I've been thinking a lot about politics and how we engage on this stage as communities lately. I can't help but wonder if we have it backwards.
Our political "leanings" tend to become a part of our identity, but these leanings aren't always tied to specific ideas as much as to a perceived allegiance to a political party.
In the US we see this with Republican v Democrat; in the UK it's Tory v Whig; and here, in Australia, it's generally LNP v Labor.
Subsequently, when we think of political parties as integral to who we are as individuals, it's inevitably hard to face the music when they disappoint. When questions of integrity arise regarding *their* political party people tend to either double down, or feel completely disenfranchised. Perhaps this is how the independent movement has grown so extensively within our political structure over the last 10 years.
These (usually) 2am musings have led me to the conclusion, generally speaking, we seem to see politics much like we do footy, and we engage with the parties like the teams we barrack for. At least, this is how we feel politics here: the emotional entanglement between ourselves and those who represent us seem to reflect those deep-seated allegiances we have with our favourite sporting teams.
Therefore, it stands to reason we choose our party allegiance much like we choose our sporting teams. For some of us, it's about who our family support, shaped by dinner table conversations and debates about performance, leadership and the impact of decisions on others. Or perhaps it's about what's popular, or what's recognisable and easily engaged with. For a small (but hopefully growing) number of people it's about personal experience and conscious, informed choice shaped by their own perceptions of their team/party's priorities and performance.
Much like sporting teams, feeling somehow connected to a political party can provide a person with a sense of belonging, a means of making sense of the world and perhaps even guidance on how to perceive the world to begin with. This is as much about creating connections with others who are fellow supporters of the same party as it is about the party itself: it acts as a way an individual may identify who their "tribe" is.
Furthermore, we have one-eyed political supporters as much as we have one-eyed sports team supporters, where they will defend their party to the end of the world, literally, void of any external capacity to think critically about what is really happening and what the real-world consequences of their actions will be.
I found it interesting to learn research has been done into the intersection of football and politics concluding how each club generally swings with regards to political support. That there could be correlations drawn between the two speaks volumes about this theory, don't you think?
MORE ZOE WUNDENBERG:
However, as nice as it is to feel like you belong somewhere, to have found your tribe, to feel rooted in a world perception that makes sense to you, there is a problem with treating your political leaning like a sporting team: it makes changing your mind about where you stand on issues virtually impossible because it requires you to go against a part of your very identity, to call out those whom you've "barracked" for, for years, to acknowledge maybe, just maybe, they are wrong, and you were wrong about them. And that's hard enough to do on any given day, let alone within the context of losing a part of who you are along the journey.
More importantly, though, it suggests this loyalty is owed by the people to the political party.
It is not.
I think many of our politicians take the support of their constituents for granted, assuming allegiance due to deep-seated family - or just habitual - ties to the party at large, when it's really the politicians who owe the people they represent their support and loyalty.
As communities, I think we need to stop waving the flag of political parties and start to really think about what it means, recognising our connections to the world should actually be borne from our responsibility to ourselves and our neighbours to ensure none of us gets left behind.
After all, we the people are more than just spectators of the political stage. We are the facilitators, the voters and the people who form the very foundation of Australian democracy.
Zoë Wundenberg is a careers consultant and un/employment advocate at impressability.com.au, and a regular columnist for ACM.
Zoë Wundenberg is a careers consultant and un/employment advocate at impressability.com.au, and a regular columnist for ACM.
There's one instance where it's OK for adults to change 'teams'
9
0
08.01.2024
I've been thinking a lot about politics and how we engage on this stage as communities lately. I can't help but wonder if we have it backwards.
Our political "leanings" tend to become a part of our identity, but these leanings aren't always tied to specific ideas as much as to a perceived allegiance to a political party.
In the US we see this with Republican v Democrat; in the UK it's Tory v Whig; and here, in Australia, it's generally LNP v Labor.
Subsequently, when we think of political parties as integral to who we are as individuals, it's inevitably hard to face the music when they disappoint. When questions of integrity arise regarding *their* political party people tend to either double down, or feel completely disenfranchised. Perhaps this is how the independent movement has grown so extensively within our political structure over the last 10 years.
These (usually) 2am musings have led me to the conclusion, generally speaking, we seem to see politics much like we do footy, and we engage with the parties like the teams we barrack for. At least, this is how we feel politics here: the emotional entanglement between ourselves and........
© Canberra Times
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Andrew Mitrovica
Mort Laitner
Rami G Khouri
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
