STORIES MATTER

The local elections in England were a disappointment to all bar the Conservative Party. Positive spinning can obscure the outcome but the gains in councils and councillors provide solid evidence of the continuing electability of Conservative Party candidates. So how can this be explained? As significant is how should the other parties respond?

My first suggestion that the response should be honest. This means not falling into the trap of saying not enough of the usual practices were done, by which I mean things like mass leafleting, door-to-door calling. The issues are deeper than that, the opposition parties have been losing for a long time.

My second suggestion is that stories matter. Although these were local elections, is it really local stories that swing voters? Maybe where the opposition parties already have a presence and have a track record to highlight, but breaking into a new ward what will voters refer to as their reference point? Is it likely to be the national image of the party? In this case, the underlying philosophy of the party will become important, except that most voters may be unaware of what that philosophy is. All they may be aware of is the image, the projection of ideals that the party stands for, in other words, the stories the part tells. This is not to say that the stories are fiction, only that they are tale that embody what the party want people to see as it essence, what it stands for and why that should be important to you as a voter, as an individual, as a member of a community.

If the stores we as parties tell are important, then what sort of stories were being told during the local elections? Were the stories easy to understand? Did they have the advantage of being the continuation of an existing narrative? Did they offer a clear picture of the he world should look like? Were they positive, hopeful stories? Did the voters know the stories and did those stories resonate with them, with their everyday lives?

So can you identify the stories that embody the values of each party? Are the stories he Conservative Party tell easier to understand, more hopeful, more appealing to the fearful? Do other parties define their stories, if they do at all, as direct comparisons to the Tory stories – if so then aren’t these stories merely extensions of the Tory story? All opposition parties have rich histories of stories, of successes, of deep convictions and values. Are these getting smothered by the need to focus on criticism, on minute detail and on the technicalities of running local elections? If voters have no idea what the opposition parties stand for, how what they offer is different from the party in power, how that offer is practical, different and relatable, then why should they vote for change?   

 

Are Taxes Theft?

‘I work hard and I deserve my money and then the government take it and give it to lazy buggers who don’t deserve it.’ How often have you heard that sentiment? How often have you found yourself agreeing with it even if only a little bit? How difficult do you find it to argue against such a sentiment? How much has this sentiment driven the demand for only the ‘truly deserving’ receiving aid, for lobbying for spending my money appropriately, for demanding low taxation rates and then implementing service cuts?

In answering this you can’t help but feel the pressure of an overarching metaphor that drives people’s feeling and attitudes towards taxes – the metaphor of taxes are theft. This metaphor drives and frames debates over what taxes are and how they should be used. This metaphor drives the need to ‘check’ taxes are being spent properly. This metaphor encourages people to see their taxes as remaining their money and under their control after they have paid them.

All the above may seem more or less reasonable but is that because the metaphor has become so all embracing that we can now only see taxation though the lens of this metaphor?

Let’s think about the metaphor a bit more. The basis of the metaphor lies in the extension of the idea of ownership to money. The argument runs something like this - the money I earn is mine, it is my property, I own it so if you take it you are stealing from me. Taxation in this view is just state sanctioned theft. As it is theft then the individual has every right to avoid taxes, to pay as little as they can get away with. If they can’t escape paying taxes then, as the money is really theirs, they feel that they have every right to demand control over how the money is spent and to whom it is given.

The taxes are theft metaphor have such resonance because they dovetail with the deep-seated desire for and expectation of individual control. The ‘taxation as theft’ metaphor links with a whole mesh of metaphors about personal control and responsibility that, through their linkages, strengthen each other’s plausibility. Individuals can’t give up on the view that their money is still theirs even when the state have it as taxes. Nor can they give up on the idea that they can control how it is used, that they can define who deserves their money and who does not. It also means that there is an undemocratic view that the more someone pays in taxes, the more they have a right, an ownership, of the use of taxes. Within such a metaphor, the insistence that only the deserving, as defined by them, receive the benefits of their taxes is overwhelming as is the demand that the way taxes are spent is properly tracked.

As the state defines and protects property rights, such rights are not a given. No state would mean no organisation to define and enforce ownership rights. Ownership is dependent on a state and its institutions which requires funds to operate to ensure that ownership rights can be sustained.  As importantly, people don’t earn money in a vacuum, they earn it as part of an economy and a society. That society is often uneven in terms of wealth, opportunities and outcomes, but without it there would be no economy to generate the money that individuals earn. Taxes are a way of diverting money back into that society and economy to benefit everyone through development and growth. Individuals who benefit most from the way society and economy are structured earn most and so pay most to maintain and develop that economy and society. Taxes are an investment in the very society and economy that provide the income of the taxed.

