The Pendulum Effect: Examining the Backlash Against Progressive Policies
In discussions I’ve had with individuals who would freely describe themselves as being on the left (and would typically be defined as privileged, i.e. mostly white males and females), I hear the argument frequently trotted out that the “woke” agenda is all part of a “re-balancing.” Specifically, for certain topics or demands that might seem exaggerated (to some), it’s all part of a pendulum swing that’s needed to happen in order to get change to happen. While some of the discussions, media viewpoints and government policies might seem extreme, they will continue, it’s a natural part of change. Ergo, the pendulum must swing far out before it naturally swings back to correct itself. They will neatly conclude that the net result is change. The “unintended” negative consequences on the “privileged” few are just a necessary part of the process.
In the continuing divisive environment in which we find ourselves, with political surprises abounding, I’ve been tracking elements of how the pendulum may be swinging back. The cases below are all US-centric which, in many ways is appropriate, since most of these trends have emanated from there. In all four cases cited below, the news came out rather recently.
Case #1: The Trump “Surprise”: A Conservative Comeback
The Trump victory in the US. Despite all the fanfare, celebrity support of Harris and predictions of a tight race by all polls and as reported by the media, Trump was re-elected, in what can only be called a complete victory. As of today, the count stands: Popular vote 75.9MM for Trump v 72.9MM for Harris. Delegates 312 v 226. Senate 53 v 47. House of Representatives 220 v 214. Governors 27 v 23. This Trump victory would seem to fall into a broader pattern whereby many incumbent governments around the world have been soundly or surprisingly defeated. The new governments have typically been rather staunchly right-wing, notably with the exception of Britain (although Starmer’s victory could also largely be down to having ousted the ‘guilty’ incumbent party of the prior 16 years.
Case #2: ADHD Overdiagnosis: Questioning Medical Trends
The ‘craze’ of ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder) and ADD (Attention Deficit Disorder) — with a corresponding rise in prescriptions of Adderall — spiked over the past two decades. With many parents consumed with angst in the hopes of finding a solution to help their “sick” child with schoolwork, the pressure was put on teachers and therapists to diagnose the illness. However, some scientists are now pushing back. The Economist reported that, “Scientists looking to simplify matters with a checklist of biological markers of ADHD have come up empty-handed.” The report goes on to say that “[s]tudies looking for genetic clues have also revealed little, other than the discovery that ADHD is heritable.” Bottom line, these scientists are questioning if ADHD can or should be seen as a disorder. I saw for myself how the temptation to accede to such a diagnostic was almost relieving as a parent. “Oh, the reason my child isn’t number one in class isn’t her fault…” Bottom line, we all have things and traumas with which to deal.
Case #3: Racial Disparities in Healthcare: Reexamining the Data
Back in 2020, research published in NVSS by the CDC, declared that in the US black babies tended to die more frequently when treated by white doctors than when cared for by black doctors. However, a new interpretation of the same data, published in September 2024 in a prestigious journal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, claims that this initial research was flawed. There were two issues. First, the initial interpretation failed to take into account that black babies are more frequently born severely underweight than white babies. Being born so underweight reduces (not surprisingly) the survival rate. Secondly, it turns out that there more proportionately more white doctors specialised in neo-natal care. As this Unherd article by John Murawski, says, “Physicians who handle the most serious medical cases tend to see higher death rates.” Once the data was controlled for these outliers, the conclusion is reversed. Check out the Economist Podcast for more. In short, this re-interpretation may well usher in a pendulum-swinging revisit of other studies that might have been shaped by the ongoing narrative. Murawski concludes, “The medical profession may be in for a reckoning of its own. Hundreds of peer-reviewed journal articles are ripe for an independent review that could result in corrections or possibly retractions.
Case #4: Corporate America’s DEI Retreat: Pressure from Conservatives
Walmart has announced that it has rolled back its DEI initiatives. US conservatives, such as Robby Starbuck, have been pressuring businesses to do so. Starbuck wrote on his Twitter feed that they’ve been able to “…change corporate policy at Tractor Supply, John Deere, Harley Davidson, Polaris, Indian Motorcycle, Lowe’s, Ford, Coors, Stanley Black & Decker, Jack Daniels, DeWalt tools, Craftsman, Caterpillar, Boeing, Toyota and now WALMART!” This Forbes article by Alicia Gonzalez writes, “The recent rollback of DEI initiatives can be attributed to various factors. Economic uncertainties, political polarization, and societal backlash against perceived “wokeness” have made some companies wary of continuing their investments in DEI.”
The Risks of Unchecked Ideological Swings
I wonder how many of these swing-backs will happen in other western countries? Meanwhile, how many more elements will it take before mass media notices that the pendulum is in full swing back. There are plenty more topics where it would seem not just wise but entirely necessary to have the pendulum swing back. For example, to date, the pendulum has yet to swing back on how the Covid pandemic was handled in the West. The question is how will the offended — the victims per se and/or the progressives — react to this? It strikes me that the support of these varyingly politicised — if not outright political — issues has become existential in nature on both sides of the equation.
