Paula Surridge has been doing some fascinating work on value clans and understanding where voters are on the Liberal/Authoritarian, Right/Left spectra. Reading some of her work has led me to wonder if perhaps there are better terms to cover the modern voter. Specifically, terms that don’t have quite the same tribal resonance and moral tone.
I’d therefore like to suggest four potential terms for measuring voters, that might be used to create political groupings for said voters. These terms are:
- Interventionism
- Inherent fairness
- Group type
- Absolutes
To be clear, these are hypothetical and would need to be subjected to empirical study to see if they are good predictors of political behaviour. They are mostly based upon my personal observations and thoughts. Outlined below is a brief explanation of what I think each term means.
Interventionism – The belief that political structures have the right to intervene to guide or control aspects of the behaviour of human beings. This might be seen as a direct replacement for the Liberal/Authoritarian scale.
Inherent fairness – The belief that the world is an inherently fair place. This represents one aspect of the old Left and Right wing dichotomy in that the traditional Left wing belief in government intervention is perhaps predicated on the belief that the world is not inherently fair. This measure also relates to the concept of meritocracy.
Group type – This is about the type of group to which individuals feel a sense of belonging. This might be seen as a measure of whether individuals see themselves predominantly as part of a local or international grouping and along which lines they measure said grouping, such as race and state. Nationalism vs globalism could fit into this measure. This is also the measure into which Remain/Brexit voters might fit.
Absolutes – This is the belief in moral absolutes. This measure is perhaps about the social dimension of the Right/Left and Liberal/Authoritarian spectra. It is the belief that there is (or isn’t) an absolute measure of moral behaviour that applies to individuals or groups. This might be seen as a contrast between utilitarianism and absolutism.
As alluded to above, the aim of these terms is twofold. They serve firstly as a theoretical basis for study and discussion within political science circles (where they may well be debunked in seconds). The second aim is to create terms that have less historical and moral connotations than current terms, in the hope that individuals will feel more comfortable identifying with groupings based upon the spectra.
It’s important to note that none of these terms can (or should) be measured in isolation of context. It’s entirely possible to have a belief in intervention in the arena of health, for example, whilst not believing in intervention in the economy. It’s also entirely possible to identify as both a member of a nation state and as a member of a racial or religious grouping.
I hope that these terms are a useful basis for debate and study and would be interested in your thoughts.
Fuller's Thoughts 