A Chicken, an Egg, and a Deeply Dissatisfied Electorate

A visit home to the United States prompted Researcher Will Scheffler to reflect on how politics has changed on both sides of the Atlantic. Drawing on recent polling and qualitative research, he explores the links between political disaffection, economic insecurity and growing sociopolitical turbulence, considers how they may reinforce one another, and reflects on the lessons that Britain might draw from the recent American political experience.

Going home has a way of encouraging reflection. Returning to the United States this past week, I found myself thinking about how much the country and its politics have changed since I was a child.

Like all of us, I owe a great deal to where I was raised. America was where I first developed an awareness of politics and civic participation. I still remember the morning after Barack Obama was elected President. At the time, eight-year-old me expressed little more than mild indifference when my parents suggested keeping the newspaper from that day, so I could appreciate its significance as an adult.

Looking back, what feels most striking is perhaps not Obama’s rise to the White House itself, but how different the political landscape seemed throughout much of his presidency. Maybe memory has a habit of smoothing over the rough edges (aided in this case by a still-maturing hippocampus), but there was a sense of stability in the early 2010s that now feels increasingly rare. The major political debates of the day were important and fiercely contested, yet there was a greater sense that the rules of the game, and the institutions underpinning them, were worth protecting.

The years since have brought profound change. In the United States, long-established political norms have been challenged and institutions have come under increasing strain. Speak to Americans today, regardless of political persuasion, and you will often encounter a sense of exhaustion with a system that feels locked in a state of perpetual turbulence.

It is difficult not to see echoes of that same story here in the United Kingdom. Over the past decade, British politics has been characterised by extraordinary upheaval: constitutional debates, a revolving door of Prime Ministers, and a political party landscape markedly different from that of only a few years ago. Some of the underlying trends also feel uncomfortably familiar. A more fragmented political landscape has emerged alongside growing signs of political disaffection.

So why do these parallels matter beyond your next foray into a comparative political science course? Not simply because political attitudes are changing, but because the consequences extend beyond election outcomes. A growing sense of public dissatisfaction can reshape democratic politics, alter the motivations of governments, and undermine the consensus-building required to tackle long-term challenges.

The risk in this all is not just that voters become more dissatisfied; political disaffection and political turbulence can often reinforce one another. Voters who feel politics is failing them may become more willing to embrace “disruptor” movements which challenge the structural status quo. Yet a more volatile political environment can make it harder for governments to provide the stability and long-term policymaking that voters often want.

The roots of political disaffection often extend beyond politics itself. Public attitudes towards politicians and institutions are shaped not only by political events, but by people’s wider experiences. Focus groups across the country tell us that years of economic turmoil and pressure on household finances have left many questioning whether those in power are capable of improving their circumstances. Our recent polling for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation found compelling evidence that economic insecurity and political disaffection go hand-in-hand.

There are signs that these financial pressures remain acute. The most recent wave of Understanding Scotland found that economic sentiment has deteriorated sharply. Strong majorities now say that the economy and their own finances have worsened over the past year, while expectations for the coming year are increasingly downbeat.

Economic insecurity, political disaffection and political turbulence should therefore not be viewed as entirely separate phenomena. When people feel less secure financially, struggle to access public services, or see little improvement in the issues affecting their communities, it becomes harder to sustain confidence that politics is capable of delivering meaningful change. In turn, that disaffection can fuel demands for political disruption, contributing to the political turbulence that many voters find so concerning. And turbulence can lead governments to chase quick wins rather than pursuing meaningful reforms that would address issues like economic insecurity.

Perhaps that is what struck me most while reflecting on that old newspaper clipping from 2008. The challenge facing political parties today is not simply how to win the next election, but how to rebuild confidence that politics remains capable of producing positive, tangible change.

If these trends continue unchecked, Britain risks following a path that will feel familiar to many Americans: a more volatile political environment and increasing difficulty in building the consensus required to address the country’s most pressing challenges.

Britain is not the United States, and history rarely repeats itself so neatly. Yet if there is one lesson from watching American politics over the past fifteen years, it is that political disaffection, economic insecurity and political turbulence can become mutually reinforcing. Left unchecked, they can create a cycle that becomes increasingly difficult to break. Rebuilding confidence in politics is therefore about more than winning elections or crafting compelling messages. It is about ensuring that people once again feel that politics is capable of improving their lives. Without that confidence, the forces driving disillusionment are unlikely to fade.