The anti-freedom fashion
Writing in yesterday’s London Evening Standard, Philip Delves Broughton gives his readers a preview of ‘Freedom’, the new work by Jonathan Franzen, the widely admired American novelist:
‘…This is the key theme of the book, and the reason for the title. We pampered creatures of the 21st century are ruined by our own freedom. Instead of bringing us happiness, it brings us only uncertainty. Having eschewed the certainties and disciplines of earlier generations, we find ourselves lost and adrift, propelled by the lingering emotions of childhood into futile searches for meaning.’
Questioning freedom is now all the rage. The RSA has been exploring the problems with the idea of human autonomy for some time, for example in our Social Brain project or the 21st century enlightenment speech. A critique of a shallow, individualistic, notion of freedom is also central to an essay on the sixties I have written for broadcast on Radio Four on 15 September.
I guess we should be pleased that we have caught the zeitgeist. The danger is that it looks like the RSA is now following fashion rather than leading it.
I have been reading the proofs of a new short book by the moral philosopher Mary Midgley (we are honoured to be hosting her here at the RSA on 20 September). The book is a critique of the idea of human beings as being wholly driven by self interest and is full of wonderful insights and arguments. I had heard many of these points before but Midgley’s powerful and persuasive style makes you think of them afresh. For example, if self interest is natural in humans while altruism is a cultural construct, why is it, Midgley asks, that we are often driven by our natural impulses to behave in ways which are demonstrably against our self interest?
She gives the example of someone who ruins their chances of promotion by having a furious row with their boss. As I have often discussed in this blog, much of the recent economic crisis can be put down to us following our animal impulses rather than cool calculation. It is not just social constraint that stops us being selfish but our animal passions; desire, loyalty, fear, a sense of fairness (which we now know children exhibit before even being able to speak): the crude neo Darwinian idea that selfishness is natural and altruism not is simply untenable. It is in our nature that we have somehow to manage the individual and collective dilemmas which result from being animals driven by a combination of self interested, social and blindly emotional forces (or as Freudians might put it, ego, superego and id).
Mary Midgley’s book is likely to be seen as another powerful assault on the ideology of individualism. But just when I was in danger of succumbing to feeling aggrieved that so many other – more esteemed – people are getting credit for making an argument we have been pursuing for several years, I had lunch with my own personal guru, Geoff Mulgan. He reminded me that the idea that freedom was both modernity’s greatest virtue but also its greatest problem was the very first point in his 1998 book, Connexity.
There is no such thing as a new idea, especially one as big as this. Rather than trying to claim credit for an intellectual fashion, the task for the RSA is to delve more deeply and widely into the debate, to make it interesting and accessible to as many people as possible and to explore new practical applications of a more sophisticated, social, idea of autonomy.
The Fellowship’s the thing
A day with RSA Scotland gave me new insights into our ambitions for Fellowship.
I spent Saturday in Edinburgh as a guest at RSA Scotland’s AGM. The first half of the day comprised a fascinating conversation about food policy chaired by Sheila Dillon of Radio 4’s Food Programme. I spoke in the afternoon but the main business was conversation around various small projects which have been supported by the RSA Scotland venture fund (the trail blazer for the international Catalyst Fund).
Although the overall numbers weren’t as high as might have been hoped, the event exemplified best practice for national/regional organisation. The emphasis was on the impact the Scotland RSA could have in wider society. There was great support for establishing local networks (to go with those already in existence in Edinburgh and Glasgow). Issues were raised about John Adam Street – particularly in relation to the bugbears of Fellowship profile on the website and the Fellows’ Directory – but the discussion was based on a shared commitment to make the Fellowship experience better and better. The whole event was friendly, informal and thoughtful and the three non Fellows who had been brought along as guests were clearly impressed by what they saw.
In the closing part of my speech I explored how I saw Fellowship as integral to the new mission of the RSA, summed up in our new strap line ‘21st Century Enlightenment’. There were, I suggested, three dimensions to this:
1. Through the lectures, website, Journal, research reports and other outlets RSA Fellows deepen their insights into the foundations and development of human capability. The RSA’s focus combines a fascination with the eclectic and growing body of research into human nature and behaviour with a normative belief that the good society relies upon the cultivation of a more ambitious, responsible and rounded account of the good life. Many RSA Fellows are already well versed in these issues and every Fellow I meet seems to be interested. Our ambition should be that the Fellowship becomes a vibrant space for inquiry into and debate about human capability.
2. The RSA’s commitment to an idea of enhanced citizenship should be reflected in the collective commitment of Fellows to have a benign impact on wider society and the commitment of RSA HQ to give Fellows the support and the tools to have that impact. Unlike most other charities, the RSA does not have to focus on only one area of social concern or offer only one variety of intervention. The two successful venture fund winner we discussed on Saturday were a community garden and a new process for public engagement and deliberation. The RSA believes that future citizens should be more engaged, more resilient and creative, and more altruistic. Any Fellow-led idea or intervention which can help towards this broad progressive goal is welcome. The important thing is that we cement the shift from a perception (often unfair) that the RSA is a social club for its members to the commitment that the RSA Fellowship should be a powerful force for good in the world.
