Tribes

Elections are won by gaining the centre ground, is the mantra of political scientists. They have a point, to an extent.

It's pointless trying to change the mind of a tribal voter - the type of voter who has an ideological fixation on one or the other end of a political spectrum and has voted that way for their entire life. They are wedded to their tribe and will argue black is white to defend it, leading to entirely valid claims of hypocrisy and intellectual inconsistency as a consequence. It is a constant struggle to see what is in front of your own nose; making other people see what’s right in front of theirs is harder, and you won’t be thanked.

Steve Allen, American comedian, TV and radio host, said; "Once the untrained mind has made a formal commitment to a philosophy, and it doesn't matter whether that philosophy is generally reasonable and high-minded or utterly bizarre and irrational, the powers of reason are surprisingly ineffective in changing the believer's mind." 

Indisputable facts have become subject to doubt when they conflict with tribal, political ideology. Factual statements tend to be trumped by arguments based on identity and emotion. This is a dangerous path and admits demagogues to the realm of politics with their 'alternative facts'.

The middle ground, however, isn't necessarily a group of undecided voters who make rational decisions after weighing up the evidence. They can be swayed by the charismatic demagogue who focuses of emotion, rather than rationality. Effective slogans, which may mean nothing when analysed, but can stir emotive responses, are very powerful tools. Make America Great Again; Get Brexit Done; Take Back Control; Labour Isn't Working; Britain Deserves Better; Strong And Stable; For the Many, Not the Few, etc. These slogans lack any intellectual currency, unless they're explained in terms of policy, which they rarely are, as that requires intellectual engagement, which can be dangerous ground for the demagogue and is thus to be avoided at all costs by going off at a tangent. They are designed to appeal to our passions - the part of our brains that control emotions. They're also very dangerous.

Dominic Cummings knew this and used emotive slogans superbly, despite it being obvious to the rational observer that Brexit would not be in the best interests of the UK, as is becoming manifestly apparent. When faced with either an array of facts and figures that require the brain to be engaged, or a catchy slogan, the reaction of the undecided middle is to latch on to the emotive mantra, despite it meaning the negation of their rational, analytical selves. 

Economic arguments tend to be trumped nowadays by arguments based on identity, prejudice and emotion. A Sunday Times poll in January showed that most Scots now favour independence, even though 42% thought they would be worse off and just 36% better off. Take Back Control is the phrase that will come to haunt Boris Johnson, as it speaks to the unthinking and passionate tribe - of which there are many comprising the regions of the UK.

To paraphrase Plato, when rationality and passion come into conflict, passion should take a back seat. It doesn't though, in most people. That's why Hitler rose to power; why Mussolini rose to power; why Peron rose to power; why Trump rose to power - the list is long and littered with failure in the final analysis as reality catches up.