Some Thoughts On The British Elections

As I write this, with the returns of yesterday’s parliamentary elections in the United Kingdom all but finalized, it appears certain that the ruling Conservative Party has fallen short of an outright majority, thereby forcing a coalition government with one of the several minor parties in Britain. I have a few thoughts on the results, and what they mean for Britain, the European Union, and the United States going forward:

First, the results, coupled with the overall election process, seem to highlight a simple fact of modern democratic governments—parliamentary systems are inherently less stable, and are less suited to leading strong national governments on the world stage, than more structured democratic systems such as in the United States. In America, a pattern of regularly scheduled elections, coupled with the historical irrelevance of any third parties, make for a more predictable and organized political system—even when, as in 2016, the ultimate outcome of those elections is unexpected. In Britain and other countries with parliamentary systems, meanwhile, elections can be called at any time (with a few limits on frequency), and complicated coalition governments are common. These arrangements often lead to weaker and more transient governments than are common in the United States and some other countries—yesterday’s election results being a prime example of that fact.

Unsurprisingly, the United Kingdom Independence Party, or UKIP, no longer holds even a single seat in Parliament, a dramatic reversal from the growing influence of the party just two years ago. The reason is simple: Brexit was the party’s single animating feature, the part of its platform that differentiated it from all others. Now that Brexit has been achieved, and the only real debate among the parties centers on the precise terms of Britain leaving the European Union, UKIP has been robbed of that which made it special. A similar phenomenon is often seen in American politics, where a single-issue minor party will enjoy some short-lived success based on the strength of one particular argument, but will quickly disappear once one or both of the major parties co-opt that argument, or the issue itself fades in relevance.

And finally, the results themselves will likely not affect American foreign policy in any meaningful way, at least in the short term. Britain will still withdraw from the European Union, although the negotiation process has just become more difficult for them. The Conservative Party is still the dominant political party in the U.K., although likewise their hand has been weakened. It would have been nice to see a right-wing party enjoy some success across the pond, but direct repercussions from yesterday’s results will probably be limited.

Still, what those results do show is the fickleness of voters in any democracy, the foolishness of declaring a political opponent to be finished, and the dangers of being seen as not delivering substantive reform. That may be the most important lesson for Americans, and the Republican Party in particular.