So. After Bradford West, does anyone still think that this anti-politics mood is just a passing phase?
Anyone still dispute that the established political brands are losing market share?
For a while now, some of us have been arguing that the days of mass-brand, generic politics are coming to an end. Bradford or Boris, the future of politics lies in brands that are niche, distinctive, particular and often local.
Why so?
First and foremost, the voters are increasingly hacked off. They have woken up to the fact that it is not those they elect who decide things. We are governed instead by an insular clique of unelected officials, Whitehall technocrats, human right judges and Foreign Office mandarins. And since those the voters elect no longer really make decisions, more and more voters have come to despise them.
The second reason mass brand, generic politics is coming to an end is technology.
A few years ago, Chris Anderson's The Long Tail showed how the internet is changing retail. Instead of simply selling one kind of item to millions, the internet makes in possible to sell many more items to many more niche markets. So, too, in politics.
Unless and until the established political parties adopt a more open source model - full open primaries, registered supporter status, and ditching that obsession with sticking to the "line to take" - they will keep on losing market share.
blog comments powered by Disqus"A revolutionary text ... right up there with the Communist manifesto" - Dominic Lawson, Sunday Times
Printed and promoted by Chris Lowe on behalf of Douglas Carswell, both of 105 Station Road, Clacton-on-Sea, Essex