Over the course of the 20th century, we as a society have seen a dramatic increase in the use of personality and charisma in politics. Previously, our politicians focused more on their policies and long-term plans, but now it seems politicians are more like slick TV personalities. Why has this happened? And should we be worried?
Firstly, we must view this from a historical perceptive. The 20th century saw a plethora of revolutions and revolts against monarchy in Europe. This eventually resulted in republics being formed, and the subsequent electing of an official ruler.
Previously, when states or countries were ruled by kings and queens, there was usually no need to worry about electing a ruler: it was a mere matter of inheritance because the eldest son of the monarch would inherent the title and responsibilities following the death of his father or mother. This meant there was no need for the ruler to persuade the public to ‘vote’ for him or her and therefore the need to ‘appeal’ to the people tended not to be an issue. Ironically this lack of support and/or ‘appeal’ led to the eventual demise of the monarchy in countries like France. Historically, the monarch’s personality or ‘appeal’ had little difference to how he or she ruled the country, but as more and more European monarchies fell and gave rise to ‘republics’ the elected politician’s personality and charisma started to play an enormous role in determining their likelihood of being elected.
Another key change that the 20th century saw was a massive increase in voter numbers. More and more people (people who previously would have been unable to vote because of their social standing) were given the right to vote through policies like the 1918 Representation of the People Act. This resulted in the electorate increasing in size, and meant that now the public had a greater interest in politics. In this new ‘Populist Democracy’ a politician’s appearance and personality started to play a colossal role in the chances of them being elected, so politicians had to manufacture a public image that would be well liked by the majority of the electorate. This trend of ‘personality politics’ in society increased throughout the 20th century, in both Europe and the USA.
Today, we see politicians like Donald Trump and Boris Johnson as symbols of this increased trend of ‘personality politics’ – both are larger-than-life personalities who rely on their public persona to appeal to voters, rather than their party’s policies. The respective administrations of both the leaders show the clear reliance on their public image and personality, however superficial it may be. Over the latter half of the century we have seen an invested interest in the importance of public opinion and appearance, but has these benefitted policies or our society as a whole? And is it in fact bad for society?
In short, personality politics is neither a good or bad thing for society, as in some ways it has increased the interest of general public concerning political matters and has illuminated the role ordinary people can gave in the governance of society. But, if ‘personality politics’ can be used by politicians to manufacture a false version of themselves which resonates with the most amount of people, this gargantuan interest in public opinion also tends to leave social issues neglected and is altogether bad for the country. I believe that the role of a leader should be making the country and the world a better place than it was when you became leader; furthermore I am certain that this can only be achieved through policies and negotiation, not smiling for photographs and telling reporters about your pet cats or worse, pretending to be a ‘man of the people’ while having a public school background and millions in the bank.
Jay Frederick Palombella (09/01/21)
Comments