If David Cameron's attempt to soften the image of the Tory party succeeds, all three main parties at the next election will stand on a platform of cultural and social liberalism. This represents the final triumph of the 1960s—the decade that sharply eroded authority and constraint, abolished capital punishment, introduced child-centred education, saw the headlong decline of organised religion, legislated for gender and race equality, legalised gay sex and made divorce easier. A big step forward for freedom and all the troubles it brings in its wake. The Conservative party was always ambivalent about much of this. It embraced economic liberalism under Margaret Thatcher, but only now, it seems, is it making its peace with social liberalism. Just as Labour accepted the legacy of the 1980s under Blair, Cameron's Tories have had to come to terms with the 1960s. There is a paradox here. Just as all the mainstream parties adopt social liberalism, the national agenda is focusing on duty, community and stability as a counterweight to that liberalism: the "respect" legislation, school discipline, ID cards, identity and Britishness. Governing Britain today means exploring the limits of social liberalism, yet—unlike in the US—getting elected seems to require exploring those limits from inside the camp.
Before Cameron, the conventional wisdom was that Labour would narrowly win the next election and that the following one would result in a hung parliament. But if the Cameron effect lasts, if Labour continues to look ragged and there is not much of a "Brown bounce," the next election might instead go straight to a hung parliament. That, as Robert Hazell points out inside, could mean the introduction of PR and the Liberal Democrats holding the balance of power in both the Lords and the Commons. It may be worth paying some attention to their leadership election.
Elsewhere, Alastair Crooke, the former middle east negotiator, gives an upbeat assessment of Hamas. The lesson of many global conflicts is that a lasting deal can only in the end be done with the "mainstream extremes" on both sides. But whoever wins the Israeli election in March is unlikely to have a mandate to return to the negotiating table if the Palestinian side has a big Hamas presence.
