In a series of recent articles David Matthews, President of the Kettering Foundation, has offered the concept of the “political wetlands” as a wellspring of an organic and deliberative form of democracy.1 He argues that the political wetlands lie underneath the superstructure of institutional politics where in “informal gatherings, ad hoc associations, and the seemingly innocuous banter that goes on. . .problems are given names, issues are framed for discussion, decisions are made, and the results are evaluated.” According to Mathews “we are seeing ways of acting, of generating power, and of creating change that are unlike what occurs in institutional politics.” He also refers to this process by the term “organic,” in other words, things “that are natural or close to ordinary life.” The political wetlands outlined by Matthews is a positive place, a place where, like real wetlands, the toxic by products of our civil society can be filtered out and public life can be refounded on civility and a desire to work together to solve a community’s problems.
Yet recent research in informal politics strongly indicates that there is nothing organic or positive about these political wetlands, if they exist at all. Two studies in particular cast doubt on the existence of political wetlands as a counter to the negativity and divisiveness of institutional politics. Katherine Cramer Walsh spent three years listening to the informal talk of a group of “old timers” (supplemented by additional groups) and how they constructed their social identities while discussing politics and other issues.2 She found that informal talk among organic affinity groups consists primarily of distinguishing “us” from “them,” most often, in her key study group, along racial lines. Public issues are then filtered through these self-constructed social identities, usually resulting in unquestioned attachment to one side of the issue. Her qualitative research points to her conclusion that “not only do people self-select into associations in which they are not exposed to cross-cutting points of view but in this interaction they reinforce communities of concern that further diminish the potential for future discussion with people of different perspectives.” The use of national, large sample quantitative data by Diana Mutz resulted in exactly the same conclusion.3 Further, Mutz found that the more voluntary associations one belonged to, the less likely one is to have conversations with people of a different point of view. This birds of a feather phenomenon is becoming increasingly known in political science not as the political wetlands but as the “dark side of social capital” — it may well be roots of the problems with our institutional politics rather than the solution.
Beyond these studies a cautionary tale lies in the two-part posting by Bill Nylen (The Promise of Local Government, below). As he details, the local institutional political scene is hideously complex, even in a small town. It creates daunting prospects for groups of ordinary citizens to find common ground and work together to effect change. The obstacles to a better form of politics at the local level lies in both the citizens themselves and in their political institutions.
Yet, while I argue that we cannot look to an organic political wetlands to fix what is wrong with our institutional politics, I do not mean to suggest that the decades of work by Matthews and Kettering on the problems of democracy have been misdirected (www.kettering.org). Indeed, they are all the more vital once the true scope of the problem is more systematically assessed. A political wetlands that brings citizens of differing perspectives together in a civil and deliberative manner to work with local institutions to solve the community’s problems will never emerge organically, it would always be an artificial and highly fragile place. Yet it is probably the only hope for a more satisfactory political system overall and thus is a goal worth pursuing with eyes open to the inherent difficulties that lie before us.
Notes:
1 Matthews, David. 2009. “Afterward: Ships Passing in the Night?” in Barker, Derek W.M. and David W. Brown (eds). A different Kind of Politics. Dayton, OH: Kettering. Also available online in slightly different editions at The Broker or on the Kettering website.
2 Walsh, Katherine Cramer. 2004. Talking about Politics: Informal Groups and Social Identity in American Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3 Mutz, Diana. 2006. Hearing the Other Side: Deliberative versus Participatory Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Post a Comment