Centre for Policy Development
Read the latest InSight edition:
Putting the politics back into 'Politics': James Arvanitakis
This week, the University of Western Sydney's Whitlam Institute released a report looking at how young people feel about Australian politics, Young People Imagining a New Democracy. Before going any further, I should declare that I was the lead author on the report.
This report attempted to answer two broad questions: What are the shortcomings of our democracy? And, how can we make democratic processes more attractive? The aim was to confront the myth that young people have no interest in politics - a commonly held belief that is simply untrue (if you need convincing, visit the CPD offices to see a room full of young, politically-active people, most of whom are volunteers).
Both national and international research has found clear evidence to support this. Young people are interested in politics, but they are turning their backs on formal political processes (or capital ‘P' politics). Reasons for disengagement include a feeling that their efforts are not appreciated and a sense that no one is listening, a general distrust of politicians and Politics, and a belief that Politics is disconnected from everyday experiences.
This leads us to ask the question, how can political interest and Political disengagement exist simultaneously? The answer is that we are seeing a change in the methods of political involvement. No longer are young people joining political parties and attending branch meetings; instead they are undertaking politics in everyday (or small ‘p') politics. Issues such as climate change are interpreted as challenges to be addressed by everyday actions, discussed with friends and family both personally and across e-networks, and to be addressed at national and international forums. These challenges are here and now, for us all to discuss, not ‘over there', monopolised by Political heavyweights.
These findings give reason for both alarm and hope. Young people are clearly concerned about politics and eager to be involved, but the current Political processes don't engage young people. In response to this connundrum, the report makes a number of recommendations and proposals, including the need to stop considering young people as ‘citizens-in-waiting' and make consulting young people part of the policy development process.
The report also recommends a radical revision of civics education. The Howard Government's civics and citizenship education initiative clearly failed: 92% of Year 6 students and 60% of Year 10 students failed to acquire the minimum proficiency levels.
Rather than portraying politics as something to be ‘done' later, civics education should encourage students to explore their passions and ‘do' politics now. This may mean ‘politicising' the classroom and giving teachers the freedom to express their opinions in the hopes of encouraging open and honest discussions.
Democracy is not a once and for all aspect of society: we must continue to monitor its health or it will wither.
- Login or register to post comments
- by James Arvanitakis
Comments
Participatory Democracy
Both James and Tony make important points.
I have been impressed with todays " Youth" who actively and bravely ask the hard questions on the ABC's QANDA programme.
With them I am equally disappointed with the cowardly piffle that comes from the august panel of politicians and journalists. A generational gap in morality or have the power brokers simply sold their souls?
Overseas there is much good news including the Dutch Administration introducing limited community service for the educational qualification of secondary school students.
A future powerful insight developed in the young could alleviate Tony's concerns
Future democracy
There is one achievable way to make a huge difference to political structures. It would also generate a huge (and worthwhile) debate in the process of working towards the change.
Recognise that people under voting age DO have a right to be represented (instead of ignored) and give parents the right to have a vote for each child in the family, under voting age. It would not be hard to police and it would shift voting towards family friendly policies and probably more women's rights...
The single drawback may be parents with differing views deciding which one gets the extra votes-but there are ways of dealing with it.
Anectodal evidence mirrors your research
James,
My anecdotal evidence mirrors your research. I know a lot of people in their twenties who are politically aware and engaged, but are understandably curious of big P politics. Their view that they won't get listened to is probably correct - just ask any ordinary member of the ALP. The one thing I note about them is although they might be alternative thinkers and/or environmentally aware and active or into social justice issues, the one area where they don't seem strong is on industrial issues. Most don't join Unions (that's probably more to do with the Unions and the way they are reaching out - or not - as the case may be) and have little understanding of themselves as workers who have rights and how to get them.
The Analysis
Hi James,
I think the reason for disengagement from Politics is it's Professionalisation.
It is not a need for education. Young people aren't ignorant and demonstrate their ability to organise and support the politics they espouse (witness the CPD offices, Greenpeace, Amnesty . . . )
"Consultation"? I'd prefer that young people be given a genuine say in what happens to them. I see no Political party that is willing to give this. Command and control still reigns supreme.
To engage young people support their politics - don't direct them (via 'education') into Politics.
Evan
We know enough for all to thrive!
Political disengagement
James Arvanitakis is addressing a youth demographic model that ceased to exist three decades ago.
The sixties-style youth product of the vast and secure middle class died with that middle class - a class which is now memorialised by the bell-shaped tombstone of Aussie egalitarian prosperity.
James is talking to their minority survivors, who have since been inculcated with elitism and unthinking populism. These are today's university students, who do not even acknowledge Australia's 69% who have incomes below $29,000, and who arrogantly anticipate their future place in the sun. Not for them, glances wasted on losers. But they do 'care' about AGW.
I have never seen reliable statistics and have not as yet measured these myself, but my guess is that around 40% of youth know they have no future, no career, no prosperity, no aspirations; and more importantly for their age, no dreams. Are these people political?
What were the 'Maroubra riots' were about, if not the grass roots democratic reaction to UN-imposed multiculturalism? If you survey mainstream Australian youth you will certainly find political views, not couched in political science terminology but in less ambiguous Oz colloquialisms. Dare I say Eurekaesque?
I would recommend against assuring these kids we live in a democracy. We do not, and they know we do not. Aussies were not asked if we wanted the tariffs removed that formerly protected family farming, manufacturing, our jobs and our working conditions. We were not asked if we would like our national resources sold off. We were not asked if we want migrants to abuse our culture and to be funded by our taxes to disenfranchise us. I could go on, but you get my drift. All these things were imposed by an oligarchy; directed by a remote plutocracy. Not by us.
And I can say that I am not attempting to persuade anyone to adopt a new point of view. I am merely pointing out the opportunity to review reality while there is still time, because if my research is accurate, we will soon be confronted by the reality of youth politics.
A reminder that any concept of democracy must accord with the astute minds of history: Thucydides of ancient Greece; the Irish Monks, Thomas Paine, Abe Lincoln and Lord Acton, to name a few. They would tell us that to elect a corrupt politician to do your thinking for you is not democracy - it is simply stupid. Lincoln had a compelling reason for producing his lyrical and powerful overstatement of Government of the people, by the people and for the people, because he knew even this impossible to misconstrue definition would be twisted by the powerful elite (which it duly was).
So, accommodating contemporary parlance, democracy is operational when informed electoral consensus formulates the direction and thrust of all government policy.
No nation has this today, but three decades ago our candidates and ministers were still required to engage the electorate door-to-door. This at least was some modicum of democracy. Today Rupert Murdoch does this for us.