The need for a more progressive narrative
From frustrations with the current discourse,.. to an alternative agenda
For two months I have been living in a new cocoon. I wouldn't call it a bubble, as by its very nature a bubble is either inescapable and defeatist, or something to 'burst' and let go of completely. I think of it more as a cocoon, a bubble to grow out of, to spread your wings and experience intense freedom after intense encapsulation.
That cocoon is Brussels. An office with colleagues, fellow progressives, from the south, the east and the west. A media landscape, that is no longer only Dutch (and American), but as much — for as good I can read it, or let algorithms translate it — German, Belgian, Italian, Spanish.
Rapidly, I am changing my perception of what it means to be a progressive. My ideals and values haven't changed, but my idea of what's normal and feasible has. And we quickly need to change those ideas; not just for my sake but for the sake of all progressives in Europe.
What is wrong with this world?
Rapidly, the world around us is changing. That is on the one hand — of course — a cliche (the world is always changing, and oft more rapid then we had seen before because of innovation and scale), but one the other a strongly felt feeling, a fear, among — I think — many.
Progress was always messy, one step back, two steps forward. But progress always seemed inevitable, to my hopeful eyes. Today, it seems the underlying structure that facilitates inescapable progress is under real threat. The progressive fear of change… it is new to me.
When progressive media and political parties start taking over, and thereby reinforcing, the narrative of the radical right — you have to start to wonder how much power the progressives have left. How realistic the long-term path towards progress still is. If you wonder why so many progressives love Merkel, this is why. She is the status quo that protects us from damaging change. In no way good enough, but far enough from what we fear to be the alternative.
If this all seems too abstract, consider the following. In the United States, in 2018, children are drugged in prisons, separated from their parents. In Europe, pregnant women and children are risking their lives on boats that we don’t give safe harbor. Politicians in ruling governments talk about infestations, about tsunamis, floods. Of ‘ants’, of ‘foreigners’.
There's now a First Lady that takes that attitude of dehumanisation and dont-care to the max by wearing a “I really don’t care, do you?” jacket. Increasingly we see social democratic parties taking over the narrative that refugees and immigrants are a threat to our norms and values. Increasingly, we see progressive media taking over the talking points of the radical right.
Ask yourself this: why is migration the number one topic for voters in about every European country (and the United States)? Is it because of the issues that (are supposed to, framed to) come with migration? Or is it because it the number one issue on the agenda of media and politicians?
I say it's the latter. Economic anxiety has to do with inequality and systemic issues with our vested-interests-capitalism, not with migrants. A declining of trust in institutions has to do with innovation, education, and old-school (hypocrite, non-transparent, etcetera etcetera) politics, not with the notion that those institutions don't hate Muslims enough.
The Overton window
Dutch activists have coined — as far as I know — the term 'het Redelijke Midden' (the reasonable center). It is by no means meant to be a compliment; it is meant to flag a structural shortcoming of both media and politics. That shortcoming is the appropriation of the non-objective but seemingly 'neutral' stance of being in the middle of the left and the right in politics.
Where do you end up, as 'redelijke midden,' when the right has become radical and the left has become (or remained) centrist?
Recently there is an increased interest in the concept of the 'Overton window' by progressive thinkers, precisely because of the bias of the seemingly 'neutral' position of the 'reasonable center.'
The concept has been developed by Joseph P. Overton. He suggests that there’s a “window” of acceptable ideas and policy proposals in public discourse. Everything inside the window is normal and expected, while everything outside the window is radical, ridiculous, or unthinkable.
Overton argued that the easiest way to move that window was to force people to consider ideas at the extremes, as far away from the window as possible. Because forcing people to consider an unthinkable idea, even if they rejected it, would make all less extreme ideas seem acceptable by comparison — it would move the “window” slowly in that direction. [I have 'stolen' this analysis, even text, from Carlos Maza, and you can find it here.]
For the last decade or more, we have seen the radical right bring extreme right ideas into the discourse. Correspondingly, for the last decade or more, we have seen the center — of politics and media at least — shifted toward the right. What was seen as reasonable and centrist a decade ago, is quite progressive when compared to today.
