The politics of re-engagement
A Plus20 Network Discussion Paper (DRAFT)
“And anyway, I’ve always thought newspapers were the wrong way around…you should start with the sports pages, then the weather, the gossip sections, business and then, finally, politics. The same goes for news on the television. I mean, politics – who gives a fuck?”
Alexander Downer at an ASEAN forum in Laos (as reported on crikey.com.au)
In this quote our Foreign Minister expresses a popular sentiment amongst today’s politicians – that Australians have no need or desire to pay attention to politics. By expressing contempt for his own profession, Downer is attempting to align himself with the supposed apathy of ‘ordinary Australians’. We are being told, in effect, “If I were you, I wouldn’t care what I did to your country.” The more people agree with him, the easier it is for those who have already gained power & influence to hold on to their positions.
This short paper aims to spark discussion on the ‘politics of re-engagement’.
- So, who does ‘give a fuck’?
The following is an incomplete taxonomy of political animals:
People in power
Alexander Downer did not get into a position of power by ignoring politics. No one does, except born Royals, and they’ll die out eventually. When a powerful person talks about the irrelevance of politics it usually means they would find their job more convenient if it were ignored.
The powerless and pissed off
No one likes to feel powerless, and given the right trigger, the experience of powerlessness can generate outbursts of anger and political mobilisation, both on the left and right. We could look at Pauline Hanson supporters as examples.
NIMBYs and neighbours
Even Alexander Downer would probably admit that bread & butter politics or ‘hip-pocket’ issues matter very much to most people. In addition, many people who have a general disregard for politics become interested when they (or someone they are close to) are affected directly by a particular issue or decision.
The ‘not in my back-yard’ factor means that people who have no interest in industrial relations become interested when they are unfairly sacked; people who have no interest in nuclear waste disposal become interested when a dump is approved in their area; people become pro or anti-war when their son or daughter is a soldier, and so on.
Idealists
It’s difficult to define what an idealist is, & what makes them interested in politics. Progressive idealists usually share common values like ‘fairness’, ‘justice’ and ‘equality’. They tend to be concerned about the lack of these qualities in our current political system, and they believe in the possibility of change.
Ideologues
These are the fundamentalists of the political spectrum – including the free-market fundamentalists. The only thing linking ideologues is that they share an absolute belief in a single political idea as the solution to every possible problem. (See the “Young Liberals in the Chocolate Factory” article distributed at the last Beers without Borders meeting.)
Others
There is room for a dozen more categories in this list, but it’s a start.
- Who doesn’t give a fuck?
Ever met someone who told you they didn’t care about politics, and then ranted for half an hour about what’s wrong with politicians? Apathy is not the same as withdrawing in disgust. If we define politics as social and economic power relations, or as the way decisions that affect our lives are made, then people who genuinely do not care about politics may well be in the minority.
Here are two exceptions:
“Things are pretty good as they are”
There are plenty of people who are content with the way our society works, and with their own position in that society. In a time of high employment and apparent economic prosperity, they may not see any need for change, or any reason to fear for the future (as long as interest rates stay low). Others would argue that all the important struggles have been won – that we’ve achieved all the social justice we’re ever going to get, and anything else is just details. This often occurs around issues of women’s rights: “feminism is so 1970s”
“Politics is irrelevant to me”
What does it take to live a good life? A lot of people would answer that it’s about taking care of your family, spending time with friends, holding down a decent job and maybe being able to go on an occasional holiday. If this idea of a good life is divorced from an awareness of the social and economic conditions that make it possible, then politics is nothing more than an unimportant distraction.
- What about the rest of us?
‘Fairness’, ‘justice’ and ‘equality’ are pretty popular ideas. Finding examples of unfairness, injustice, and inequality in Australia is not a difficult exercise. Most Australians are materially well-off, and have at least some disposable time. So why are there so few activists?
What stops people who care from acting?
“It wouldn’t make any difference anyway.”
People often do not believe their own influence stretches very far. This is amplified by mass-media outlets that present us with an endless competing array of apparently insoluble problems. While the experience of powerlessness can piss people off and motivate them to take action, in can also make them feel helpless and without hope.
The ‘bystander effect’
We are far less likely to reach out to help others when we are in the presence of other people who are doing nothing. Psychologists who have researched this aspect of human nature call it the ‘bystander effect’. When we are confronted with situations in which we are unsure of what we are seeing and uncertain of how to react, we conform to the behaviour of others who are equally uncertain. The result is that we do nothing.
