The politics of fear have trumped the politics of courage – more’s the pity

Fear

Our democratic ship of state is in bad shape. Filippo Menalli/flickr, CC BY-NC-ND

There is now a clean break between the two main functions of Australia’s political parties: to get elected and to govern.

In the past, there has been some overlap between these two. Politicians would derive the manner of the former from what they intended to do in the latter. If they intended to reform health care, they would make this their campaign, for example, taking care to provide detail and room for discussion.

But campaigns aren’t about what you would do if you were elected. Campaigns are now more focused on how to manipulate the electorate so you can govern as you see fit once you get power.

The old adage that “you can’t do anything from opposition” now rules all. If you care about the reforms you want to make, you get elected – whatever it takes.

Politicians don’t try to lead, they try to herd

To this end, the voter as an individual umpire and decision-maker has been bypassed for the new model of voters as a mob, a crowd to be played and swayed.

It’s not realpolitik to have us think for ourselves.

I’ve written elsewhere that politicians often do not want us to think, just to judge. Their role is not to provide evidence and argument to persuade by cogent engagement; it is more to frame the game so only certain choices seem palatable. The false dichotomy of “with us or against us”, used by Prime Minister Tony Abbott in the recent brouhaha over the ABC’s Q&A program, is a notable example.

Politicians have always played for mass appeal, but it was never hard to find serious debate and mature discussion – even a willingness to engage. But those days seem to be over, as ABC journalist Barrie Cassidy has recently noted.

Led by a new class of political advisers, the words politicians speak are not being used to convey meaning and intent. Instead, they are being used to elicit specific responses, to spark emotive reactions. These are workshopped phrases tested for effect on focus groups.

We are being fed doublespeak and asked to doublethink. In 2013, Abbott said of soon-to-be-unemployed auto manufacturing workers:

Some of them will find it difficult, but many of them will probably be liberated to pursue new opportunities and to get on with their lives.

All of this produces a kind of violence of the mind; a jolting change of perception brought about by the conflict between reality and the words used to describe it. It is a weaponising of our language in the service of power.

Fear is a double-edged sword

An ironic outcome of the above is that politicians have become victims of their own success. They live with the constant risk that those they try to herd will turn on them just as blindly as they are being mustered.

The means to political survival is to second-guess the mob, to live politically on the back foot. It is often reaction, not action, that brings down or raises up governments. If you fan the flames of conflict just to ride the thermals, you play a dangerous and uncertain game.

The idea of journalism as a force for public good has taken a battering. Mark Anderson/flickr

The changing power relationship between politics and the news media exacerbates this effect. The Fourth Estate, once seen as a check on the hubris and power of government, a keel of public reasoning, now has a sizeable element that aspires to steer the ship of state towards its own goals.

In the pursuit of ideological and financial ends the public is intellectually press-ganged as much as informed. No wonder, then, that journalists have joined politicians at the top of the list of least-trusted professions.

When political, ideological and commercial interests of media elements and political operatives align, herding the population becomes an even easier and more appealing option than engaging with them.

When these interests do not align, it can mean the death of political aspiration.

Hence, if the media cannot be conscripted, it must at the least be accommodated – like an unpleasant co-worker whose co-operation remains a possibility as long as a line is not crossed.

Leaders must be rational

Not all politicians can be tarred with this brush. This is more a commentary on the system than on any particular politician.

The challenge, therefore, is for Australians to rise above this tide of obsequence and appeal to the rational nature of their fellow citizens – to be bold enough to encourage voters to think for themselves by outlining a cogent, serious and substantive plan for future action.

Two necessary political characteristics for this are a belief in the power of reason to affect change, and a confidence that one’s own beliefs are solid, rational and capable of being communicated and accepted in the absence of spin.

But this is risky behaviour. It requires an almost inevitable push against what has become accepted political wisdom. It also means that whatever party line is being toed cannot be drawn using the lowest common denominator or through mere appeasement.

We need leaders capable of providing a rationally coherent plan for thought and action. And we need them to avoid misrepresentation and doublespeak blatantly shaped to achieve ideological goals unsupported by our best collective evidence-based reason.

