It’s no secret that “news” often feels synonymous with “bad news.” Every evening, a news presenter greets the audience with a cheery “good evening,” only to recount stories that suggest quite the opposite. War, corruption, political incompetence, air strikes, collapsing public services—these are the dominant themes, creating a gloomy backdrop that shapes contemporary political discourse. Over time, this relentless focus on negative news has contributed to a widespread sense of apathy and defeatism. People feel weary and disconnected, and their engagement in civic life, from voting to political discourse, reflects it.
A new kind of plague has spread across the West: the plague of resignation, marked by diminished voter turnout and a general retreat from political engagement. People feel frustrated by a system that seems to yield little change, regardless of their involvement. But treating this “plague” requires an understanding of its cause. While it’s easy to diagnose public sentiment as apathetic and cynical, we must ask what fuels this mindset and what might reverse it.
At the heart of this apathy is a deep-seated reluctance to self-examine or step beyond comfort zones. Many, especially on the political left, hold fixed beliefs about who holds power and who bears responsibility for society’s ills. There’s a pervasive notion that those in power are inherently to blame, that the powerful are perpetually working against the interests of ordinary people. This perspective is often accompanied by the view that any issue of injustice or inequality can be traced back to the “evil” actions of the elite. The public, in turn, finds a certain comfort in this approach. It allows people to feel moral and justified, focusing their frustrations outward rather than examining their own roles and responsibilities.
This mindset has significant consequences. By placing sole blame on those in power and absolving themselves of any personal responsibility, people fall into a cycle of complaint without action, resentment without solutions. They cling to the comforting illusion that problems are “their” fault—those in government, corporations, or other positions of influence—and rarely consider how collective choices or inaction play a role. When change doesn’t materialise, the blame shifts back to the same powerful figures, further feeding public dissatisfaction and withdrawal from meaningful engagement in political life.
Examples of political apathy and defeatism
Consider the recent general election. Low voter turnout, at just 59.8%, reflected a sense of futility; people went to the polls less out of enthusiasm for Labour than out of a wish to prevent a Conservative victory. And with just 29 million of the 48 million UK registered voters voting, the 2024 general election was a clear example of a large, uninterested electorate. This “anyone but them” mentality is a symptom of deeper political exhaustion, as citizens cast votes not from hope or alignment with policies but from opposition to the status quo. The result? A Labour government now facing intense criticism after only months in office, with many blaming them for longstanding issues, as though a single election could undo years of disillusionment.
Similarly, across the Atlantic, we see a comparable fatigue among the American left. In the past, waves of support propelled Democrats like Obama and, more recently, Biden to victory, fuelled by hope and a desire for substantial change, and a appealing progressive agenda. In 2008, Obama’s historic win included a record breaking 69 million votes, and in 2020 Joe Biden received the most votes for any presidential candidate, with 81 million votes. These past examples prove there has been large scale engagement in politics. But by the time of Kamala Harris’s potential historic candidacy, this momentum had stalled, losing with only 72 million votes- a lot of votes, but 9 million less and not enough to beat Trump. Public support for Harris had waned, and the excitement that marked previous elections was somewhat absent, hence the considerable drop in votes for presidential candidates compared to the last four years. Instead of a politically movement, there was resignation—a sense that meaningful change is out of reach, and this was reflected in the sense of disappointment and hopelessness expressed by the media.
Low voter turnout is just one indicator of political apathy and a sense of defeatism; another key issue is the absence of a solution-oriented approach in addressing major problems. For example, despite widespread condemnation of the violence in Ukraine, the international response has largely focused on sanctions and military aid rather than exploring creative diplomatic solutions or conflict resolution frameworks. This highlights a reactive rather than a proactive approach, showing the need for more forward-thinking efforts in global politics
So, how do we cure this plague of defeatism and apathy?
It begins with a shift in perspective. First, the public’s approach to politics must move beyond passive resentment and embrace active, informed participation. Political engagement should not be limited to voting; it should involve a commitment to understanding the foundations of government and the principles of good governance. We need to revisit fundamental political questions: What makes for a just government? What role do citizens play in shaping their society? What responsibilities accompany the freedoms we often take for granted?
The fact that most of us hold no official title or political office is no excuse for disengagement. As John Locke argued centuries ago, power resides in the consent of the governed. This means that legitimacy in government is not granted by titles or authority but by the active support and engagement of its citizens. Power without legitimacy—without the consent of the governed—loses its essence. True change, therefore, requires citizens who not only understand their rights but also their duties in sustaining a functioning, ethical government.
History repeatedly shows us the power of an informed and mobilised public. It was not elites alone who ended wars, or secured human rights—it was the collective will of citizens who refused to be passive, who were motivated by reason, conviction, and a vision of a better future. The great transformations of the past were driven by people willing to take action, willing to question systems, and willing to be held accountable.
In the end, overcoming today’s culture of apathy requires a public that’s willing to confront uncomfortable truths. Change will not come simply by blaming “them” or waiting for the “powerful” to act. It demands that we each take responsibility, that we look inward and question our own roles, our own assumptions, and our own capacity to contribute to meaningful progress. The future of politics and society depends on a citizenry that not only hopes for change but is willing to be an active part of it.
Featured Image Credit: Pexels Free Photos.