would boring politics make us happier? (2)
It has commonly been said that boring politics are best politics, especially in this article by J. Andrew Zalucky.
His main argument is that boring politics create the happiest societies because they avoid mass turmoil and potential bloodshed. He uses the example of Europe, in the pull between a liberal democracy and social democracy, which made for a boring fight for outsiders, but has avoided the mass-movements in Europe’s History. He argues that people are allowed to pursue their interests in things like sports, music, film, etc. because they do not have to participate in politics, which makes them happier. He then uses examples from Venezuela and North Korea to show how involved politics have led to crises.
Certainly, this country has become polarized and anxious, along with other parts of the world after large movements in politics. However, is being preoccupied with other interests a sign of true happiness. If we go to Venezuela and North Korea, it is, but they are facing a humanitarian crisis and famine. Radical and “inspired” politics did not solely lead to the situations on these countries, as Zalucky would like one to believe. As with the political situations in America and Europe, there have always been eras of an influx of movements. They are a response to other problems we are facing, not just a response to not being bored anymore. Additionally, when we are not in one of these phases, are we as a world fully happy, or are we turning a blind eye to problems that do not affect us directly? This resentment that has been brought to surface in this era has always been there, people were just ignorant to it. So no, boring politics do not solely mean that life is better and people are happier.
Finally, involved politics do have their benefits. They can bring change to people’s lives, change to the problems some were ignorant to.
