Centrism is the only antidote to fear-based politics in Israel and the West

Our government did much to be proud of during that time and had an extensive list of successes across a whole variety of fields. Ultimately, however, its political diversity, which was almost unprecedented in global politics, proved to be its downfall.

Those on the edges of the coalition, from the left and the right, tore the fragile partnership apart and the centre was not strong enough to prevent it.

Demonstrators chant slogans and gather with pictures showing cabinet members in the current Israeli government during a rally against the government's judicial overhaul plan in Tel Aviv on September 23, 2023. (Photo by JACK GUEZ / AFP) (Photo by JACK GUEZ/AFP via Getty Images)AFP via Getty Images

While the key players were consistently willing to compromise and cooperate, the political fringes, under pressure from the extremes on their sides, ultimately resorted to “all-or-nothing” politics. That left us all with nothing.

At the end of December 2022, I watched from afar as a new government was sworn in to replace us. It was by far the most right-wing and conservative coalition ever elected in Israel and its divisive actions and policies led to the most divisive and ultimately disastrous year in the country’s history.

I entered government a committed centrist. I left with a conviction deeper than ever that centrism can provide the answers to the challenges of our time; it is the antidote to the extremism and sustained attacks on liberal democracy that are sweeping the democratic world.

The experiences of those 18 months, one of the great political experiments of modern times, and the centrist leadership I saw up close as we met with counterparts from all over the world, led to the idea for a new book, a collection of essays entitled The Centre Must Hold.

It is an attempt not only to explain what centrism really is but to lay out the positive vision it has for the world, to see if it can answer the questions being asked of political leaders in the 21^st century and, critically, to assess if it is strong enough to stand up to the threats coming from the populists and political extremes.

Resentment, anger and despondence all drive populist sentiment. People who feel a sense of loss for a world of the past and fear the one that is coming are drawn to politicians who offer simplistic solutions, especially if no one else is willing to take those genuine fears seriously.

Populists always have an easy, if ultimately unworkable, answer. That is, at its core, the attempt to divide society into two easily distinguishable groups. Often, it’s the “real” people vs those working against them, whether that’s the elites, the “deep state”, newcomers or outsiders. Or sometimes it’s the oppressed and oppressor, in which the latter is always attempting to subjugate the former, based on race, ethnicity, gender or economic status. The individual doesn’t count, only their identity classification.

Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich campaign ahead of the 1 November 2022 election (GIL COHEN-MAGEN/AFP via Getty Images)AFP via Getty Images

Whatever form populism takes, this divisive approach leaves no room for context or complexity. There is no room for introspection, for debate or for self-criticism. That is why populism goes hand in hand with political extremism, dividing us and preventing us from finding any common ground. Extremists want us to believe that compromise is never necessary, that it is a symbol of weakness and failure.

But what if those people who guarantee easy solutions to complex issues – who seek to exploit genuine economic difficulty and sincere cultural fears – are the problem? What if we’re not as divided as they want us to believe? What if, in fact, many of us are eager to inhabit a political centre ground?

Centrism is based upon a clear set of ideals and principles: the importance of moderation and pragmatism; the embrace of complexity; the deep commitment to liberal democracy; the belief in equality of opportunity, and that through balancing the tensions that exist in every nation we can make people’s lives better.

That alternative to extremism can’t come from another brand of extremism or a different strain of populism, it must come from the centre. It is the centre that offers the antidote to the politics of intransigence and inflexibility; it is the centre that can counter the messages of despair and divisiveness. It is where the mainstream of politics should be, it is the agenda to which others should be made to respond.

We will never beat the extremists at their own game. Nor should we ever seek to. If illiberals drive the agenda with fear, then centrists must do the opposite. One of the major effects of fear-driven politics is that it destroys trust in public institutions and poisons the public sphere. It creates what political scientist Lee Drutman of the New America Foundation calls the “cynicism and mistrust doom loop”.

This cycle only serves to strengthen the extremes and weaken moderate liberal centrists. It is why we must lead the fight to preserve liberal democracy and the institutions which sustain it.

The best defence, though, is for centrists to help people feel that even when things are genuinely difficult, as many believe they are now, they can be better. To show people a path that seems plausible. To offer them hope, a powerful emotional driver. It works across borders and across generations.

Political consultants and marketing experts have debated for years whether this can compete with fear. It can, and there are plenty of examples where it has, perhaps most notably Bill Clinton’s 1992 election campaign, which was infused with messages of hope including a particularly famous and impactful 60-second advert, “A Place Called Hope”, named after his birthplace.

The former chief rabbi of Great Britain, Lord Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, one of the great thinkers and writers of our time, wrote: “Optimism and hope are not the same.

“Optimism is the belief that the world is changing for the better; hope is the belief that, together, we can make the world better. Optimism is a passive virtue, hope an active one.”

The “politics of hope”, as Rabbi Sacks termed it, not only inspires an emotional reaction but drives action, forming healthier societies that are more cohesive, tolerant and open, as opposed to politicians with authoritarian and illiberal tendencies who imbue societies with fear and create violence and prejudice.

The politics of hope is strongest when it is infused with patriotism, acknowledging the public’s sense of pride in the tradition, community and character of their society. People want to feel pride in the place they live, in their community, in their history and values, and want to know that the unique characteristics that make up their identity are genuinely respected. They want to be part of an uplifting story.

We can strengthen society by respecting traditions and still be committed to moving forward. That is something centrists are uniquely placed to do. Centrists can offer a hopeful national story that is patriotic without being jingoistic, which respects the past without dreaming of reliving an idealised version of it and which embraces cultural icons with the same nuance with which we approach our daily lives.

That embrace of complexity is at the heart of centrism.

Centrism seeks out the most productive and effective approach to tackle the competition between globalisation and local communities, civil rights and security, religion and democracy, free markets and social-safety nets.

It is by no means an easy act to balance these inherent tensions. When globalisation does not protect local communities too many get left behind, but isolationist policies that reject the international community leave too many opportunities untapped. Free markets that leave the poor to fend for themselves destroy healthy societies, but welfare states can strangle the free market, destroying enterprise and innovation.

[Missing Credit]

Policies that try to impose total equality in society disincentivise hard work and individual success, but ignoring structural inequality ensures whole communities are almost guaranteed to fail.

Centrism is the never-ending work of managing competing tensions, of setting national priorities that accept those tensions exist rather than wishing them away. Centrists believe in such incomplete answers as part of an imperfect world; those seemingly partial solutions help us to continue living together by creating a broad-based shared narrative, a tolerance and understanding of differing points of view, a continuation of government rather than wild swings of the policy pendulum. When centrists govern, it is with the aim of making sure no one is entirely overlooked, even if no one will get everything they want.

While extremists seek total victory and dominance over the entire political system and to remove dissenting voices, centrists understand the dangers of that approach – it is the driving force behind some of the darkest periods in human history. Centrists must do the opposite, embrace compromise and do it willingly, not as a measure of last resort but as the key to building successful policy that allows us to live harmoniously in one society. That is the higher value.

Ultimately, centrism subscribes to a belief that we can make people’s lives better through an acceptance of complexity and moderation rather than a search for simplicity.

And, as former Australian prime minister Malcolm Turnbull wrote, “In a frenzied world, the respect, compromise and moderation at the heart of political centrism are the best guarantees that our democracies will endure.” That’s what political centrism has to offer, and it is a dramatic break from the trajectory of our modern political world.

​

Yair Zivan is the author of The Centre Must Hold and former senior adviser to Yair Lapid