Another example of the phenomena from Britain, which is less blatant than race, is to be found in a comparison of the perceptions of Prime Minister David Cameron and Nigel Farage, the leader of the United Kingdom Independence Party ("UKIP").
They are both conservatives of a type. Both support lower public spending and lower taxation. Both are sceptical of the European Union (though Farage is an outright opponent of it), and both want more control over immigration into the country. Both are from similar backgrounds, having been privately educated and having worked for private enterprise before entering politics.
A crucial difference, however, is to be seen in their presentation of themselves, and in the way that potential voters react to it. Cameron does nothing to hide his aristocratic vowels, his aristocratic wife, his European holidays or his socially liberal views (his government introduced gay marriage). Farage, however, has affected a somewhat mongrelised estuary-English diction. His German wife never appears in public. He wears a rustic-looking tweed suit instead of the usual dark grey, and he is careful to be regularly pictured with a pint of beer.
The result appears to be that a considerable minority view Cameron as a detached, elitist, metropolitan "toff"; while seeing Farage as an ordinary, down-to-earth, trustworthy kind of "bloke". The importance seems to be the difference in seeing either as "one of us" or "one of them". Differences in policy or in perceptions of administrative competence are generally ignored.
I find this very striking, particularly because it demonstrates that voters can be duped into supporting candidates on the basis of shared background, even where there is none.
It's the principle that makes me uneasy!
