The problem with democracy: Kids and their phones
In the
age of insta-everything, it’s little wonder voters fall for populists peddling
quick and easy ‘solutions’.
By PAUL
TAYLOR 2/27/20, 4:00 AM CET
The
internet generation finds it hard to grasp that they can share opinions
instantly on social media and zap between hundreds of films — but only get to
elect their leaders once every four or five years | iStock
Paul
Taylor, a contributing editor at POLITICO, writes the Europe At Large column.
PARIS —
Citizens in the smartphone era are falling out of love with democracy.
Partly,
that’s due to the failure of governments and political systems to deliver
solutions to rising inequality, social disruption wrought by globalization and
uncertainty over the future of work, welfare and the planet.
But it also
reflects a growing gulf between the instant gratification connected consumers
take for granted and the ponderous pace of local, national and European
governance: The faster life moves, the more exasperatingly slow politics seems.
The
internet generation finds it hard to grasp that they can order a home-delivered
meal on their cellphone, share opinions instantly on social media, friend and
unfriend people with one click and zap between hundreds of films — but only get
to elect their leaders once every four or five years.
This gap
has made the political establishment appear even more remote — and populists
peddling eye-catching, quick and dirty “solutions” to complex problems even
more attractive. That, in turn, makes implementing long-term structural reforms
to employment, welfare, health, pension and asylum systems ever more difficult,
given that they normally take years to yield results.
In many of the world’s largest and most advanced
market economies, public discontent with democracy stands at record levels.
“The
digital revolution doesn’t automatically lead to a democratic revolution, but
it creates that expectation,” said French journalist Francis Brochet, author of
an incisive 2017 essay, “Démocratie smartphone” ("Smartphone
democracy").
‘Zone of despair’
Indeed, in
many of the world’s largest and most advanced market economies, public
discontent with democracy stands at record levels, according to The Global
Satisfaction with Democracy Report 2020, published by Cambridge University’s
Bennett Institute for Public Policy.
Nearly 60
percent of EU citizens were dissatisfied with democracy in 2019, the survey
shows, after a decade of malaise over the eurozone crisis, the influx of
refugees and migrants and a perceived erosion of national and local identity.
The report
identifies a “zone of despair” englobing France and Southern Europe, and a
“zone of complacency” across Scandinavia, western Germany and the Benelux.
Central Europeans have grown happier with democratic institutions since the
mid-1990s, except in Romania.
The happy
few who are still overwhelmingly satisfied with democracy reside in small, wealthy
countries such as Switzerland, Denmark, Luxembourg, Norway, Ireland and the
Netherlands.
Citizen
participation
France’s
current confrontation over pension reform, hot on the heels of last year’s
Yellow Jacket protests, is emblematic of the political mismatch between
short-term pain and promised long-term gain.
While the
government seeks to ram the unpopular pension reform through parliament,
President Emmanuel Macron is simultaneously trying to show he has taken on
board the concerns of the Yellow Jackets and has created a so-called citizens’
convention — made up of 150 randomly selected people — to come up with
proposals to make the process of reducing carbon emissions by 40 percent by
2030 as fair as possible.
This
unelected assembly, representative of the adult population by age, gender and
region, has taken testimony from climate experts and is due to produce
proposals in April for how to manage and fund the climate transition.
Given the
national culture of protest and widespread opposition to Macron’s plans, it
remains to be seen whether this method will ease public acceptance of painful
but necessary increases in fossil fuel prices, construction of wind turbines or
the closure of carbon-intensive factories.
Other
countries are experimenting with other forms of citizen participation to fill
the gap left by declining collective intermediaries such as big-tent political
parties, trade unions, religious communities and “old” media.
Some towns
in the Netherlands, for example, set aside part of the municipal budget for
citizens to allocate. In Italy and Spain, radical populist parties have experimented
with online policy votes among members, while Macron based his presidential
campaign platform in part on a door-to-door questionnaire conducted by his
young followers on the basis of an algorithm analyzing voting history in 67,000
polling stations, correlated with population, income and employment statistics.
Democracy
and its disconnects
However,
grassroots democracy requires careful handling. It is vulnerable to being
hijacked and manipulated by minorities of determined activists.
In
Switzerland, for example, a popular initiative signed by as few as 100,000
citizens can force a national referendum on issues as varied as banning the
construction of minarets, curbing immigration or subsidizing farmers who don’t
dehorn livestock. A 2014 vote in favor of immigration quotas, carried by a
knife-edge 19,000 majority, has caused a prolonged diplomatic crisis with the
EU.
Italy
offers another cautionary tale: There, the populist 5Star Movement operates
with a radical system in which roughly 100,000 registered party members take
all major policy decisions in online votes via the Rousseau participatory
platform. But they are not necessarily representative of the 10.7 million
people who voted for the party in 2018. Nor do they define the questions.
In France, where anti-Macron protests have cast a
shadow over the president’s proposed reforms, public efforts to involve
citizens may not be enough to turn the narrative.
Social
scientists also warn that these types of democratic experiments tend to attract
middle-class professionals, rather than low-skilled workers or the unemployed,
and therefore don’t address many of the root causes of public discontent.
In France,
where anti-Macron protests have cast a shadow over the president’s proposed
reforms, public efforts to involve citizens may not be enough to turn the
narrative — and could even backfire.
“The worst
thing would be to have people meet and deliberate and for it to lead to
nothing,” said Brochet. “So it will be crucial to see how the climate convention’s
recommendations are translated into policy.”
Failure
would be bad news for Macron — and for democracy. It would prove once again
that in our age of smartphones, the political messages that break through are
the easily digestible, tweet-ready soundbites. And that, for now, is a game
best played by populists who aren’t shy about promising easy answers.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário