Labour Should Have Heeded Maslow

Behavioural motivation, according to Maslow, has a hierarchy of needs.  At the base level, humans are concerned with fundamental things, physiological needs such as food clothing shelter etc.  Safety comes next followed by love and belonging.  Human needs are represented by a pyramid with each level having to be met before the next level is addressed.  In essence, humans need to satisfy their physiological, safety and social belonging needs before things like self-esteem and self-realisation become important. Perhaps Maslow’s theory explains the dramatic disparity between the final opinion polls before the election and the exit poll followed by the results? 

From enjoying a healthy lead which would, apparently have translated into a 60 plus majority, the Conservatives appeared to shrink in the polls as polling day drew near.  With unconcealed delight, the BBC, Channel 4 and Sky began to speculate from “too close to call” to “hung parliament.”  With Labour support rising, would there be a snowball effect propelling Corbyn to a commanding position or would that very threat stiffen the Conservative vote and encourage waverers to tun out? Or would both things happen and cancel each other? Even James Forsyth trimmed his expectation forecasting, on the eve of the poll, that he “still thought the Conservatives would achieve a majority in the low twenties.”  But he also said things are so tight that if you offered Boris a majority of 8 he would take it with alacrity.  So what happened to give Boris such a thumping majority?  Alternately, did nothing happen?  I favour the latter.

Mushroom recalls, as a youth playing in the Newcastle YMCA snooker room, being advised by Bobby Dixon, who knew a thing about odds and chances, that, no matter what they might say beforehand, the only thing that mattered to voters in the privacy of the polling booth was their wallet.  So when voters were canvassed whether they wanted, amongst other things; more or less equality, better or poorer public services, five day's pay for four days work, free broadband and free childcare, they answered, predictably, in a way that showed support for Magic Grandpa’s give-aways and ignored his shocking leadership failings.  Nevertheless, these answers probably found their way into sophisticated models that were designed to predict voting intentions.  But all these things would feature at the top of Maslow’s hierarchy pyramid and would only be significant, in polling terms, if everything underneath, the psychological and safety needs, were settled and satisfactory.  Although I doubt if Bobby Dixon had ever heard of Maslow, he would have called this election right – voting Labour was just too much of a risk to basic safety and security.

Although one shouldn’t rejoice in the distress of others, it is impossible not to savour the delicious reports of Labour tearing itself apart after their disastrous election result.  Often mentioned is the ambivalence on Brexit.  Keir Starmer said that not rebutting, “Get Brexit Done,” was a key failure of the Labour campaign.  It may well have been but, whilst navel gazing, Labour should credit the Conservatives with hitting the right button.  Getting Brexit done was just the outward face of a much more important message, namely, Boris will get (other) things done.  If you were worried about those basic Maslow needs, here was the best chance of preserving the contents of your wallet, regardless of your political leanings.  As I said, Bobby Dixon would have recognised that all was not well at a basic level and wagered accordingly.