Politics and the Art of Manifesting
It all starts with the political manifesto
Thank you for reading The Breakout Room ✨If you enjoyed this piece and wish to support my writing, consider upgrading to a paid subscription — I would appreciate it very much!
Ah, the political manifesto. A relic from another age I hear you say. If you’re one of the many people who doesn’t read political party manifestos because of apathy, boredom or lack of curiosity, perhaps the surprise announcement of a UK general election in July will make you a little more intrigued. If peculiar, unmoored political times aren’t enough to capture your attention, then what will?
Politics and the political process is in a weird place right now, something I’ve previously touched on in my piece Energy, Power and Political Language. The essence and nature of politics is very practical and grounded in reality, something which Stephen Bush claims that British politics is currently not. In contrast, manifesting, a word and practice which tends to have magical and mystical connotations, doesn’t possess the same doing nature of politics despite the being nature of manifesting a very beneficial state to bring into the political sphere.
If we – and politicians – took the opportunity of reengaging with what the political manifesto actually is – the ideas, plans and spirit of a political party to be manifested into reality – would we treat the process of electing our politicians differently? Could it impact the way politics is carried out? Should “political manifesting” – a conscious and collective practice that changes how we interact with politics and the meaning we give to its role in society – be something we give serious thought to?
A manifesto is the starting point of change, whether personal or political. It requires truth and honesty of what is wanted. It demands a vision and an expectation of events evolving. A shift can only happen if the hope of something is openly declared.
Whilst we often perceive political manifestos as boring and bland documents which set out the policies a political party would seek to deliver on being elected, if we look back to the origins and purpose of manifestos we see that they were ultimately perceived as a source of power.
Power from having an idea and intentionally outlining it in words. Power from communicating and sharing those ideas with an audience, asking them to unite in agreement and change something. Power from the fact that it is a party’s deliberate declaration to history, that this is what a party wants to contribute to the society it seeks to govern.
What makes the manifesto unique from other texts is that it fuses art and politics to create a type of modernist literature. Because of this, it has the unique power of being unlimited in creativity and imagination whilst still possessing the depth of thought that is required to make lasting political change.
The earliest recorded examples of manifestos can be traced back to 16th century Europe. The most famous examples include the US Declaration of Independence, the 1848 Communist Manifesto and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights published in 1948. These documents are still alive in the public imagination, their ambitions and ideals omnipresent years after they were published.
In contrast, modern day manifestos (in the UK at least) have changed in style, content and length over time. In 1945 a manifesto was, on average, 3,000 to 6,000 words. By 2019 it was over 20,000 words.
This suggests that not only are politicians getting lost and tripped up by the amount of detail in manifestos, but they are also not actually able to deliver many of them by the time of the next election cycle. Clever and innovative ideas require brevity and boldness. That way they are more memorable and easier to keep track of. Whilst a detailed roadmap is always welcome (more so when it comes to the policy implementation stage which is orchestrated and implemented by civil servants), there’s something to be said about keeping it short and simple.
Take, for example, the Labour Party’s 1945 “Let Us Face the Future” manifesto which contained seven specific pledges including the creation of the NHS and a system of social security. Both these pledges became reality, and we live with them to this day. This highlights that manifestos do matter, even if more focus is placed on a party’s core values or the party leader when it comes to voting.
Yet manifestos, like our own personal manifestations, set the tone for everything else, including how we show up. Inevitably, this impacts a party’s core values and the leader it chooses. A manifesto which fully engages a reader – whether that be a voter, politician, reporter or civil servant – with the energy, spirit and care of its words will likely carry on and use the manifesto as a guiding force for the political decisions and actions made down the line.
In this respect manifestos are like paintings. When we begin to paint a picture of something we want to know the theme of what we are seeing and dreaming into existence. This then conjures up a feeling. Having a feeling of genuine hope rather than a feeling of gloom and despair at the political choices on offer is more likely to lead to the emergence of great political change.
If I think about my own personal manifestations and the amount of energy and thought I give to them, how much I delight in them when they actually happen (note to the manifesting skeptics out there: manifestations do happen!), it’s interesting to think what political manifesting on a collective level could do.
