The importance of hope in a cynical age

Hope fuels collective aspiration and personal perseverance, providing a foundation for meaningful action amid cynicism.

First published in the Mandarin.

Hope for the future remains central to the political imaginations of most Australians.

Australians aspire to higher living standards, increased respect from others in society, better-paying jobs, durable physical infrastructure, enduring safety and security, and responsive government action to social problems.

Hope is both an individual and a collective property of society. Hope and hope-making intertwine Australia’s broader social, cultural, and economic processes.

We are comfortable discussing the erosion of trust in society, but hope and trust are interdependent.

The ABC published the views of undecided voters, highlighting the lack of political vision in the current election campaigns. Two observations from voters stand out:

“I don't need you to tear down the other side … I need you to give me a good reason to want to vote for you.”

“What is their long-term vision? Where do they see Australia 20 years from now? That's what I want to know.”

Would we allow a politician to present a vision or aspiration of the future that breathed possibility into our collective hopes?

The challenge of hope

During his speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, Barack Obama asked, ‘Do we participate in a politics of cynicism or do we participate in a politics of hope?’ In 2008, Rudi Giuliani, reacting to then-candidate Obama’s ‘hope and change’ campaign, stated, ‘Change is not a destination, just as hope is not a strategy.’

In politics and management, hope is often framed negatively. The reflexive response is that ‘hope is not a method’ or, to repeat Giuliani, ‘hope is not a strategy’.

We are living in a time of pervasive negativity. Doomscrolling through social media has become a dangerous addiction that erodes our mental health and well-being. The recent Netflix series ‘Adolescence’ dramatically showed the impact of social media toxicity in our society.

The challenge of maintaining a hopeful narrative that counters the focus on political gaffes, gotcha moments, and demands for ‘policy details’, dragging those who may have a more hopeful or aspirational vision into the cesspit of negativity.

Yet, there is a rich philosophy of hope that explores its importance and paradox within human experience. Ernst Bloch, in ‘The Principle of Hope’, views hope as ‘teachable’, suggesting that there is a method and strategy to hope.

If we accept this, then despair is also something we learn. ‘Adolescence’ provided a worked example of this.

Replacing hope with optimism

Optimism is a leadership characteristic that is more digestible than that of a hopeful leader.

The optimistic leader always sees the upside of every problem. They possess an unwavering cheerfulness about the future. With a fixed smile and a spring in their step, problems seem to melt away.

Optimism that focuses exclusively on success is a trending problem in workplaces. But ‘toxic positivity’—optimism overdone—has become a feature of leadership that people reject.

Philosopher Terry Eagleton explored the distinction between hope and optimism. In summary, optimism is a disposition for Eagleton, whereas hope is a virtue. Hope is grounded, while optimism is speculative. Hope is active, while optimism is passive.

Ultimately, hope looks to the future while remaining grounded in the present, whereas optimism often overlooks the complexities of the current situation and focuses on an idealised future. Rebecca Solnit captures this idea of hope:

Hope is not a lottery ticket you can sit on the sofa and clutch, feeling lucky. It is an axe you break down doors with in an emergency. Hope should shove you out the door... To hope is to give yourself to the future - and that commitment to the future is what makes the present inhabitable.

Are the major political parties making our present inhabitable by presenting us with a hopeful future? As one undecided voter put it:

“To be honest, I just weigh up everything. How does this best help our family? Not just financially but also emotionally.”

Hope or cynicism, it’s a choice

Do we participate in politics of cynicism or hope?

This isn't just about viewing the glass as half full or empty to gauge whether we have an optimistic or pessimistic outlook. Instead, it’s a question rooted in our history and identity. Do we have valid reasons to hope? Are we confident in our ability to create a better future?

Reasons always underpin genuine hope. We have reasons to hope that are grounded in our past and present. Hope offers a glimpse into the future in a way that cynicism and negativity cannot.

Inconsistent with the assured and certain future often presented to us, hope admits the possibility of failure. ‘I hope so’ is an uncertain statement. Hope grounds success in our abilities, but acknowledges that it may not be enough.

The criticism against hope is that it is naïve or foolish.

It is naïve and foolish to hope for the impossible or to wish away the idea that the path toward our aspirations will be arduous. There are no absolutes with hope; there is always risk.

Hope looks ahead, showing patience and persistence; most importantly, hope is directly linked to human intent, actions, capabilities, and capacities.

For many Australians of all ages, a prevailing sentiment associated with core election issues—housing affordability, the rising cost of living, and accessible health services—is: ‘No matter how hard I work and how much I earn, I can never get ahead.’

Do the policies of political parties promote a hopeful outlook on these issues, one in which Australians feel that they can achieve the outcome through their actions?

If politicians presented us with hopeful policies, would we indulge in a variation of the ‘tall poppy syndrome’ and delight in tearing them down? Would we subject them to the ‘pub test’ to ensure that only the basest desires are considered?

Hope and cynicism are choices.