The main reason for the decline in turnout for voting in Britain is the end of class alignment”
Introduction
Voting process in Britain normally displays different political and social alignments that determine the outcomes of elections. However, the dominant class of the average people are the determinate forces that sway and influence the direction of the process and outcome. Therefore, in the recent past, the decline in voter turnout replicates the end of class alignment because of inability to determine the inclination of the classes. This arises because similar political classes support varied political policies. For instance, working class voters and middle class voters indicated to vote mainly for the Labour and Conservative parties correspondingly although there were also substantial fractions of divergent voters who did not vote probably according to their social class. Even though, the social classes are vital in voting patterns in British, decline in turnout for voting can determine adjustments of the adjustments.
Arguments for decline
Decline in voting turnout is experienced in modern democracies, which are going through an evolution period that pose challenges to the essential role of parties, and to their association with the electorate. Therefore, position of political parties changes by increasing ranks of education and liberation of citizens, who will not always back similar party in elections. Similarly, ideological merging of the larger parties along the different dimension makes it easy for voters to shift, but also for parties to contest along issues that are not organized by left-right. Additionally, reduction in turnout occur when parties are ideologically less different, which makes voters evaluate parties progressively by their enactment, rather than by their philosophical positions. According to Jones and Gray (143), the central reason for this reduction is due to class dealignment where members of some classes losses their support of the parties; hence, abandon the voting process. This also happens as individuals lose their customary class loyalties to an actual party. This dealignment shows that temporary aspects might play a significant role than usual in whether a contender obtains a vote from somebody of his party. This is due to the reality that numerous factors can be accredited to partisan dealignment such as political alertness and socialisation, thorough mass media exposure and decline of admiration. Other aspects that contribute to low turnout of voters are disappointment both with parties and candidates, and the poor enactment of government (Jones and Gray 148).
Arguments against
However, on another side, due to harsh economic situations, voters prefer attending to their daily occupations to voting. This is precipitated by the poor governance displayed by the ruling parties. This is because voter turnout seems to be lower in regions of above average joblessness, below-average earnings and higher charges of economic and social dormancy. Clearly, the majority of these voters feel completely detached from mainstream politics both at domestic and national level. The turnout appears to be strongest when, at a national stage, the election perceived as being of distinct political significance or when domestic political issues are of satisfactory salience, to pull out voters from all parties. When the result appears to be relatively a foregone assumption, many voters observe that their ballot will have little or no impact on the result (Garnett and Lynch 169).
Alternatively, the decline in voter contribution is insignificant for young electorates, many of whom perhaps were not listed to vote or attend the polling station, and also among ethnic subgroups. There is evidently a considerable organizational problem as administrative parties are not recognizing or responding to the many and diverse requirements and priorities of younger supporters and people of dissimilar social and cultural backgrounds (Garnett and Lynch 181). This increased perception of voters could be forced as being a reason keeping them away from the elections, with a greater consideration of the political organization comes acknowledgment of many responsibilities and the relative irrationality of balloting.
Therefore, the appreciation of the political system is indifference inspiring. The British democratic structure itself is a factor in the declining voter turnout, encouragements to vote are marginal and many faults exist within the voting process. For example, the democratic system makes polling rather useless in posts that are safe for one of the political parties. This implies that, in such populations, the outcome is often clear, and so supporters can become uninterested and marginalized from voting as it seems that their ballot does not have identical political load as the vote of a person in a challenged constituency (Garnett and Lynch 175).
Conclusion
Indications of low voter turnout offer varied opinions that try to explain the phenomena. Supporters of this tendency state that it arises due to transformations in evolution period that pose challenges to the essential role of parties, and to their association with the electorate. They also claim that ideological differences are not clear, which makes voters evaluate parties progressively by their enactment, rather than by their philosophical positions. On the other hand, opponents of this notion suggest that low voter turnout stimulated by lack of political exposure and awareness among the young voters. This is precipitated by the poor governance displayed by the ruling parties.
Works Cited
Garnett, Mark, and Philip Lynch. Exploring British politics. New York: Longman,
2007. Print.
Jones, Bill, and Andrew Gray. Politics UK. New York: P. Allan, 1991.
Print.
