| Changing Politics / Political system |
Changing Democracy / Democratic system Electoral/Representative democracy/ democratic elections |
Democracy has strong positive connotations for these audiences, whereas politics does not. When talking about the problems we’re facing, point the finger at politics and the political system. |
| Who will do right by us |
Who will make the best / better decision |
When talking about who should make decisions on our behalf, if we ask who will make the best decision it cues a more utilitarian set of considerations around who has the expertise, qualifications and competence to make them. This connects with the belief that decisions should be left to highly educated politicians and elites. However, if we ask who will do right by us, we cue a more moral set of considerations around who is honest, sincere and holds our best interests at heart. On this turf, politicians can’t compete with the public as trust in politicians is so low. |
| We have a right and responsibility to contribute to decisions |
The public are shut / locked out of decisions |
Both groups, but Passive Allies in particular, point to the opportunity to vote, lobby your MP and even stand for election as examples of how ordinary people aren’t locked out of politics. |
| We, us |
The public/ they |
Don’t separate our interests and experiences from those of the public. |
| People like us / people from our communities – our teachers, doctors, scientists, shopkeepers, friends and family members People from different walks of life |
The public/ people |
We found that “people like us” was a sticky phrase that people recalled. And specifying groups of people who the public trust and or have an affinity with can help to remind them that they already trust members of the public with important decisions. |
| Like a jury ... we all have an equal chance of being selected / they mirror the population in terms of things like gender, race, age and class. |
Random selection |
When talking about participatory processes (e.g. Citizens’ Assemblies), talking about random selection tends to cue “randoms” i.e. odd, untrustworthy people. In comparison, a jury is relatively well understood and trusted by the public. |
| Not representative / unrepresentative |
Not elected / unelected |
Emphasising the importance of being elected (e.g. in the House of Lords) can reduce support for (unelected) citizens being more involved in decision making. Furthermore it positively depicts politicians as “more democratic” in comparison, subtly reinforcing the legitimacy of the current electoral system that appointed them. |
| The system is... old fashioned / Victorian / needs updating / upgrading |
The system... is broken / democracy is broken / we need to fix democracy |
We found that these audiences had some pride in the democratic history of the UK, especially compared to other countries. They don’t agree that democracy is broken and as it’s not broken nor does it need to be fixed. However, they acknowledge that there is plenty of room for improvement to make it fit for purpose in the 21st century. Talking about updating or upgrading also makes it clear that the system is designed by human beings and can be changed. |
