Nelson Lebo.
By Dr Nelson Lebo
AS Donald Trump feebly attempts to "pivot to the centre" it appears that Europe may be pivoting right. Brexit was a relatively tight vote, but a potential Frexit (French exit) could be a landslide as Marine Le Pen, leader of the conservative National Front, leads in polls and supports a referendum.
Although the British working class has legitimate grievances after decades of stagnant wages and offshoring, what interested me most about the pre-Brexit debate was the overt rejection of expert opinions, championed by Michael Gove, Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson. Of course Gove, Farage and Johnson do not hold a patent on this strategy -- Trump has been promoting it for the entirety of his presidential campaign.
When I named Trump "Person of the Year" for 2015 (Chronicle, January 2, 2016) I wrote:
Trump's political success relies on the fact that many people only accept information that fits their existing worldview. Facts don't matter. Research doesn't matter. Trained experts don't matter. As Ray Davies sang in 1981, "Give the people what they want."
Rejecting expert advice -- or any alternative perspective for that matter -- is known as dogma, and it is not exclusively the domain of the extreme right. The far left is just as guilty of embracing dogmatic positions on issues such as vaccination, fluoridation, education, climate change and solar energy.
I find nothing more boring than a dogmatic right-winger and nothing more annoying than a dogmatic left-winger. Joe Egan and Gerry Rafferty hit the nail on the head in 1972, "Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right. Here I am stuck in the middle with you."
Please be aware that right and left are relative positions and dogma is not synonymous with conservatism or liberalism.
The difference between right dogma and left dogma is the right does not attempt to hide it while the left makes claims of open-mindedness while shutting down discussion.
Case in point, some members of the local green movement hold dogmatic positions on a range of issues and prefer to "shoot the messenger" when confronted rather than engaging in self-reflection.
For example, a significant amount of misinformation about solar energy has been promoted including false claims about photovoltaic panels and recently a bizarre and unsubstantiated attack on passive solar home design. When I have pointed out the claims are not sound the responses have been to ignore or dismiss the critique. Refusing to look at the facts is the heart of dogma.
Similarly, there appears to be a belief that "awareness raising" through movies and protests -- and even movies about protests! -- is the way to address climate change in the River City. I could provide hundreds of peer-reviewed papers on why this is not only untrue but also potentially self-defeating, but when I politely suggested that a steady stream of awareness-raising without real actions could result in making our community more vulnerable to the effects of climate change, the feedback was dismissed and ignored. Bang! Bang!
On two occasions discussions were taking place online and the moderators shut them down. Researchers have found that in many places environmentalists have adopted "a bunker mentality, causing the environmental community to remain exclusively focused on its ideological goals and on self-protection. Even pragmatic evaluations of efficacy were viewed as an assault against the movement, and they were often rejected without acknowledging important criticisms" (Blumstein & Saylan, 2007, The Failure of Environmental Education).
Only by abandoning dogma and taking a holistic approach will the movement leave the fringe.
In an era of increasing ideological Balkanisation, being "stuck in the middle" looks pretty good to me.
� Dr Nelson Lebo is an eco-design consultant and social science researcher.