Neal
Lawson would, under normal circumstances, be a UK Labour MP but
is one of these rare characters who, somehow, understood that such a
career path would constrain him and is living proof of the adage that
“another world is possible”. Some 2 decades ago, he founded the
centre-left Compass
which seeks alliances with others seeking a better society and, since
then, has inspired the most creative conversations mainly via
pamphlets which force us to look at the world in a different way eg
45
Degree Change (2019)
Earlier
this year he had
a fascinating podcast discussion with Geoff Mulgan who is of more
academic bent but had also founded a famous centre-left Think Tank
(Demos) a full decade previously
which he had left in 1997 to be Head of Tony Blair’s Policy Unit.
Since then he has pursued
a more academic career – with books on “good and bad”
government; strategy; capitalism; social innovation; AI and, most
recently, on imagining better societies.
Mulgan’s
books actually don’t impress me. He’s clearly very well-read but
his writing is a bit too nuanced and soporific for me – on the one
had, this. On the other had, that... I need a little bit more
guidance in my reading.
But
put Lawson and Mulgan together and the results are much better. This
is one of some 70 podcasts Lawson has done
Mulgan’s
latest book is actually called “Another World is Possible” –
the title as it happens of quite a few other books inc this
one reflecting the World Social Forum discussions. A piece Mulgan
wrote a couple of years earlier gives
a very good sense of the argument -
Some
fields are good at thinking far into the future – business invests
heavily in visions of future smart homes, smart cities or health.
Fiction is adept at exploring the future boundaries of humans and
technology. Mainstream culture finds it easy to imagine apocalypses –
what would happen if temperatures rose 4 or 5 degrees or AI enslaved
humans or even worse pandemics became the norm?
But
we struggle to imagine positive alternatives: what our care or
education systems, welfare, workplaces, democracy or neighbourhoods
might be like in 30-40 years.
And we appear to be worse at doing this than in the past. This
lack of desirable but plausible futures may be contributing to the
malaise that can be found across much of the world. It’s certainly
linked to a sense of lost agency and a deepening fear of the future.
The
institutions which in the past supported practical social imagination
have largely dropped out of this role.
In
universities social science frowns on futurism.
You’re much more likely to
succeed in your career if you focus on the past and present than the
future. Mulgan
indeed used a lecture to
his own London college to develop this critique
Political
parties have generally been hollowed out
and lack the central teams which at one point tried to articulate
imaginative futures to shape their programmes.
Think-tanks
have been pulled back to the present,
feeding into comment and news cycles.
This
very much
echoes what I was feeling a
decade ago when I posted
Political
parties are a bust flush
- All
mainstream political parties in Europe have been affected by the
neo-liberal virus and can no longer represent the concerns of
ordinary people. And those “alternative parties” which survive
the various hurdles placed in their way by the electoral process
rarely survive.
The
German Greens were an inspiration until they too eventually fell
prey to the weaknesses of political parties identified a hundred
years ago by Robert Michels.
More
recently, “Pirate” parties in Scandinavia and Bepe Grillo’s
Italian Five
Star Movement
have
managed, briefly, to capture public attention, occupy parliamentary
benches but then sink to oblivion or fringe if not freak interest.
What
the media call “populist” parties of various sorts attract
bursts of electoral support in most countries but are led by labile
individuals preying on public fears and prejudices and incapable of
the sort of cooperative effort which serious change requires (I
was wrong about this!!).
NGOs
are no match for corporate power
- The
annual World
Social Forum
has
had more staying power than the various “Occupy movements” but
its very diversity means that nothing coherent emerges to challenge
the power elite whose “scriptures” are delivered from the pulpits
of The World Bank and the
OECD There
doesn’t even seem a common word to describe our condition and a
vision for a better future – “social change”? What’s that
when it’s at home?
Academics
are careerists -
the
groves of academia are still sanctuary for a few brave voices such
as Noam Chomsky and David Harvey to
speak
out against the careless transfer by governments of hundreds of
billions of dollars to corporate interests
Think
Tanks play safe – and….think
Most
Think-Tanks play it safe (for funding reasons) – although there are
honourable exceptions eg
-
Susan
George, a European activist and writer, who operates from the Trans
National Institute and,
amongst her many books, has produced two marvellous satires –
Lugano I and Lugano II
David
Korton’s books and Yes
Magazine keep
up a steady critique.
Joseph
Stiglitz, once part of the World Bank elite, writes scathingly about
economic conventional wisdom.
Pope
Frances
has
the resources of the Vatican behind him; and is proving a great
example in the struggle for dignity and against privilege.
Geoff
Mulgan has a more balanced take and argues that
Although
there are
fascinating pockets of creative social imagination
– for example around the idea
of the commons, zero carbon living, radical new forms of democracy,
new monies, food systems or ways of organising time -they tend to be
weakly organised, lacking the critical mass or connections to grow
and influence the mainstream. The World Social Forum used the
powerful slogan: ‘another world is possible’. But the fate of the
WSF – now only a pale shadow of what it was 15 years ago -is
symptomatic of what’s gone wrong.
As
a result, the space these ideas might fill is instead filled either
with reaction and the search for a better past, with narrowly
technological visions of the future or with fearful defence of the
present.
So
what can be done to address this gap? This is a huge task,
involving many people and methods. In this paper (“The
Imaginary Crisis”) I set out a few thoughts on the what, the
how and the who.
And
indeed the last link gives important excerpts from that paper.
In
the podcast, Mulgan gives examples of leaders he’s worked with
globally and raises the key question - Why is UK political
leadership so unimaginative?
I
have a feeling that they’re scared of the responsibility they’ve
had thrust on them and just can’t see that the way to deal with
this is ensure that a lot of people in the nation’s cities and
organisations are actually helping you - through a real programme
of decentralisation.
He
also makes an important point that we need to reward the “doers”
rather than the “thinkers”