The
question resonating around the world after the demonstrations in Brazil is why
the dissatisfaction is emerging from the 'middle class', from those who have
gained much from the economic boom that the country has enjoyed over the last
20 years. I would like to claim that my
rousing public speeches during my recent visit to Brazil were the catalyst that inspired the protests, but since I only spoke at the university in Sao
Paulo this would be an outrageous lie. In fact I had no hint that these
demonstrations were on their way. What I did experience was a horrifying level
of advertising desperately trying to funnel the new wealth towards private,
individualist consumption. Can it be that the demonstrations are proof of the
ultimate dissatisfaction people feel with this as the end of a human life?
The
erosion of democratic politics in the world after globalisation has led to a
world where the young do not believe in the organised politics of the party.
When all politicians look the same, espouse the same message and act as
mouthpieces for corporate interests politics itself becomes tarnished. If the
market is at the heart of all political ideologies what is the point of voting
or attaching yourself to a party? Of course I have to say that I think the
world's green parties are different, but that message is not being relayed though
the media and is not reaching the people on the streets.
In Brazil
the disillusion set in under Lula, the former trade-union unionist who had been in gaol under the
dictatorship and was President for the first decade of this century. Although
the evidence to support this is patchy at best, the suggestion made by radical
critics to me was that Lula had made a deal with the denizens of global finance
that he would not challenge the basic rules of capitalism in his country. Private
enterprise would be allowed to flourish and people would be encouraged to
content themselves with consumer goods rather than seeking to wrest control of
the means of production from their betters. It is this deal that appears to be
threatened by the demonstrations and the reaction from Dilma Rousseff, herself
formerly a guerrilla fighter, is awaited with interest. Can she use the street
mobilisations to increase the radical stance of her government? And does she
wish to?
The
mobilisation of political energy amongst the educated young of the world is
exhilarating. It is the first step towards the next generation taking on the
responsibility for building the world they want to inhabit and share. But at
some stage economic and social demands need to be translated into political
proposals that are agreed and implemented. The decision by pro-corporate
politicians to encourage young people to see themselves as individualist
consumers means that they have no tools, education or experience to make this next
step. I am not seeking to criticise young people finding their own
way of doing politics; in fact, I am rather excited about it. I am looking
forward to discovering what they will propose.
The basic
pattern of the politics I understand is threefold:
- Demands need to be translated into a political programme that is consistent and coherent;
- Platforms are preferably underpinned by and ethical and/or ideological commitment, e.g. equality for socialist parties, ecologism for green parties;
- These platforms are then used to organise political mobilisation into legislative action by political parties.
My own
history of activity in the Green Party has convinced me that the second two
requirements of a functional democracy are not working in the UK and many other countries. But for the young people
demonstrating on the world's streets I think their problem lies more with the
first requirement. I was alerted to this by watching the BBC3 programme Free
Speech. Aimed at the young and politically disengaged, it assembles a panel of
celebrities to make a political case on a certain topic. The panel is mixed
between celebrities from various walks of life one of whom is probably a
politician. Ok, I was feeling pretty snobby about the facile comments made by
pop stars about revolving world poverty or tackling the civil war in Syria, but
this was not the main problem. What got me really concerned was the way the
audience was encouraged to celebrate entirely inconsistent proposals.
The result of this approach to politics is a world where young people feel disgruntled and take
to the streets with a bewildering array of demands that cannot all be
accommodated. While it makes sense to demand new shoes and a new sofa and a mini
break to Venice - the only limit being the plasticity of the credit card - this
simply is not true of political demands. If we abolish tuition fees we will need
to raise taxes, cut other spending or engage in some radical monetary policy; if we
fly more then we will need to cut our carbon emissions in another area.
Politics is the art of the possible precisely because the skill lies in
mediating conflicting demands rather than accepting then all. And of course
this is all so much easier if you have an ideological rudder and an organised and trusted party structure
to undertake the negotiation. Dilma's request to meet the demonstration's
leaders may be disingenuous, but perhaps, being of the same generation as I am,
she has simply not caught up with the idea of a leaderless demonstration of
discontent.
No doubt politics-as-consumption seemed very smart to Edward Bernays and his ilk, whose
attempts to merge the worlds of advertising and PR with that of political
debate and citizenship were dissected by the TV series The Century of the Self.
They were reactionaries, concerned about the radical nature made by newly
emancipated citizens, and fearing that open democracy would lead to alienation
and chaos. I hope to be proved wrong, but it seems to me that the mobilisation
of those who have grown up to demand three mutually incompatible things before
breakfast faces politicians with a more challenging task than ever. I am
waiting to see how the demonstrators devise their own way of turning their
demands into a legislative platform that can change their society.
.
Tweet
