Continuing the discussion from The complex voting system:
Hey Guys @Sven_the_Barbarian made a great point about our current position and our marketing at the bottom of this thread and I think it requires some attention.
Firstly, I think @TomSesselmann is doing a great job on Social, so this certainly isn't a criticism of his current work.
I think we may need some clarification on how we choose to disseminate our message to gain more following. @max.kaye and @Nathan feel free to correct my thinking but essentially we can learn a lot from the recent rise in populism across America, Europe, The Philippines, and even at home. I have been reading about the "phenomenal rise of populism" and what has caused it recently so initially I'll introduce a few notions that seem to be driving the rise in popularity of populist candidates, then I'll propose some ways we can use it to our advantage.
If anyone is sensitive to their political biases please stop reading now and jump down a few paragraphs so you don't get upset.
From my understanding there are a few cultural shifts occurring; Firstly, our notions of right wing and left wing are inadequate in making sense of globalisation and technological innovation over the industrialisation mindset from which they sprang. A hundred years ago or so we started using left wing right wing rhetoric to simplify, pro-industrialisation (Right Wing) vs anti-industrialisation (left Wing). These days the supposed "Right" wants to return to manufacturing jobs and conservative values, vs the "Left" which wants to further social liberalism and the current economic paradigm of globalisation and technological innovation (at least internationally, where most labour movements have died or dislocated from their original inspirations).
Secondly, there is growing distrust in the political establishment, born of the internet and the unprecedented levels of information available to us all. Backdoor deals have always been part of the political process and have greased the groove for progress in spite of opposing view points for centuries. Unfortunately with globalisation and the increasing power of the corporations, money carries significantly more weight than it once did, so lobbyists and interest groups have unprecedented control of the current democratic process. The general public have an immediate skepticism of backdoor deals and are intelligent enough to know when something seems amiss. Thus the rise of populist perspectives in both political camps regardless of their supposed wings.
Finally, peoples attention spans are increasingly diminished as everything is becoming available to them at the touch of a button. Headlines will do where articles were once important, people need not stop scrolling for that would impede the dopamine hit their device gives them each time they scroll through their feed.
All these issues have coalesced into a disparate often illogical even contradictory movement against almost everything. Certain political units have been able to draw significant numbers by capitalising on these particular issues in ways the "less disenfranchised" haven't.
Trumpism gained popularity across the disenfranchised by being opposed to those the "disenfranchised" saw as the perpetrators of their demise, namely "Wall Street" and "Migrants", but Trump didn't create that perception, the media and the "right wing conservatives" had been selling that message to the populous for years, Trump was just outlandish enough to catch the wave and ride it. (along with the DNC misreading the field and running the wrong play).
In the Philippines, Duturte; someone progressives would think was un-electable, simply capitalised on his countries chosen narrative that the drug dealers were the problem.
Marine Le pen, is positioning herself as a serious contender on a similar message to Trump and UKIP, because france's political sphere is heavily influenced by the same global rhetoric. The nationalistic positioning has been "we have a problem with globalisation and immigration, thats why you haven't achieved everything you were promised by those corrupt forces on the left"
From a slightly different perspective, the 5 star movement (S5M) in italy has gained significant traction in the italian parliament by preaching a message similar to ours, of a direct democracy and anti-corruption. They have been preaching from a central political position and gathering support from all over. Whether or not they are who they claim to be remains to be seen, but they have gained 30% of the popular vote.
All these movements successfully identified the disenchanted narrative within their country and preached that they were the solution. The predominant position to take seems to be "anti-corruption".
I think the Flux platform is uniquely situated to capitalise on our current governments inability to resolve their budget issues, and the general level of disenfranchisement Australians are feeling. Australia is facing similar conversations as all these other countries, I think we simply need to position ourselves as the single solution to all these issues. Effectively every issue regardless of where someone sits politically is a Flux issue, because if they feel that way about X, if Flux was in power they could actually have an impact on that legislation. But I think, more broadly if we can steer conversations toward corruption and the ineffectiveness of the current political paradigm, I'm sure we can gather significantly more than the 30% the S5M have gained.
Let me know what you guys think!