The Campaign Company specialises in social research and behaviour change. This is your guide to what we’ve been reading. Here’s what’s coming up this week:
Polls, politics and policy ~ Made to be broken? We discuss politics and rules
Hello and welcome to the TCC Weekly – the Friday bulletin for people who know their Lizard People from their Dinosauroids.
This week we look, in our politics section, at the concept of rules. Why do they matter and can politics ever do without them?
And of course, there’s the regular Friday rule bender that is Charlie’s Attic – this week including the discussion, sparked by ‘man of the people’ Dan Walker, about whether it’s wriggle or wiggle room.
Made to be broken?
Are rules a good thing? We considered this recently, after reading an article by US writer Freddie deBoer. His piece comes in response to a vigorous online backlash by progressives, against a woman who apparently called for tougher rules against people smoking on New York trains.
DeBoer critiques the ‘anti-rules’ ethos of the new progressive left in American politics, writing that “The socialist left has never advocated for a system in which there are literally no expectations on personal behaviour.” He adds that: “This attitude has become inescapable. It’s not just the attitude that the enforcement of societal rules and norms is bad, but that this is the default assumption of all right-thinking people – it’s not just a left-wing perspective but the left-wing perspective.”
De Boer’s central argument leads into some fairly deep elements of political philosophy. Is the role of the left to change the rules and then enforce them – or to break the rules come-what-may? If a disadvantaged social group are disproportionately likely to break the rules then does this not imply a systemic factor – and diminish individual responsibility? Etc etc.
The piece also got TCC cogs whirring, given the values dimension. This isn’t a Values Lab week, so we don’t assault your senses with heatmaps. But it’s worth noting that a key difference between the three values tribes relates to rule breaking. Pioneers frequently struggle to care about issues like petty crime – which rules-orientated Settlers are often exercised about. Progressive parties, who need to appeal to both, struggle to bridge this gap.
Indeed, the deBoer piece is particularly relevant given that local election season is approaching. Anyone tramping the pavements in a rosette will no doubt be hearing from voters about ultra-local issues – from dog poo and fly tipping to anti-social behaviour – the solutions to which invariably come down to enforcement. Most councils in fact have an enforcement team, whose job is to make sure rules are implemented – be they rules the left generally cares about (like the minimum wage) or those it generally does not (like graffiti). Even among voters who are tougher on the causes of crime than on crime itself, idea that rules are a reactionary construct in themselves would be a hard sell.
Are rules a good thing? There are a whole range of answers to this question, spanning kneejerk doorstep responses and esoteric theories. But perhaps the most fitting retort is simply ‘it depends on what they are’.
And finally, this week, Charlie’s Attic, the part of the bulletin where anything goes:
See how the cost-of-living is affecting voting behaviour.
