The latest in Nick Clegg’s Anger Management series of podcasts is my favourite in the series so far, by a long way.
He talked to writer, feminist and campaigner Elif Shafak. I was so impressed with her that I immediately went and bought a whole load of her books.
She talked about the importance of appealing to emotions, of the very real threat to democracy posed by populists across the world, of the threat of majoritarianism – where the rights of marginalised groups are ignored.
She talked of the importance of dialogue and not writing off people who have a different view, of trying to understand concerns so that you can persuade people round to your point of view.
I was particularly interested in what she had to say about her experience of recovery from post partum depression, as outlined in her book Black Milk. She saw her recovery in terms of restoring her body’s inner democracy, of indulging her own interests as a means of self-care.
She also has some interesting things to say on political developments in Turkey as their elections approach.
I just liked her thoughtful and kind take on the world, which chime with my own.
This one is well worth a listen. You can find it here if you are an Apple lover and here if you aren’t.
* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings. You can find her on Bluesky at caronmlindsay.bsky.social
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Latest voting intention and leadership ratings opinion polls
The Joy of Six 1568
A very Russian conspiracy
Kevin Hawkins
David Raw
Steve Trevethan
5 Comments
If Nick Clegg is desperate to understand the causes of populism, perhaps he should also talk to a British police officer, doctors in South West England, Prudential staff facing jobs offshored to India, RMT train guards at Northern Rail, front line armed forces personnel, Deliveroo and Uber workers, a few tradesmen, and Sports Direct / Amazon warehouse workers for starters.
I am no fan of Clegg (for reasons many of us share), but I will state that he is a great debater and he is a fearless individual who is willing directly to debate with the likes of Farage or speak to ordinary voters on his phone in – unlike many of our politicians who are gutless cowards who are afraid of engaging with the electorate. That has always been Nicks’ strength, and he is never given enough credit for it. It would do a world of good for him to actually give the people above a proper voice.
Populists aren’t a threat to democracy. They are democracy. The reason that centrist parties are being sidelined is that they are seen as the comfortable middle class attempting to prolong the status quo which has suited them so well. They have nothing to offer but continuation of the bland. I dislike Trump a lot but he (and those who voted for him) are correct in fighting back against China’s aggressive and one sided trade policies which his predecessors have been too timid to confront.
In basic terms, majoritarianism and democracy are the same thing. Otherwise we are in a hell of mess. How large does a minority need to be to overturn the majority? Even more controversialy who gets to decide which minority gets listened to? Populism and popular democracy are clearly imperfect, but having just read several histories of England in the middle ages, I have to revel in an era when it is the people who set the agenda.
‘In basic terms, majoritarianism and democracy are the same thing.’
If you want to see the limits on majoritarianism you need go no further in the UK than the Stormont government in the Northern Ireland for the half-century from 1921. Democracy needs the possibility of change of government and consent of the (for the moment) minority; otherwise it goes sour, and, in that case, resulted in a terrorist campaign that cost 3000 lives.
It wasn’t a wholly bad government and in many respects looked after its province better than Westminster would have done, but it did look after one section of the population (seen as the source of its support) better than the other and for most of that time tolerated discrimination in local government and business.
So for an entrenched majority to be a really valid democratic government, it must be deliberately looking after ALL the people, including those who would never vote for it.
Though my example is from Northern Ireland, I suspect readers from some counties and cities which have been under one-party rule for a long time can see the signs there too.
@Richard O’Neill
‘In basic terms, majoritarianism and democracy are the same thing.’
If you want to see the limits on majoritarianism you need go no further in the UK than the Stormont government in the Northern Ireland for the half-century from 1921. Democracy needs the possibility of change of government and consent of the (for the moment) minority; otherwise it goes sour, and, in that case, resulted in a terrorist campaign that cost 3000 lives.
It wasn’t a wholly bad government and in many respects looked after its province better than Westminster would have done, but it did look after one section of the population (seen as the source of its support) better than the other and for most of that time tolerated discrimination in local government and business.
So for an entrenched majority to be a really valid democratic government, it must be deliberately looking after ALL the people, including those who would never vote for it.
Though my example is from Northern Ireland, I suspect readers from some counties and cities which have been under one-party rule for a long time can see the signs there too.