Centrism's Anger Problem
It's Hard To Be Reasonable When People Are Furious
Catch-up service:
George Eliot’s Blind Spot
All Hail the Putter-Togetherers
How Not To Use AI
The Stamina Gap
Has Paul McCartney Read My Book?
How The Mad Men Lost The Plot Again
I’ll be talking John & Paul with Helen Lewis at Union Chapel, London, this Thursday February 12. Still a few tickets left.
There is an argument that the (further) disgrace of Peter Mandelson has been magnified out of all proportion. Mandelson was fired from his government post several months ago. These latest revelations will rightly ensure his permanent exclusion from civic life, and possibly his inclusion in jail, but they shouldn’t be the dominant story of the day. Britain has much bigger and more urgent problems than the question of how to withdraw an honorary title from someone who can make no use of it anyway.
Yes, the affair raises a question mark against the Prime Minister’s judgement, but the page is already dense with those. The marginal value of this one is near zero. Why aren’t we obsessing over our chronically sluggish economy; our failure to build houses and infrastructure; the state’s financial punishment of young graduates; the bloating of our public sector and simultaneous decay of our public services? Fixating on a cache of emails from over a decade ago is the mark of a country that doesn’t want to face up to its present, let alone its future. An avoidance tactic.
The fact I am even entertaining this point of view tells you I am a centrist. Insofar as that baggy term means much at all, it refers to one who puts hotheaded emotion aside in order to get things in proportion. Centrism, at least as I’m using it here, is not an ideological position so much as an attitude or style which prioritises competence and pragmatism; which focuses on sturdily tangible problems and feasible solutions.
This describes the approach of many or even most British politicians, although not any of the popular ones right now. When Prosper UK, a new movement of centrist Tories, launched last week, its co-founders Andy Street and Ruth Davidson declared themselves in favour of “sound finances” and “evidence-based policymaking”. They sounded like faint voices from a bygone era, and were immediately overrun by events.
Centrists find themselves impotent in the face of stories like Mandelson. They can condemn his offences and point to the mistakes of process and judgement. What they can’t do convincingly is express or channel the anger and disgust that voters feel about it, because they feel it obscures more substantive questions.
Strong emotions have no place in centrist praxis. When centrist politicians survey the scene, they see cynical populists, ideological extremists, and click-driven media whipping everyone into a frenzy. Their response is to invite everyone to calm down and be sensible. But some things are worth getting angry about. In fact, some things demand it. If the Mandelson affair isn’t doing it for you, try this.
