{"id":29968,"date":"2016-12-22T14:30:53","date_gmt":"2016-12-22T03:30:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?p=29968"},"modified":"2016-12-22T16:02:10","modified_gmt":"2016-12-22T05:02:10","slug":"saving-the-center","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/saving-the-center\/","title":{"rendered":"Saving the centre"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/p>\n
There is no doubt about the waves of discontent and anger sweeping Western politics. The United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union after four decades of membership, jeopardizing all the intricate trading and political connections that such a long relationship created. Against all forecasts by political pundits, Donald Trump won the United States presidency, something the political class thought virtually inconceivable. Throughout Europe, new political parties are springing up, all based on variations on the same theme: the political establishment has ignored us, and we will throw them out in protest.<\/p>\n
One defining feature of this uprising is that the impetus for change has become more important than any consideration of what change might mean in practice. The things said by leaders riding this wave can be wildly out of kilter with normal rules of political conduct; but none of it matters. What matters is that the revolt is happening, and whoever happens to catch the wave will be born aloft.<\/p>\n
By contrast, politicians who make reasoned arguments of a conventional kind merely irritate rebellious voters, arousing impetuous dismissal, if not contempt and derision.<\/p>\n
There are stacks of analysis of the factors underlying the populist surge: stagnant working- and middle-class incomes; the marginalization felt by people just managing to get by; the disruption of communities as a result of economic change; and resistance to the seemingly relentless forces of globalization: trade and immigration.<\/p>\n
Social media is a major part of this wave. It enables movements to grow in scale quickly, contributes to the fragmentation of media, and creates a new world of information in which rules of objectivity do not apply, and where every conspiracy theory can stampede over the facts\u2014and fact-checkers\u2014standing impotently in its way.<\/p>\n
In a country like Britain around 20 years ago, when I was first contesting elections as a leader, the BBC\u2019s main nightly news had an audience of roughly ten million; today, the figure is just over 2.5 million. What was one conversation is now many\u2014often among people with the same views.<\/p>\n
This change in the method of receiving and debating information is a revolutionary phenomenon in its own right. The traditional media, which could reassert their role as purveyors of trustworthy news, have decided that it is easier and more commercially feasible to reinforce audiences\u2019 loyalty by not challenging them.<\/p>\n
Of course, some feel a sense of power in flouting convention and shaking the established order. But we shouldn\u2019t kid ourselves. Shaking up the system can produce necessary change; but it can also produce consequences that are neither intended nor benign.<\/p>\n