,
13 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Wondering when the mainstream media/political discourse will finally wake up to the obsolescence of 20th century “right/left” framing of (western) politics? theatlantic.com/international/…
1/ I think it is important to do so because not doing so at best muddies the real societal debate, and at worst misdirects attention away from the fundamental questions of how to structure our society and institutions (to the benefit of simplistic, extremist ideologies.)
2/ “left/right”, “labour/capital”, “socialism/capitalism”, “big govt/small govt” etc etc are paradigms that usefully framed the societal debate in our 20th century, industrial society.
3/ But - like the parties that grew up to represent them - these frames of reference are today anachronisms. But turkeys rarely vote for Xmas, so traditional political parties & their leaders hold on for dear life, ignoring their own irrelevance in the face of a changing society.
The inertia of political systems (which however frustrating is a feature not a bug in most times), becomes a liability at moments (like now) of societal “phase transition”.
5/ In particular, it (inertia) risks giving purchase to all forms of extremism. The faster it can give way to a new organising framework*, the better, so that we may frame the relevant societal debates in a positive/pro-active, rather than a negative/reactive way.
6/ *this new framework remains to be articulated defined, by early indications are that its polarity lies on axes such as: “open/closed”, “urban/rural”, “private data/public data”, “supranational/national”, etc. Or if we want to appropriate old language, progressive/conservative
7/ Semantically, I like the “progressive/conservative” framing as I feel it is the appropriate and potentially timeless frame of reference for democratic civilisations.
8/ However I fear this language is too firmly attached to its 20th century manifestation, so as to be impossible to use today, at least for the foreseeable future. But have no other shorthand language to suggest.
9/ Fwiw, think Macron is probably best (although flawed, v0.1) of this new “progressive” movement. Unfortunately, the new “conservative” movement is currently being colonised by the likes of Trump, LePen, etc.
10/ I say “unfortunately” because although this side of the new (relevant) 21st century politics does not resonate with my beliefs, I understand that it does for many, and is entirely legitimate. Further it is essential to societal health to have these two world views debate.
11/ Indeed it is why I think it is so important to be done with & rid of 20th century party politics asap, so as to make way for robust, thoughtful parties and leaders organised (& opposed) along the new axes of debate...
12/ ...and in so doing, remove the oxygen from those that espouse extreme (& simplistic) ideologies, while giving legitimacy to “conservative” (my definition) ideas and politics, acknowledging and respecting the constituencies of our society they represent.
