Nick Robinson says the Tory conference was “almost entirely unmoved when again and again David Cameron tried to evoke the spirit of The Big Society.”
I suspect there’s a reason for this, which is to be found in this new paper (pdf). It says:
74.5% of subjects reported tails, which suggests that a large number of them are prepared to lie for a measly €2.
But here’s the thing. Of those who received nothing from the dictator game, 82% reported tails on the coin toss, whereas only 73% of those who thought that game had treated them fairly reported tails.
The message here is that if people feel they are unfairly treated, they are more likely to behave anti-socially, even towards those who had not wronged them.
What’s this got to do with the big society? Plenty. The big society asks people to “step forward…come together…contribute” - in other words to be pro-social.
But the Munich experiments show that this is less likely to happen if people feel they are being treated unfairly, even in different contexts.
And here’s the problem. There are two groups of people - many of them Tories - who have the time on their hands to do more voluntary work, but who are feeling unjustly treated now. I refer to housewives of moderately high earners who will have their child benefit cut, and to retired savers who face negative real interest rates. At the margin, these people’s sense of unfairness could make them less likely to contribute to the big society.
Now, you might say that such people are not really the victims of injustice. This is irrelevant in this context. What matters is that many feel as if they are. And this is a barrier in the way of the big society.
I suspect there’s a reason for this, which is to be found in this new paper (pdf). It says:
Individuals who believe they were treated unfairly in an interaction with another person are more likely to cheat in a subsequent unrelated game.They found this by getting 502 students at the University of Munich to play a simple dictator game. After the game, the students were asked to toss a coin, being paid €1 if it landed heads and €3 if tails, and to report the toss of the coin themselves.
74.5% of subjects reported tails, which suggests that a large number of them are prepared to lie for a measly €2.
But here’s the thing. Of those who received nothing from the dictator game, 82% reported tails on the coin toss, whereas only 73% of those who thought that game had treated them fairly reported tails.
The message here is that if people feel they are unfairly treated, they are more likely to behave anti-socially, even towards those who had not wronged them.
What’s this got to do with the big society? Plenty. The big society asks people to “step forward…come together…contribute” - in other words to be pro-social.
But the Munich experiments show that this is less likely to happen if people feel they are being treated unfairly, even in different contexts.
And here’s the problem. There are two groups of people - many of them Tories - who have the time on their hands to do more voluntary work, but who are feeling unjustly treated now. I refer to housewives of moderately high earners who will have their child benefit cut, and to retired savers who face negative real interest rates. At the margin, these people’s sense of unfairness could make them less likely to contribute to the big society.
Now, you might say that such people are not really the victims of injustice. This is irrelevant in this context. What matters is that many feel as if they are. And this is a barrier in the way of the big society.
...plus, of course, there are all those who think 'They' are getting away with something, lounging oround on benefits, sprogging armies of feral kids and living off hard-working taxpayerzzzzzzz...
(Sorry. Drifted off there.)
In other words, it's hard to get people to 'join in' if you've pandered to their sense of resentment for decades.
Posted by: redpesto | October 07, 2010 at 04:18 PM
That's one big problem with (say) privatising schools / hospitals etc.
At present, lots of people give their time and resource to being governors/PTA/playgroup/pre-school volunteers/"Friends of X Hospital" etc. Were these to be profit-making institutions they'd feel they were being taken for mugs.
It wouldn't be as bad if we could reconstitute the spirit of the pre-NHS health service - the Voluntary and Cottage Hospitals, the myriad private health associations set up by and for working people. But the culture and social solidarity which produced them has long gone.
Posted by: Laban | October 07, 2010 at 10:22 PM
With the greatest respect Chris you must stop dignifying Cameron and Gideon by associating them with serious interlectual ideas,
The Big Society is a con trick!!
If they believed in us all being "in it together" they would be spending more on the Welfare state, not less. As this is the concrete expression of concern by a Democratic and liberal society for all its' members. Thats why it was created by people who really cared for Human flourishing.
The idea that social problems can be sorted by charities and some voluntary work is balls and always has been.
All you are doing chris is expanding the smirk on Gideons face.
The more they cut helped by you, the Daily mail, red pesto ( and the other spiteful fools in the land)the more Gideon can cut his tax bill and those of his rich mates.
Get real and defend the Welfare state you might need it one day and red pesto too!
Posted by: Keith | October 07, 2010 at 11:11 PM
Does that game really show that people who feel poorly treated will behave anti-socially?
An alternative reading is that once they realise lots of other people are cheating they are more likely to cheat themselves.
The causal mechanism then isn't that because they have been wronged they want to wrong others, but that there is an advantage to be gained by adopting a certain strategy and there seems to be little social stigma about it (given that so many people are doing it).
Posted by: Jimmy Hill | October 08, 2010 at 01:44 AM