Steal the topics from the extremists
#171
My Dear Friend of Democracy,
Populist and extremist parties usually score points with their voters by claiming they are committed to keeping everything as it is. For example,
the language (although social changes have always been reflected in language changes),
the combustion engine (despite the overwhelming evidence that human-made CO2 emissions are the primary cause of climate change),
the population composition (although, given the global refugee movements and demographic change, isolation would have dire consequences),
the landscape (no wind turbines!) or
peace and freedom, without having to defend them militarily if necessary (and therefore, one would rather not see the Russian dictator Putin for what he is, namely a dictator who intends to secure his power through expansion).
The growing success of populist and extremist parties can be explained by this "let it stay as it always was" mentality. Change means disadvantages, perhaps more and more people think.
In any case, these status quo voters want to continue driving their combustion engines, eating meat without consequences, living with the same people they always have, speaking the way they always have, and not seeing any wind turbines while walking in the local recreational forest.
There is nothing wrong with that in principle. At least it is not undemocratic.
On the contrary.
A democratic society finds ways to negotiate what is allowed and what is not, what is social consensus and what is not. This negotiation is sometimes carried out with harsh tactics. The thing is called an election campaign and is the heart of democracy.
However, these status quo attitudes can become problematic for two reasons:
Firstly, when populist parties promise to preserve the status quo without specifying the price that must be paid for it. For example, when necessary changes to ensure prosperity and peace are not made, and consequently immigration is prevented and more money is withheld for essential defence.
Second, when extremist parties use populist issues to find majorities and destroy democracy.
In the end, in both cases, nothing remains as it was. The status quo lovers then destroy what is most important to them: the status quo.
How can this be prevented?
By making it clear to status quo voters that by voting for populist and extremist parties, they are shooting themselves in the foot.
This awareness needs to be increased.
In two ways.
Firstly, by not missing any opportunity to reveal that the party officials of populist and extremist parties have one thing in mind above all else: to increase their own power and success, usually at the expense of their electorate.
Secondly, by convincing status quo voters that to preserve a life they love, a certain willingness to change is necessary.
Often, less change is needed than many people think.
Because progress solves many problems.
Mobility will still be possible but with different driving technologies. Meat consumption will be given new foundations regarding animal husbandry and energy consumption. Immigration ensures that the country's workforce is met. Changes like that.
Once awareness has been created, alternative offers must follow. Status quo issues must not be left to populist and extremist parties.
However, these issues mustn't be negotiated in the same way as populist and extremist parties do. The centrist parties, one could also call them the solution-oriented parties, must not parrot populist attitudes, but must make attractive offers for status quo voters. We can emit less CO2, allow more equality, and ensure better animal welfare without status quo voters becoming losers. – We do not need a radical reversal but intelligent adjustments.
Such messages are heard. The majority can accept such adjustments. Because they hardly change the lives of those who vote for the status quo (which is precisely what they want).
As a result, the electorate of extremist parties shrinks to the number of extremists. Every one of them is one too many. They are far too few to end democracy.
See you in Europe,
Johannes
It's not only about the status quo voters and the pertaining parties. It is more about the "lost paradise" voters and their parties, who want to go back to some cherished, not existing point in time, when the world was still in order and free of challenges.
That point can be freely chosen by any leader and painted in rosy colours. A good example being the Reichsbürger movement.
Fact though is, that this past paradise never existed. With all its challenges and shortcomings our current societal system is the best we ever had.
Let's keep at it and continue to improve it, together with the other people of Europe and beyond.