Emocracy: an end or beginning?

The concept of emocracy is not the only harbinger of finality. The end of democracy has been proclaimed many times. Emotions in politics are not new either. Passion, anger or even positive emotions and the resulting urge to act are always reasons to listen to politicians and their ideas or to start one’s own political career. It becomes more dangerous when people's emotions are played with, because at this point people and, as a consequence, their emotional decisions are particularly vulnerable and manipulable. Playing emotional politics therefore means playing politics at the expense of the population.

In a crisis that has long since ceased to be merely about health and economic policy, but one in which more and more people are becoming lonely, depressed or afraid because of the so-called Corona measures that have become necessary, the struggle for political truths is becoming more complex. There has been a lack of social exchange. People no longer meet each other as they once did and this has, certainly put the breaks on their meeting other ways of life, ideas or opinions. For the past year, many have surrounded themselves with the same people, the same activities, and smartphones have become their best friends. The people giving the press conferences have become familiar and their explanations have become known by heart. Thus, it’s reasonable to see the appeal when albeit even slightly different news that is forwarded to you or the info that the algorithm on social media has in store for you sometimes seems more tempting than what journalists write or what experts and politicians call for.

People let themselves be caught up in this often cited emocracy, succumbing to the images, and seeking salvation in many a pretty catchphrase. ⁴ At the same time, politicians additionally serve the emotions of the citizens by selling truths at junk prices and letting facts degenerate into moods. Then the emocracy represents a preliminary stage to a certain dystopia. In such a dystopia, people perish, not least because of their emotions. Meanwhile, experts and politicians are busy with other necessities of the crisis and there is no time for them to listen.

When people talk about the declining trust of the population in democracy, they usually ignore the fact that, conversely, politicians should also have trust in the population. Dystopia is not yet a reality, because it lives only when one believes in it. ⁵ It is precisely this context that offers a first potential approach to a solution, which at first sounds terribly boring: increasing media and political education as well as ethical responsibility. In this respect, dystopia can also be the call for politicians to prioritize ethics over emotion, and for the population to be willing to (co-)invest in their own democracy. For democracy, in contrast to emocracy, means that citizens can make choices every day.