Is the sensible centre empty?
One hears that the lefties have taken over the public broadcaster. To provide a fair balance, the fear-mongerers advocate loudly for a world where Plutocrats tell everyone what to do. The reasonable person on the Clapham Omnibus has nowhere left to stand. Surely this is not how it was meant to be?
If you can imagine a curve in the shape of a bell—like the Liberty Bell but without the crack—you will see how peoples’ preferences are usually arranged. Most people are in the middle, where the curve is high. There are a lot fewer people at the extreme left and right edges. This curve illustrates how democracy was meant to work. Everybody votes according to their preferences and we wind up with something that a lot of people want and that very few people are desperately unhappy with.
Unfortunately, it seems that peoples’ preferences have changed now. The curve now looks like two bells set so far apart from each other that they don’t overlap at all. Now, voting produces an outcome that half the people will always be desperately unhappy with. It is also an unstable outcome because if the unhappy people get the upper hand next time, the people in charge and the rules they make will change to something very very different from now.
You may well ask whether this is a problem? After all, we don’t all want the same beverages, clothing styles or haircuts. Different tastes make the world an interesting place. By diversifying, we strengthen society. Why not here?
Well, it is a problem because in politics, everyone has to have the same thing. I can’t have a conservative national leader while you have a progressive one. We all have to have the same leader, and we all have to follow the same laws, administered by the same bureaucrats.
One solution would be to split into two separate nations. Lefties to the West and conservatives to the East. Alternatively, Lefties in the coastal megacities and Righties in the agricultural heartland. Lefties and Righties might not agree on the laws that govern their local behaviour, but they might not need to do that. Different cultures still seem to be able to trade with each other.
I have to say that the history of partitions like this is not a source of encouragement, but let’s not rule it out entirely. If there is a geographic dimension to the split, then partition may be easier to bring about without massive property disputes. Of course, it all gets harder if one group occupies resource-rich territory and the other group doesn’t.
Another solution is available, although I hesitate to mention it because it is so revolutionary. Perhaps people on opposite sides of the preference curve could speak and listen to each other about their concerns and values. The challenges of living together as a single society could be treated as a problem that everyone needs to solve. We could take the view that the problem is not solved until everyone believes the solution is acceptable, if not ideal. Finally, and most radically, we could listen to what facts and logic suggest we should do. Rather than shut out inconvenient messages that pass a basic truth test, perhaps we should take the view that the problem is not solved until these messages have been incorporated in the answer.
The sensible centre is looking pretty vacant right now, but when the stakes are high and we all have to do the same thing, it is in everyone’s interest to move into that space.
Even if you disagree with me, you might find it interesting to consider the analysis in this book: “Economics Even a President Could Understand”. It is quite inexpensive for an economics book ($5), and can be found at this Amazon landing page.