If Twitter was the primeval rain forest and I were the time traveler doing the tourist thing to gawp at dinosaurs, my footprint would pose no threat to the delicate butterfly. I know that I cannot exert influence on the great and good on Twitter any more than I can travel in time.
Yet occasionally I find myself on the periphery of a debate that I feel is so important, the 140 character limit cannot hope to convey my thoughts, let alone change minds. So it has proved with the horrible violence and rioting we see in the US at the moment. The synaptic tangents it set off highlighted uncomfortable parallels in what we are seeing here in the UK when it comes to democracy, Covid response and Brexit.
What set this off was my rather innocent suggestion that if Americans insist on calling these ‘race riots’ akin to those in 1968, then they are actually reducing the chances of bringing about real, meaningful change.
Leaping back 300 years or so ago, a little spat took place in one of the British colonies. Wealthy landowners took offense at being asked to pay their taxes and so rose up in violent insurrection. They took on the mighty British and won. Having won, they were then faced with the rather tricky task of defining how they wanted to be governed.
It was a turbulent time and I will take a simplistic view of the philosophy behind the discussion. Somewhere in this meandering morass of a blog there is a discussion about the competing theories of Thomas Hobbes and john Locke.
When Thomas Jefferson came to draw up the US Constitution, just having fought the British he didn't buy into the ideaof the Hobbes assertion that human beings are incapable of ruling themselves so need to be kept in their place by a dictator. So, the US Constitution was written from the Locke viewpoint that government authority is gained through the consent of the people.
Just in case, dear reader, you have any doubt, I must state for the record I abhor racism. It is a cancer of society that if it cannot be stamped out, must never be condoned or encouraged. I hate the use of any stereotyping that is used to suggest that another human being either through their choices or accident of birth can be considered as being inferior to another, they are just different. Diversity brings new and potentially interesting views into our lives; embellishes our culture; broadens our outlook and ultimately makes us stronger and better.
Now back to the matter in hand. The US Constitution was therefore drawn up based on the Locke principles of government by consent.
While the riots in the US ignited by the spark of Derek Chauvin, a white police officer, killing an unarmed black man, George Floyd. The anger that erupted seemed to stem from accusations of racism.
Yet, the root cause is not racism, that was just the flint that provided the spark. The problem in my eyes at least is that it was another example of what happens when you cease to police by consent. The founder of the British Police, Sir Robert Peel wanted to ensure policing by consent and set out principles of transparency, integrity and accountability to achieve legitimacy in the police.
However, it isn’t just policing by consent that is the issue here, we appear to have lost focus on the need to govern by consent as well. Despite the Locke principles that are enshrined in the constitution, the need for government by consent appears forgotten. Instead we have a leader who appears to be operating straight out of a handbook written by Hobbes.
This is why we need to be careful about describing this as a race riot. It has a lot more to do with how the current art of politics is about encouraging tribalism. Elections in the US and the UK are being won and lost on it.
This is why describing the cause as racism is not only wrong but ultimately counterproductive. Racism only plays on the tribal images of us and them. It is how lazy (and ultimately dangerous) politicians get elected by using this tribalism and the language of populism. They make it all sound so easy and are quite happy to espouse policies that marginalize minorities if it gets them the majority the crave.
Social liberals (of which I hope I am one), have been getting it all wrong for this very reason. We are outraged by racism and howl at the moon. What we should be calling out is the eroding of government by consent and the way that those in charge are playing the system to their own advantage.
I would love to say that this is a US problem. It is not. The UK has suffered from it as well. At the last election we had the Tory tribal call of get Brexit Done while Labour were evoking a class war. The Liberal Democrats, who should have been highlighting how they were the guardians of government by consent were politely trying to fight a battle that was already lost and remained puzzlingly silent on the need for consent.
Now if you ever wonder just how dangerous this new Hobbes politics is, consider Covid. Lockdowns have been the cornerstone of attempts to battle the virus until there is a vaccine. Maintaining lockdown of a country is hard and relies on behavioral science to bring all of the population – not just some of the tribal elements together so that everyone obeys the rules. The US, UK, Brazil and Russia have not been able to hold the lockdown together for various reasons and it is no surprise that in terms of deaths they are among the world leaders.
What is worse, it is election year in the US. If everyone allows this tribalism to continue and not highlight the need of government by consent, we risk further erosion of any government and policing by consent.
Posts
