Politics is a subject that arouses great passion in many people. Some develop very strong opinions about important issues such as justice and how to create a fairer society. Sometimes, however, this can tip over into prejudice towards those holding different views. Much attention has been paid to the impact of President Trump and also on the damage done by far-right groups. But the left needs to be examined too. 

Debate recently has centred on the attitudes of left-leaning people and institutions towards those they disagree with. At some universities, identity politics is dominating. The University of St Andrews recently introduced compulsory modules on sustainability, diversity and consent that students must pass in order to matriculate. 

Students responding ‘yes’ to the question, ‘Does equality mean treating everyone the same?’ are told: ‘That’s not right, in fact equality may mean treating people differently and in a way that is appropriate to their needs so that they have fair outcomes and equal opportunity’. This is presenting equity, a belief in equality of outcome, as a fact. In reality, it is a widely-contested political opinion. 

This situation is complex, with some people, especially the high number of Americans studying there, desiring this sort of training. It is not clear who is pressuring whom. But bias of this nature should not be part of study, whoever is demanding it. It risks excluding and silencing those with differing political opinions.

At the University of Kent, meanwhile, all students have been told to take a four-hour ‘Expect Respect’ course covering similar issues. One part is a ‘white privilege’ quiz, which involves selecting benefits experienced by white Britons. Students ticking certain boxes get a gold star; those who do not are told to try the quiz again. Are all white people really privileged? What about those living in poverty?

Worryingly, it is not only students experiencing pressure. A report administered by YouGov for Policy Exchange in 2020, with an exceptionally large panel of respondents, found that many academics self-censor, including 32% of those identifying as ‘fairly right’ or ‘right’ compared to around 15% of those leaning left or centre. 

No organisation should ever push people into certain political views. It is especially worrying to see universities engaging in such behaviour. A university should be a robust space, where students engage with various beliefs and learn how to think critically. It should never be a place where one has to conform politically.

At the Labour Party Conference, meanwhile, Deputy Leader Angela Rayner caused controversy when she described Conservative politicians as “scum” in a video shared widely on social media. Fellow Labour MP Emily Thornberry commented on BBC’s Politics Live that “there may have been drink partaken”.  

In all fairness to Rayner, most of us have had moments that, if filmed, would not look good, particularly if alcohol has been consumed. This class-based mockery, referencing comedian Catherine Tate’s ‘Am I bovvered?’ catchline, was also tactless given that Rayner was born on a Stockport council estate and left school pregnant at sixteen with no qualifications. 

However, the video hit a nerve for a reason. Some on the left do express negative views towards their right-wing counterparts. This is often seen in the left-leaning arts & culture sector. Evidence suggests that such attitudes are common amongst Labour supporters. Research by SMF/Opinium, in July 2021, revealed that 46% of Labour supporters would feel ‘more negatively’ about friends and family voting Conservative, compared to 15% of Conservatives feeling the same about friends and family voting Labour. Previous research also backs this up. 

Disagreement is fine but this can spill over into frustration. When many red wall communities voted Conservative in the 2019 election, there was open anger, as though these voters had somehow misbehaved. Following the earlier Brexit vote, these voters were dismissed as ‘thick’, though this attitude was not limited to the left. 

Such belittling is a form of discrimination. It is one thing to intensely dislike opinions, behaviour and values. It is quite another to dismiss a person or organisation as ‘stupid’ or ‘scum’. A line is crossed from challenging to stereotyping which distracts from raising serious moral questions.

There are major criticisms to be made of the Conservative Party, particularly in the light of the Pandora Papers’ revelations of the dubious nature of some political donations. The handling of the pandemic also warrants serious investigation. But surely it is best to question individual behaviour and structural issues, raising legal challenges if necessary?  

Many take a different approach, notably Blue Labour. But this attitude can seem very loud and damages the reputation of the left as a whole. Expressing anger towards those who have voted differently to oneself does not encourage them to change their mind. 

These attitudes have a wider impact. Following the BLM protests in 2020, assistance programmes for people from minority backgrounds proliferated. Where is the equivalent support for those in the red wall, whose frustrations were revealed by the leave vote? Are some only helping those with aligning political views? Assistance should be open to all who need it, regardless of belief or background.

Political diversity is very important, especially in these polarised times. Discriminating against someone because of their politics is no different to doing so on the basis of religion. Universities should expose students and academics to a broad range of opinions and people with a passion for politics should engage with the ‘other side’ (if indeed they have taken a side). MPs could take a lead in this and challenge each other with courtesy. We all need to be forgiving, particularly in this era of smartphones where so much can be recorded, distorted and taken out of context.