.svg)
In our recent conversation on Navigating Noise, Adrian Pabst and I explored a fundamental tension in contemporary politics: the disconnect between high-level policymaking and local realities. As someone who studies narratives and how they shape political outcomes, I've long been fascinated by how the technocratic language of policy often fails to capture what actually matters to people in their communities.
Pabst, drawing from his experience at the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (founded by Keynes himself), argued that we need to move beyond the false choice between pure idealism and fatalistic realism. Instead, he suggested we focus on understanding and aligning interests that aren't currently working together - capital and labor, young and old, different regions within countries.
What struck me most was his insight about dignity in work. When we analyze our data at Filter Labs, we often find that beneath complaints about wages or working conditions lies a deeper question: "Is my labor dignified? Is it respected?" This dimension is frequently missing from policy discussions, yet it's fundamental to how people understand their place in society.
The conversation took an interesting turn when we discussed the green agenda. Pabst pointed out a crucial paradox: while environmental protection is necessary, current policies often place disproportionate burdens on working-class communities. This highlights a broader challenge in policy-making - how to achieve necessary societal changes without exacerbating existing inequalities.
Perhaps most encouraging was our discussion of trust in local institutions. While national trust metrics often paint a bleak picture, we're seeing a resurgence of confidence in local governance and community organizations. This suggests that rebuilding institutional trust might need to start from the ground up rather than the top down.
This local focus led us to explore which institutions might be underutilized. In Britain's case, Pabst identified several promising candidates: public spaces like parks and gardens, religious institutions, and social gathering places like independent pubs. These spaces, he argued, often command more trust than formal political institutions and could play a crucial role in rebuilding community cohesion.
For policymakers, particularly those working in foreign policy like Secretary of State or potential future leaders like Marco Rubio, Pabst offered clear advice: don't get lost in endless procedure. Instead, focus on understanding and aligning interests that aren't currently working together. This requires gathering granular data about local needs and conditions - something our current policy apparatus isn't well-designed to do.
The conversation highlighted an urgent need to develop new forms of labor representation suitable for the gig economy era. As Pabst noted, we need "economic democracy" - not just political democracy - but the forms this might take remain unclear. Similarly, we need to rethink sovereignty, moving away from unmediated state power toward more nuanced arrangements that better reflect local realities.
As we started to wrap up, I was struck by how many of these challenges come down to measurement and understanding. How do we properly value and reward different forms of work, especially care work? How do we gather meaningful data about local needs and conditions? These questions don't have easy answers, but addressing them seems essential to bridging the gap between high-level policy and lived experience.
Listen to Adrian and I attempt to address them in this week’s episode. I’d love to hear what you think.
.png)
