In the Guardian Weekly of October 14th George Monbiot quotes the work of social science professors Christopher Achen and Larry Bartels, who say that most people possess almost no useful information about political policies and their implications, have little desire to improve their knowledge, and have a deep aversion to political disagreement. We base our political decisions on who we are, not what we think. We act politically – not as individual, rational beings, but as members of social groups, expressing a social identity . We seek out political parties that seem to correspond to our culture, with little regard to whether their policies support our interests. And we remain loyal to political parties long after they have ceased to serve us.
I am not sure that this is a new thought, but it certainly fits the people and the political parties whom we see about us. In an American context, Republicans continue to vote for the Republican party even though it brazenly represents a tiny number of very rich people and corporations and does little or nothing for its voters. In fact, it does nothing, period. The Democrats are not far behind, are also in bed with the rich, are advocate for globalisation and immigration etc, and are , or were, either ignorant or unaware of the hurt and desperation of many of its voters. Hence Bernie. Everyone I know fears or half expects a Brexit surprise tomorrow, despite the polls and overwhelming evidence of the unsuitability of Trump as prospective President.
The situation in Britain parallels that in the US. The whole “blow the whole thing up” vote for Brexit was an emotional reaction of working class (perhaps we should call them “former working” class) people, feeling out of luck and mad about Tony Blair, the fat cats, the EU and East European fellows who have taken the jobs. Wide knowledge of policies there was and is none.
This is why we elect representatives, paid to understand and address the complexities of modern life, and why it is important to have interested, capable, experienced and informed representatives. Regrettably, nowhere are we getting the brightest of the bright, or the most honest, and this is a threat to any democratic system. Nor does it look very likely will be done to improve the situation.
As an Epicurean, I don’t like it , but can see what is happening and am not surprised. We have to retire to the “Garden” and cultivate what ataraxia we can summon up.
This is such an importance post! I totally agree, my disdain for the electorate means I could never go into politics. There seems to be a lot of anger, yet people are not voting for the logical solutions to their perceived problems. In the case of America, it doesn’t make sense to vote for Trump if you’re unemployed. Trump isn’t going to dramatically reduce unemployment- most economists think he’ll do the opposite. HIs fiscal policies would result in a massive deficit, increasing the debt, which would cost the economy in the long term. Similarly, it doesn’t make sense to vote for Brexit if you’re unemployed. There have been a lot of companies that have said they will move some jobs abroad, depending on how poor the terms of negotiation are. Yet no company says Brexit will mean more jobs.
I think your point about social identity is crucial. Its why many white voters without college degrees have left the Democrats for the Republicans. The Democrats have become the party of the city: liberal, multicultural, modern. Trump voters want a different America: small towns, traditional values, cultural homogeneity. A comparable phenomenon has happened in the UK: Labour does terribly in nearly all rural areas because its seen as the party of the city. Conservatives underperform in wealthy urban areas like Edinburgh, Oxford, Cambridge or parts of North London. What’s lamentable about both countries is that there has been very little discussion of how social identity predicts voting intention. Unlike Sanders, Clinton doesn’t seem concerned with white working class voters- she wrongly assumes she doesn’t need them. Trump makes gestures towards minority voters, but none of his policies would benefit them.