Are you frustrated by your social democrats, by your progressive newspaper, by the debate in the television programs you watch? The logic of the Overton window, the radical right's extremist positions, the center (and, thus, the center-left) moving into that direction — that's why.
Looking for hope after that depressing analysis? I get it. Here's some hope:
I need hope, desperately. I am one of the people — it is probably why I have the job that I have — that can't 'just chill' when I can't convincingly tell myself our world will get better. And although recently I find it harder to hold on to hope, I can still see it.
I see it in music and cinema. I see it when Donald Glover goes absolutely viral with a videoclip for 'This Is America' that, quite painfully, confronts the United States with all it's systematic issues of racism and biased marginalization. I see it when Beyonce, clearly one of the most important artists of this decade, speaks up for feminism and takes on a 'white cube' such as the Louvre and remixes symbolic, historic art to pay equal respect to black people.
I see it when famous actresses (and actors) share their #MeToo, when acclaimed moviemakers such as Guillermo Del Toro win oscars with movies that depict the disdain for and fetishization of 'the other'; a low-budget movie such as the Florida Project — also last year — that gets critical acclaim for debunking the Disney-packaging of utter economic despair that is traditionally American.
Much of popular culture — music, cinema — is becoming more outspoken, more feminist, more anti-racist, more empathetic, more open.
There is a lot of cherry-picking involved when looking at statistics on where 'the people' stand (I should know, as a former datajournalist — I've seen way too many of it) so I won't dive into them. One should, however, ask the question: Does where people stand, correspond with what the media believes the center of the discourse is? If popular culture (for the young) is becoming more progressive and outspoken, don't you think they will follow and/or reflect that in their own opinions? Music and cinema gives me hope.
And then there's recent examples of successful politicians that either moved the Overton window and/or stopped with leftist centrist politics and with that found a new possible, and progressive, majority. Both Bernie and Corbyn come close to a majority, with a very outspoken leftist economic agenda — considered radical — whilst not moving into an anti-migration narrative. Hell, there's even scientific proof that Social Democratic parties fare better when they combine investment-oriented economic and open(!)cosmopolitan(!)cultural policy positions. Bernie gives me hope.
Changing perspectives of the possible
Alright, let's get back to my cocoon shall we. The point that I want to make is that bias of the 'reasonable center' affects us all. But when you break out of the discourse that you are used to, you start to see how skewed it is. You see the power of letting go of what you currently read and see in media and politics, and reassess what we could be talking about.
For over three years I worked at de Volkskrant as an investigative datajournalist. At numerous occassions I have tried to innovate journalism so to have more impact with our progressive journalism. In numerous stories I have tried to set the agenda with 'leftist' issues (such as lobbying, tax avoidance, climate change, right wing hypocrisy). To little avail: increasingly I have become frustrated with the newspaper, and other 'progressive' media, as I witnessed them move further and further to the right.
And then I started reading Suddeutsche Zeitung. It was as if I finally read De Volkskrant again after ten years. Strong narratives and amazing investigative journalism on the issues of pervasive racism, the dangers of the radical right, on how Greece fell victim to Northern European interests, on the need for structural economic change. And I started reading De Morgen and Standaard (Flemish) and it was if I was reading de Volkskrant from five years ago — I mean it, again, as a compliment: it is as if it's void of underbelly-narratives, of irrational fears and frustrations.
Increasingly, I open an Italian or Spanish article on European politics and it amazes me how there is a well-informed narrative that is often far from the Dutch. Dutch journalism is biased towards the interests of the Netherlands and stereotypes of southern countries. Yes, again: 'duh' of course that happens, but I needed to see it to really get it.
—
I am in a new Green family. With people from all corners from the European Union. From countries such as Spain where feminism has become mainstream. Countries such as Italy where the debate on structural and radical economic change is more developed (It's not mainstream, but it is there). Countries like Germany where it's quite normal to call a racist.. a racist. Belgian and Finnish greens, that dare to be more aspirational with ideas such as a basic income; the question 'how will we pay it' is still open, but it does not restrain them from saying 'this is where we need to go.'
And I work in an organization that's predominantly female. Just saying.