It’s Them that’s Extreme…
Just as the narrative in the press tends to portray the right as being “extreme”, it’s evident that those on the right have been looking at the claims and policies on the left as extreme as well. This has been central to the vigorous momentum and reach of the so-called pendulum. There are three reasons why this argument of just letting the pendulum swing wildly one way can go astray.
- First, the damage that has been caused is not just to the privileged few. There have been many communities, families and individuals who have had their lives inalterably impacted, which will inevitably have long-term negative consequences.
- Secondly, freedom of speech is under siege and democracy is, therefore, ‘naturally’ at risk as well. Given the broadly left-leaning tendency in mainstream media and on university campuses, it takes considerable courage to speak up about these sensitive issues. The risk of being cancelled or losing one’s job or reputation, is a risk too far for many. The turbulence is thus bound to continue to the extent the existential tussle remains top of mind.
- Thirdly, the swing back may be equally swift and, even, violent. Worse, it may provoke civil unrest.
Media Transformation: The Rise of Independent Voices
In this context, it’s worth pointing out that over the past five years, the much-maligned X (formerly Twitter) has seen continued growth in its user base. In 2019, it had 330 million monthly active users, which grew through the pandemic to 396 million by 2021. In 2022, it was purchased by Elon Musk, who changed the name to X in July 2023. People talked about the need to abandon X in protest. However, it now has over 600 million monthly users. This success is interesting in light of the battle over free speech, the continuing decline of mainstream media’s influence, and the fact that its owner (Elon Musk) is now one of the most influential members of president-elect Trump’s circle. Back on Jan 8 2021, Twitter (not yet X), announced: “We have permanently suspended the account [of Donald Trump] due to the risk of further incitement of violence.” The maxim, Never Say Never, comes to mind. In an episode of Unherd, with guest Megyn Kelly, hosted by Emily Jashinsky, I heard the question whether mass media would soon be overtaken by independent bloggers, podcasts and non-legacy outlets? Perhaps that tipping point is not yet a reality, but it does seem that we are otherwise about to experience a significant sea change (excusing the reference to climate change).
Speaking of change…
Change is a difficult thing to entertain, especially when the nature of the change seems perilously existential. For both ends of the spectrum, the proposition of the other side feels like it’s ‘dangerous.’ You’ll hear both sides trying to claim the higher road, control the narrative and position the other side as the “end.” What’s going to motivate someone to want to lean into the other side’s beliefs and position? One approach I like to take when trying to help two people at loggerheads is to find common grounds. As two human beings, the challenge is to find something that both people can agree on? For example, they should strive to find a sport, a food, music, or a part of nature (mountains, sky, oceans, lakes…) that both enjoy. For many hard-nosed activists, the idea of acceding to anything the other says or believes can be antithetical. Yet, we surely have things we share. In fact, the chances are that we share many more things in common than not. What’s going to motivate someone to want to do this? At the very least, each may learn something they’d not previously known, such as how/why each other came to hold their deep-rooted positions. But the bigger need is to agree to a bigger picture, for example, that they both wish for the divisiveness to stop, democracy to continue and, better yet, belong to the same country.
A solution…?
It strikes me that there are two routes to a constructive resolution on the political front. The first is that we create a multi-lateral discussion about what our country stands for. I feel that many nations would, in fact, do well to visit this topic. The purpose is to help foster a common vision of the future to which all can agree. For example, what concretely do we mean when we sing in the US: “the Land of the free and the home of the brave”? How do we concretely define “freedom” or “liberty”? Afterwards, we’ll always have different propositions as to how to get there. But when all parties have disparate visions of the future ‘destination’, there is little route for reconciliation. Secondly, we need some responsible parties who are able to gather representative views on either side (and in the middle) of the spectrum to present decent (aka civil) debate. These shows must reach a mainstream following without resorting to clickbait and vulgar tactics. There are some podcasts (e.g. Left, Right & Center) that attempt to do so, but these shows are generally lost in the morass of other more outrageous, unchecked media. The same goes for universities which seem to have lost their way in hosting free speech and honest debate.
I note that, as for the two medical cases above (#2 and #3), these are also political in nature, related to the surrounding narratives. These issues – and a potential return of the pendulum — underscore the reduced respect held by Americans in the major institutions. Experts have lost their shiny reputation. As reported by the Economist earlier this year about the latest Gallup poll, trust in American institutions has been at historic lows over the last two years. For this, there will be hard work needed in order to gain that trust back. This will involve institutions taking a hard look at themselves in the mirror. And, again, it will take a bi-partisan, shared understanding why and how these institutions must serve a higher purpose than merely be instruments of a political agenda.
If the pendulum swing feels like it’s about to swing back, I hope that, rather than revenge, the spirit is truly about reconstruction.
I welcome your thoughts!
