This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jun/10/arcoss-world-voters-need-positive-future
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| Across the world, voters need to imagine a positive future, to be part of something | Across the world, voters need to imagine a positive future, to be part of something |
| (about 1 month later) | |
| The world’s electorates are confounding what we thought we knew about voters and voting. Neither Brexit nor Donald Trump was on the cards. Nor, until the very last moment, was a Labour surge predicted in last week’s election. Explanations are forming. The rise of populism and a disenchantment with globalisation are blamed. But what is actually changing in politics and what do we really know? | The world’s electorates are confounding what we thought we knew about voters and voting. Neither Brexit nor Donald Trump was on the cards. Nor, until the very last moment, was a Labour surge predicted in last week’s election. Explanations are forming. The rise of populism and a disenchantment with globalisation are blamed. But what is actually changing in politics and what do we really know? |
| People have found their lives transformed since 2008, but establishment politics have not kept pace with the change. A downturn in economic growth and technological change have caused a precariousness in employment, a loss of social status and a sense of being culturally imperilled. Across the world, the results are being felt as people use their one remaining weapon – their vote – to voice their discontent. | People have found their lives transformed since 2008, but establishment politics have not kept pace with the change. A downturn in economic growth and technological change have caused a precariousness in employment, a loss of social status and a sense of being culturally imperilled. Across the world, the results are being felt as people use their one remaining weapon – their vote – to voice their discontent. |
| Representative politics seems broken. The parties that were built to represent working people moved to a “consensus politics” in the 1990s when economic growth was lifting everyone. Then came the financial crisis and its aftermath. As wages have stagnated and jobs become scarce, workers feel shut out of the political mainstream. They cannot hear their own voices and concerns in established political parties. In some countries, the result has been to choose outsiders and “strong man” politicians who voice their concerns and promise to bring pride and order to chaos and humiliation. Across the world, we see this in Duterte, Orbán, Erdoğan, Putin and Trump. | Representative politics seems broken. The parties that were built to represent working people moved to a “consensus politics” in the 1990s when economic growth was lifting everyone. Then came the financial crisis and its aftermath. As wages have stagnated and jobs become scarce, workers feel shut out of the political mainstream. They cannot hear their own voices and concerns in established political parties. In some countries, the result has been to choose outsiders and “strong man” politicians who voice their concerns and promise to bring pride and order to chaos and humiliation. Across the world, we see this in Duterte, Orbán, Erdoğan, Putin and Trump. |
| The cost of running for president or Congress in the US has spiralled out of control, yet this may be changing | The cost of running for president or Congress in the US has spiralled out of control, yet this may be changing |
| Blaming these outcomes on “post-truth” politics suggests a misunderstanding of the role of communication in politics. Voters are not suddenly being swung by the purely emotional. The agenda and ideas of candidates have always mattered. Politicians are communicators in chief, but what they promise has never mattered in a narrowly rational way. This has long baffled economists and technocrats. It’s not the costed agenda that matters, it’s how a politician’s ideas speak to psychological and social needs. This is truer than ever after the 2008 crisis. Social theory helps us here. Voters at this juncture need to vent, to imagine a positive future, to feel part of something and to latch on to some concrete changes. Yet all these are long-established effects. | Blaming these outcomes on “post-truth” politics suggests a misunderstanding of the role of communication in politics. Voters are not suddenly being swung by the purely emotional. The agenda and ideas of candidates have always mattered. Politicians are communicators in chief, but what they promise has never mattered in a narrowly rational way. This has long baffled economists and technocrats. It’s not the costed agenda that matters, it’s how a politician’s ideas speak to psychological and social needs. This is truer than ever after the 2008 crisis. Social theory helps us here. Voters at this juncture need to vent, to imagine a positive future, to feel part of something and to latch on to some concrete changes. Yet all these are long-established effects. |
| Let me construct a four-part test. First, ask whether a politician is creating symbolic enemies to permit the electorate to vent their sense of injustice, what social theorists call the cathartic effect. Think of Corbyn’s billionaires and fat cats and Trump’s depiction of the media and the “swamp” of Washington DC’s political establishment. Second, ask whether a positive future vision is being offered that engenders morale, such as Corbyn’s “fairer, better Britain” and Trump’s “make America great”. Third, ask whether the campaigner has generated a sense of belonging – or the solidarity effect? This was quaintly put as “collective endeavour” in Corbyn’s campaign and less quaintly framed in “us” versus “them” terms in Trump’s. Finally, offering voters concrete specifics that fit their lives and on to which they can latch fulfils the advocacy effect. Think about Corbyn’s “no tuition fees” and “free school meals”, which went viral. What politicians say can have psychological and social effects. These can be tracked and analysed rather than consigned to “post-truth” politics. | Let me construct a four-part test. First, ask whether a politician is creating symbolic enemies to permit the electorate to vent their sense of injustice, what social theorists call the cathartic effect. Think of Corbyn’s billionaires and fat cats and Trump’s depiction of the media and the “swamp” of Washington DC’s political establishment. Second, ask whether a positive future vision is being offered that engenders morale, such as Corbyn’s “fairer, better Britain” and Trump’s “make America great”. Third, ask whether the campaigner has generated a sense of belonging – or the solidarity effect? This was quaintly put as “collective endeavour” in Corbyn’s campaign and less quaintly framed in “us” versus “them” terms in Trump’s. Finally, offering voters concrete specifics that fit their lives and on to which they can latch fulfils the advocacy effect. Think about Corbyn’s “no tuition fees” and “free school meals”, which went viral. What politicians say can have psychological and social effects. These can be tracked and analysed rather than consigned to “post-truth” politics. |