So a better metaphor for taxes might be thought of an investment in society and the economy. As with investments through banks, all funds are pooled and then used to invest in diverse enterprises that create a return to the economy and society as a whole. Except this metaphor is not perfect either. Even this metaphor still has the control of taxes as a key characteristic. When you invest you expect to be able to specify the types of activities you are happy to invest in and those you are not.  With taxation, an individual expects to be able to identify and delineate their personal taxes from the ocean of taxes flowing to the state. It is as if a single raindrop thinks it can retain its own identity as it merges into the sea. 

Countering the ‘taxes are theft’ metaphor is crucial if taxes are to be seen as the essential lubricant for economic and society development and growth rather than the stealthy theft of wealth. If the metaphor is not countered then all debate takes place within the constants of that metaphor and so limits and defines acceptable evidence and arguments.

For more on the metaphor these website are useful:

Taxation and its metaphors

Taxation is a Burden 

Metaphors – What are they good for?

Metaphors steer political discussions. Most debates revolve around choosing an appropriate metaphor to get your view across to voters and decision makers.  You pick a metaphor as you think it can explain how something complicated works. You pick a particular metaphor because you believe it highlights an important characteristic or attribute of the thing it is difficult to explain. You use the metaphor – it seems to work, people seems to understand the complicated thing in the way you do.

You might, for example, believe that national finances are just the same as household finances so you use the metaphor to explain why the nation shouldn’t get into debt. You extend the metaphor – you add attributes to the complicated thing that the metaphor suggests. For example extending the national finances = household budget metaphor you believe that just as families should budget for the important things, the necessities first and then the luxuries, so the nation should spend only on the necessities first – of course you know what the necessities are and what the luxuries are.

Eventually, the metaphor becomes synonymous with the complicated thing you were trying to explain. Problem is was it the right metaphor? Has it been extended in an appropriate way? Has the metaphor now become so synonymous with the thing that understanding of the complicated thing has become simplified to just what the metaphor tells us?  Household budgets, for example, are not the same a national finances but the continual repetition of the metaphor makes any counter argument difficult. (why a federal budgetis not like a household budget)

There is now an inbuilt assumption that the household budget metaphor accurately described national finances so any counter metaphor or explanation is often viewed as suspect. This is partly because the metaphor has become ingrained into people’s understanding, they understand national finances only through the metaphor of a household budget and so can only view any argument, any presentation of facts, through the lens of that metaphor. The metaphor limits understanding of the complicated thing and so ends up guiding not only how people think about the thing but also how they try to manage it with potentially disastrous results.

Metaphors are vital in communicating ideas but they are also constraining. A way around the impasse with something like the household budget is to extend the metaphor again and find attributes that highlight the differences between the metaphor and the thing. Extending the metaphor to explore the absurdity of its attributes in relation to understanding national finances in one approach. Trying to construct an alternative metaphor that highlights other characteristics of national finances is another way to try to prise people out of their metaphorical thinking. Metaphors work because they provide a framework within which to interpret and underfund facts. Facts on their own have little impact unless they fit within a framework of understanding, such as that provided by a good metaphor, that resonates with the individual and which they invest their belief in (what if the national economy is like a household budget).  

Liberal - The Deep Story

Liberals – The Deep Story

Arlie Russell Hochschild (2016, Strangers in Their Own Land, The New Press, New York) undertook an extensive sociological study of right-wing supporters in the US, the ordinary people who voted for Trump in 2016. Her analysis threw up what she called the 'deep story' of the right, a narrative that seemed to resonate with those voters, that seemed to express and explain reality as they experienced it. Any 'facts' were filtered through and interpreted within this deep story. Below is a first attempt at a Liberal deep story that counters the deep story of the right.     

I am in a line, a long and narrow line, standing next to a long fence that divides me and everyone else in the line from the economy on the other side of the fence. Those in charge tell us that we can’t go over the fence to look at the economy; that we wouldn’t understand it, only they can understand the economy. Apparently, only they can make the economy work for us so that we can all move along the line towards the riches they promise await our hard work. The economy on the other side of the fence produces opportunities that grow like delicate flowers along the side of the fence I am on. I grasp these opportunities and use them as best I can so that my family can move up the line. There seems to be fewer of these opportunities than there used to be, but at least there are more where I am in the line than there are further back in the line, but those in front of me always seem to have more opportunities. It really isn’t fair.

Looking back I can’t see the back of the line, looking forwards the front of the line snakes out of sight as well. I can’t even see the place we are meant to be heading towards. We seem to spend most of our time complaining about where we are in the line and about how unfair it is that others seem to skip ahead or that others seem to be able to move more quickly up the line than we do.  But the line isn’t moving. Some tell me it is because people are pushing in in front of us, but that isn’t the reason. Some tell me that the line isn’t moving because we aren’t working hard enough, but that isn’t the reason. The line isn’t moving because, despite what those in charge keep telling us, there seems to be no fair rewards for hard work in our society. In truth, the line is going nowhere, we are just arguing about where we stand to whilst we wait around. Our children are in the same predicament and so are our grandchildren. We all seem destined to wait in a line that doesn’t move.

