparison of the electorate choice of party with a consumer deciding on a purchase. He also found that the majority of the Conservative votes came from the middle classes while the majority of the Labour votes came from the working classes. However, he has been criticised by Crewe saying that he did not take account of the fact that there had been a growth of a third party and also that the salariat and working class combined only made up 45% of the electorate. People were no longer sticking with one party who they identified with, either because of class or political socialisation, but were more likely to change their vote from one election to the next so as to get the best deal for themselves. However, Heath also said that, while class is important, it does not directly determine the party voted for. Whilst Heath rejected Himmelweit's consumer model of voting, he did say that the image of a party, projected by its policies and ideologies, had an effect on the electorate.
Common topics in this essay:
Whilst Heath,
Crewe Sarlvik,
Butler Stokes,
Whilst Labour,
,
voting behaviour,
realignment voting behaviour,
realignment voting,
middle class,
class system,
1997 election,
middle classes,
dealignment taking,
voting behaviour britain,
class based voting,
workers voted,
party image,
labour middle class,
party represents,
dealignment voting behaviour,
|
Acceptance Essays
