Obsessively following the daily political news feels like an act of politics, or at least an act of civics. But what if, for many of us, it’s a replacement for politics — and one that’s actually hurting the country?
That is the argument made by Tufts University political scientist Eitan Hersh in this episode of The Ezra Klein Show. In his incisive new book Politics Is for Power,Hersh draws a sharp distinction between what he calls “political hobbyism” — following politics as a kind of entertainment and expression of self-identity — and the actual work of politics. His data show that a lot of people who believe they are doing politics are passively following it, and the way they’re following it has played a key role in making the political system worse.
But this isn’t just a critique. Hersh’s argument builds to an alternative way of engaging in politics: as a form of service to our institutions and communities. And that alternative approach leads to some dramatically different ideas about how to marry an interest in politics with a commitment to building a better world. It also speaks to some of what we lost in rejecting the political machines and transactional politics of yesteryear — a personal obsession of mine and a more important hinge point in American political history than I think we realize.
We are, as you may have noticed, deep into election season, and that’s when it’s easiest to mistake the drama of national politics for the doing of actual politics. So there’s no better time for this conversation.
Here’s a lightly edited transcript of part of our conversation, which we released this week on The Ezra Klein Show.
Ezra Klein
It seems to me that you are quietly making a distinction between what we might call politics as a verb and politics as a noun — between being interested in the subject of politics and doing politics. So what is “political hobbyism”?
Eitan Hersh
Political hobbyism is a catchall for all the ways we do politics to serve our own emotional or intellectual needs or wants rather than do a kind of power-seeking organized behavior. It’s arguing about the news, sharing the news, reacting to news, being an at-home pundit about the news. All of those things that involve giving politics your headspace and emotion but not doing the real work of it.
Ezra Klein
Depending on how you cut it, it seems like this definition could implicate me quite deeply. You could categorize a lot of the work I do as functionally crack for political hobbyists and categorize many people listening to the podcast right now as political hobbyists.
But, in my head, the work I do is give people good information and analysis on politics that helps motivate their action. And I think a lot of people imagine that’s what they’re doing when they inform themselves about politics: That information leads to people being able to take good, clear action. How do you make a cut between those two things when a lot of people see the former is being necessary for the latter?
Eitan Hersh
For most people who are political junkies, their news consumption is not really geared toward information that is going to help them be active citizens in the community. And even if it is, they’re not being active in the community. Most people who are daily news consumers belong to zero organizations and have worked zero times in the past year with other people on a community problem. So, most people are not doing anything.
Ezra Klein
You have actual survey data in the book on the amount of time people spend on politics and the amount of time they spend on political hobbyism. Could you substantiate this little bit for me?
Eitan Hersh
If you look at the number of people who are spending time on politics, there’s about a third of the country that says they’re spending about two hours a day in news consumption. That might sound crazy at first, but if you add up all the time on podcasts or radio and reading the news and worrying about it and talking about it at the family dinner table, two hours actually doesn’t seem that unreasonable for a whole lot of people.
Ezra Klein
How does the two hours break down and how does it differ among groups?
Eitan Hersh
Almost none of it, let’s say 2 percent, is real community or volunteer engagement. The rest is mostly news consumption and sharing, talking, and debating online. The group that spends the most time in any kind of political engagement is white men, particularly college-educated white men. They know the most facts about politics, but they are not the group that is engaging most in real politics — organized politics with goals and strategies. You have women overwhelmingly in those roles. You also have racial minorities, particularly blacks, but also to some extent Latinos who spend less overall time on politics like following the news but more of their time is spent in these concrete ways.
Ezra Klein
You say that there are three primary reasons a political lobbyism is bad. It makes our politicians worse, it makes us worse, and it takes away time that could be spending building power. Let’s take those one by one. How does it make our politicians worse?
Eitan Hersh
A lot of what’s happening in small-dollar donations, for example, is that the second a politician on the debate says stage says something really provocative you feel connected to them and you give them a $5 donation. Or you’re watching a congressional hearing and a politician grandstands and makes some speech. And because they grandstand in a way that you liked, you react by giving a $5 donation. So, what’s really going on is you have no goals except to reward a politician for saying something that feels great in the moment. I think that makes politics worse rather than better. And you are doing it more for yourself — for your own kind of emotional cathartic ends — rather than to move politics in a direction that’s good.
Ezra Klein
How does political hobbyism make us worse?
Eitan Hersh
There are a lot of power relationships we have outside of politics [boss, coworker, parent] where we are trying to get other people to take some action that they wouldn’t otherwise take that we want them to take. And we kind of know the basic parameters for how to behave in those situations: We have to understand where people are coming from and understand their needs. We have to be empathetic to them. Because that’s how you can bring other people along with you.
That does not describe the way that people do politics online. If the whole point of it is kind of for fun or catharsis, then anger and outrage and not taking people’s opinions seriously will be normal. Actual politics requires a sense of empathy and understanding other people’s interests; Otherwise, you can’t get anything done. So, in that sense, we’re just practicing the wrong skill set.
You can listen to the full episode by subscribing to The Ezra Klein Show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, or wherever you get your podcasts.
OTTAWA – Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says the NDP is caving to political pressure from Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre when it comes to their stance on the consumer carbon price.
Trudeau says he believes Jagmeet Singh and the NDP care about the environment, but it’s “increasingly obvious” that they have “no idea” what to do about climate change.
On Thursday, Singh said the NDP is working on a plan that wouldn’t put the burden of fighting climate change on the backs of workers, but wouldn’t say if that plan would include a consumer carbon price.
Singh’s noncommittal position comes as the NDP tries to frame itself as a credible alternative to the Conservatives in the next federal election.
Poilievre responded to that by releasing a video, pointing out that the NDP has voted time and again in favour of the Liberals’ carbon price.
British Columbia Premier David Eby also changed his tune on Thursday, promising that a re-elected NDP government would scrap the long-standing carbon tax and shift the burden to “big polluters,” if the federal government dropped its requirements.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 13, 2024.
Simon Jolin-Barrette, minister responsible for consumer protection, has tabled a bill to force merchants to calculate tips based on the price before tax.
That means on a restaurant bill of $100, suggested tips would be calculated based on $100, not on $114.98 after provincial and federal sales taxes are added.
The bill would also increase the rebate offered to consumers when the price of an item at the cash register is higher than the shelf price, to $15 from $10.
And it would force grocery stores offering a discounted price for several items to clearly list the unit price as well.
Businesses would also have to indicate whether taxes will be added to the price of food products.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 12, 2024.
Quebec legislature member Youri Chassin has announced he’s leaving the Coalition Avenir Québec government to sit as an Independent.
He announced the decision shortly after writing an open letter criticizing Premier François Legault’s government for abandoning its principles of smaller government.
In the letter published in Le Journal de Montréal and Le Journal de Québec, Chassin accused the party of falling back on what he called the old formula of throwing money at problems instead of looking to do things differently.
Chassin says public services are more fragile than ever, despite rising spending that pushed the province to a record $11-billion deficit projected in the last budget.
He is the second CAQ member to leave the party in a little more than one week, after economy and energy minister Pierre Fitzgibbon announced Sept. 4 he would leave because he lost motivation to do his job.
Chassin says he has no intention of joining another party and will instead sit as an Independent until the end of his term.
He has represented the Saint-Jérôme riding since the CAQ rose to power in 2018, but has not served in cabinet.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 12, 2024.
