The Psychology of Elections (Part I)

By Rev. Dr. Marcus Lashley

Without doubt, from the time an election is announced in this region, there is not just a hive of activity but an overflowing of emotions.  There was a time when in some countries, it could be anticipated that some citizens would die.  However, this period also speaks to not just stark contrasts but irrational behavior which borders on insanity.

We take membership in or alliance to political parties seriously; some might even argue too seriously.  This is a period when there is a strict understanding of an ‘us and them’ the belongers and the non-belongers, to quote an expression that was once posted in a regional port of entry years ago.  Psychologically, having an ‘enemy’ or opponent is one of the oldest and most primitive of needs and desires.  People are united in a common cause to defeat the enemy, sometimes at all costs.

In some households, not all members of the family may hold the same political persuasion.  The result Is that heated debates dominate every discussion and tempers flare.  At its extreme, those people who are united by blood can even stop speaking to each other or refuse to extend basic courtesies.  When politics comes into a Caribbean home, it has the potential to destroy and not create.  In some homes, the ancient maxim is invoked, and there is a strict rule to not discuss religion nor politics.  What the average person may choose to forget, ignore or blind themselves to, is that in private, the bonds between members of Parliament, run deep.  Some members are related to each other by blood or by marriage.  Others have been partners in business or are the Godparent to the opposing member’s child.  There is no greater bond for some than the ‘old school tie,’ or a sacred fraternal alliance.

I will never forget the story of my mother visiting the home of a dear family friend, way earlier that was usual.  The home was that of a well-known politician, and their conversation was interrupted by the visit of someone from the party that was opposite to her friend’s husband.   Clearly, not only was this not the first visit, but he had a undeniable familiarity with the home.  Upon asking where the gentleman was, the lady of the house replied that he was in the bedroom dressing.  Without missing a beat, the politician marched upstairs and remained there for a while until he was heard shouting back, as he marched back downstairs, “I gine give yuh  hell in Parliament today.”

Two clear psychological features can be easily identified and are openly on display during what is now known euphemistically as ‘the silly season.’  The first is understood clinically as ‘the herd mentality.’  People give up the sanity of individual thought and reasoning and can be seen, not only moving in ‘packs’ but repeating and being convinced by the same persuasive narrative.   Belonging to a group or motivated by a cause is still very attractive to a large number of our fellow Bajans.  This is particularly stimulating and exciting when one believes that they are on the ‘winning’ or more ‘virtuous’ side.  Winning is attractive and being associated with success can be like a stimulant drug.

The second feature is more subtle than the first, and it is identity.  Being part of the ‘red or yellow shirt group,’ reinforces one’s identity.  It defines the individual as who they are and who they are not, and one is sometimes as important as the other.  The question must be asked however, “does this unite the nation or force unnecessary division in a small country.  We keep mimicking the worst of other larger countries.  Ironically, the leader of the winning party always say at a few minutes after midnight, “I promise to be Prime Minister to all Barbadians, B’s and D’s.” Or “I call on us to now heal and come together as one people,”  

Historically, Barbadians have become accustomed to a having a personal relationship with their parliamentary representative and the same with their Prime Minister.  Even with all of the recent technological advances and social media, it is important for a candidate to ‘press the flesh’ and interface with the electorate and “beg for a vote.”  The voter wants to see their representative or contender and to be seen by those persons willing to serve in the constituency.  That intimacy speaks to a deeper psychological need, that of recognition and validation.  At the extreme, there can even be a sense of ownership.  The man in the street – especially the one aligned to a party – feels a sense of pride in being able to say the words, “this is my representative.”

In reality, too many parliamentary representatives absent themselves from this degree of intimacy once the polls have closed at 6:00pm on election night.  It is almost comical to hear the familiar refrain, “but I ain’t see he (she) in the last four years.”  The voter takes this slight in a deeply personal way, and uses the vote as a way of punishing the delinquent individual.  Only if their allegiance is greater to that MP’s party, would they extends some forgiveness and with some reluctance, vote him/her back into office.

Rev. Dr. Marcus Lashley is an Anglican Priest and Clinical Psychologist