“I don’t have time for politics”
Living an “ordinary” life is time-consuming. After a 40 hour week, child-rearing, housework, a bit of socialising, how much energy is left over for the grunt work of activism; going to a 3 hour campaign-planning meeting, handing out flyers, reading policy documents? Or even for reading enough news to stay well-informed?
Family or community perceptions of an individual taking action.
Ignoring family and community expectations of how we should live can be a serious challenge. Disapproval from parents and lack of support from friends is hard for first-time activists who don’t yet have other support networks.
Some of these things are beyond our power to change – we can’t replace someone’s family or create 10 extra hours in their week. But sometimes people who care don’t act because of the nature of activism itself.
For every person who devotes their weeks to consensus decision making & planning the ultimate banner drop, there are five who have been involved and have given up. Political activism burns people out. It could be factional brawls, power struggles, personal conflicts, lack of resources, unrealistic expectations, or whatever, but the activist life cycle can often be short and unrewarding.
It is hard to stay motivated when you can’t see the results of your actions – or when the actions you take seem ineffective. Think of the anti-war protests– if a million people can’t make change what’s the point?
Sometimes it seems even ‘winning’ isn’t good enough – instead of celebrating we worry that our victory will lull people into a false sense of security. We can be even more demanding when it comes to our fellow activists – do they have ‘good politics’? Are they ‘selling out’? The ‘leftier than thou’ attitude can mean that progressive activists are judged more harshly than people on the ‘other side’.
How easy do we make it for people to get involved?
How inviting do progressive movements look to first-time activists? Do we welcome people who aren’t already ‘up’ on the issues? Do we welcome people who don’t fit into our idea of what an activist looks like? Do we make it easy for people to contribute just a little bit – or do we expect them to devote their whole life to our cause? Are we really looking for fellow activists – or foot-soldiers? And do the potential foot-soldiers know it?
Right-wing politicians and commentators portray activists as ‘elites’ who can never represent the interests of ‘ordinary Australians’ because they don’t share their culture. Like the idea that politics is irrelevant, this stereotype is very useful to people in power. But that doesn’t mean it is entirely without truth.
Let’s conduct a thought experiment: if a) you weren’t an activist, b) you had a full-time job, and c) you didn’t live in the inner city, and you decided you wanted to do something about [insert your favourite cause here] – how would you start?’
- What is strategic activism?
What does all this have to do with long-term thinking about social change? Imagine how much more we would achieve if there were twice as many of us in twenty years time! In this context, strategic activism is activism that recruits new activists and is satisfying & rewarding for existing ones.
A central principle of successful organising is to start with small, winnable goals. If our goal is for there to be more active progressives, then where are the people who are one step away from being activists & how can we be more relevant & inviting to them?
Some promising examples include:
Anti-GM campaigns that are being undertaken with farmers;
‘Get Up’ – http://www.getup.org.au/
The ‘precarious workers alliance’ – this is a new project which is attempting to establish a ‘union’ for those living and working under precarious conditions;
The Reachout ‘act now’ project
An ‘activist training school’ in Newcastle
More generally:
Community organising – meeting potential activists in their own communities, their own workplaces, and on their own terms. Helping people achieve the change that they want rather than trying to convert them to our cause;
Bridge building: crossing artificial divides with action, communication and creative alliances;
Policy ideas that articulate a vision ‘for’ rather than ‘against’;
Mainstreaming: framing our goals to appeal to groups outside our usual base – such as the ‘wellbeing manifesto’;
Investing time and energy into the infrastructure that makes activism sustainable and better-resourced over the long term – co-housing, organising space, ethical money-spinners, training, etc.
Building our movements – one valued & respected human at a time;
- Where to from here?
How to add to this paper:
This is a draft version of the paper. We will be posting this draft on www.2024network.org and for two weeks any registered user can make changes to it! If you want to edit or add to it, then you are free to do so. You can also discuss or respond to the paper using the comments function on the site. Please contact miriam@tsd.net.au if you have any questions about this.
Sydney Social Forum workshop
On 4pm Saturday the 27th August there will be a 2024 workshop at the Sydney Social Forum, where we’ll be discussing some of these ideas. Please come along!
Leave a Comment so far
Leave a comment
Plus Twenty 