The current school curriculum and wider education system in Britain is failing to address crucial historical and more topical debates. There is a systemic stigma around certain topics, such as the Israel-Palestine history and conflict, which are deemed too controversial to be tackled in school. 

This neglect is a problematic issue because young people are constantly being exposed to issues such as Israel-Palestine in their home, on the news, and crucially on social media. Where a deeply complex and bloody history is reduced to 10 second clips (which the algorithm often caters towards your existing opinions), leaving people without a developed understanding of such sensitive topics.

The Psychological Appeal of Populism

By Millie Dowdall

Frustration over the widening rift between the people and those tasked with representing them has exploded, especially among the youth of the United Kingdom. Continual dissatisfaction with what 15% of 13-27 year olds believe is an entirely broken system  is reviving an ideology that skillfully taps into the crucial psychological need for belonging and status; Populism. 

With the potential to emerge from both spectrums, ‘people’ (the morally just and ‘good’ group in society) are positioned against the self-serving elites, or ‘the outsiders.’ With politicians utilising effective communication, which is constructed using skillful style, rhetoric, and performance, they are able to catalyse immense social support. Is the intended rationale of the ideology being diminished by the high levels of exasperation, which arguably acts as primary fuel for achieving pivotal goals and aims?

A sense of urgency among the younger generation is rampant and the slow pace of traditional democracies is not designed for the speed in which they desire to be heard. The solution: a politician that is one of ‘us.’

Psychology demonstrates how humans have the tendency to form identities on the basis of groups, and populists aim to equate themselves as being part of the ‘in-group.’ It creates a common enemy of the ‘out-group,’ and strengthens social cohesion. For example, support can be held in both times of economic hardship and of prosperity, with cause of hardship often being placed on the perceived ‘out-groups’ (those separate from the ‘people’). In times of economic prosperity, it is more difficult for politicians to operate, however a common approach is to isolate the benefits of this success within a small group consisting of the elite, and to diminish or ignore potential positives it may be having nationally. 

In the face of adversity, we favour simplistic approaches. Cognitive ease can be employed in times of political uncertainty and individuals tend to gravitate towards strong leadership, with politicians ensuring that they can restore order. Social media plays a crucial role in forming echo chambers of simple rhetorics, and amplifies the ‘illusory truth effect.’ Repetition statements begin to be perceived as true regardless of accuracy, creating severe resistance to conflicting points. 

Populism can satisfy key psychological needs among humans; the needs for belonging, status, and certainty. It utilises emotions to fuel its support, and can often favour this over rational thinking as a tool to push its agenda. Despite having the possibility to empower marginalized groups and challenge elites, in order to ensure representation of the general population is being achieved, Populism can easily become radical and erode democratic norms. Understanding how and why this may occur is fundamental when trying to minimise the damage it could cause, while working towards addressing social discontent without mass division and political activity that seeks support by appealing to the desires and prejudices of people, rather than using rational argument.