Beyond left and right

The words 'left' and 'right' in politics were born out of a rather unusual seating arrangement. In 1789, in the National Assembly of revolutionary France, those who stood by the monarchy and tradition sat on the right. Those who wanted change sat on the left. A seating arrangement became a way of seeing the world, and over two centuries, it hardened into distinct political ideologies.

Every ideology begins as an attempt to answer a real human need. The trouble begins when we cling to one so tightly that we cannot see the other, and when loyalty to a label matters more than the interests of society at large.

Our ancient texts offer a different way of seeing. Gita speaks of samatvam, an even-mindedness that is not indifference but balance. Buddha taught the Middle Path, which avoids both indulgence and austerity. Imagine a politics guided less by rhetoric, and more by compassion, humility, competence and integrity. Imagine citizens asking not, 'Which side is this person on?' but 'Will this person serve everyone fairly?' Such questions demand that we think for ourselves and judge people by their conduct, not their tribe or ideological orientation.


A healthy society needs caution that protects, and courage that reforms. But disagreement need not manifest as hatred. When we see 'the other' as a fellow traveller with a different view of the same road, division softens. Perhaps the most worthwhile ideology is not a position on a spectrum. It's non-partisan commitment to the welfare of individual and society, free from the scourge of separatism, exclusion or condemnation.