Abbott provided an unfortunate example of this slippery rationality in his reaction to the Adani mine project not being approved. He said, despite substantial evidence to the contrary:

It will create about 10,000 well-paid jobs in Australia. And if it goes ahead, it will provide for decades to come for 100 million people in India who currently have no power.

Sure, the ideal of a rational public space populated and defined by our leaders sounds a bit of a pipe dream. But we need to at least articulate and demand this before any progress can be made towards it.

The alternative is to be governed the way we are now. It’s hard to imagine a rational argument for that.

The Conversation

Peter Ellerton is Lecturer in Critical Thinking at The University of Queensland.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

 

Republished by Redlands2030 – 14 August 2015

Other articles by Peter Ellerton include:

This is why you will lose your argument

Please note: Offensive or off-topic comments will be deleted. If offended by any published comment please email thereporter@redlands2030.net

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

5 thoughts on “The politics of fear have trumped the politics of courage – more’s the pity

  1. Further to what Toni says here about Mayor handing back a 2030 Business card torn to bits is not surprising. Older folk often state Karen Williams is too young to be a mayor, inexperienced in dealing with people from all walks of life, often with differing points of view on issues important to them who deserve to be heard. Paid public servants need to develop a thick hide, as they say, when dealing wih citizens of all ages and backgrounds or step aside for someone more able to keep a cool head when handling, as often the case, difficult community situations.. As the saying goes… ‘if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen’.

  2. A very timely and rational response to the betrayal of society by the political ‘elites’ that pretend to govern us but in fact line the pockets of a social and economic elite, crudely described as the onepercenters. In reality they are a ruling class that has never left us.
    It is interesting to note the trends in Greece and Spain where the ‘traditional’ parties have been rejected by the electorate in place of new parties representing what the ‘left’ used to stand for. Also in Britain, Corbynism offers a move back into a political area once the domain of the Labour party where social justice, economic democracy and political commonsense replace the ‘economic rationalists’. Interestingly, there has never been anything ‘rational’ about economic rationalism, the current ideology of all mainstream parties – a dogma that has become almost a religion to major political parties. It is the ideology of the wealthy elites, the old ruling class, a creed or greed and is nothing new. It is also the creed that brought us the bailout of the banks without reference to popular opinion, a bailout that has left the old democracies with enormous debts. That on top of a skewed taxation system that rewards the failures of the rich with tax breaks in a hectic race to the bottom.

  3. Hope you all read this from the on line Guardian

    “This week saw a teetering Coalition government dig in on gay marriage and climate. The government’s positions on both issues will emerge as strong ones, with time.

    Labor is a pretty simple read. They are now shackled to 50% renewable energy targets regardless of economic cost and are effectively a gay marriage voting bloc, regardless of the public’s divided sentiments.

    The Coalition position will come to be seen as the high ground. Same-sex marriage does divide, but the oft-quoted polls showing overwhelming support are usually telephone-based. I and other Coalition MPs have been polling our electorates, and the reality is the majority can’t be bothered responding”.

    It was followed by 625 comments (then shut down) that were mostly (6 to 1) scathing of Laming…some suggesting it was written as satire…not by Laming but by Lemming. Feather weight intellectual was a favourite.
    .

  4. Great piece and the Monty Python videos were the best, thankfully people are not sheep like they are in the video, they are well informed and have had a gutful of Politics especially in Redlands.
    I heard on the grape vine that the Mayor was given a Redlands 2030 business card recently and at the General Meeting this week got out of her seat in the middle of a debate and left the room returning to finally hand the card back to a resident in tiny pieces, OH how immature and foolish. This conduct from a Mayor is shameful

  5. Unfortunately we have come to an age where we cannot believe what our politicians say, but we judge what our politicians do. Unfortunately by the time the next election comes around so much damage can be done – to our way of life, our environment, our reputation – both here and abroad, and the legacies we can pass on to the future! We can only look inside ourselves and act from fair and equal principles.