Our biggest challenges; a different agenda
There is still reason to hope. There are strong signs of progress and of progressive activism. Leftist and (truly) liberal politicians can, and do, still win elections. An alternative discourse is possible, one with less stereotypes, hatred and conservatism.
But progressive politics won't set the agenda without a clear vision of where to go and pointing the finger at the real, or bigger, problems in society. Bernie Sanders (and Occupy before him) set the agenda by starting to talk about the 99%, about equality, about systematic racism, an oligarchical political system and the need to tackle climate change. #BLM and #MeToo brought sexism and racism to the agenda.
What are the challenges we need to talk about in Europe? Here's an attempt:
Challenge 1: We live in a Europe where divisive populists scapegoat and dehumanize the other, increasingly supported by media and increasingly elected in office. Progressives have started to be afraid of politics, of change.
- We need EMPATHY to thrive over hatred.
- We need politics that speaks to our better nature, not brings out the worst in us.
- We need the HOPE that a different path is possible.
Challenge 2: We live in a Europe where multinationals get tax deductions and are allowed to avoid them, while people increasingly suffer to hold on to a job, get a house and build a future. Progressives are frustrated with the inequality of a growing precariat and growing profits.
- We need large corporations to pay their FAIR share.
- We need SOLIDARITY among memberstates and stop the competition that has led to increased labour exploitation and lower corporate taxes. End the race to the bottom!
Challenge 3: We live in a Europe where we fear we will leave our children with a world that is worse than how we got it. We have heard enough talk, we need to see real climate action.
- We want our CHILDREN, our future, to grow up in a healthy and safe world. We need to stop climate change.
- We need to invest in a cleaner and more SUSTAINABLE economy, that leads to more decent paying jobs and economic development.
Challenge 4. Many of the achievements for racial, sexual and gender equality are under attack from conservatives all over Europe. We will not accept sexism, lgbt+ violence, unequal women’s pay or racism, we stand up against it.
- Everyone deserves the same chances and FREEDOM in society, no matter the color of the skin, sex or religion.
- The European Union should enforce the protection of human rights, even when memberstates do not.
- We need politicians that SPEAK UP and denounce every form of racism, fearmongering and sexism.
Challenge 5. We live in a Europe with neo-authoritarian regimes, attacks on free press, attacks on the truth and attacks on activists; where too often vested interests look away instead of act against it — after the Brexit, how much further do our leaders let us slide away from progress and democratic integrity? We need to stand up for democracy.
- Anti-democratic policies should be tackled by the European Union, with investigations into, and powerful measures against, governments that enact them. We stand firm for DEMOCRACY.
- We need to speak up, loud and passionate, FOR the European Union. That includes speaking up against those that scapegoat the European Union for electoral benefit.
Challenge 6. A Europe where pregnant women and children are risking their lives on boats that we don’t give safe harbor — that's not our Europe. We cannot accept a lack of solidarity among memberstates and we do not accept the non-humane treatments of refugees, of humans.
- We require SOLIDARITY among memberstates when dealing with incoming refugees.
- We demand HUMANE treatment of refugees and immigrants. That excludes camps outside of the European Union and deals with countries that imprison refugees or put minors to work.
Challenge 7. In Europe we share a currency, but we not share an economy. It has led to extremely divergent interests between northern and southern European countries on how to achieve economic prosperity. The situation where saving the worth of a currency outweighs the economic despair of an entire country, is not sustainable. Nor is it acceptable for memberstates to take incredible risks with the economy of which so many citizens depend.
- The Euro countries should be strengthened by both risk-mitigation and risk-sharing policies; so that economies run a lower risk of plunging and have increased opportunities for investment and growth.
A new narrative
It is a time for a confident, proud and loud progressive narrative. One that offers an answer to racism, fearmongering, climate change and inequality. One that stands for the shared future of the people, not the vested interests of businesses. One that stands for solidarity and cooperation between countries, not division and competition. One that speaks to our better nature, to empathy; in stead of bringing out the worst in us, in stead of hate.
Europeans should come together for real change.
The elections in 2019 will be more important than ever. I have hope.
