The Fool In The Tunnel
by Jay Griffith
Them pesky protesters are at it again. Emerging from a tunnel entrance and abseiling down a cliff face with a grubby, tatty bit of paper comes Swampy, announcing his intention to stand as the dinkiest MP in the coming election. His banner read: 'Dig for victory' and comes w ith T-shirt tie-in.; so between the crumples in his (suspiciously clean) T-shirt appear the words "Dig for Victory...". In a less Churchillian vein, his manifesto (to contest Blackley, near Manchester, against Graham Stringer, Chairman of Manchester Airport plc) shows the said Stringer giving a two-finger salute.
The Times and The Independent gave it a big front-page splash yesterday morning [1st April]. The Guardian and the Mail gave it a little drizzle. The Express and Telegraph went big, but were safely indoors on pages 25 and 13 respectively. Tony Blair was dutifully asked for his reaction; Swampy added 'colour', said Mr B, colourlessly. There was a flat-footed response from the Labour Party spokespersons.
But protesters scorn parties of all colours: Conservatives conserve nothing; Labour has no broadly perceived commitment to the environment; Lib Dem promises sounded very hollow when the Lib Dem MP for Newbury supported the bypass. Further, protestors find the whole Westminster politics antipathetic, for theirs is a movement in structure so unlike an organisation, in style so unlike a suit. Protestors - and Swampy more than any - dislike personality politics; and yesterday's stunt was a send-up of politics which too often ignores "the issues" to concentrate on "the face".
It may seem amazing that anyone could take Swampy's manifesto seriously, for this is a movement which is patently against Westminster style politics. But never underestimate the capacity of the press to misunderstand this movement; by mistake in the case of most, and by malice in the case of the Times and the Sunday Times. The idea of Swampy really wanting to stand for Parliament would have been a joke whichever day of the year. The Independent, to its credit, shyly noted that the date was April Fools Day.
What is the point of fools? Historically all "fools days" are intended to reverse the usual order, undermining those who govern, cocking a snook or three at pomp and power. Such days have a cartoon-quality; The Simpsons have done more to damage America's nuclear industry than thousands of petitions. The fools, then, are critics from the margins, tunnelling - appropriately underneath the straight face world of "realpolitik".
The figure of protestor-as-fool is powerful precisely because protestors stay underneath, outside society, out-laws in practice since the Criminal Justice Act, and outlaws in a figurative sense. Outlaws by tradition have to voice their criticisms from outdoors. In the case of the anti-road, anti-airport protestors, they are voicing their criticisms from the outdoors and for the sake of the outdoors.
The protest movement is intrinsically out of tune with Westminster because protestors speak for nature. Government is increasingly an urban affair; London dominates the provinces, city councils dominate rural parishes. To speak "political sense", politicians seem required to speak a very urban language; of economics, taxation, budgets, investment, infrastructure, buildings. To speak of concerns for something as intangible as Nature is to seem to speak like a fool - like a fool of nature.
But protestors are actually speaking for a huge number of people. Membership of environment groups in Britain totals five million, over twice the number who belong to all parties put together. Yet the democratic system we use doesn't seem to reflect those five million concerns.
Protestors are accused of not being democratic, of side stepping the ballot box. But many of them are passionately pro-democracy - but for one thing. They want more of it, not less, more participation from voters, more accountability from politicians, more accurate representation of concerns. What they see in parliament is an increasing coalescence of political philosophy, into a puddle of "middle of centre" parties. Middle England's middle of the road. Further, a nation which has effectively disenfranchised thousands of voters - via the poll tax and ineluctable voter-cynicism - is not democratic. That the emergence now of a de facto one-party government is not democratic. That a nation ruled for 18 years by a government which the majority did not vote for is not democratic.
Swampy (Mister Hooper, according to the Daily Telegraph) intended to stand for the "Never Mind Ballots" Party. For those who remember the Sex Pistols, it is a skittish and printable way of saying Bollox to Voting. "Democracy", said Swampy, "is more than a vote once every five years. It's about active participation. One act is worth 10,000 words. Let's vote with our feet." Democracy. It isn't. Are you?
This article was first published in The Guardian Newspaper on April 2nd 1997.