The Harsh Truth: Political Loyalty Might Be Our Downfall
Why acting with predisposed political and economic positions are a mismatch to what we need for a better future.
By Troy Benton, Friday October 6th, 2023
In today's globally connected society, all of us often engaged in discussions about the challenges we face and then our ideas on what “we” should do. They happen in cafes but nowadays mostly on closed group messaging apps. It feels like we're constantly searching for the ultimate political and economic response to current challenges, hoping that through endless debates and arguments or by rallying behind a charismatic leader, we'll eventually land on the ideal formula.
A humorous observation is the cyclical nature of history, with societies regularly swinging between phases of governmental intervention and laissez-faire attitudes. These phases typically get stamped with broad labels—Democracy or Autocracy for politics, and Capitalism or Communism for economics.
It is amazing given this history, people still worship single political and economic ideologies or one concept fits all authors from the past.
Reality requires specific responses to specific challenges. A dynamic world requires dynamic responses. Rigid political stances and parties obviously do not fit the bill of what is required.
For instance, during the global reopening post-pandemic, companies saw consumers with flush bank accounts as prime targets. Under the guise of rising supply chain costs, businesses significantly hiked their prices. Financial statements later revealed these to be misleading, as companies reaped record profits. In such instances, the distinction between capitalism and socialism blurs—when businesses exploit regulatory environments, are calls for more governmental oversight inching towards socialism?
In reality, many of us ally with people whose principles we don't fully align with. Absolute rigidity in our principles, unless one is willing to die for them, is practically impossible. Nations like Russia, UK, and the USA showcase this; their real-world actions often don't match their proclaimed ideologies.
The solution?
Pragmatism.
Labels should be sidelined. People who label themselves or seek to apply a political position to dynamic situations should also be sidelined. Alarm bells should ring when individuals are unable to flexibly navigate the spectrum of ideologies in response to challenges. Ideological rigidity not only hampers appropriate responses but also supports destructive behaviors. This phenomenon is evident in the gun debate in the US, or the scandals in the Catholic Church. Group members rarely criticise their own, believing that unwavering commitment - no matter the specific issue within the overall cause - lends credibility and power to their cause.
People often get trapped by the images they want to project (ego) or the legacy they aim to leave (ego). They get so consumed by their cause that they overlook the immediate situation. This can lead to narrow-mindedness and a failure to adapt and applying a square peg to a round hole. These dogma driven people who also gain power also sadly rank themselves - and the admiration of their inner circle - above the greater population.
A good way to spot these idealogues who do not contribute to a better future, is when “their” ideas magically align with one political party and always opposed to the other. Oh, and be very wary of anyone who is like this but calls themselves as a centrist. Must be exhausting checking what a political party or dogma thinks on a new issue to get your opinion.
The key to a better future lies in pragmatism and seeking out pragmatic people to support. We need to start labelling and sidelining people who worship past authors or seek to apply one side of the economic or political spectrum. We need people who evaluate each situation independently and can draw from a wide range of potential responses and care less when political pundits call them “left wing”, “right wing”, “socialist” or “capitalist”. Every situation is dynamic and requires a dynamic response. If someone claims to have a one-size-fits-all position that they are going to apply to the future or sticks to an unwavering label, be skeptical. No single ideology has all the answers.
So, maybe just ponder this. If you and I call ourselves above all left leaning or right leaning or a supporter of Labor or Liberal or Republicans or Democrats - are we part of the problem ? Should we start thinking of ourselves as big P Pragmatists that are dynamic enough to think about solutions that are an appropriate response to the issue regardless of how that response might be labeled ?
In summary, while Russia and China may be seen as symbols of autocracy and communism, and the USA and UK as torchbearers of democracy and capitalism, the true path forward for us, the people, lies in sidelining those who come with labels and embracing those who are as dynamic as the world we live in.