buy from amazon.com
buy from amazon.co.uk

The enneagram of mainstream politics

Mainstream political debate has two competing ideologies: capitalism and socialism, the right and the left. These become the energy points – THREE and SIX – for an enneagram analysis of mainstream politics.

For the most part, contemporary western democracies operate in a pragmatic ‘center ground’ of politics, wholly committed to neither ideology but operating a ‘mixed economy’: a free market and self-reliance in some areas, state control and state provision in others. This ‘moderated’ center ground becomes point NINE in the analysis.

Those who tend to favor the free market and self-reliance are conventionally called ‘right wing,’ and those who favor state control and state provision are conventionally called ‘left wing.’

The full spectrum of the debate can now be arranged around the diagram.

Each country will have to do its own analysis of individuals and parties – but for the UK, New Labour has been the epitome of NINE politics: a pragmatic government of the center ground.

It operates on the THREE-SIX-NINE ‘triangle of simplicity.’ It can talk in the language of both capitalism and socialism, praising both the freedom of choice and self-reliance implicit in the free market, and the sense of community, interdependence, and common action implicit in universal provision.

It accommodates – sometimes with some tension – its two wings: the center left of the mainstream union movement at ONE, and the center right at EIGHT, which feels quite at home with New Labour’s continuing program of ‘part-privatizations’ and increasing private sector involvement at all levels of government.

The Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats have taken up residence at SEVEN and TWO respectively – two of the only spaces left on the diagram with New Labour proving so versatile from its base at NINE.

It was all very different in the 1980s. In 1984 and 1985, the battle of the ideologies in the UK was fought out in the streets – literally at times – between the miners under Arthur Scargill and the right wing government of Margaret Thatcher.

In retrospect – and looking at this enneagram analysis – the issues were fairly moderate, but very clearly of the left and of the right. Scargill wanted state subsidies for a major core industry – still a fairly common approach for many governments throughout the western world. Thatcher wanted the provision of a basic, readily available, global commodity to operate on free market principles – also a fairly common approach throughout the world. In terms of the enneagram of political debate, this is just a ONE-EIGHT spat – but the stakes were very high in terms of jobs and therefore the economies of several large regions.

What each of the main players did to raise the temperature so much – apart from refusing to find common ground – was to go to the extreme under pressure, following the links to the bottom of the diagram. Scargill began to talk the language of communist revolution, and Thatcher won few friends when she referred to the mineworkers as ‘the enemy within.’

The 1980s was also the decade of the SDP – emerging from one party, forming an alliance with another, and surviving briefly as a splinter group when the alliance partners merged. There were brave political journeys for many of those involved. Some moderate Tories found that a decade had taken them all the way from EIGHT to TWO. David Owen seemed to start at ONE and end up at SEVEN. If UK political debate since 1997 has been conducted on New Labour’s triangle of simplicity, political debate in the 1980s was conducted on the hexagon of complexity.

It has often been said that socialism is the politics of the heart while capitalism is the politics of the head. Socialism dreams of how the world could be or should be given that we are all human beings ‘with a heart’: it is the politics of emotions and visions and dreams, of reaching out to the world. Capitalism looks at how the world works, assumes that that is essentially how it is going to be, and works from there: it is the politics of observation, logic, analysis, and planning.

Socialism is the politics of the heart zone – at TWO and THREE and FOUR. At its practical TWO it longs to care for every one of its people like a big mother, ‘from the cradle to the grave.’ At its central THREE it tries to inspire everyone to pull together as a team to achieve great things. At its philosophical or ideological FOUR it longs to create a beautiful world. And socialism’s opponents call it ‘the nanny state’ at TWO, and ‘the politics of envy’ at FOUR, and accuse it of deceit in its efforts to present a leading, achieving image at THREE. Socialism’s proponents and opponents are both right. Corrupted – managed and populated by corrupted humankind – socialism does indeed become the politics of the heart zone’s temptations: a smothering nanny-ism and envy and deceit, plus anger at ONE. Redeemed – promoted by good people – it becomes the politics of the heart zone’s gifts: compassion and beauty and inspiration, plus fairness for all at ONE.

