Who is morally responsible for Britain's political short-termism?
About this episode
The episode explores the moral implications of Britain's political short-termism and its impact on societal issues.
A Labour leadership challenge would mean Britain could have a seventh prime minister in a decade. Each change of leadership promises renewal, but each delivers fresh disappointment. Meanwhile the problems compound: crumbling infrastructure, polluted waterways, a cost-of-living crisis, a planet warming faster than our policy responses. Why can't a mature democracy fix things it can clearly see are broken? In the late 1960s, Stanford psychologist Walter Mischel devised a deceptively simple test of human nature. A child is left alone with a single marshmallow and a choice: eat it now, or wait fifteen minutes and receive two. It measures willpower, impulse control, and the capacity to sacrifice immediate satisfaction for a better long-term outcome. Mischel's follow-up studies found that children who waited tended to grow into healthier, better-educated, more emotionally stable adults. But subsequent researchers identified a crucial caveat: children from unstable backgrounds, used to broken promises, were entirely rational to eat immediately, since they didn't trust that the second marshmallow would ever arrive. Britain, it could be argued, is living through its own national…
More episodes of Moral Maze
- Artemis 2 and the ethics of human space flight
- Is an Established Church Morally Defensible?
- Economic shocks: is there a duty to accept sacrifice?
- Pragmatism and Principle: what is the role of morality in foreign policy?
- Is it moral to attack Iran?
- What Is Truth?
Explore listener stats, chart rankings, contacts and more on the Moral Maze podcast page.