3. I finished my annual lecture this year with a Margaret Mead quote along the lines ‘never imagine that a small group of determined people can’t change the world; in fact, it is all that ever has’. This is the good news. The bad news is that it is far from easy to get small groups of people – however committed and talented – to feel able to work together to make a difference. Obviously, this is even harder when the people concerned are volunteers with busy lives. I have suggested in the past that effective group working requires that the group is made up of people who are able to work co-operatively (not hierarchically or bureaucratically), that the group has enough initial capacity in terms of commitment and skills, and that the group is able quickly to develop a strong ‘content proposition’ (the thing it is going to try to do). The problem is that if the group has two out of three of these attributes it isn’t generally enough for success. To this I would add a new insight emerging from the growth of Fellows’ projects: successful RSA projects require the three characteristics I described above, the group then needs to see very quickly how working in the RSA adds value to their endeavours (through the brand, seed funding, access to the wider Fellowship, insights from the lectures programme or projects team etc), then, as the project starts to develop (and if there is ambition for it to last and to grow) a route to sustainability needs to be developed possibly involving accessing funds from other sources or developing a viable social business.
The third part of our ambition for Fellowship is that we develop powerful insights into how to get groups of people working together to develop and implement good ideas. This challenge is certainly not one many other membership organisations have worked out how to crack (which may be why so many beat a path to our door to find out how we are doing and collect tips). Of course, we don’t yet have the answers but the RSA is in this for the long haul, and just by continually asking the right questions Fellows and staff (for example through the work of the Fellowship Council) are beginning to develop valuable knowledge and experience.
Through shared interests and awareness, through making a real difference to the world and through developing insight into how to foster collaboration and innovation the Fellowship will become the driving force of the RSA as a 21st century enlightenment organisation.
The strange case of conservative progressives
One of the most interesting lines in Tony Blair’s revealing book comes in the introduction:
’…I was and remain first and foremost not so much a politician of traditional left and right, but a moderniser. I wanted to modernise the Labour Party so it was capable, not intermittently but continuously, of offering a progressive alternative to Conservative rule. I wanted to modernise Britain so that, while retaining pride in having worn the mantle of the world’s most powerful nation as the twentieth century began, it didn’t feel bereft and in decline as the twenty first century began because that mantle would no longer fit’.
The admission that Blair was not a man of the left – indeed he acknowledges that on economics and law and order he is on the centre right – may appal some in the Labour Party but comes as no surprise to those of us who worked for him.
Everyday it seems a Labour leadership candidate repudiates another aspect of New Labour doctrine and record. But behind this tactical posturing there is a more profound questioning, which is of wider relevance and interest than Labour’s internal manoeuvrings.
In this month’s Prospect, two former Brown advisors Nick Pearce (now back as Director of ippr) and Gavin Kelly write about the need for social democrats to tap into a sense of ‘social patriotism’:
‘Beyond eco-conservativism, the centre-left hasn’t worked out the strands of conservative thinking that should form a core part of its political identity in the 21st century. Only when it finds a sure footing on this territory will it find a way of responding to some of the cultural concerns of the electorate that currently find expression in hostility to immigration.’
And here is Jon Cruddas MP, one of Labour’s most original and respected thinkers, writing in a few weeks ago in the New Statesman:
‘Labour has to win back…terrain with a language that can encompass both cosmopolitan modernity and English conservative culture, linking them together in a sense of national purpose. It would incorporate all the things Blair dismissed as anachronisms: tradition; a respect for settled ways of life; a sense of local place and belonging; a desire for home and rootedness; the continuity of relationships at work and in one’s neighbourhood.
England once had this kind of conservative, common culture; it acted as a counter to the commodification of labour and to social isolation. Ruskin provided its rallying cry, “There is no wealth but life.” At one time Labour gave expression to this kind of conservatism. It need not be reactionary, right-wing, or sentimental, although it has been all these things. Its political character will depend on Labour’s capacity to articulate a progressive and ethical conservatism that embraces difference. It need not be parochial or conformist: England celebrates a rich tradition of volatile, creative cultures. ’
These ideas strike a chord. Here is an extract from an article I wrote last year in Prospect:
‘New ideas about human nature can contribute to a more substantive meeting of minds between left and right. Thoughtful conservatives are once again recognising the importance of social context, inequality and the limits to market rationality. Labour thinkers can use the research to make the case for collective action and social justice, but they may also become more cautious about the capacity of the central state to empower communities, and more interested in the role of social norms and civic institutions”
So as Tony Blair reminds us that he was above all a moderniser, some thinkers from the left are exploring how (small ‘c’) conservative perspectives can be incorporated in the social democratic story.
