Reith lecture 2023

[WarriorN]

Very interesting, and I believe, very relevant to the issues we regularly discuss here.

Well, that looks depressing.

Sorry, I mean I'm sure it will also be interesting, Warrior! 😁

😂 I'm only a little way in; it's complex but interesting....

Mentions "tyranny of the minority" too.

Eg why can't America pass gun reform laws

He is also getting a few laughs, believe it or not!

Social media and polarisation

Discusses importance of a good media (papers etc) which gives push back to government

Open citizen debate etc

Conversations across divides (cites Ireland and abortion)

So it's clear that silencing of women about gender stuff has resulted in concerning authoritarianism

(He doesn't say that last paragraph, that's what I see from what he's saying)

One part that leapt out at me:

ANITA ANAND: Just before we get questions from the audience, Ben, how worried should we be about the future of democracy?
BEN ANSELL: Democracy will outlast us. So that’s the good news. The formal institutions of democracy are pretty hard to undermine and to destroy without a strong reaction. But what’s easier for all of us to do, perhaps unthinkingly, is to corrode and demean some of the norms of democracy, the norms about letting others speak, norms about not casting aspersions on people as enemies of democracy, norms about the role of some of the more undemocratic elements of our democracy, like courts, and I think that’s where we’ve struggled in this country in recent years. I don’t think anyone thinks that tomorrow we won’t have free and fair votes, but a lot of the menagerie, as I call it, of liberal democracy, I think, is under more threat.

https://downloads.bbc.co.uk/radio4/reith2023/Reith_2023_Lecture1.pdf

I was disappointed and with the questions too
I admit to being suspicious as Ben said he was an academic and I blame them for many of societies problems right now😄
I didn't like that he missed highlighting problems with our voting system which adds to the apathy. I live in a strong Tory area. Has been for years, no point in voting
He also missed the influence of lobby groups and MPs/political parties being funded by interest groups
I would like politicians to have to wear their donors like snooker players do. Or have them on a board behind them aka BBC sports interviews. I think it should be much clearer who is paying them

Tatchell pops up at the end by the way...

I only caught the last part on PR and then the questions

The part where he said we should leave institutions alone, eg ECHR was very interesting but I really wanted someone to ask what happens if the institutions are not in line with voters

Imo we will see further strain on post war set up and new pressures, eg climate / migration

What then?

It also applies to gender as we’re bound by international law even if voters want sex based distinction not gender

How is he bloody everywhere?! I swear he has a wardrobe full of clones that attend demos, speaking engagements, etc, all at the same time.

The part where he said we should leave institutions alone, eg ECHR was very interesting but I really wanted someone to ask what happens if the institutions are not in line with voters

That sounds like it would just set up a perfect lacuna for anyone who wanted to take over and change an organisation to do so with impunity. Institutions have to be questioned, surely?

Anyway, I should listen to the lecture.

He basically says that besides the institutions, the courts are really important (and it's good that we don't have the system they do in America) as well as the newspapers/ journalism - and presumably the fact that we have a wide range of different papers with different views, as the bed rock of democracy is to be able to listen and converse with people who have opposing opinions. But social media and AI is an added issue as creates more polarisation.

Hasn't said the obvious part out loud though, that universities used to be these places too and now are really not!

His answer seemed to be politicians need to not promise change which they can’t achieve due to institutions then blame them for it

So how do we change the institutional laws?

The balances may well be good in theory but if the world changes to a large degree to when certain conventions were created, which it is, how do we handle that

It can’t be voters get increasingly angry, we’ll just get public disorder