![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Not the New Progressivism
Thursday, October 25th, 2012 12:29 pmI watched the RSA talk Prospects for a New Progressivism The title was completely misleading, as this was just a bunch of politicians moaning about how politicians haven't created the society that politicians deserve to be leading. There was nothing particularly new or progressive, not even prospects for it. (The only high point was Miranda Green's defence of liberal individualism: "We're not all Ayn Rand solipsists if we like to buy shoes.") All-in-all it was a waste of twenty minutes, which is unfortunately the way it goes with RSA talks: you may be glued to your monitor for the entire talk or find yourself checking e-mail after thirty seconds, reluctant to stop the video because after all this is the RSA and they ought to say something important before long.
It was still worth watching (while checking mail) though, because it got me thinking about a divide I keep seeing between new progressives and old progressives … and the folks at the RSA were very much old progressives (except for Jesse Norman, who is a Tory; I don't know how he snuck in). When I say "new progressives" I'm not sure exactly what I mean (which is not good) but it has something to do with people who are actually future-oriented, and in particular, people who don't just spend a lot of their time online, but live in a world shaped by that. This is something subtler than the old digital natives vs. digital immigrants thing, since age has less to do with it than is claimed. Tristram Hunt is 13 years younger than me, but listening to him droning on about the decline in authority and the erosion of class solidarity made me show my age by thinking "Hey daddy-o, don't be such a square — get with the groove, man!"* I'm not even sure it has that much to do with frequency of net use, since you can spend all day sending business e-mails in between putting pictures of the office party on Facebook and still be living in a slightly more convenient version of the twentieth century.
I suppose what I mean by "new progressives" is something to do with optimism. When I watch talks from the RSA or TED from people who are highly networked and future-oriented, they strike me as empowered and optimistic, even when they're talking about grim stuff like global warming or the rise of religious fundamentalism. I don't mean the happy-clappy positive Secret crap; I mean an approach which is solution-oriented. In Rising Sun Sean Connery quotes a Japanese proverb, "Solve the problem, not the person." I don't know if it's a real Japanese proverb or Michael Crichton made it up, but it's a good motto (and for me completely failed as a trope that was meant to show how totally inscrutable these strange Japanese people are). The old progressives are still into solving people, and here again Miranda Green made a good point: "The language of virtue is not unproblematic."
The part I found most interesting was when the assembled talking heads lamented the state of youth, and in particular their rampant individualism and lack of social involvement. Apparently a recent study revealed the shocking fact that for an overwhelming majority of young people, the number one priority in "moral behaviour" was looking after one's family. Dear God, we have created a nation of lawless Confucians! To listen to the pundits of Old New Labour and Tories alike, it would seem that for today's British youth, the most admirable act would be to loot an iPad and give it to your granny.
That may be true, for all I know. I haven't lived in Britain for twenty years, I don't follow the British media that much, and the last time I visited was for the riots. (OK, not actually for the riots, officer, they just happened to be going on at the time.) But when I look online, I see a different world. If young people are so unwilling to volunteer their time and energy for good causes, as many progressives lament, is it only oldsters like me who are writing Wikipedia? Or doesn't sharing knowledge count as a good cause? Were the teenage hacktivists who inspired Little Brother just a figment of Cory Doctorow's imagination? Are all the people signing Avaaz petitions over thirty?
* I lie. I haven't actually spoken like that since I was ten years old.
It was still worth watching (while checking mail) though, because it got me thinking about a divide I keep seeing between new progressives and old progressives … and the folks at the RSA were very much old progressives (except for Jesse Norman, who is a Tory; I don't know how he snuck in). When I say "new progressives" I'm not sure exactly what I mean (which is not good) but it has something to do with people who are actually future-oriented, and in particular, people who don't just spend a lot of their time online, but live in a world shaped by that. This is something subtler than the old digital natives vs. digital immigrants thing, since age has less to do with it than is claimed. Tristram Hunt is 13 years younger than me, but listening to him droning on about the decline in authority and the erosion of class solidarity made me show my age by thinking "Hey daddy-o, don't be such a square — get with the groove, man!"* I'm not even sure it has that much to do with frequency of net use, since you can spend all day sending business e-mails in between putting pictures of the office party on Facebook and still be living in a slightly more convenient version of the twentieth century.
I suppose what I mean by "new progressives" is something to do with optimism. When I watch talks from the RSA or TED from people who are highly networked and future-oriented, they strike me as empowered and optimistic, even when they're talking about grim stuff like global warming or the rise of religious fundamentalism. I don't mean the happy-clappy positive Secret crap; I mean an approach which is solution-oriented. In Rising Sun Sean Connery quotes a Japanese proverb, "Solve the problem, not the person." I don't know if it's a real Japanese proverb or Michael Crichton made it up, but it's a good motto (and for me completely failed as a trope that was meant to show how totally inscrutable these strange Japanese people are). The old progressives are still into solving people, and here again Miranda Green made a good point: "The language of virtue is not unproblematic."
The part I found most interesting was when the assembled talking heads lamented the state of youth, and in particular their rampant individualism and lack of social involvement. Apparently a recent study revealed the shocking fact that for an overwhelming majority of young people, the number one priority in "moral behaviour" was looking after one's family. Dear God, we have created a nation of lawless Confucians! To listen to the pundits of Old New Labour and Tories alike, it would seem that for today's British youth, the most admirable act would be to loot an iPad and give it to your granny.
That may be true, for all I know. I haven't lived in Britain for twenty years, I don't follow the British media that much, and the last time I visited was for the riots. (OK, not actually for the riots, officer, they just happened to be going on at the time.) But when I look online, I see a different world. If young people are so unwilling to volunteer their time and energy for good causes, as many progressives lament, is it only oldsters like me who are writing Wikipedia? Or doesn't sharing knowledge count as a good cause? Were the teenage hacktivists who inspired Little Brother just a figment of Cory Doctorow's imagination? Are all the people signing Avaaz petitions over thirty?
* I lie. I haven't actually spoken like that since I was ten years old.
