A good day for Enlightenment ideals

(C) DM

Recent years have unquestionably not been kind to the concept of human progression. The old Enlightenment ideology that humans can reliably apply ‘reason’ to reach a better understanding of the ‘truth’, thus allowing for improvement in their social and political world, has come to be viewed by many as wholly flawed. Even where this view is not expressed explicitly, the use of inverted commas for ‘reason’ and ‘truth’ are indicative. The more parochial sphere of current politics displays a similar logic. Say what you will of our politicians, utopianism and idealism are certainly not crimes they can be accused of. Despite the best efforts of the parties to present their ideas as bold, far-reaching ‘visions’ for society, it is clear that our political reality is more influenced by what is ruled out rather than which possibilities are up for debate.

In such an environment it is pleasing to see some signs of old-fashioned progress, suggested by the recent ‘snapshot‘ of the British Social Attitudes Survey. This study, tracking the opinions of British people over the past 25 years, finds that Britain has become steadily more liberal. Only 36% of Britons today think that homosexual relations are wrong compared to 62% in 1983. Almost twice as many people think that women should be allowed an abortion (37% vs. 60%) and almost a third as many people think that sex before marriage is always or mostly wrong (28% vs. 11%). Anecdotal evidence would suggest that racist attitudes have progressively declined even more starkly. This is all cheering news.

The report offers some accompanying trends in explanation of this progress: declining rates of religiosity (1/2 rather than 1/3 of people now do not belong to any religion) and increasing numbers of graduates (graduate attitudes reported in the survey are far more liberal). The rate of change is misleadingly slow because of skewed population demographics: while the young are more educated, liberal and secular than older generations, they are heavily outnumbered. It would be a mistake, however, to attribute these changes exclusively to the effect of population change – much of the impact must be attributed to the Labour government. A consistent anti-discrimination, pro-tolerance line has redefined what is socially acceptable. It is hard to imagine that attitudes towards homosexuality could have improved so sharply with a Tory government agitating against homosexuality being portrayed as acceptable in schools. (Cameron supported Section 28 as recently as 2003). The flip side of this is seen in worsening attitudes towards benefit claimants and the unemployed. The government’s frequent courting of reactionary opinion with “tough” policies on scroungers (in reality a minimal and wildly overblown problem for our benefits system) actively shores up negative attitudes and regressive misperceptions.

What is most cheering about these findings is the suggestion that in the long run, the general population can be responsive to reason (allowing good arguments to shift political consensus) and that the state can play a positive role in encouraging this. Policies that are ruled out today as ‘practically unworkable’, or ‘politically impossible’ can come to be accepted. Attitudes towards women, the poor, other races, etc. that used to be viewed as natural and unassailable are now unthinkable. The state can take a lead on these issues by implementing policies – such as formal equality legislation – that do not merely change behaviour, but attitudes as well. Just imagine what could be achieved if the government were to enshrine other equalities – of opportunity or material resources – in legislation. The policy is of course, at the moment,  ‘politically impossible’, but the shifting attitudes of the British public suggest there is reason to be hopeful.