| Technology is also being blamed for a dark turn in politics. But the effects of technology are mixed. Big data has not yet been translated into reliable information about how people will vote. When it comes to punditry and polls, we seem to know less, not more. We expect election predictions to become more and more accurate, given that companies can now track what people eat, read, buy and search for on the internet. Yet the verdict after Trump’s victory was of “unanimous collective failure”. Pollsters and pundits have so far failed to capture and use available data effectively, although YouGov did much better in this last UK election. Experts explain that far more reliable than polls are the surges in Twitter handles for and against candidates. | Technology is also being blamed for a dark turn in politics. But the effects of technology are mixed. Big data has not yet been translated into reliable information about how people will vote. When it comes to punditry and polls, we seem to know less, not more. We expect election predictions to become more and more accurate, given that companies can now track what people eat, read, buy and search for on the internet. Yet the verdict after Trump’s victory was of “unanimous collective failure”. Pollsters and pundits have so far failed to capture and use available data effectively, although YouGov did much better in this last UK election. Experts explain that far more reliable than polls are the surges in Twitter handles for and against candidates. |
| Social media has become key to successful campaigning. The king of Twitter is Donald Trump with 32 million followers. His electoral rival, Hillary Clinton, has 16.2 million. Jeremy Corbyn has 1.2 million compared with Theresa May’s 351,000. In France, those who pulled ahead were Emmanuel Macron (1.4 million followers), Le Pen (1.5 million) and Mélenchon (1.19 million). The presumed (but somewhat disgraced) heir to the presidency, François Fillon, has just 542,000 followers. Perhaps it was not just the corruption case that held him back. It was his inability to reach out to the younger parts of the electorate, who are those most affected by the aftermath of the financial crisis. | Social media has become key to successful campaigning. The king of Twitter is Donald Trump with 32 million followers. His electoral rival, Hillary Clinton, has 16.2 million. Jeremy Corbyn has 1.2 million compared with Theresa May’s 351,000. In France, those who pulled ahead were Emmanuel Macron (1.4 million followers), Le Pen (1.5 million) and Mélenchon (1.19 million). The presumed (but somewhat disgraced) heir to the presidency, François Fillon, has just 542,000 followers. Perhaps it was not just the corruption case that held him back. It was his inability to reach out to the younger parts of the electorate, who are those most affected by the aftermath of the financial crisis. |
| Technology might also be having a positive effect on the nexus between money and politics. The cost of running for president or Congress in the US has spiralled out of control, yet this may be changing. Taking a lead from Barack Obama, Bernie Sanders put together an extraordinarily effective campaign using small online donations. Although the Conservative party spent heavily on Facebook attack videos and advertising on Snapchat, it was the free, viral spread of positive memes about Corbyn that dominated social media in the UK, such as #grime4corbyn. | Technology might also be having a positive effect on the nexus between money and politics. The cost of running for president or Congress in the US has spiralled out of control, yet this may be changing. Taking a lead from Barack Obama, Bernie Sanders put together an extraordinarily effective campaign using small online donations. Although the Conservative party spent heavily on Facebook attack videos and advertising on Snapchat, it was the free, viral spread of positive memes about Corbyn that dominated social media in the UK, such as #grime4corbyn. |
| Finally, notions of leadership have been demolished. A week ago, Corbyn was being likened to a tired geography teacher, yet he seems to have mobilised millions. Without this evidence, May’s poor results might have been attributed to her lack of traditional leadership attributes, such as telegenic presence, charm and charisma. | Finally, notions of leadership have been demolished. A week ago, Corbyn was being likened to a tired geography teacher, yet he seems to have mobilised millions. Without this evidence, May’s poor results might have been attributed to her lack of traditional leadership attributes, such as telegenic presence, charm and charisma. |
| The self-effacing mobiliser seems to have found a new niche, particularly in appealing to the young. Early evidence suggests that young voters turned out in much larger numbers and voted overwhelmingly for Labour. This is the sector in the UK that faces fewer job opportunities, spiralling housing prices and rising university fees and will be expected to support an ever larger group of pensioners because of an ageing population. Perhaps these young voters would rather be mobilised than led. This is a rational choice if you examine the significant loss of trust in leaders around the world. A new more collective and mobilising politics may be in the offing, providing an alternative to the strong man outsider. | The self-effacing mobiliser seems to have found a new niche, particularly in appealing to the young. Early evidence suggests that young voters turned out in much larger numbers and voted overwhelmingly for Labour. This is the sector in the UK that faces fewer job opportunities, spiralling housing prices and rising university fees and will be expected to support an ever larger group of pensioners because of an ageing population. Perhaps these young voters would rather be mobilised than led. This is a rational choice if you examine the significant loss of trust in leaders around the world. A new more collective and mobilising politics may be in the offing, providing an alternative to the strong man outsider. |
| Ngaire Woods is the dean of the Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford | Ngaire Woods is the dean of the Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford |
| Social media | Social media |
| Opinion | Opinion |
| Digital media | Digital media |
| Jeremy Corbyn | Jeremy Corbyn |
| comment | comment |
| Share on Facebook | Share on Facebook |
| Share on Twitter | Share on Twitter |
| Share via Email | Share via Email |
| Share on LinkedIn | Share on LinkedIn |
| Share on Pinterest | Share on Pinterest |
| Share on Google+ | Share on Google+ |
| Share on WhatsApp | Share on WhatsApp |
| Share on Messenger | Share on Messenger |
| Reuse this content | Reuse this content |