William Bowe, aka The Poll Bludger, has an interesting take on the pro-Greens trend apparently evident in recent elections, about which there’s been a bit of talk around the traps. It’s been most evident in the ACT election on the weekend, where The Greens secured a 6.6% swing in their favour. I wonder to what degree this might be an artefact of the ACT’s election system, where there’s a much more transparent representation of voters’ preferences, and thus, conceivably, a greater incentive to vote for a non-major party.
Of course, the ACT isn’t exactly a population representative of Australia. Nevertheless, there may be, as Bowe suggests, some tea leaves to read for inner city Labor held seats federally and in states where Labor is really on the nose. (I’ve qualified the statement about the trend with “apparently”, largely because I think that far too much can be made of comparable results in distinct jurisdictions and similarly, I don’t accept that all the remaining Labor state administrations are in as much trouble as the NSW government. I suspect there’s a significant degree of error – something like the ecological fallacy – committed by NSW-centric media and political commentators extrapolating far too readily from what’s around them locally to other parts of the country.)
The two explanations for The Greens’ increased success in vote gathering tend to be posited – that they hoover up “disaffected left-wing votes” and that there are largely positive reasons based around issues and the party’s own profile and image which are attracting more voters. The two, of course, aren’t necessarily incompatible, though political journalists tend to present them as if they are. I strongly suspect there are some soft Liberal and swinging votes going to The Greens, and for a range of reasons. Here, it would be very useful to have some good focus group research rather than endless voting intention polls. So while I know we’ve got our share of both Labor and Green partisans around here, I’d be very interested in hearing from people who feel less identified with either the ALP or The Greens about what might sway their voting choices, and also from those who are more directly involved in party politics in anything they’re picking up from campaigning (without the partisan hats on!)…
Update: A post on this topic from Andrew Bartlett.
Muting a generation
mute a generation by ~funkadelic on deviantART
Image courtesy of Funkadelic at deviantart. Click through and click on full view for a higher res version.
Regular LP readers might recall that I’ve been emphasising for some time now research evidence which suggests that the “apathetic youth” narrative is nonsense. Just because no one’s marching in the street, doesn’t mean that nothing’s happening. Further evidence for that case comes from a literature review prepared for the Whitlam Institute by Philippa Colin – Young People Imagining a New Democracy [link to pdf]. Colin finds that engagement is migrating online, and that it’s much more likely to be issues or cause based than the “citizen oriented repertoires” of involvement in political parties. The review also suggests significant disengagement with the formal practices of citizenship coincides with idealism and engagement around issues and networks.
This report was discussed in the most stereotypical possible way on last week’s Q&A (where most of the panel wanted to diss blogging and those intertubes). Doing it justice might force us to answer the question of what’s wrong with our democracy, rather than squeeze it into the most tedious and condescending media frame of what’s wrong with teh yoof… In many ways, one could argue that disengagement from an unresponsive and elitist “democracy” is an eminently rational choice. That might be something the professionally cynical pundits and pollies might wish to ponder.