Flags aren’t left or right wing – yet suddenly, they are

The obsession with flags is called vexillomania.  A flag is just a symbol. It’s tribalism – which side I’m on.  Tribalism in football is mostly good natured banter.  I’ve been to European games and international games where it has built bridges with foreign fans.  That’s what responsible adults do.

Tribalism says my side is good, your side is bad, and evidence is irrelevant.  If we lose it’s the ref’s fault.  If we win it’s my personal achievement.  Tribalism works in sport.  But it’s dangerous in governments.  Left unchecked it leads to wars because their religion is different from ours.

Is vexillomania over flags right wing?

The current wave of vexillomania is labelled as right wing.  But what is right-wing?  I worked with a Tory councillor who was genuinely concerned about child poverty.  He hadn’t connected the dots the same as me.  He hadn’t concluded that Thatcherite economic policies led to wealth inequality, increased utility bills, spiralling housing costs and a wave of insecure employment.  He was economically right-wing, but in opposing poverty, supported left-wing economic values.

Thing is, he’s not unusual.  As mayor I met with a centre-right think tank researcher who agreed with me on decentralisation and devolution.  He was all for free market economics, but genuinely anti-racist.

And is decentralisation left-wing or right-wing?  Communist parties want to replace capitalism with a centrally planned state-owned and state-run economy.  Anarchists want to replace capitalism by supplanting all hierarchies with decentralised voluntary associations.  They are polar opposites, but both want to replace capitalist inequality.  Both are left-wing.

What is left wing?

I was once at a global investment summit, flying the flag for the North East (metaphorically).

People like Bill Gates were there, hedge fund managers and all kinds of government ministers. I got talking to a Treasury minister I negotiated with over the North East devolution deal.  “I can’t place you politically,” he said.  “You’re creating jobs and investing in businesses and talk about fiscal devolution.  But you’re left-wing.”  Some people think economic competence is the preserve of the right.  Although less so since Boris Johnson and Liz Truss.  And austerity.

On Newsnight I argued against Labour’s adoption of the Conservative’s two-child benefit cap.  “This is fiscally sensible,” was Labour’s argument.

“It costs a fortune to keep kids in poverty,” I argued:

Our health is plummeting.  Our NHS waiting lists are through the roof.  Teachers are leaving education in droves.  How are we going to get a healthy, productive high-skilled workforce unless we look after kids?

It’s common sense to say that lifting 400,000 kids out of poverty provides a long-term benefit not just of those kids and their families, but public services and the economy too.  Is this a left-wing argument, though, or just a logical, evidence-based argument?

Centrist dads

In response to this interview, Novara Media’s Aaron Bastani made an interesting point, “I can’t help but feel that in a sane political culture Jamie Driscoll would be a, quote, ‘centrist Dad’ rather than regarded as too radical to run for a Labour Party on the apparently centre-left.”

The Nolan chart, or political compass, attempts two dimensions.  One dimensions is economically left-wing or right-wing.  Redistribution and taxing wealth vs. unfettered free markets.  And by the way, billionaires really don’t like free markets.  They engage in all kinds of anti-competitive behaviour and lobby for huge taxpayer subsidies and government contracts.

The second dimension is libertarian vs. authoritarian on personal freedom.  But gun control is authoritarian.  Pro-choice on abortion is libertarian.  So millions of Americans are simultaneously at both ends of that spectrum.

I’d have two totally different dimensions.  One axis is how willing are you to listen to evidence, check facts, and think things through.  That’s also the hallmark of a good leader – someone who listens without prejudice.  That’s why I’m an advocate of deliberative democracy.  Not reality TV style popularity polls.  But citizens’ juries where they weigh evidence and expert testimony, and bring their diverse lived experience to bear.

The second axis is how much you want to control other people.  Do you object if people are different from you?  Do you believe that how they live their life is their business, not yours?

Strip away all the sophistry and distraction, and in the end it comes down to which freedoms you prefer: the freedom to exploit, or freedom from domination?

Waving flags is not always tribal – but it currently is

Everyone should enjoy the freedom from violence, harassment and hate just for being who they are.  Everyone should enjoy the freedom to pursue economic, cultural and personal endeavours.  But when freedoms collide, we should prioritise freedom from domination over the freedom to hoard resources.

That means your freedom from damp and eviction trumps your landlord’s freedom to make more money.  Your freedom to raise children on a sustainable planet trumps a corporation’s unregulated freedom to pump oil.  Your freedom to grow up in peace trumps the freedom of warmongers and arms dealers to profit from war.  The freedom to starve is no freedom at all.

The people waving flags outside asylum accommodation are completely tribal.  They’re not interested in evidence or thinking things through.  The freedom they seek is the freedom to vent anger and hatred on those worse off than themselves.  Sadly in most cases, they’re punching down because they’ve been punched down upon.  If they want real freedom, they should punch up, at the billionaires who oppress them.

Featured image via the Canary