Still I work hard for myself and my family. I believe everyone should have the opportunity to live as they want, as long as it doesn’t harm others. I may be in a line but that doesn’t mean I have to play by the rules of those who try to that keep me in the line. I know that my success is built on by my own capabilities, by taking and making the best of the opportunities I have had, but I am not arrogant or stupid enough to believe I could have achieved this all on my own. Some people, oblivious to their luck of their birth or their profession, brightly wear their success as a badge of purely personal achievement. They think that don’t need to stand in line, they are above that sort of thing. To them others exist only as things to use to further their own interests, keeping us in line ensures they stay out of the line. They believe they are entitled to the inequalities they fight to perpetuate, the inequalities that they maintain to keep the line, and everyone in it, in their proper place.

My success depends on those around me in the line, on my family, on my community, on people like me I suppose. I know that my success depends on the support I have had. The support I can see is easy for me to recognise and value but it is the support I can’t see, the schools, that gave me my education, the infrastructure that mean I live as well as I do, the health service and public services that I know I can rely on; I forget about how important these have been to me sometimes. I have seen others struggle alongside me, then falter and fall as their support withered and their isolation destroyed their hope. Any success I have had is because of my own determination and capabilities and because of the support I have had to develop, to expand and explore my life and to follow my dreams. They are so woven together I honestly couldn’t tell you if I could have achieved anything without both my capabilities and the support of others. 

Oddly, very few of us ask why we are standing in line in the first place? I want a good life for myself and my family, I want to live my life as I choose, but I want the opportunities to expand and explore what life has to offer. Will I get those opportunities standing in line, knowing my place and sticking to it? Sod it, I am going over the fence, I want to look at this economy that seems to dictate how I have to live my life. Despite the protests of my family I manage to climb the fence and tumble over onto the other side. In front of me is a vast field and far, far across the other side I can see a huge mansion with a forest of opportunities growing around it. The mansion isn’t even in the direction the line is heading. There is a huge wave of wealth flowing from the line I was in towards the mansion, the flow is so strong it almost pulls me off my feet as it spills out and fills the economy in the field in front of me. There are some trickles of wealth back towards the line that turn into opportunities and services as they get closer to the line, but the trickles aren’t very big compared to the tidal wave flowing towards the mansion and the trickles don’t seem to flow evenly to all parts of the line, some the trickles are even swept back up by the wave of wealth and redirected back to the mansion.

I walk further out into the wealth flowing to the mansion. I am so far away from the line now that I can’t really make out where my position was. I look around me, there are others who have jumped the fence as well to my left and to my right. They seem to have lost sight of where their place in the line was as well, none of us know where we were. We stand and chat. We are all appalled by the huge wave of wealth leaving the line and the little trickles flowing back. They seem like nice people, they seem to be people just like me. 

We all decide we have to do something about the wave of wealth. We spot a trickle that seems to turn into schools and teacher’s salaries as it approaches the line so we decide to build a dam to divert some of the wealth back down this trickle. None of us could build the dam on our own; we all need to help each other to plan the dam, to shift the stones, to pile the stones up so at least some the wave of wealth is redirected and to dig new ditches to direct the increased flow to the fence. Suddenly the person to my left asks which part of the line do we direct the flow towards once we have diverted the wave of wealth? We all stop. We have no idea where we were in the line and we are too far away from the line to be able to even guess. We discuss it and decide the best thing would be to try to distribute the flow back as fairly as possible although we have a long discussion about is it fairer to divert more towards the back of the line or to divert the same amount along the whole line, but at last we reach an agreement. With the final stone in place, some of the wave of wealth starts to flow along the trickle, enlarging it and, as we can see across the field, new schools pop up all the way along the line as the extra wealth reaches the fence.  

   

‘Oi, you get lot off my field’, shouts a voice from the mansion. Those in charge are not happy. They berate us for not knowing our place and don’t we know how dangerous it is to meddle in the free flow of the economy. We begin the trudge back to the line, but we notice they forget to destroy our dam. We reach the fence and can now clearly see where our places in the line were. We all shake hands and clamber back over the fence. I am a little surprised to see a lot of my new friends scramble over the fence so far towards the back of the line – they are people just like me, I would never have known. My family are relieved to see me, I seem to have been gone a lot longer than I thought I had. There seem to be a lot more opportunities popping up along the fence now, both where I am and all the way back down and up the line. I look back and am surprised that I think I can actually see the back of the line and, when I look forward, I can just about make out the front of the line. We still don’t seem to be heading towards the mansion though. Looking around at my place in the line there seems to be a lot of people in the same spot as me than there were. There seems to be a lot more equality between people in the line.

