Happiness and politicians
Having worked in the voluntary mental health sector for ten years before becoming an academic, and having also faced some weighty challenges to my own wellbeing in the past, I have had a longstanding interest in what makes people happy with their lives despite facing many difficulties along the way. For many years this topic seems to have been the domain of philosophers, religious thinkers and poets. The scientific community appears to have been more interested in exploring what makes things go wrong, looking at ‘pathology’, rather than seeking the ingredients for a contented and satisfying life.
In recent years this deficit has started to be addressed, especially by proponents of ‘positive psychology’ who have studied the factors which make people happy with their lives. Personally I have welcomed this approach as I think it provides some useful insights into what really makes people happy, offering an alternative to the messages peddled by advertisers that we can buy our way to happiness.
So, in theory, I should be pleased when politicians embrace the messages coming from positive psychology. Richard Layard is an economist and Labour Peer who has written a popular book on happiness and has promoted policies focusing on increasing psychological and emotional wellbeing. Conservative leader David Cameron has been on record as saying that GWB (general well being) should be as important as GDP (Gross Domestic Product). Both talk about the dangers of thinking that more money equals more happiness. However, in practice I feel disturbed by such messages coming down to the populace from people with positions of power in our society. While they may be genuine in their intent, there is always a danger that positive psychology will become associated with ulterior political motives – a new ‘opium of the masses’. If the move towards being a happier society is to be a liberating experience doesn’t it has to come from the bottom up and not the top down?
August 12th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
There is indeed something slightly worrying about it. Bandwagon and climbing on board come to mind? It is easy for politicians to talk in theory about the importance of happiness, but when it comes down to the reality the ‘happiest’ countries overall are those that don’t have huge inequalities in wealth – and no politcian these days seems genuinely interested in tackling that. Inequalities are what keep the rich happy and the rest struggling hard to climb the ladder, and that keeps the capitalist system chugging along (with blips of course!).
A country with high levels of GNH may be economically worse off than many of its neighbours, but what it has will be spread more evenly across all members. A politician who stands up and says to the voters ‘hey guys, we’re going to take money off the richest and give it to the poorest and not bother about making more wealth – and we’ll ALL be happier!’ is not likely to stay happy in their job very long!
August 19th, 2009 at 7:51 am
There have been moves of late to curb higher salaries. I’m not sure that these have been about greater equality but rather as a mechanism to maintain the exisiting framework. A focus on GWB seems to be a different paradigm altogether.
I suspect that the Conservative’s focus on GWB was akin to their other attempts to become a more cuddly and gentle party. More recent moves have indicated that the Conservative Government will introduce a era of frugalness. Perhaps the message more money does not equal more happiness will be part of the sales job for this approach?