Post Reply Collectivism in Politicians of Democracy
1365 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 1/18/17
The Western politicians in democratic countries seem to be developing some form of collectivist sub-culture like the East Asians. This collectivism is attributed to the demand of strong alliance with many interest groups and activists on similar power relation. Political alliance is important in election because most voters are uninformed and so can be influenced easily by interest group and activists. The politicians tend to form large coalition, which constantly accommodate new political groups, to gain a competitive advantage. The clustering of the politicians into two parties reflect this competition by cooperation with its maximal cooperation and minimal competition. This collectivist tendency is more prominent in the past few decades as new media technology allow the less wealthy population to sustain political campaign. This competition by cooperation occur in Socialist economy and contrast with the competition on free market where wealth and property ownership provides a greater competitive advantage than alliance.

In this competition by cooperation model, the leaders of the major political parties gain their position by uniting their coalition on mutual goals and acting as the middleman. If the leaders can no longer fill this role, then they will risk competition from other members for the leadership. The leaders will create an illusion of cohesiveness within their party to foster a sense of unity. This illusion of cohesiveness threatens their image of diversity to uninformed voters but the influence of the allied politicians on uninformed voters will compensate for the negative image. Conversely, politicians who emphasize their individuality and differentiate themselves from their party can threaten the unity within their party and anger their coalition members; by angering their allies, those individualistic politicians will lose their allies and fall down the social hierarchy due to the lack of alliance.

I can think of a joke story here: “Invisible hand! Why did you make our politicians follow the East Asian mentality? We are Westerners who should follow the individualist mindset and our politicians should represent our individualist cultures. I cannot understand how my East Asianized politicians think. Why do our Western cultures have to be threatened just because we have a fully functional Democracy?”

Of course, this idea do raise one question: If political alliance is so important for a politician's election victory, them how did Donald Trump manage to win the 2016 US election when he lead the Republican coalition which suffer heavy fragmentation?
21969 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 1/18/17
Haha! Trump didn't really lead the Republican coalition so much as he came in, ravaged the Republican political machine, vassalized them and they grudgingly followed their new "candidate" while offering as little support as possible.

The Republican party and independents pretty much jumped on the Trump train and propelled him to victory. Now the republicans are being towed around by Trump. The Republicans would have kicked him off the ticket if they weren't sure Hillary would win by doing that.
You must be logged in to post.