It’s been a long time since politics has excited quite so much passion as it seems to do these days. For the last few years, politics has largely been characterized by widespread voter apathy. Not today.
The Brexit debate, the rise of insurgent parties, the US elections. All of them have unleashed passion on all sides of the arguments. This is to be welcomed. There is nothing that undermines our democracies more than a voter base that believes itself utterly detached from the political establishment. Insurgent parties have changed that over the last five years. For this, at least, they should be thanked. As a recent article points out:
“Since we’re all affected by politics, if we choose not to be involved in creating the conditions of our own lives this reduces us to what [Simone] de Beauvoir called ‘absurd vegetation’.”
“Since we’re all affected by politics, if we choose not to be involved in creating the conditions of our own lives this reduces us to what [Simone] de Beauvoir called ‘absurd vegetation’.”
Which is why I have very little sympathy for people who declare themselves (or at least pretend to be) ‘apolitical’.
The flipside of political passion is political polarization. People form groupings that share views and close their minds to the arguments and positions expressed by ‘the other side’. We have seen this maybe most markedly in the US. When President Obama was elected, those on the Republican side were determined that he should fail and did everything in their power to derail his programme. The same is now happening with President Trump. ‘Progressives’ have mobilized and are determined to find ways to frustrate his intentions. Both sides are behaving in exactly the same way. Yet each is convinced of the righteousness of their ways.
Jonathan Haidt in The Righteous Mind explains that once people bind themselves into groups that share a common perspective, they become unable to see that any legitimacy in other perspectives. When their man or woman makes a rousing speech, he or she is a great orator. When their opponent does the same, he or she is a populist demagogue.
Polarization is, maybe, the price to be paid for passion and political involvement. Is this better or worse than widespread apathy?
