BlogWhy Dishonesty in Politics Affects Us On a Personal Level
First shown on Welldoing.org October 24th 2018
In recent weeks we have been hearing blatant denials from Russia and Saudi Arabia about the state sponsored murders they have been accused of committing. The quality of the denials, despite evidence to the contrary, is what is so striking. Individual nations have in times past been responsible for the murder of dissidents on foreign soil, but rarely have we witnessed such blatant disregard for public opinion. In fact, the murder of Sergai Skripal was surely designed for maximum publicity to maximise terror.
When leaders blatantly lie it is a serious abuse. We are born depending on love and family for our survival. We need to be cared for and we need to trust those who are responsible for us and our wellbeing. When this trust is broken, children will suffer. People have often needed the care of their community for their very survival in times of crisis and hardship. When we hunted in groups, we needed to trust the integrity of our fellow hunters. We teach children that lying is wrong and being seen as untrustworthy is bad. We do need to be able to trust each other more than we distrust, if we are to live positive lives.
I think about the damage done to our politics by our Brexit referendum campaign - whether we voted to Remain or Leave - and what will be the long-term consequences for the political life in this country. People worry about demanding another referendum on the Brexit deal because the people who voted Leave will not trust the political process again. That is possible, but we can also consider the loss of trust that has taken place because of the many conscious falsehoods people were fed. Michael Gove, a government minister told us not to trust the ‘experts’ who did not agree with his views. Experts can be wrong of course, but it is a rare expert who deliberately lies.
Loss of trust in expertise will put our very survival at risk. Global warning is now virtually unanimously accepted as a danger to humanity and our way of life. It is a reality and we always deny reality our peril. We have been given only twelve years to make major changes to the way we live and the use of our resources. President Trump now says the climate might be changing but the causes are not necessarily ‘man-made.’ He says that the climate experts have a ‘political’ agenda. Indeed they have. Their agenda is to save the planet. However, in the world of Donald Trump, lying and politics seem to have become one and the same thing and this is very dangerous.
We lie at our peril. We damage our relationships and a sense of trust in the world. Being lied to is one of the most distressing of human experiences. When faced with a partner’s infidelity or a trusted friend’s betrayal, people will say it was the lying that hurt the most. People who lie easily cause immense hurt because our instinctive sense of trust is damaged and we feel foolish at having trusted them in the first place. We need to know what is true and untrue to make considered decisions and good decisions are always based on reality.
People who believed what they were told in the Brexit referendum don’t deserve mockery. They need sympathy because their trust was abused and that is serious. At some point if politics is to recover our respect, then the public figures who lie and distort reality will need either to apologise to us all or be held to account.
The news of the bombings in Paris brought back my memories of the London bombings of 7/7. The terrible anxiety for loved ones who might be involved, then the more chronic anxiety of how dangerous London might be in the future. I remembered thinking of different locations that could be ‘obvious’ targets and maybe I would avoid these. The panic passed and I do travel on the underground and fly but once again I am reminded of the anxiety and I find myself wondering where will be ‘safe’ versus ‘unsafe’.
The use of the quotation marks says it all. We don’t know what is ‘safe’ or ‘unsafe’ and that is the problem. The randomness of the attacks, the killings in places where loved ones or we could happen to be is what is so terrifying. We cannot assess the risk with any degree of accuracy.
I noted my reactions when I first heard the news of the Paris bombings. I thought of friends who were working just outside of Paris but then decided that it was unlikely that they would be in Paris that evening. The next thought was ‘but they just might be’. The stab of anxiety that this thought evoked meant I had to telephone just to check. For five minutes there was no answer to the phone call. The fear ‘they just might be’ became much more real even though it was not.
When worried we often tend to anticipate the worst rather than make more optimistic and realistic assumptions
When worried we often tend to anticipate the worst rather than make more optimistic and realistic assumptions. Human beings find the helplessness of the unknown very difficult to deal with. We tend to fill in the gaps with explanations that are not necessarily accurate and we ‘avoid’ in order to try and manage our anxiety. I won’t fly or I won’t travel to that place. We know that tourism will be hit in Paris just as it was in London after the bombings and has been in Tunisia and Egypt. But we all continue to travel in cars and walk in streets where the likelihood of a serious accident or death is much higher than death by terrorist action. I was surprised to find that in 2013 over 1,700 died on the road in the UK.
The fear that a terrorist can instil in a population is enormous. Scenes of carnage show the reality of the fragility of our existence and it calls into action immediate thoughts on how can we best protect ourselves. When frightened we think less clearly and rational thought is often a casualty. Trust and tolerance is also damaged when we feel under threat. We want answers that can make us feel safer and blaming religious Muslims is one answer even if it is the wrong answer. Rising racism and anti-Muslim feeling will not improve our situation. Good security is based on accurate information not on prejudice.
