On a superficial level, it is widely assumed that centrists would maintain a comparatively diplomatic and neutral position in situations of debate and political decision making, generally supporting liberal and democratic values as opposed to encouraging the implementation of radical far-left proposals. They would be considered to likely have a selection of both socially orientated policies and those related to promoting economic growth and security of the markets. However, there appears to be a lot more to these centrists than can be observed here. As well as this, I would argue, it appears that a lot of the ideas of a true people-led communism, without the barriers of state and corruption of power, would appear to have a lot more in common with democratic centrist politics than one might assume.
Whether this is as a tactical vote, a preference for more pragmatic and less ideologically orientated leadership, having a wide variety of values that span different areas of the political spectrum, or the attractive image presented by many centrist candidates to voters, it is clear that there has been a rise in support of centrist political parties in recent years with the Liberal Democrat Party in the UK having experienced a 655% increase in seats in the 2024 general election (at 72 compared with 11 in 2019). This was likely due to the lack of transparency in policymaking, ineffective decision making, and corruption of interest observed under the past Conservative government, as well as the disappointment with other supposedly more leftist political groups' values. It, is therefore, clear that strong governance and stability in political leadership is considered a priority and gives a clear representation as to the likely characteristics of many centrists, be they newly converted or consistently keeping to these values.
This strong governance observed links to the emphasis on state involvement and adoption of liberal (as opposed to libertarian or anarchist) ideas regarding its presence and influence within society. This opposition to any radical or authoritarian governance as examined here is not a new phenomenon in that the 1950s (after and during several global conflicts and the rule of several authoritarian dictatorial leaders), strong anti-communist sentiment was evident globally leading to a rise in support for liberal, moderate left or right, and centrist political organisations. This distaste of communism and presentation of centrism is described through the sentiments of a 1950s Harvard undergraduate presenting for the "Ideal Centrist Man" to be a "balanced, prudential, rationalist who was tolerant of ambiguity, distrustful of absolutes, the perfect antithesis to the sadomasochistic, mildly paranoid, rigid Communist". Sentiments such as these then appeared to be responsible for the widespread attack to centrists by individuals on both sides of the political spectrum during and after this period.
Furthermore, it also proves to be important to note the clear influence of class on what values one has, and therefore, how far from the central region of the political spectrum they appear to be positioned. Class and typical perceptions of specific social classes prove to have proven to lead to conflict as to what constitutes effective leadership, and present for classism to act as a clear barrier to the preservation of adequate and just legislation influencing this. This is shown through many leftists perhaps considering those in positions of power to be supported more and given greater rights and privileges under this legislation, as well as people on the right perhaps favouring greater economic organisation and efficiency, or not agreeing with this greater emphasis observed regarding social policy and wealth distribution. This might mean that centrist legislation would prove to be a clear cause of tension between individuals on both sides of the political spectrum, and ironically, perhaps mean that centrist governance does not always appear to effectively provide more transparency and better organisation in policymaking and legislation, the main reasons for many to support it as a means of governance.
Finally, while much criticism of communism appears to be evident in centrists, as a liberal communist myself, and as is apparent in many of my previous posts, I would consider many of the liberal and libertarian values adopted by centrists to be at the foundations of a true communist society. These relate to panarchy, the support of individuals of all opinions on the political spectrum, communitarianism, egalitarianism and freedom of expression. While this may perhaps appear to be a contradiction of terms and like a potentially impossible claim to make considering how communists and centrists lie on vastly different positions along the political spectrum, and evidenced by the emphasis of the importance of the state in a centrist society, it appears that a communitarian society led by the people in which all contributions are valued would be favourable in both a centrist and communist society. After all, true communism was never intended to be authoritarian and the first libertarians were in fact communists. This would, therefore, explain the tensions between centrism and communism being largely down to presentation of these perspectives in common societal viewpoints as well as also being heavily influenced by past experiences and perceptions of societies under specific forms of governance.
Kelman, M (1991). Dunwody Distinguished Lecture in Law: Emerging Centrist Liberalism. Published in Florida Law Review 43(3). https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/uflr43&collection=journals&id=425&startid=425&endid=452
7/1922. Theses on Relations to the C.P. to an L.L.P. Published in The Communist. 1(9) https://www.marxists.org/history/usa/pubs/thecommunist/thecommunist6/v1n09-jul-1922-com-CPA.pdf300- 1
https://www.statista.com/statistics/716971/general-elections-seats-won-by-party-uk/
No comments:
Post a Comment