Inside the Political Mind: The Human Side of Politics and How It Shapes Development

by Greg Power

This book examines why political behaviour in developing countries so often deviates from outsiders' expectations--and not for the reasons you might think. Analysis of developing countries tends to be preoccupied with the seedier aspects of politics, finding explanations for lack of progress in vote-buying, clientelism and naked self-interest. But this ignores the question of why politicians, as people, do what they do.

Drawing on the experiences of hundreds of MPs in some of the world's most complex environments, Greg Power explores their personal motivations and daily pressures in filling the gaps left by failing states. In countries as diverse as Iraq, Nepal, Ukraine and Tanzania, he shows how institutions work within highly informal political cultures, driven by public expectations, social norms, reciprocity and altruism. He reveals that development is determined as much by MPs' foibles and preferences as by the wider battle for power.

Combining insights from political science, behavioural economics and business management, Power argues for a more human approach to political reform--one that starts with individuals, not institutions. His fascinating book shines new light on how politics works from the inside, and why the human element is central to making change happen where it really matters.

Genres: Politics

379 pages, Kindle Edition

Published February 15, 2024

Reviews

[Jane Griffiths · Rating 4 out of 5]

Greg Power is a former special adviser to UK Labour government ministers, notably the late Robin Cook of blessed memory, and on ceasing to do that he worked with his democracy-promoting think-tank in various countries, particularly in several in Africa.So, he is well connected, and a thinker, and interested in democratic processes, so I was keen to read his book, and I have. His key point seems to be that where states are weak, informal and party networks are not only strong but essential to governance of any sort. He notes that in Libya and Tunisia these networks have not successfully emerged, and the polities in those countries are thus barely functional. However, while he recounts an interesting tale, I did not find much in the way of insight, but rather a series of aphorisms and influential quotes. In particular, he notes that where the often tedious and bureaucratic notion of “agreed working practices” does not exist, as it apparently does not in Egypt, it has proved nearly impossible to counter an autocratic or theocratic regime in any meaningful sense. In the democratic West we tend to think of “ agreed working practices” as a kind of barrier to change, colloquially called the “blob”, but it’s worth having it pointed out that this is not the case elsewhere. Libya and Egypt, he says, suffered from the fact that their politicians “could not get a handle on the art of political opposition”, but in Iraq there is actually some progress in this direction.


Power singles out Somaliland as a stable democracy. We do not hear much about that state, for this very reason. It is stable, and is not undergoing war, uprisings, or famine.


He devotes much of the book to the notion of “clientelism”. He means by this large numbers of people approaching their MP directly for help with a problem they have. This happens of course in the developed democracies of the West, where citizens often believe that their MP can overturn government or local authority decisions they disagree with, and become angry and abusive when they are told this is not possible. But the example he uses is that of Zimbabwe, where it is common for people to approach MPs because they cannot pay school fees or medical bills, or the roof of their house has fallen down. The MP will as often as not simply give their constituent money to pay to fix the problem. This of course is both shocking to Western perception, and illegal in most developed jurisdictions, but normal in many around the world.


By contrast, Power gives an example from the US when discussing the difficulties of changing institutions, including legislatures. Change, he notes, despite what the history books would have us believe, “is snever the result of one initiative, but tends to happen when multiple competing interests and different motives start to congregate around specific suggestions for reform”. Thus, Aneurin Bevan did not bring the National Health Service into being. He calls for a behavioural approach to politics, ie why do people do what they do, and how can those reasons be prayed in aid when change is wanted. One of the great change-makers in US politics was Lyndon Johnson, who said “You can put an awful lot of whiskey into a man if you just let him sip it. But if you try to force the whole bottle down his throat at one time, he’ll throw it up.” Politics is about power, he says. Yes, of course it is. But it’s also about practice. 


This book is interesting, and a bit worthy. A good one for occasional political nerds like me.

[Axelle · Rating 3 out of 5]

(this is an unexpectedly long review lol I guess I am passionate about this)

I was very excited to read this book after reading a blog post from the author. I wholeheartedly agree with the premise of the book—that international interventions in new states focuses way too much on importing Western formal political institutions and not on whether it works for the locals.