Whilst the idea of manifesting has been around for a long time, it feels as if we are in an age of manifesting mania. A quick Google search of “manifesting” reveals around 1,380,000,000 results. I sense that interest in manifesting has come about as a direct response to the collective underlying sense of powerlessness that has been created by an internet largely controlled by algorithms, rising economic inequality, climate crisis and record low levels of trust in government. Manifesting, at its core, is about connection and connecting to what we want. And as suggested by Kyla Scanlon, “The way forward for the economy and society at large is some form of reconnection.”
Manifesting is a word with draws intense interest or deep suspicion but never indifference. According to the Cambridge Dictionary manifesting means “to make something happen by imaging it and consciously thinking it will happen.” Gabby Berstein claims that it “is the creative process of aligning with the energy of the Universe to co-create an experience that elevates your spirit and the spirit of the world. Manifesting isn’t about getting; it’s about becoming” whilst Roxie Nafousi observes that “manifesting is the ability to use the power of our mind to change and create the reality you experience.”
Manifesting is about making what you want to feel and experience a reality by your thoughts, actions, beliefs, and emotions. This is why the manifesto is so important because it informs us of the character and focus of political parties and the gravitas they give to governing. Equally, it tests the strength and unity of a political party; do they collectively feel the weight of those written words, the duty and responsibility of their promises? Do they truly think, believe, and act on them? The more they do, the more likely it is they will make it happen.
When we elect our political leaders, it is ultimately a question of faith and a test of trust. Trust is a problem in politics, we all know that (I write this whilst watching the news and seeing that the first conviction of a former US president has taken place). Yet manifestations and manifestos are about speaking and standing in our truths. They set the standard for what it is we wish to create. We must also act in alignment. So too must political actors.
Following through on the energy of an idea unleashes the frequency of the idea itself and prevents the ego from taking reign. This is why the idea-focused nature of manifestos are important. They focus on the political ideas and plans of the political party and not the leader of the party which may act as a distraction from the execution of policies.
When I was a public law researcher at Cambridge University and had to keep a close eye on political developments and debates, I was alarmed by the number of politicians who were effectively anti-manifesting. An example of this would be Conservative Party politicians complaining about the EU during the Brexit process, rather than positively and proactively putting forward a clear plan of action which celebrated the UK’s departure from the EU (which would be an example of manifesting).
Instead of manifesting a more positive political reality which involves thinking, speaking, believing, and acting on what is sought, many politicians have fallen into the trap of thinking, speaking, believing and acting on what they don’t want. This has, in my view, been an underlying reason why politics in the UK and elsewhere has felt sticky and stuck in recent years.
This “sticky and stuck” energy is also reflected when a leader doesn’t speak the truth. Everyone, to a certain degree, feels that misaligned energy and many will seek to avoid that leader on both a conscious and subconscious level because of it. The news that Rishi Sunak lied to a mother of a Manchester Arena bomb victim who had walked 200 miles to meet him where he promised to introduce Martyn’s Law before the summer recess was not a wise choice hours before announcing the general election. Such behaviour prevents politicians and their political party from manifesting success.
The energy we give to something is the energy we will get back. There’s no escaping the law of attraction. The political manifesto needs to reclaim its sacredness. The promises made must mean something, and they must mean something to everyone. The practice of manifesting is inherently individualistic in nature. Yet political manifesting could be a way of transitioning from our highly individualistic and atomised societies under neo-liberalism into more collectivist ones where people are actively aware of and feel the fact that we all are interconnected beings. The political manifesto has, in recent years, made many of us feel political numb. What say we change the script on manifestos and our relationship to them?
I think you’re onto something. Both major parties in the US are confused and confusing. We have no idea what they stand for at core. I’m not talking policies they want to enact. I want to know why they want to enact them.
Or maybe they’re clear on their why’s and I’m the confused one.
In the US there is also a lack of manifestos. I am liberal but I must say that the only serious manifesto is the conservative Project 2025, https://www.project2025.org/. In my view it is a backward way to look at the future, but it is nevertheless a manifesto, clearly stating its mission.