Gerry Stoker Canberra and S outhampton ProfStoker What I am not arguing That citizens were ever enchanted with politics That there is imminent crisis in politics That antipolitics is conceptually unambiguous ID: 412472
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Understanding political disenchantment i..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Understanding political disenchantment in contemporary democracies
Gerry Stoker,
Canberra and
S
outhampton
@
ProfStokerSlide2
What I am not arguing
That citizens were ever enchanted with politics
That there is imminent crisis in politics
That anti-politics is conceptually unambiguous
2Slide3
What I am arguing
Decline and change are observable
Differences between countries but widespread
Differences over time Differences between social groups Complexity in and of explanation
Research beginning to offer new insights
3Slide4
Anti-Politics: What is it?
AMONG CITIZENS:
Negativity towards politics rather than democracy
Attitudes?
Individual Behaviours?
Collective Actions?
Trajectories of change measured these factors
FROM ABOVE: let’s exploit it; lets remove issues from politics
FROM BELOW:
: passive and active forms
Source: Vittorio Mete, 2010
4Slide5
Five types of “decline” trajectory
Flatliners: Italy, Greece
Modest decliners: Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Germany
Slow burning and deep decliners: UK, USA
brupt decliners: Spain, Portugal , Japan, Iceland
B
lessed decliners: Australia, Canada
NB Other countries, other trajectories. In each case of course the story is complicated
5Slide6
Three broad types of explanation
Inputs have changed
Processes have changed
Outputs have changed
6Slide7
INPUT: SOCIAL CHANGE
1/1
Input/ social capital
Decline in social capital ( and more broadly the quality of civil society) means loss of capacity to engage in associational activity and impacts on anti-politics as citizens support and independent dynamic to engage is weakened
1/2
Input/ decline of collectivism
Decline in collective institutions from trade unions, through churches and large firms reflects an individualisation of life ( more consumer focus and less citizenship focus). Expressed also through expectations gap
1/3
Input / inequality
Increased inequality given impact of economic globalization has created a more fragmented citizenry and led to the intensified exclusion of some from the political process
7Slide8
INPUT: ATTITUDINAL CHANGE
2/1 Input /
Less deferential more critical citizens
As citizens have become more educated and information more freely available they have become more critical and challenging to all types of authority, including political figures
2/2 Input /
More issue oriented, more on-line and less partisan
Citizens are less committed to one partisan perspective or party and more issue-driven and fragmented in their interests and more on-line therefore less loyal and more selective in their political engagement
2/3 Input /
Impact of neo-liberalism and depoliticization
The dominance of neo-liberal ideology has weakened citizens’ sense of what government can do and what action in the public realm can address, thereby limiting engagement with politics and processes of depoliticization have removed a swathe of decisions from public input
8Slide9
THROUGHPUT
3/1 Throughput / political elites out of touch and managerial
Political leaders are drawn from an increasingly small pool, often lack a broader life experience. The declining social base of political elites in turn rests on the weak and declining membership and active capacity of political parties. Politics offered more managerial and less value driven
3/2 Throughput : media culture and spin response
The emergence of intense 24 hour media coverage of politics, and the parallel developments in social media has developed a sense that politics is obsessively short-term, focused on spin and presentation and lacks the substance to demand engaged public attention
3/3 Throughput: dominance of lobby politics and special interests
Politics is dominated by special interests and the lobbying of those seeking favours from government rather than any concern for the public interest. The nature of campaign and lobby finance, party funding and networks of influence and ties confirm that politics does its business with the few rather than for the many
9Slide10
OUTPUT
4/1 Output: Opaqueness of Governing System
The complexity of modern governance arrangements caused by the impact globalisation and other factors means that the system lacks a basic accountability or legitimacy, turning many away from politics
4/2 Output : Failure to tackle big or long-term issues
Politics cannot grapple with the big issues such as climate change or economic renewal; nor can it because of democratic myopia driven by electoral and other popular pressures deal with long-term issues such as care for the elderly
4/3 Output : economic austerity
Politicians and politics have presided over economic failings and loss of living standards and potentially worse still connived with bankers and others in making ordinary people pay for the problems caused
10Slide11
Comparison of Trajectories: UK and Sweden
UK
Not 1/1- but all other input factors
All throughput factors strong concerns
Concern about all three output factors
Sweden
Not 1/1 , 1/3, 2/3 yes to other input changes
Throughput factors weak concerns
Some concern over 4/1 but not so much other factors
11Slide12
There is something about politics
Trust and politics: a complex relationship
Civic culture: subject, parochial and active?
The nature of citizenship
12Slide13
Depth to issues of what troubles people about politics
Project 1:
Anti-Politics
: Characterising and Accounting for Political Disaffection ( with Colin Hay and Ruth Fox, Hansard Society)
Project 2: Popular
Understandings of Politics in Britain,
1937-2014 ( with Will
J
ennings, Nick Clarke and Jonathan Moss)
13Slide14
Project 1
Based on focus groups/ new survey work
KEY LESSONS:
Fast and slow thinking: how citizens think/talk about politics The contingency of political attitudes
Folk theories, the media and anti-politics: towards a theory of how citizens think about politics
Reform preferences on the surface not too radical
14Slide15
Project 2: Mass Observation History
Mass Observation
Est. 1937
1937-60: mass observers1937-65: panellists (day surveys, directive responses, diaries)
1970: est. of Mass Observation Archive
1981-present: Mass Observation Project
Eight relevant directives:
Pre-1960s: Feb/Mar 1945, May/Jun 1945, Nov 1945, Jul 1950, Nov 1950
Post-1960s:
Aut
/Win 1996 combined with Spr 1997, Spr 2010, Spr 2014
Responses per directive: 98-369
Panel not formally representative but: it is more representative than is often assumed; we can sample within
it; this is not essential
15Slide16
Already clear from historical qualitative analysis
British citizens sceptical to some degree
Embedded “put upon”, “us and them culture part of context
Benefit of the doubt/mustn’t grumble/ useless idiots
16Slide17
History of anti-politics: survey work
tracking longitudinal trends in public attitudes towards politics with quantitative data limited by historical repertoires of question wordings (and contemporary concerns).
Developing and trialling new questions
Example of a creative solution: replication of Gallup question first asked in 1944 (and in 1972).
“Do
you think that British politicians are out merely for themselves, for their party, or to do their best for their country?”
17Slide18
Evidence of decline/change
Source:
YouGov
, 2,103 GB Adults, Fieldwork: 20th - 21st October 2014
18Slide19
Anti-politics: Having political impact now
Conservative voters are more positive: 34% think politicians out for themselves, 21% that they are out to do what is best for their country.
UKIP voters are most negative: 74% think that politicians are out for themselves,
just 3% to do what is best for their country.
Modelling drivers of UKIP voting intentions shows negativity towards politics matches impact of demographics
19Slide20
What can change ?
Input factors can be seen as an opportunity as well as a threat …that is they could be (are being) exploited to change politics
Various institutional reforms could make a difference to throughput concerns and address some output issues
Parties and Political Class need to recognise the scale of change required
20Slide21
Devolving power: part of the answer
We have no national parties in Britain
Social and economic issues are dramatically different in different locations
Democratic innovation is more feasible and flexible at the local level
Real power, open engagement: still need to move beyond faux localism
21Slide22
Conclusions
Single club “solutions” unlikely to work
Politics may well be changing as much as declining
A party that finds a way could lead the way The “Conversation” about change needs to develop, be open, evidenced-based, reflective and not dominated by established political actors
Universities could and should play a greater role
22