To live without risk is not to live at all
We all live risky lives. We go up and down stairs not expecting to fall and break our necks. We walk the streets, we get into cars and we fly and take trains. All these actions carry risk. We continue to drink alcohol, eat foods we shouldn’t and not exercise enough. We live with the risk because we tell ourselves the chances are it will be OK. And it usually is. To live without risk is not to live at all.
So that is what we have to remember and tell ourselves when we go about our lives. No-one can promise that nothing bad will happen but we do know that living as if it is going to happen is no way to live. We need to make sensible assessments and take sensible precautions. We try and drive carefully, we cross roads with care. We might even watch what we eat and drink. We fly with airlines with good safety records. But above all we have to remember and tell ourselves that just because we are anxious about something does not mean it will happen.
First published November 16th. 2015 for www.welldoing.org
How We Lose Trust in Politics and Politicians
As I was writing my thoughts on the erosion of trust in politics and our national institutions, the New Year Honours list was announced. Sean O’Grady, the journalist, wrote a passionate piece in the Independent. He felt ashamed that given the number of terrible events in the last year, the Prime Minister failed to reward ‘a single fireman or woman, police officer, paramedic, hospital worker, or any civilian’ caught up in the horrifying events of the Manchester bombings, nor the Borough Market attack, nor the Grenfell Tower fire. These were people who actually risked their lives to rescue, support, comfort and treat the victims of these terrible events. He ended with, ‘If you want to understand why Britain has become more bitterly divided of late, you need do no more than have a flick through the honours list. It is, like the blackened hulk of the Grenfell Tower itself, a monument to a sickening hypocrisy.’
It is also, I would argue, politically inept. We are living in times where many people feel let down by the political institutions, believing that those with power will look after their own interests first. But looking after your own interests too ruthlessly can backfire. History is full of examples. The victors of the First World War exacted such a heavy price on the defeated Germany, it wrecked that country’s economy and gave birth to the rise of fascism. The ‘victors’ could only enjoy their ‘spoils’ for 22 years before they were at war again.
If society becomes so polarised between ‘winners and losers’, the ‘haves and have nots’, something very ugly and irrational can emerge as resentment builds. Wilkinson and Pickett in their illuminating book ‘The Spirit Level’ showed that in countries with the least income inequality there is a greater sense of wellbeing across all income levels. Everyone benefits from increasing equality and excessive inequality harms us all. If people feel disadvantaged, their confidence and health, both physical and mental, suffer. Their sense of mattering, or having significance, is damaged and multiple problems can ensue.
These feelings of inadequacy can be exploited by the ruthless. President Lyndon B Johnson put it succinctly and shockingly in 1960 with this example: "If you can convince the lowest white man that he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket." In other words, being provided with someone to look down on makes people more inclined to ignore the true cost of the cause they’re supporting. In lieu of better conditions and wider opportunities for all, you can be offered a false, distorted sense of superiority. This is the phenomena that President Trump has encouraged so effectively. Liberals, the ‘elite’, the mainstream media, Muslims, immigrants are all offered up as targets to be attacked and despised. Boosting a sense of importance at the expense of others rather than through the serious work of offering real opportunities for achievement.
People have a profound need to feel valued and if the culture and society don’t provide an opportunity for this to find expression, then it will find an outlet in another way. Why was Michael Gove, the lover of traditional educational values, so quick to dismiss the opinion of experts over Brexit during the referendum campaign? He was telling voters who felt let down, excluded, that their opinion is as valuable as the ‘experts’ also known as ‘the elite.’ The message is that you don’t need an education to understand difficult, complex economic issues. You know what you believe and that is good enough. Except it isn’t. It is deceptive and dishonest. Schooling does not make you a better person or a decent human being, but you do need knowledge and education to succeed in today’s society. Implying you do not, is an attempt to cover up and divert attention from the weaknesses of an education system that has failed to provide a good enough education for all. The ability to question and think critically is fundamental to a decent, democratic society. If knowledge is power then this power needs to be shared as widely as possible. Aaron Sorkin, who wrote the West Wing, said that what worried him the most was the ease with which people had come to disbelieve what was probably accurate in favour of what was patently false.
People, as I have said previously, need to feel important, need to feel they are significant. I have noticed that my clients who most strongly believe in conspiracy theories, often feel relatively marginalised and powerless. The strong pull of the conspiracy theory is that you are part of the ‘privileged’ few who ‘know’ what really happened. It is a powerful illusion to believe you have the truth about who killed President Kennedy, murdered Princess Diana, or flew planes into the twin towers.
First shown on welldoing.org February, 2018