Andy Burnham has embarked on a tour of the UK where he will champion a “ten-year plan to bring back hope”. This has been the language of the early stages of the Burnham premiership – in his first speech in Downing Street, he proclaimed it the moment when “Britain starts to believe again, the moment we bring back hope”.
Politicians invoking hope are sometimes denigrated as trite and vacuous – as if they are leading people on with empty rhetoric. Even Barack Obama, who used the rhetoric of hope in his 2008 US presidential campaign, was later mocked by Sarah Palin, running mate of Obama’s rival for the White House John McCain, about “that hopey, changey thing”.
Psychologists and philosophers have fleshed out what hope means as a distinct concept. Rather than just expecting the future to be better than the present somehow, hope is about being faced with uncertainty and believing it is possible to make that future better.
Giving people hope is about convincing them that it is possible to pursue that better future, either individually or collectively. For Burnham, a wide body of research suggests there are three kinds of hope in particular that he will – or should – be aiming to rekindle on his tour of the country.
Psychological hope
Psychologists make a critical distinction between hope and optimism. Optimism is about tending to believe that things will be better in the future, come what may. Hope is the conviction that it is possible to achieve goals we set out to reach: where there’s a will, there’s a way.
One popular psychological measure of hope involves splitting it into two dimensions. “Pathways” describe people’s ability to imagine the routes to a good outcome. “Agency” describes the motivation to pursue those pathways. Hopeful people are more likely to take action towards their goals because they can see the steps that might get them there, and feel empowered to follow them.
When it comes to voters, they will be better able to see pathways that politics clears for them. And they will feel more agency in pursuing them when politicians show them a route.
Understood in these terms, Burnham’s abstract emphasis on hope sits comfortably alongside his more concrete focus on giving people “room to breathe” with regard to the cost of living. If he can convince them that marginal relief on energy bills and bus fares are just the first step on the road to making life more affordable, people may be able to look beyond each month’s expenses and start hoping for meaningful improvements in their living standards.
Democratic hope
But in a democracy, hoping isn’t something that individuals do alone. Philosophers have written about democratic hope, arguing that democracy involves seeing ways to produce a better future together, in relation with our fellow citizens.
After all, in politics, the main source of uncertainty about how things will turn out is the actions of other people. So hoping for better from our politics involves believing and trusting in others to make choices in our collective interest.
Burnham has shown concern about the loss of such trust and respect between citizens. During his campaign for the Makerfield byelection, he lamented the “polarised” and “poisonous” direction of British politics. Inspiring hope for a brighter collective future could help Burnham put that right, by encouraging people to see that this prospect relies on cultivating better civic and democratic attitudes towards fellow citizens.
For example, the government’s plans to give people a bigger say about improving their high streets suggest an intention to bring communities together in the hope of making their everyday lives better. He may see these plans as a route to restoring the respect between citizens that he says is being lost.
Electoral hope
Finally, Burnham will be keen to boost hope in Labour’s electoral chances. In my work, I have developed the concept of “electoral hope”, explaining why people tend to believe that their preferred party stands a chance of winning an election.
The so-called “Burnham bounce” has seen Labour’s polling rise to overtake Reform UK for the first time in months. This followed Burnham’s appointment as prime minister and initial policy announcements.
A well-executed tour of the country in which Burnham convinces the public he can deliver on these priorities may consolidate that improved performance.
My research has found that (psychologically) hopeful people are the most inclined to expect their preferred party to win. But more positive polling of the kind Labour is now beginning to enjoy helps to get those who are otherwise low in psychological hope to get on board and start believing too.
And that could prove important, because creating the impression that the Labour party is best placed to beat Reform will be essential to winning the next election. To gain the support of voters in the so-called “left bloc”, who want to minimise the chances of a Reform victory, Labour will have to appear to be the most viable option in this group of progressive parties.
Hope, far from being mere rhetoric, can be a powerful force in politics. Whether Burnham’s tour of the UK, and the announcements made along the way, will be enough to inspire such hope remains to be seen.
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
