In this week of August one year ago, the national mood
was very different. We were witnessing a wave of unprecedented social unrest
driven largely by civic disengagement and a generation disillusioned with the
world around them. With all eyes on London as the international media
broadcasted the scenes of urban havoc, the riots were described as 'mindless'
and the rioters as 'feral', our global compatriots wondering how these could
depict a supposedly civilised society. But in the aftermath, consensus emerged
that the main drivers of the riots stemmed from detachment from civic
institutions, diminished sense of collective responsibility and citizenship,
and low levels of trust in how society could deliver on prospects and
aspirations.
The Commission on Youth led by ResPublica and NCVYS, although
only its early phases, has already uncovered interesting points, not least that
many young people rioted as a way to participate in something bigger than
themselves, and 'belong' to an event which was receiving extensive media
attention. It is also notable that many young people who chose not to riot were
those who felt they had something to lose, such as a job or other future
prospects, as opposed to those who consciously ‘did not care’ about the consequences
of getting caught.
One year on, Britain is experiencing an entirely
different public temperament. The whole country has been swept up in a mood of
pride, participation, and celebration. The Olympics have demonstrated civic
identity, volunteerism and social capital at their best. In comparison to the feelings
of fear, disappointment and disgust of this time last year, good humour
prevails.
The widespread national bonhomie could be dismissed as
another transient event which sparks public interest and then gives way to the
mundane just as quickly. Just as the anniversary of the riots has received
little attention this week, eclipsed by something more exciting and
pressworthy, so one might doubt that the spirit of the Olympics will have any
lasting effect. But the Olympic legacy should not be about economic
regeneration and infrastructure alone. Whilst these are important priorities,
there is also clear potential for a legacy of social optimism and positive
community interaction. So what can we learn from London2012 with regards to
civic engagement generally, and young people in particular?
Firstly, the Games were underscored by the central
tenet of participation, which extended far beyond those who were competing as
athletes. There were opportunities for young people to be involved in a number
of ways, and these were widely publicised. Importantly, volunteering was not
seen as an obligation or a chore, but an opportunity in the most meaningful
sense of having value. Participation was based on common ideals and shared
goals. But additionally, the prospect here was one of enjoyment and a choice to
be involved. In moving forward, we should ask how young people can participate
meaningfully in other things, and towards other shared goals, in a way which
both complements their own interests and achieves a real sense of the parts
making up the whole. Too often, it is a sense of being a part outside the whole
which leads to detachment and anomie.
Secondly, the Olympics are a clear example of positive
peer role models, with 26 as the average age of an Olympic athlete and no lack
of celebrated sports people from a number of economic, social and cultural
backgrounds. Perhaps the most important lesson for young people themselves was
that hard work leads somewhere - sporting prowess aside, these were young
people who pursued a talent and worked hard to achieve something with it.
However, it should not be forgotten that the talents
were recognised and supported in contribution to a national purpose. In many
other walks of life, and with many other talents, there are not adequate
support structures, whether formal or peer-to-peer, to make hard work and
diligence seem attractive or worthwhile. Our Commission on Youth recently
highlighted a ‘poverty of aspiration’ amongst young people, in relation to
expectations around issues such as housing and employment. What the Olympics
also represent, is a joined up commitment from national and local government,
voluntary organisations and businesses. This unified approach does not have to
be restricted single-issue challenges or multi-billion pound initiatives;
common goals and a sense of shared value can be applied to smaller-scale
ventures too.
Another issue exposed by the Commission on Youth
pointed to the role and responsibility of the media in mediating and enforcing
public attitudes. Coverage of London2012 has portrayed pride and optimism in
the press that is lacking in regards to many other issues, not least the
portrayal of youth, or a certain glamorisation of the riots, this time last
year. Yes, these events can be fleeting and transient, but they can also be
memorable and instil sentiments and motivations which last into the future –
and are more likely to do so with a positive and responsible attitude from the
media.
None of this means that there are not challenges which
must be faced: in order to improve young people’s prospects, aspirations and
engagement, there are of course practical concerns relating to employment
policy, services for young people and economic investment. But these can only
be complemented by awareness of meaningful participation opportunities – such
as, for example, incentivising unemployed young people to gain skills through
voluntary or community work which they value and enjoy – whilst prioritising
the importance of positive peer role models and support structures. Our
Commission on Youth has set out to bring together leaders from the public,
private and voluntary sectors, and the media, in addressing these issues for
joined-up solutions. Lessons from the Olympics will no doubt contribute to the
debate: ‘legacy’, after all, can be defined as ‘heritage’, ‘inheritance’ and
‘gift’. What more important legacy than the society inherited by the next
generation?
Find out more about ResPublica/ NCVYS Commission on Youth here.