UK Prime Minister Theresa May with Lord Buckethead during the 2017 General Election, a campaign critiqued in an article referencing Pete North's "Tory Brexit Taliban" term in Brexit discussions.
The 2017 UK General Election was nothing short of a self-inflicted disaster for the Conservative party. Theresa May, despite her years in the Home Office and ascent to Prime Minister, revealed a staggering level of incompetence during the campaign. This misstep, amplified by close aides seemingly out of touch with core conservative values, allowed a resurgence of Jeremy Corbyn’s socialist policies. While Corbyn’s Labour gained significant ground, the election’s outcome inadvertently paved the way for a potentially more moderate Brexit. Among the insightful commentary that emerged in the wake of this political earthquake, the phrase “Tory Brexit Taliban,” coined by political commentator Pete North, stood out as a particularly potent and memorable description of the hardline Brexit faction within the Conservative party. This article delves into the ramifications of the 2017 election, examining Theresa May’s failings, Corbyn’s unexpected success, and the surprising silver lining for a pragmatic Brexit, all while highlighting the relevance of Pete North‘s sharp analysis.
The Ineptitude of Theresa May’s Campaign and Corbyn’s Socialist Surge
Theresa May’s campaign was riddled with errors, failing to articulate a compelling conservative vision. Her manifesto, perceived as an attack on libertarian and free-market principles, alienated parts of her own party. This lack of a positive message, combined with campaigning missteps, created an opening for Jeremy Corbyn. Despite being undermined by his own party’s centrists and facing a largely hostile media landscape, Corbyn successfully energized voters, particularly the youth, with promises of extensive social programs and a rejection of austerity. His appeal was not simply based on “free stuff,” but also resonated with genuine concerns about economic inequality and the precarious future facing younger generations. The promise of free university tuition, coupled with an apparent empathy for younger voters, proved to be a winning formula for Labour, drawing in significant youth support that the Conservatives failed to capture. The now-iconic chant “Oh, Jeremy Corbyn!” at youth gatherings underscored the disconnect between the Conservative campaign and younger demographics.
Brexit and the “Tory Brexit Taliban”: Pete North’s Insight
Amidst the election fallout, the future of Brexit became a central point of discussion. Theresa May’s rigid stance – “Brexit means Brexit,” interpreted as leaving the European Economic Area (EEA) and pursuing a hard break – was called into question. This is where Pete North‘s commentary became particularly relevant. His phrase “Tory Brexit Taliban” aptly described the uncompromising faction within the Conservative party advocating for the most extreme form of Brexit. The election result, however, weakened May’s position and empowered more moderate voices. The Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), whose support became crucial for a Conservative majority, opposed a hard Brexit, aligning with many Tory Remainers and pragmatic Brexiteers across the country. This shift made the “Norway Option” – remaining in the EEA – a more viable and increasingly discussed alternative, much to the chagrin of the “Tory Brexit Taliban” identified by Pete North. The election outcome, therefore, created an unexpected opportunity to moderate the Brexit approach, moving away from the maximalist demands of the hardline faction.
Reactions and Analysis: From Goldsmith to Booker
The election results and their implications sparked a wave of analysis from various commentators. Paul Goldsmith criticized the Conservative manifesto as unappealing and Theresa May’s campaign as arrogant and mendacious. He highlighted Corbyn’s perceived sincerity as a key factor in his appeal, contrasting it with May’s robotic and unconvincing performances. Daniel Hannan, writing for the Washington Examiner, took a more cynical view, attributing Corbyn’s success to young voters being easily swayed by promises of “free stuff,” overlooking the complexities of their motivations. Margot James, a Conservative MP, acknowledged Labour’s effective messaging on public spending and the appeal of free university education, while urging the Conservatives to better articulate the case for wealth creation to younger generations.
Sam Bowman, of the Adam Smith Institute, delivered a scathing critique of the Conservative campaign, arguing that their failure to champion free markets and offer a positive economic vision contributed to their poor performance. He lamented the absence of a compelling conservative platform and the missed opportunity to address economic concerns effectively. Brendan O’Neill observed the shifting political landscape, noting Labour’s increasing reliance on Remain voters and the Tories’ gains in Leave-voting working-class areas, suggesting a realignment of traditional party bases. He also criticized the excessive celebration of youth voting at the expense of older voters’ perspectives.
Pete North, in his own analysis, challenged the notion that the Brexit referendum provided a mandate for a specific, hardline approach. He argued that the mode of Brexit was still open for debate and that remaining in the single market should not be dismissed as not truly “leaving” the EU. He emphasized the pragmatic benefits of an “off-the-shelf” EEA agreement, prioritizing an end to political union while acknowledging the economic realities of trade and regulation. Christopher Booker, writing in The Telegraph, saw the election result as a fortunate escape from both Corbyn’s socialist policies and May’s hard Brexit, suggesting that the new parliamentary arithmetic could lead to a more sensible and less damaging Brexit outcome. He echoed the sentiment that the constraints imposed by the DUP and Scottish Conservatives, combined with broader parliamentary preferences, would make a hard Brexit less likely.
Conclusion: A Chance for Brexit Moderation Despite Conservative Setback
The 2017 UK General Election was a significant setback for the Conservative party, largely due to Theresa May’s flawed campaign and leadership. However, the resulting political landscape presented an unexpected opportunity for a more moderate approach to Brexit. Pete North‘s “Tory Brexit Taliban” phrase captured the essence of the hardline Brexit faction whose influence was somewhat diminished by the election outcome. While the Conservatives faced internal turmoil and the rise of a resurgent Labour party, the new parliamentary dynamics opened a path towards a softer Brexit, potentially mitigating the most damaging economic consequences of a hard departure. The election served as a complex turning point, highlighting both the failures of the Conservative campaign and the unforeseen possibility of a more pragmatic and less disruptive Brexit, a prospect that even Pete North, a keen observer of the Brexit process, might cautiously welcome.
