It's Maslow, stupid!

It takes a rare piece of journalism or opinion to make me stand back, reassess my own attitudes and finally to change my stance.

This piece in The Age today, does just that.

What Australian and US voters now crave

The Age - November 11, 2004

The left has failed to recognise society's need for a sense of social and moral order, writes Gregory Hywood.

But I'm going to take it further than the author does. It is more than just morality being sought, it is the wider umbrella of safety and security - the need to be protected.

It is clear to me now that we (the libertarian progressive left) have been going about the last few months (years even) with our heads stuck so far up our arse that we couldn't see what was really changing in Australia, let alone the rest of the world.

I'm not saying that we are wrong, just that we need to rethink the issues that are important to voters. I think Abraham Maslow might have the answer.

When an economy is doing well (as has the USA and Australia) basic needs, such as food, water, sleep etc, are mostly met and few want for much. Such is the first level of Maslow's "hierarchy of needs" - the physiological.

The next concern is that of safety. We desire the need for a secure home and a family. Refugees stuck in a detention centre are clear examples of those who desire this basic need. But middle Australia also, in its own way are being failed at this basic level, because national security and moral grounding are also tenets of safety.

When both physiological and safety needs are met, we tend to aim for love or inclusion - we need to feel we belong. That is part of the reason for creating a family. It is also why people joing sports clubs, community organisations and churches.

After that is met we focus on our esteem and we seek to improve this by the clothes we wear, the car we drive, the house we live in, the job we have. The luxuries in life that tell society "what and who we are". We give ourselves status.

Finally, if we can ever fulfil those four needs we can then seek 'self-actualisation'. We seek to improve ourselves, not by physical stuff but mentally and spiritually. Self-fulfilment, peace, knowledge etc.

It is becoming clear to me that the stereotypical "leftie" is predominantly coming from a higher level on Maslow's hierarchy. We are campaigning for how WE want the world to be by fighting for human rights and debating high-brow issues like stem-cell research and the war in Iraq. We are the Chardonnay set.

However, middle-Australia (as with the majority middle in the USA) are still scrambling to meet their needs for safety and belongingness. Quite often they are trying to aim for esteem needs (by purchasing plasma screens with surround sound) in the hope that it will fill the other hole in their life. But they are ahead of themselves. They turn to materialism because they cannot answer the need for safety and security for their family.

They are so hocked up (average debt is 140% of the average Australian's income compared with 50% two decades ago) that if interest rates rise by 1/4 of a point they will need to work an extra shift to pay for it.

These people, the majority of voters, do not care that Howard lies, as long as he keeps the economy safe. They've had enough of saving the trees and the rivers, they want someone to keep interest rates low and employment high. They have no need to understand the plight of refugees or the Sudanese because they are rightly concerned about their own plight. Charity must begin at home.

So how do we, the high and mighty lefties turn the focus from our pet projects (war, free trade agreements, old growth forests, medicare gold, gay rights, Telstra, ABC funding, etc) and towards the things that matter to THEM?

It's their sense of security, stupid!

Until all those millions of middle-Australia voters feel secure enough with their lot to comfortably move onto the esteem train, or even the self-actualization shuttle, we will be fighting a lost cause campaigning for the esoteric, the altruistic and the utopian.

The reason that we had the human rights boom of the 50's and 60's is precisely because the economy was sound and families were not under financial pressure. They had the time, the money and the desire to move past esteem-building and into promoting self-actualisation.

At the moment we are trying to pull down the upper-class in order to
haul the lower class up Maslow's ladder - over top of the middle
class, even! If instead we choose to help middle-Australia to move
beyond their safety-net concerns, they will undoubtedly turn around
and assist the lower class to move up.

How do we do it? I'm honestly not sure. But sitting in our ivory towers drinking Chardonnay and discussing the rights and wrongs of the world ain't cuttin' the mustard.

We need to be forming progressive economic policy that can be implemented step by step. E.g. While a Tobin tax is a great idea we need to realise that it isn't going to happen soon. However, income splitting is plausible and possible. An overhaul of the tax brackets to link them with CPI is a valid proposal. But these are just some of the ideas that need to be promoted and they require strong campaigns.

As much as I despise the religious right, I must admit that Family First seem to be on the right track. Their policies are in line with the strategy I've outlined above. They are off the blocks and racing ahead while we are left scratching our heads and wondering why everyone has shifted to the right.

They haven't! They've just voted for the people that are listening. We've stopped listening because we are spending too much time preaching about the things that DON'T matter (at the moment) to the average Australian. Us lefties are simply ahead of schedule in being too progressive for the issues that are not high priority and we've forgotten what really matters to the voters that count.

It reminds me of a human resource philosophy I learned many years ago ... a happy employee is an effective employee. If an employee is having trouble paying the mortgage, it will reflect in their work and they are less likely to be enthusiastic, effective or charitable to colleagues that may need help.

The same goes for voters - the Australian public. A happy Australian will be more enthusiastic, more effective in their work and home life and more likely to take an interest in current affairs, social issues and the plight of those less fortunate.

To that end, I'm making a big commitment to focus my energies on assisting the necessary reforms to shift mainstream Australia out of the safety mindset and into the esteem and self-actualisation phases. That can only be achieved by focussing my energy on domestic issues, especially pertaining to the economy.

I'm basing that strategy on the hope that once in these higher levels of Maslow's hierarchy, Australians will be content to support the greater causes in life. I could be wrong, but I'm hoping I'm right.




[+/-] show/hide this post