I climb over the fence again, others follow. Some want to plough up the field and to destroy the mansion. Several of us dissuade them as that would destroy the flow of wealth completely. Instead we all set to work diverting some more of the wave of wealth back into the trickles that snake towards the fence. Some of us even dig new ditches so that the wealth flows back in different ways. We make so many dams and ditches that those in charge can’t destroy them all when they chase us off the field. We all get back to the fence and clamber over. The back and front of the line seem a lot closer now from where I am in the line. There are a lot more opportunities all around for everyone where I am in the line. There are also a lot more people in the same spot as me and the whole line seems to be moving forward, but oddly, still not in the direction of the mansion. People don’t seem to be too concerned about that now as they are beginning to live the lives they have always wanted to. Some people are clustering together to set up new businesses, creating opportunities themselves from the wealth that is now flowing back to the line. People are joining together to form new organisations to help their friends further back in the line. Some people just wander off to live and be alone. But at least people have more choices to make because of the increase in the opportunities available to them.

A whisper goes back though the line - the new opportunities had been noticed and most people think our trips over the fence were the reason why. People huddled together, discussed and then decided that some people should be delegated to go over the fence all together and make sure that the right sort of changes were made to divert the flow of wealth, changes that created more opportunities for everyone waiting in the line.

I climb the fence once more, this time with emboldened by the belief people have shown in me. The fence starts to break apart. I look across the field and see the mansion crumbling and the forest of opportunities around it rotting. People start to wander from the narrow confines of the line and spread out across the field. They join together and begin to divert bits of the wave of wealth themselves. No-one from the mansion bothers to come out and tell us to get off the field anymore. The line is now a crowd, all moving forward together, but not towards the mansion; that goal seems to have disappeared. The economy still works, there is still a wave of wealth from people in the line flowing out into the field, but less, a lot less of it flows across the field to the mansion. I don’t know if I will live long enough to see where the crowd finally reach, if we ever reach anywhere, but I am happy that my family have opportunities I never had and that they are moving forward with everyone else, with the friends I had before I went over the fence and with the friends I made on those trips. They are all people just like me. 

Has there ever been a time in recent history when liberal ideas are needed more? Have liberals risen to the challenge?  Progressive Potato is a blog that comes out of a personal concern that liberal ideas and liberals have been on the defensive for a long time, struggling to compete with the populist ambitions of their opponents. Progressive Potato hope to help to revive and redirect liberal thinking so that it is more clearly relevant to people. The blog will publish short reports on voter attitudes, analysis of census and attitudinal information on voters as well as dissect and reconstruct common metaphors used in political discussion.

Why Progressive Potato? Well, I had toyed with blander titles such as’ Liberal Thinking’ or ‘Liberal Analysis’, but in a crowded blogsphere, such titles are rapidly passed over.  Progressive Potato had a certain ring to it – whether that is a good or bad thing I will find out.

It’s Lonely in the Middle: Perception of Political Alignment and Likely Voting Behaviour

Figure 1  Example of voter self-perception of polticial alignment 

An analysis of voter perception in the British Electoral Survey throws up some key poitns for liberals. Voters were asked to assess how left ro right wing thet thought they were - their self-perceived left/right alignment. On an individual’s self-perceived political left/right alignment there are three clear peaks (Figure 1) – one for people who define their political views as occupying the centre ground, and two slightly smaller peaks where people seem to identify themselves as slightly left or right of centre.

Figures 2-4  Perception of self right/left alignment and right/left alignment of political parties. Contours are percentage of voters. 

Voters were then asked to to assess the left/right alingemnt of the polticial parties. Cross tabulating self-perception of political alignment with an individual’s perception of alignment of the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties the Conservatives are perceived to align with the right of UK politics but with a small peak of individuals believing that the Conservatives represent the centre ground as well (Figure 2). The Labour party are clearly perceived to align with the left of UK politics (Figure 3). The Liberal Democrats are perceived to occupy a very narrow central ground of UK politics and exhibit none of the spread to the right or left that the Conservatives and Labour party show (Figure 4). Trying to align the party to occupy the centre ground is a pointless exercise – the public believe that hte LibDems already  occupy this position. 

When the likelihood of voting for a particular party is crosstabulated with the perceived left/right alignment of that party  there is a clear and strong distinction in the respondents mind concerning their likelihood to vote for Conservatives or Labour parties based on the individual’s perception of their left/right alignments. For the Liberal Democrats there is a lack of strong likelihood to vote for the Liberal Democrats even amongst those who perceive the party as aligned with the centre of UK politics. In addition those who perceive the Liberal Democrats as representing a more left-wing alignment, there is a low likelihood that they would vote for the party. 

(The full report is available if you email me privately)