In Politics, You Judge A Book By Its Cover
On Democracy, Trust, Perception And A New Politics.
Democracy is more art than science. Even the most astute of politicians will admit that there’s no one clear formula or set of rules that governs politics. And this is especially in an era where political longevity becomes more scarce. Governing has become something that is made more difficult by a series of structural factors from everything like social media to the inherent geopolitical uncertainties that shapes our post Berlin Wall world, a place where long established norms and rules such as unfettered global trade are being torn apart - something that is definitely more norm than exception in human history.
Globally, some argue that the 2020s has marked the death of traditional left-right politics. Instead, we see the rise of new brands of politics and buzzwords such as populism. Politicians themselves have taken to new means to capture the attention of voters and espouse new ideals that are diametrically opposed to the “elites” and “establishment” in hopes of being swept to power in the ballot box by voters.
In today’s world, we also see politicians increasingly leveraging on personality politics as well as “attention” to gain prominence. We immediately think of the most proximate examples, from Donald Trump’s reality TV-like antics to the firebrands like Turkey’s Recep Tayip Erdogan or even Indonesia’s Prabowo Subianto whose personality-driven videos dominated TikTok for much of the 2024 Indonesian Presidential Election campaign. In contrast to this stands the decline of facts and technocratic governments such as Mario Draghi’s Italy - these often seem dull and “out of touch” with emotionally-charged voters who are driven to the polls based on short-term interests which weigh more weigh heavily due to factors such as behavioural economics and the severity of pressing and immediate issues like the cost of living.
In essence, if politics is the act of fruit-buying today, you can naturally conclude that people seem to increasingly pick their fruits based on its appearance today - and that is precisely why perception and image matters in politics. Perception matters because it is the essence of politics, it is the bedrock of trust between voters and politicians, it inspires confidence and it gives voters a sense of who the party or politicians represents and whether it deserves a vote, something like a sorting mechanism in and of itself. But this is precisely the reason why things like populism are on the rise today. Populism should not be a dirty word. It encapsulates the fury and frustration of voters who view a cabal of political elites as increasingly out of touch with people. In short, establishment politicians today have an image problem.
The battle over perception is even more pertinent today given the way the media shapes our perception of the world and dominates political discourse. Gone are the days where voters rely on newspapers and word of mouth to become informed. Social media has become part of our lives 24/7. This means that the kinds of image and narratives being perpetuated online, coupled with the inherent nature of social media being driven by algorithms and echo chambers, will mean that politicians have to work harder to reclaim their image and perception from these companies who could be under the influence of moguls with a vested political interest. Even if that is not the case, failure to do so can be fatal. It is tragic that though we speak truth from facts in saying that the US economy has tackled inflation more successfully than many other OECD countries, or that the shape of the Australian economy in terms of key indicators like employment is more stellar than what the media and ordinary people seem to suggest, that is not what voters see or perceive. Incumbent governments in these countries are now toxic and if polls are to be believed, on the way out. Perception, emotions and feelings do matter.
A visit to the market last week laid bare the most visceral impacts of “shrinkflation” for me. When prices rise and the portion of your purchases shrink, it’s no wonder that pent up anger against the state for failing to do more to curb the rise in costs would fester at a grassroots level. Even with a swath of mitigation measures, there’s no denying that our tendencies for loss aversion and coupled with the saliency of such inflationary pressure having the most proximate impact on our lives would mean that emotions will indeed triumph over the data and facts this time.
Beyond this, winning the battle over facts isn’t enough. You could speak the truth but if trust is eroded, governance and even politics can take a dark turn. In fact, one would make the case that trust is more hard-won than votes these days. Case in hand, it is a wonder how many netizens would cast doubt over the impartiality of Singapore’s judicial system, and especially after the recent high profile court cases involving former Minister S Iswaran and Leader Of The Opposition Pritam Singh. Though the Singapore government points out that there is no evidence to suggest that the rule of law does not stand tall in Singapore or that courts are inherently biased, the flurry of online speculation which point to a trust deficit could be more detrimental in the long-run. One can thus argue that governments cannot just win on facts. It has to win the image battle and the fight over perception if trust is indeed a desirable end goal.
The last thing that ought to be covered is attention. Politics is an attention game. In stark contrast to other countries, many point to Singapore’s “boring political landscape” as a good thing. I tend to agree with this point insofar as it suggests that the lack of drama or scandals would be a sign that policymakers are indeed able to devote their fullest attention to governing in the best possible way. Yet, the obvious trade offs would be a more disengaged and disinterested masses not keen on political literacy. This is evidently damaging to a system of democracy premised on participation and something that cannot be solved merely by implementing policies like mandatory voting. If politics is indeed boring, then perhaps politicians ought to make it less so in hopes of fostering a more politically educated populace. Democracy is not a one way street. Neither is modern politics in the context of social media.
In politics, people judge a book by its cover. We cannot blame voters for doing something so naturally intrinsic.
Likewise, we mostly pick our fruits based on its appearance. We would do well to remove that when fruit shops do not make an effort to scrutinise the appearances of its selection of fruits, then voters will simply flock to other shops.
For better or for worse, this is not the case in a democracy - people simply stop buying fruits.