Call me a sad case, but I find this intriguing. The RSA is a strictly politically non-aligned organisation but that doesn’t mean we aren’t interested in politics. Indeed, over the last few years we have had fascinating events discussing currents in left, right and liberal thinking.
Usually when people talk about moving beyond traditional left and right it is seen as a political ploy – a form of triangulation. But exploring the possibility of philosophy and practical politics which seeks to reconcile the ideals of social justice with the insights of social conservatism is a fascinating intellectual exercise.
I see an RSA event in which social democrats and social conservatives (like Roger Scruton or Ferdinand Mount, for example) are invited to explore common ground. Any takers?
Boing!
This short post has three elements: self promotion, self indulgence and humour amusing only to its author (‘no change there’ I hear you chorus). If you have anything better to do with your time (eg watching paint dry, re-reading the Thompsons business directory, removing the Madonna or Queen songs which have unaccountably got on to your ipod playlist) I strongly advise you to do so.
On Tuesday I went to Leyton Orient to see the West Brom second string win 2-0 in the Inter-city Poundstretcher Vase (aka the Carling Cup). Apart from a great last minute goal from New Zealand wonder boy, Chris Wood, it was a pretty grim game, of which it could fairly be said ‘neither team deserved to win’. Still, at least there were two chances to go through the West Brom fans’ goal celebration ritual.
This comprises the supporters jumping from one foot to the other and punching the air out of time shouting ‘boing, boing’, followed by a discordant but strangely uplifting rendition of Psalm 23 (The Lord’s My Shepherd) and ending with the ungrammatical but elegant simplicity of ‘The West Brom’ clap, clap, clap ‘The West Brom’ clap clap clap. The whole thing lasts about a minute and has over the years occasionally been rudely interrupted by the opposing team equalising.
The next day, as is my habit, I visited Boing – the excellent unofficial West Brom supporters’ site – to see whether my player ratings matched those of other fans. As you will see if you visit it, Boing is to website graphics and technology what West Bromwich town centre is to urban aesthetics.
So…imagine my surprise and delight when a colleague at the RSA (presumably looking for a rise, clever girl) referred me to a link to my 21st century enlightenment talk (‘46,000 views and counting’ now you ask). The link is on what it turns out is one of the world’s most hip blogs (formerly a ‘zine and web site). Its slogan is ‘brain candy for happy mutants’ and its name is?
No really, this is worth waiting for…
Oh, how I laughed. Oh, how I patted myself on the head. Oh, how I marvelled at the inability of my long suffering PA Barbara to see this as the most exciting thing to have happened all week.
My YouTube obsession
My Youtube obsession
I’m finding it hard not to become obsessive about checking the viewing figures for my RSA Animate. It reminds me of a few years ago when I wrote a book with my old man. It got part serialised (in The Times I think) and for a day climbed the Amazon charts reaching the heady heights of the top fifty. Thereafter it fell inexorably and now every year I get a royalties statement from the publisher which is always a negative figure.
There was a point a few days in, when we were still in the top thousand, when I flirted (as so many other authors must have done) with buying ten copies myself to see if I could start a reverse trend. Given the pretty ghastly reviews the book received, the fact that I didn’t try to rig the market is one of the few scraps of dignity I can take from the whole episode.
But the YouTube number is continuing to rise, which makes it all the more addictive. I find myself day dreaming complex theories about on-line contagion effects. The viewing figure is rising steadily at about 5-6,000 a day, but how long until the momentum runs out? Is there a certain window of time in which an acceleration of take-up has to take place, and if so, how long is it?
The main value of the video is that it is helping get the RSA brand out world wide. But it is also great to see the ideas being debated. For example, blogs by Duncan Green and Julian Evans have been talking about them. Julian and I have had an email conversation following his post (I’m delighted that he is thinking of becoming a Fellow). Like a number of critiques of this and others of my lectures he worries about the strength and linearity with which I link evidence about human nature to actual human behaviour.
My defence goes back to my elephant rider metaphor in which our conscious self is the rider, our automatic systems the elephant and the social context the jungle. I like this metaphor but am having to accept that it doesn’t seem to resonate with other people. The point I am trying to make is not simply that what we can do is conditioned by who we are as a species and the situation in which we find ourselves, but also that we use our freedom as riders most effectively when we understand how we operate and how we are constrained. It is when we see how our conscious self is only a part of what we are that we understand what an amazing part it is and how best to use this amazing mysterious capacity to be fulfilled and effective people.
So, far from being a neurological determinist I believe that the key to being powerful self-directed individuals is to understand our physiological and social nature. But somehow I’m not managing to get this across. Is it because the point is simplistic, wrong, or the metaphor inept or something else?
Do tell me….
RSA Pamphlets
RSA Vision
RSA Animate
RSA Comment
- Twitter @RSAMatthew
RSA Bookshop
The RSA Bookshop, in partnership with Blackwell's the UK's leading academic bookseller, offers Fellows and friends an opportunity to purchase books and to explore our speakers’ ideas in greater detail. Visit the RSA Bookshop.