The Dividing Lines Obsession

Tuesday, 9th February 2010

This is one of those things that I don't quite understand. Gordon Brown is obsessed with dividing lines and this is supposed to be upsetting us? Sure, this need to draw a contrast (often a false one, but never mind) between his Virtuous Labour party and the Callous Toffs & Cads at Tory head office is frequently petty, prickly and pointless. But what of it? Pete's the latest Spectator gentleman to complain about the Dividing Lines Obsession:

So far as the government is concerned, it matters not that these pledges have been made before – what matters is the opportunity to draw more dividing lines across the landscape of British politics. "Caring" versus "cruel", as far as the eye can see.

In fact, Dividing Lines are something of a Spectator obsession too (See here for instance for the 79 other times the term's been cited on this site) and I don't understand why. Surely, Dividing Lines are Good Things? Otherwise, how do you tell the parties apart? Sure, all politics is short-term and dirty as far as Gordon is concerned but that's the nature of the game, isn't it? Perhaps it is tedious and frequently tendentious, but that's only to be expected in an election year. Right?

Filed under: Brown (179 more articles) , Dividing lines (64 more articles) , Labour (2014 more articles) , Tories (265 more articles)

Previous Back to Alex Massie Next

Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Melanie Phillips | Coffee House | Faith Based

Actions: Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (2)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Post comment

DavidDP

February 9th, 2010 6:07pm Report this comment

Yes, well, if you read those 70 or so instances, you'd know the phrase was short hand for taking ridiculous positions that don't even have a short term benefit for the sole purpose of casting the Tories as "evil".

The long term care bill is a case in point.

Pete Hoskin

February 9th, 2010 6:58pm Report this comment

Alex, I see what you mean. But in my (The Spectator's?) defence, we tend to get angry about "dividing lines" which are misleading or just straight-up lies (eg "investment vs cuts"). The Burnham press conference was abour "caring Labour" against "cruel Conservatives" - which may just be part of the roungh 'n' tumble of politics, but surely you wouldn't say that's a genuine way of "telling the parties apart".

Also, looking back through various posts, we sometimes use the phrase when referring to any especially concerted attempt to put clear water between the parties - which is, as you say, a general feature of politics, and may not be cause for annoyance.

Maybe we should be clearer about it, maybe we shouldn't use "dividing lines" as a kind of shorthand for lying or whatever - but I hope that clears things up a bit. I certainly don't mean to attack any differences between the parties in and of themselves.

Post comment