The vote for the Brexit agreement in the British house of Commons, after Prime Minister Theresa May has postponed the date for Tuesday. The output is highly uncertain. The sociologist Lisa Suckert analyzed at the Max-Planck-Institute for the study of societies in Cologne, how societies imagine their future. Currently, she is investigating the campaigns for and against Brexit – and discovered some common ground.
woman Suckert, in 1975 there was a Referendum on an exit from the European economic community. At the time, two-thirds of the British to remain voted. Compare the campaigns, which accompanied the voting in 1975 and 2016. What was the biggest difference?
Lisa Suckert: the most interesting are the completely different ideas of the future, the two campaigns are most. Both the Pro – and the Contra-side.
How do they differ?
in 1975, it was promised on both sides, much stronger for a positive future. One, you can actively shape. How can we ensure that in one of the EU together for a better future? Or outside the European community, and in a developed Commonwealth? In the campaign of 2016, however, it went on “Leave” as well as “Remain”-campaign – is something to avert the brings only risks and dangers. There were pictures like that of the “Remain”side of a hand grenade and including the saying, “Don’t pull out!” It could terribly bad things happen if you chose wrong now.
What are the fears for the future were?
On both sides of the very diffuse Fears were. “Remain” and warned the labour market and the entire economy would collapse. Brexit-opponents feared that the conservative government could align with the UK even more neo-liberal and the employee to restrict rights when it comes to the outlet. The advocates warned that the country would be strangled by the EU bureaucracy, with bizarre consequences such as the Disappearance of the National dish, Fish and Chips. Or that the UK, like Greece, austerity would be imposed. Big fear was stoked in front of Alienation and Terror, in front of millions of migrants, which would uncontrollably come into the country.
What are the consequences, if the future is perceived as uncertain?
The trust across many institutions, we have to ask actually, never behind, is fading. As in the EU-the Brexit. Democracy is generally in doubt, in Faith, a politician could anyway change nothing. Recently, the trust in science goes back even further. Ten years ago, nobody would have predicted.
where does this pessimistic view of the future?
The societal Trend of individualisation is reflected in the ideas of the future. Relevant is about how I plan for the next two years of my income, what training I’m doing, or if I want to lose weight – how I can optimize so as an individual. The future, but it is especially manageable if we edit collectively. Many of the collective institutions that shaped early public life, in contrast, have lost their clout: political parties disintegrate, trade unions and churches have declining membership.
Why is there this Trend towards individualization?
A more important reason was the increasing competitive society. As more and more than competition is organized, how the choice of a partner via Dating Apps, auditions for the WG or the daycare, we don’t live increasingly in a world where the other one is our ally, but also our potential competitor. Every man for himself, everyone against everyone.
What is the importance of future expectations for a society to have?
you are a Central concept in understanding the society, what drives people and how they coordinate their Actions. If, for example, will be discussed, in what the Federal government today to invest, it is Central to how we imagine the future. We will have more pensioners? Then we need to build today a sustainable pension system. Will the digitization of massive upheavals in the industry? Then we need to invest in certain technologies. As we think about the future, is already leading to changes. And instead of flowery utopias is today trying with scenarios and models, the own ideas of the future as a possible, plausible and alternative.
data research by the Guardian shows that one in four Europeans selected populist parties. Depends on the rise of this collective loss of confidence?
wing Populist movements can flourish, precisely because a stronger sense of uncertainty. At least the right-wing populist sketching a picture in which the past as a desirable future. The Central Pro-Brexit Slogan was “Let’s take back control – take back the control”. This means that you want some back where: the Commonwealth, for national sovereignty. The past is the new future. If the future appears as something Threatening, is the escape in the past.
What the established parties can resist that?
In the Public must be positive and open about the future, talked about potential, opportunities and options. The future may not seem to be the only alternative. But the people are not unsettled just because wrong about the future is spoken. They are insecure, because they are, for example, in precarious work. Because you don’t know how to find affordable housing. Much of what has been done by the neo-liberal globalisation, leads to this uncertainty. Politically, should more be done to ensure that the people can shape their future themselves. (Editorial Tamedia)
Created: 11.12.2018, 10:05 p.m.
