THE THEORY of planned behaviour predicts whether change is likely in three questions: do I think it’s a good thing, does the wider group agree and do I think the change is possible? Answer yes to all three and the change is likely.
If I don’t like smoking, and all my peers agree but I believe it’s not within in my control then it’s a ‘not likely’. If I think I could stop but my peers don’t think it’s a good thing, it’s also ‘not likely’. A change is on the cards when individual and group values align and also we perceive it as within our control.
Values live in public and private systems. Until now, individual concerns about immigration have been private because they seemed in contradiction to the public sphere. Most individuals will keep their mouths closed if they think no one else thinks it. Believing that the public hears ‘too much immigration’ talk as racist and a bit thick can stop an individual belief seeing the light of day. Every member of the big group might have the same private beliefs, but the views are kept away from public view, like an embarrassing relative. This self-censorship is what makes us social – we can read the room, and know when to shut up. But we can also see when the room has changed.
The flags on display across the United Kingdom are not a little decoration or even a signal that we are suddenly patriotic or want to preserve our national identity: it’s a sign that personal views on immigration are now okay to share because they align with the wider group. The flags say that we are on the same page on our views, and you now have permission to share them.
The local authorities seeking to take the flags down are facing a losing battle. Once a common group agreement is achieved, then it’s Big Group: 1, Local Authorities: 0. Flags become contagious and speak to our joint, openly shareable views, or ones that society says are okay to have. Flags also can be great fun. Pride flags have been a success in that even schools hang them, letting children share in the belief that same sex relationships are just great. Palestinian flags are now ubiquitous especially within the boho set. Mostly, the children and the Palestine supporters might not ever understand what’s being said, but they know it means they are accepted. When views over immigration are openly shared then Parliament has a problem.
Value alignment alone is not enough for change to happen. We also need to think that the change is possible in that there is a serious mechanism for this change. If voting systems allow the possibility of the change, and voters believe that their vote could lead to this change, then vote for change, they will. If people think they can’t win, then forget about value alignment, change will fail. Labour and Conservative are spotting the danger and trying an approach that says new parties are not credible and, if their mirthless cackling on the BBC panel shows is anything to go by, trying to show them as laughable. But that strategy isn’t working, so they are also now slowly signalling that they are prepared to align their own views with the outside world.
The recent moves to the right would suggest that politicians are listening to the concerns of voters. But voters might be thinking that they are being humoured like children to give them a little of what they want, without fundamentally changing the design. The Conservatives are getting more outspoken and are trying to align with the public but only when they read the room rather than coming from their own values. Labour are beginning to slowly getting with the programme (with the ‘principled’ Keir Starmer making yet another new phase, or u-turn on immigration). Voters can sniff out a fake belief and want people in power to believe what they are saying.
Change can only come about when a representative government reflects values, is not faked and not humoured.
What is safe to say is that group values, are out of the bottle. The question now is whether people perceive change as possible. That’s the question for polling. Is it do-able? If new parties are perceived as a realistic option, then they become very strong contenders. Labour and the Conservatives can’t defeat them without getting rid of leaders who pretend to share values, yet do nothing.
The tactic of laughing at, or belittling these ‘racists’ is no longer working. If Labour or Conservatives want to win the next election, then they need someone who actually properly, truly, deeply shares the concern about what’s happening across the UK.
Established in 2006, ThinkScotland is not for profit (it makes a loss) and relies on donations to continue publishing our wide range of opinions – you can follow us on X here – like and comment on facebook here and support ThinkScotland by making a donation here.
