Democracy and Populism
To a greater or lesser extent, we are all children of the Enlightenment: we assent, almost as if it were a religious doctrine, to a series of core beliefs, many of which are derived from Rousseau’s concept of the General Will. This might be taken as alluding to the equal status before the law of all individuals, irrespective of their social rank, along with liberal notions linked to freedom of thought, religion, speech, assembly and so on. The Abolitionist Movement, 19th Century statecraft, the European Convention on Human Rights and, more recently, the Equality Legislation of 2010 all have their origins in the philosophical writings of the 18th Century. As referenced in last week’s Notes, science and rationalism are presented as having replaced superstition and medieval obscurantism. Not for nothing was the Christian altar dismantled in Notre-Dame de Paris in 1793 and a statue to the ‘Goddess of Liberty’ installed in place of the crucifix. The old order, propped up by an ‘unholy alliance’ between the monarchy and the church, had been discarded in favour of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. Put in these terms, it would be almost impossible for any schoolboy to propose a defence of the ancien regime. The new calendar introduced by Robespierre and his confreres symbolised the ‘dawn of progress’ and a determination to wipe from the collective memory all that had gone before.
The relationship between liberalism and democracy is interesting. Even though the two concepts are often presented as two sides of the same coin, any discerning student of political theory will know that there is an obvious paradox with a belief system rooted in the rights of the individual and a political framework that depends on the will of the (collective) majority. Western democratic states, though far from perfect, might be seen as the best means of holding government to account and enshrining the rights and freedoms of the individual. Thus, democracy might be viewed by liberals as the least worst form of government by virtue of its provision of statutory protection for individuals and minority groups.
Today, democracy seems to be losing its appeal, especially amongst the young. Why so? The Guardian has reported that one in five voters under the age of 45 would prefer to do away with democracy and have an authoritarian strongman govern Britain. The findings come from the as yet unpublished FGS Global Radar report, which surveyed more than 2,000 UK adults. In the case of those aged 25 to 34, support for democracy was down to just 60%. I can’t help but think that many young people feel let down by the economic system, especially when they compare themselves to their parents or grandparents. Up until the late 1990s, it was quite typical for graduates to leave university with no debt, with fees and living costs having been covered by a combination of local authority grants and parental support. Typically, a graduate today will find themselves tens of thousands of pounds in debt, doing a job which does not require a degree and with perhaps half of their salary diverted to rental accommodation and paying off student loans. Only 37% of those born in the 1980s achieved home ownership by age 30 compared to 62% of those born in the 1960s. An average-priced house in England today costs 8.6 times the average annual income. People in their 20s and 30s have worked out that they are paying a great deal of money and getting very little in return. I suspect there is a perception amongst the young that the political and economic system is not working in their favour and that there is a sense of deep malaise within the body politic. We see the results of this in election results across Europe and in the USA. Georgia Meloni, Italy’s Prime Minister, seems positively middle-of-the-road in comparison to Dutch and German politicians.
Of greater significance than economic factors, I would posit, is the fact that the western world seems to be engaged in a battle of ideas and identity: assumptions that have been taken for granted are now up for debate. At the heart of liberalism lies a commitment to equality of opportunity, a rejection of privilege and a belief in a plurality of voices. As Voltaire famously put it, ‘I detest what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it’. Yet on university campuses, which are meant to be citadels of freedom of thought, there have been countless examples of university staff, visiting speakers and students facing ‘cancellation’ because they dared to express an opinion that has been deemed beyond the pale. I’ve spoken many times to the boys about the free market of ideas as well as that of trade. Arguments which are convincing will succeed whilst those without secure foundations will simply crumble. Shutting down ideas and not allowing proper scrutiny is not only intellectually enervating but might also have the effect of increasing radicalism through frustration. It is easy to speak of Fascists, or Communists, for that matter, as radicals but we ought to remember that those who hold to religious faith, Catholics or otherwise, have also come to be seen as ‘extremists’. This can be seen in the recent debate on assisted suicide where Lord Falconer, a proponent, said that the Justice Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, who opposed the bill, should ‘not impose her religious beliefs on everybody else’. This was arguably a disingenuous way of shutting down any reference to ethics. Religion was forced out of the public realm by brute force in revolutionary France and although the context is quite different there is very much a sense that certain beliefs can be tolerated whilst others must be suppressed at all cost. Even the very concept of democracy has come to be disparaged when the electorate makes a choice that can be dismissed as ‘populist’.
What does this all mean for our boys? I would venture to suggest that it means that an intellectual grounding in literature, religion, the arts, history and science will be invaluable resources as they navigate their way through a topsy-turvy world that seeks to confound and confuse at every turn. Wasn’t it ever thus? Each generation undeniably faces its own particular challenges. That said, I do find myself wondering whether we stand on the cusp of something truly seismic.
Categories: Uncategorised
