Expecting top-down change from political party leadership is a flawed strategy. True societal transformation starts with grassroots movements and shifts in public sentiment. Political parties are reactive entities that eventually adopt agendas forced upon them by the people they seek to represent, making them followers, not initiators, of change.
Related Insights
In times of crisis, expecting an opposition party to lead the charge is a mistake. Real political movements are initiated by citizens who set the moral terms and take risks. The political party then becomes just one part of a larger coalition that it doesn't necessarily lead.
While public support is vital, movements don't just happen. They require specific individuals who act as catalysts. The British abolitionist movement, for example, is inseparable from Thomas Clarkson, who was the first person to envision a national public campaign and dedicate his life to it, turning a latent issue into a powerful political force.
Widespread suffering alone doesn't trigger a revolution. Historically, successful uprisings require a politically savvy, well-organized group with a clear agenda and influential leadership. Disparate and unorganized populations, no matter how desperate, tend to see their energy dissipate without causing systemic change.
Ideological loyalty is an illusion in politics. Once in power, parties will quickly abandon the very groups that propelled them there if it is politically expedient. Examples include the UK's Labour Party turning on unions and Democrats ignoring BLM after the 2020 election. Power, not principle, is the goal.
Political parties now adopt positions primarily to oppose their rivals, rather than from consistent principles. This is seen in the multiple reversals on COVID-19 policies and vaccines. When beliefs flip-flop based on the opponent's stance, the driving force is tribalism, not ideology.
Major political realignments are not always triggered by specific crimes but by a pervasive 'vibe' of elite entitlement and impunity. Revelations that expose a culture of being above the law can act as a societal 'let them eat cake moment,' sparking a revolutionary shift in public sentiment and policy priorities.
The primary value of protests isn't just cinematic outrage; it's serving as a gateway for deeper organizing. Demonstrations allow individuals to connect with the groups that form the backbone of sustained political action, creating lasting, though often unseen, infrastructure.
Political figures like Donald Trump don't create movements but are instead elevated by pre-existing societal moods. They succeed by reflecting the populace's will to stay in power, not by shaping it. Had Trump run in the 90s, he would have failed.
Effective activism doesn't try to persuade politicians or stage a revolution. Instead, it should 'inject a retrovirus': build and run privately-funded alternative institutions (like citizens' assemblies) that operate on a different logic. By demonstrating a better way of doing things, this strategy creates demand and allows new institutional 'DNA' to spread organically.
Populist movements are often driven by a collective intuition that the system is rigged, not by complex intellectual analysis. People can viscerally "feel" when they're being taken advantage of, demonstrating a form of societal awareness that can precede formal critique from the educated class.