However, I had a few issues with this book. The first is that it spends 2/3 of the time talking about the mismatch of current international interventions and the impossibility of reform if we continue with the status quo. I was more interested in how reform can actually be possible, but that was only treated in the last 2 (out of 9) chapters and still coached in “but it’s hard! almost impossible!” language. If I were the author, I would have dedicated only the first third at of the book at max explaining what is wrong with the current approach to building new democracies, and then dedicate the rest of the time to exploring ways to actually improve it. Like—this book didn’t have to be so fatalistic.

But maybe the book was set up as such, and I feel this way towards it, because it was written for an audience that is… not me. For us scholars from developing countries interested in genuine and lasting political reform, a lot of the chapters explaining informal politics and international intervention was basically common sense. Duh, international intervention never takes local perspectives into account. Duh, politicians are expected to meet the basic needs of their constituents when the state is not present. I got the sense that this book was mainly trying to tell the white western savior that Maybe Your Systems Don’t Work In Other Places. It was overly didactic, quite patronizing at times. Tell me something I don’t already know?

Third, I don’t quite buy the concept of “mētis” that Power develops in the book. Mētis is basically the intimate knowledge of the political institutions + culture and norms of the place. He says that politicians need the good kind of mētis in order to implement reform. To me, mētis is just a result of more time spent as a politician. How is it different from technical and psychological expertise developed over the years, or skillful political maneuvering?

Lastly, after advocating for radical incrementalism (which I do agree with, save for the fact that incrementalism can be exploited by politicians to provide concessions and not proceed with longer-term change) and working with what you have, at the very end of the book Power says that what is ideally needed for reform is a sizable cohort of progressive politicians who are given enough time (ie not short political terms) to build institutions that work for their state. Cool! That’s not unrealistic at all! Where do we order this cohort of incorruptible progressives? Overall, this book still reeks of the neoliberal Western mindset of talking down to people from the Global South and lowering expectations instead of uplifting them.

Things I did appreciate: bringing in organizational change literature, considerable citation of political scientists and sociologists. I attended a book talk by the author and someone asked whether he drew from global south academic perspectives in talking about how to make reform work for the global south, and he said no. I think that should tell you everything you need to know about this book.

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am always attracted to those who approach an issue from a heterodox standpoint – those who ask new questions and set one’s own thoughts off on a new path. Greg Power’s book does exactly that. A British political insider himself, he has had many rich conversations with politicians around the world over the last 20 years when he has run an organisation that has worked to strengthen democracy in some very challenging places including Libya, Malawi, Egypt and Iraq. Inside the Political Mind distils that professional experience and encourages readers to think differently about the way politics can work better to achieve better outcomes for citizens – and how those involved in supporting development can better understand their part in achieving those outcomes. Greg writes engagingly and employs some nice images to explain his theories. For example, road traffic signs may look the same superficially in, say, the Netherlands and in Nigeria but you would be very foolish if you deduced that you should drive the same way in both countries. This very neatly illustrates a fundamental thesis that Greg espouses – that rules and norms of behaviour are very different, as can be what rules say and what rules mean. Greg encourages his readers to think about some fundamental foundation stones for political behaviours. One of his key concepts is something I associate with Homer’s Odysseus – “metis”, normally translated as “cunning” but a word that has a much richer undertone that involves something like “knowing how to work things effectively” – an excellent quality in any political actor. Another basic concept that the book explores is the importance of reciprocity – the old Roman concept of “hand washes hand”. The reciprocity in the relationship between the politician and their electors – as well as the absurdity of importing Western ideas of appropriate behaviour to non-Western societies – is well described, and the discussion of clientelism in this context is particularly perceptive. Unsurprisingly, given Greg’s background, the book is strong on the weakness of parliamentary institutions and on the reasons why politicians are disincentivised from strengthening them, and though the book largely concentrates on the non-British world, there is a good chapter on House of Commons reform in this context. The concluding part of the book is entitled “Institution-building from the Inside” and basically argues that change will only be achieved by a gradualist and sensitive approach that understands that politicians are humans and that cultures are more potent than strategies: successful reform will only come from a proper understanding of what politicians want. You need to get inside their minds. Inside the Political Mind is a thought-provoking, stimulating and wide-ranging book that anyone who wants to understand how politics works, and how it can work better, is well advised to read.