)
A very worrisome trend has been developing in major parts of the world: an ever-widening gap between governments and the national political establishment on the one hand and the people on the other.
Using a broad brush, it could be said that this widening gap has different causes, depending on which part of the world is being considered. In the industrialised countries - the US, most of Europe, and Japan - this gap results mostly from the inability of governments and political elites to provide adequate answers to the frustrations and the anxieties about the future of the traditional middle class. This category had been the founding block and the stabiliser of the democratic system as it had so far functioned in these countries. However, it has seen its acquired advantages and its sense of security about the future being steadily eroded by the impact of globalisation, and by demographic trends that make existing the welfare and pension systems unsustainable. And this without speaking of the anger and fear about the perceived risks from a loss of identity generated by uncontrolled migration in Europe.
There has been growing popular disappointment in - and scepticism towards - the political establishment and the widening gap between governments and the people. This has been caused by two factors: one, the inability of governments to offer the vision and policies that would provide some answers to these concerns; and two, the use of empty rhetoric as a substitute for the structural adjustments required to face the new realities of a global economic landscape, where new players are aggressively questioning the supremacy of the industrialised world. Not surprisingly, this is contributing to a growing polarisation in political life, as each party tries to assert its appeal to disenchanted voters by staking out starker positions. This is also generating an increasing dysfunctionality for political systems: they are stuck with paralysis, even as compromise and the search for common ground become more difficult. Just look at the results of the last Italian elections, or at the situation in the US Congress.
In emerging market countries, the widening gap between the political establishment and the people stems from the people's growing frustration and anger - especially the fledgling middle class in both urban and rural areas - at corruption, abuses of power, and blatant inequities, which are being increasingly exposed owing to the activities of civil society groups and the widening reach of social media. In China today, 300 million people are in constant touch through the Weibo, the microblogging service.
What was considered until a few years ago a fact of life - that political elites would subvert power and influence to their personal benefit - is increasingly perceived as an unbearable obstacle to the better quality of life and the higher standards of living that tens, if not hundreds, of millions of people now consider a legitimate aspiration. The squandering of opportunities, the added miseries of everyday life resulting from widespread corruption, abuse of power and unbridled greed are now the causes of popular protests either on the streets or through an increasingly inquisitive and harsh social media in many emerging market countries. This is all the more so when the powers that be turn a blind eye to environmental degradation and the tampering of food and other products.
It is true that this has created more scepticism and cynicism towards governments and national political establishments than it has concerted political action. However, one cannot underestimate the risks and the costs that this dysfunctionality entails.
Interestingly enough, it is in China that the concern about the trend has taken its most visible form. Even before being officially inaugurated at the National People's Congress two weeks ago, the new leadership in Beijing, especially through the voice of President Xi Jinping and Premier Li Keqiang, kept reiterating its desire - and has already taken some symbolic measures - to tackle the corruption and abuse of powers that irk the Chinese people and have become a major concern for social stability. This should not be surprising given - contrary to what many people think - that the Chinese leaders are among the most attentive in the world to public opinion.
The new leadership has come to power in full awareness that this widening gap with the people is now sapping the "mandate of heaven" - a ruler's legitimacy based not on any electoral mandate but on the ability of the ruler, whether yesterday's emperors or today's communist leaders, to be close to the people and to exercise power wisely. It remains to be seen whether President Xi and Premier Li will succeed in closing the gap with the Chinese people. But their acute awareness of the urgency of doing so cannot be doubted.
Globalisation and its impact - whether the stress on societies of industrialised countries or the radical changes in emerging markets, with the explosion of new aspirations and a fledgling middle class - are creating tremendous challenges for political governance. It is not enough any more for democratic countries' leaders to pat themselves on the back and to bask in the merits of their system; or for rulers of more autocratic regimes to consider that they know better than their people, and that the structures they have put in place will ensure their long-term survival.
There is today a general need in most countries for leaders to reconnect with the people. You don't need to get into the details of how the total disconnect between the governments and the people in West Asia led to the Arab uprisings. It suffices to measure how ineffective most European countries, the US or Japan have been in tackling their challenges - or how growth could have been much higher and more inclusive in India - to realise that a thorough rethinking of governance is in order.
We are just at the dawn of the era of social media and instant communication - of a new global environment of heightened popular awareness and expectations. Any form of government, whether democratic or authoritarian, that fails to adjust to the new requirements that this puts on governance standards and governance efficiency is bound to pay a heavy price for that failure.
The writer is president of Smadja & Smadja.
Disclaimer: These are personal views of the writer. They do not necessarily reflect the opinion of www.business-standard.com or the Business Standard newspaper