Capitalism is the politics of the head zone – at SEVEN and SIX and FIVE. At its practical SEVEN it sets people free to try out countless new ideas and inventions and businesses and schemes, each pursuing their own route to their own chosen happiness, rejoicing in this very freedom as a good in itself, hoping that everything will work out well for everyone: SEVEN the optimist-generalist with the gift of joy. At its central SIX it likes to stick with what it knows and honor and reward all that is or has been good: it has a certain loyalty and faithfulness built into the way it works. At its philosophical or ideological FIVE it observes the world with a certain detached objectivity and speaks about it with objective wisdom. And capitalism’s opponents call it ‘the politics of greed’ at FIVE, and conservative to the point of cowardice at SIX, and use ‘consumerism’ as a synonym for self-centered, self-defeating gluttony at SEVEN. Capitalism’s proponents and opponents are both right. Corrupted – managed and populated by corrupted humankind – capitalism does indeed become the politics of the head zone’s temptations: greed and gluttony and fear, plus arrogance at EIGHT. Redeemed – promoted by good people – it becomes the politics of the head zone’s gifts: joyful diversity, faithfulness, even wisdom – and a keen sense of justice at EIGHT.

In passing we could note that the center ground of politics often has the gut zone’s benefits – it can be just and peaceable and patient. And the center ground’s politicians sometimes submit to the gut zone’s temptations: idleness perhaps, and in political debate, a little too much political arrogance and anger. Justice and patience and peace would not be bad goals for the modern center ground of politics. And down at the foot of the diagram: utterly corrupted ideologically driven governments of left and right have looked remarkably similar to each other in their oppression of their peoples; and in contrast there is no more refreshingly honest political conversation than that between retired grandees of left and right who are no longer cursed by detailed policy making or the need for re-election, discussing their shared sacred ideology that all are born equal in dignity and value, and the only mystery and disagreement is how to turn that ideology into a practical policy. In corrupt form or redeemed form, left and right find that they do indeed meet at the extremes.

If we dare to talk names, the analysis can be developed to include individuals – for example, there is indeed a lot of the NINE about Tony Blair. He likes to keep his politics simple, and will not bother having an opinion about something unless it has practical applicable value in the here and now. NINE’s security type is THREE: the 1997 election campaign involved creating a sense that the entire nation was pulling together as a team to create a new beginning full of new hope – all very THREE – and in the wake of 11 September 2001, he presented the Labour Party Conference with a vision whereby all decent people everywhere in the world would pull together to save the world, one continent at a time. The stress type would be SIX: under pressure, Blair is surprisingly quick to call in the private sector to try to sort things out. And when clinging to false security back at THREE: the biggest complaint against New Labour is that ‘spin’ sometimes seems to stretch all the way to ‘deceit,’ the temptation of THREE.

Gordon Brown is a good example of someone operating politically at one of their link types. As the dour Scot whose guiding principle is prudence, he has the nature of SIX, but his politics – don’t tell Blair – are all discreetly THREE. While nobody is looking, he keeps piling up new benefits and tax breaks for the poor, and especially for those – a hint of SIX – who take low-paid work rather than no work at all. He remains pragmatic about all of this, placing him confidently on the THREE-SIX-NINE triangle, and therefore in tune with the New Labour ‘project.’ The widely rumored ‘sparky’ relationship with Blair is the classic form of relationship for people at the opposite ends – personally or politically – of an internal arrow on the diagram.

Margaret Thatcher was a classic EIGHT. Determined and unstoppable, she really would have stand-up arguments across the cabinet table, and respect people for taking a stand: the rest she dismissed as ‘wets.’ With the miners she pushed it right to the limit – and won in the end – but eventually the country had had enough. In retrospect, while she led the way in many areas, her main policies while in power are now seen as very much in the mainstream, only just right of center – even if she had extremist moments, visiting the foot of the diagram. Her campaign for the renewal of the inner cities even took her over to security type TWO for a while, and she put the interventionist Michael Heseltine in charge.

Scargill in contrast was a classic ONE. There was a moralistic perfectionism about his stance and he spluttered with indignation if challenged. His energy was limitless, and there was no room for an inch of compromise. Apart from his occasional trips to the foot of the diagram, most of his policies are surprisingly moderate. The main tax policy of his own Socialist Labour Party today is to double the personal allowance for income tax – which sounds quite radical until you do the sums, and compare it to what Gordon Brown already has in hand.

And so it appears to be the case that many people do indeed do politics ‘by type,’ mapping the enneagram of politics on to the strategy board. The option to follow a link or use a wing means that nobody’s politics are fixed or predetermined: a SIXish chancellor can be politically all NINE and THREE; the strategy board’s FOURs and FIVEs have easy links into the mainstream of politics in the top half of the diagram or to the other side on a wing; and SEVENs and EIGHTs and ONEs and TWOs can all take fairly confident trips across the board.

And the logic of it all is this: that an enneagram analysis of any human endeavor or choice is likely to map on to the strategy board whenever there are two contrasting approaches – for head and for heart – and a third neutral or moderating place, for the gut reaction.

next >>

amazon.com

amazon.co.uk