Throughout history, it has been argued that societies make decisions on the basis of logical and rational reasoning. Both Max Weber and Émile Durkheim argued that the actions of individuals were increasingly rational, relegating emotions, values, fantasy and religion to personal or spiritual spheres. For a long time, emotions have occupied a secondary role in the social sciences, being considered deviations from rational action. However, in the mid-twentieth century, social theory began to reassess the importance of the affective in social life, generating a renewed interest in the relationship between emotions and politics.
Today, politics is deeply marked by passion and irrationality. Neuroscience suggests that 98% of human thought is unconscious, highlighting the central role of emotions in decision-making. In his article for the European Association of Political Consultants' book "Emotions in Politics and Campaigning," George Lakoff emphasizes that emotions influence how we process political information, as they are intrinsically linked to our values and identity. When voting, people do not choose based on their material interests, but on the basis of their identity and those they perceive as like-minded (Haime, H. 2013, p. 30). Politics involves issues fundamental to individual and collective identity, such as justice, equality and belonging, which reinforces the emotional impact on political decisions.
Twenty-first century voters have experienced a radical shift in their perception of politics. They no longer necessarily identify with the traditional ideological divisions of left and right, and many view politics as a "suspect" activity detached from altruistic values. In contrast to previous generations who saw politics as a space for solidarity and the struggle for ideals, the new voters tend to perceive it as an avenue for personal gain. This change is partly explained by the context in which they grew up: an era of ideological crisis that weakened communism, machismo, racism and other myths and values that were decisive in the past. In addition, the impact of technology has been crucial, as today's young people have incorporated the digital world as a fundamental part of their daily lives, changing their relationship with information and politics.
If politics has changed due to the transformation of constituents and their values, it is worth asking how it can modernize itself to capture the interest of this new society. While answering this question in its entirety is a challenge, a key aspect of the solution lies in the role of social networks in political participation.
New voters have a close relationship with technology and social networks, using them to inform themselves, debate and connect with other voters. Platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and YouTube have become central tools for political discussion, enabling the dissemination of information and the formation of online political communities. Neuroscience has also contributed to the understanding of how social networks shape political opinion. Marco Iacoboni (2009) in his book; "Mirroring People: The Science of Empathy and How We Connect with Others", argues that political attitudes are largely shaped through affinity with other individuals who share similar values and ideas about the organization of society. This phenomenon can be related to the concept of "cascading activation," which describes the process by which users amplify content with which they agree, generating a reinforcing effect within their digital communities (Gatica Mancilla, 2021, p. 16).
Although social networks have democratized access to political information, they also present significant challenges. While these platforms allow the expression of diverse opinions, they can also generate polarization, misinformation and hate speech. Anonymity and lack of physical interaction facilitate the dissemination of aggressive messages and the dehumanization of the political adversary. As Gustave Le Bon points out in "The Psychology of the Masses", group dynamics can lead to the disappearance of conscious personality and the predominance of emotional and impulsive reactions. In this context, controlling emotions and encouraging rational debate in social networks represents a considerable challenge.
By way of conclusion, the emergence of new voters, the influence of neuroscience on politics and the impact of social networks have transformed the contemporary political scene. The transition from a politics based on rationality to a politics centered on emotion and identity requires new communication and engagement strategies. While social networks offer unique opportunities to connect with constituents and mobilize public opinion, there is also a need to develop mechanisms to mitigate polarization and foster a more informed and constructive political debate.
Comments