Rapid Exploration: Rising Social Confrontations And Their Implications For Transitions

This rapid exploration is part of the Foresight towards the 2nd Strategic Plan of Horizon Europe project.

Different social groups have linked their ambitions and beliefs – from various emancipatory goals to the “great reset” – to this movement and re-interpreted it in line with their world views. Consequently, the tone in the echo chambers of social media is getting rougher, and nobody can tell what a subjective opinion is or what is reliable information. Rational political discourse is getting increasingly difficult. Polarisation is growing along many conflict lines. When politically incorrect words are used, people are immediately put in a particular political corner, even if they only want to point out real problems. The art of finding political compromises is reaching its limits, and there is growing and even violent opposition against democracy.

About this topic

DRIVERS AND BARRIERS

One enabling driver of this development is undoubtedly the pervasive embedding of digital devices in our environment and the omnipresence of social media. Algorithms help to create false and fake news. There is a lack of reliability of news, and even trust in science is declining, not to speak of governments. However, there are more substantive controversies underlying these developments: people and stakeholders feel that only some voices are heard in policy debates, based on elite favouritism rather than the quality of arguments; the gap between elites and marginalised groups is widening; critical opinions get suppressed. This is coupled with increasing inequalities resulting in social divide and mistrust. (Multinational) companies make use of the widespread sense of uncertainty and further polarise public opinion for the sake of marketing. Increasing inequality, marginalisation and political polarisation (right/left/green/brown) have led populists and extremist groups to undermine the green transition movements. These political partisan groups try to benefit from the visibility of the transition agenda to spread their fake news and beliefs. The political elite is disconnected from the people, resulting in mistrust, polemics, and taunts for many people. Consequently, people reconnect in smaller groups in real life and form ‘tribes’ in their respective echo chambers in virtual space, sharing and confirming their distinctive world views and value settings

FUTURES

• Proactive responses to social inequalities in the EU
  What if social inequalities in all places are starting to be tackled because they endanger society as a whole? What if social tensions give rise to a deep institutional change?
  What if citizens find alternative ways of self-governance which work? What if social tensions lead to a responsibility rise in some groups?
  What if society self-organises into diverse groups (possibly including also communities of researchers based in the same location?)

• Further strengthening of social inequalities in the EU
  What if there are institutional mechanisms at work that would translate inequalities into a real risk for the union?
  What if disbelief, distrust and ignorance accelerate the erosion of public institutions?
  What if a government becomes inactive because of social confrontations (e.g. no more fight against climate change)?
  What if trust in government is lost as policies are perceived as unfair?
  What if social confrontation leads to violent societies where the government cannot regulate violence (e.g. riots, civil war) anymore?
  What if the public engagement of citizens stops?

• Regarding the role of science
  What if science is not regarded as an essential EU policy affair any longer?
  What if science and research are privatised?
  What if EU S&T policy turns into an affair for corporate elites only; an affair that does not care about inequalities?
  What if scientific movements spearhead the fight for a more cohesive and equal society)?