Abstract
Despite its specific origin in the seating arrangement of the French National Assembly after the revolution of 1789, the right–left divide of the ideological spectrum has proved remarkably resilient in anchoring public intellectual life for over two centuries. In this article, I argue that we are witnessing a 90° rotation of this ideological axis, resulting in a new set of poles, each of which combines elements of the old right–left divide. The ‘precautionary’ pole brings together the conservationist side of the right and the communitarian side of the left, whereas the ‘proactionary’ pole unites the libertarian side of the right and the technocratic side of the left. I prepare the ground for discussing these new alternatives with a consideration of the political theology of the old right–left divide, which ultimately turns on alternative visions of how the past determines the future. This ‘left’ basically holds that what is possible significantly exceeds what is probable, with liberals adopting an ‘antirealist’ and socialists a ‘realist’ stance towards the prospect of an optimal social order. Both the precautionary and proactionary poles of the new ideological spectrum are fixated on our attitude towards a future in which the ontological constitution of the polity (i.e. its ‘humanity’) is among the issue under contestation. In this emerging ideological conflict, more of which is transpiring in video than in print, the precautionaries are marked as more ‘risk-averse’ and the proactionaries more ‘risk-seeking’ than had been presumed to be the normal attitude in the modern welfare state.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Agassi, J. (1975). Science in flux. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined communities. London: Verso.
Bloom, J. D. (2009). Hollywood intellect. Lanham: Lexington Books.
Böhm-Bawerk, E. (1959). Capital and interest: history and critique of interest theories. (Orig. 1884). South Holland: Libertarian Press.
Brague, R. (2007). The law of God: the philosophical history of an idea. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Briggle, A. (2010). A rich bioethics. South Bend: University of Notre Dame Press.
Brush, S. (1975). Should history of science be rated X? Science, 183, 1164–1183.
Cassirer, E. (1923). Substance and function. (Orig. 1910). La Salle: Open Court Press.
Chan, S., Zee, Y.-K., Jayson, G., & Harris, J. (2011). ‘Risky’ research and participants’ interests: the ethics of phase 2C clinical trials. Clinical Ethics, 6, 91–96.
Commager, H. S. (1977). The empire of reason: how Europe imagined and America realized the enlightenment. Garden City: Doubleday.
Crichton, M. (2006). Next. New York: Harpercollins.
Davies, W. (2010). Economics and the ‘nonsense’ of law: the case of the Chicago antitrust revolution. Economy and Society, 39, 64–83.
Duhem, P. (1969). To save the appearances: an essay on the idea of physical theory from Plato to Galileo (Orig. 1908). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Elster, J. (1983). Sour grapes: studies in the subversion of rationality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Elster, J. (1998). Deliberation and constitution making. In J. Elster (Ed.), Deliberative democracy (pp. 97–122). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Extropy Institute (2004). Extropy Institute’s Vital Progress Summit challenges President Bush’s Bioethics Council Report (press release: 19 February) http://www.extropy.org/summitpress.htm. Accessed 30 July 2012.
Festinger, L., Riecken, H., & Schachter, S. (1956). When prophecy fails. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Fuller, S. (2000). The governance of science. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Fuller, S. (2002). Knowledge management foundations. Woburn: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Fuller, S. (2007). New frontiers in science and technology studies. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Fuller, S. (2008). Dissent over descent. Cambridge: Icon.
Fuller, S. (2009). The sociology of intellectual life. London: Sage.
Fuller, S. (2010). Science: the art of living. Durham, UK: Acum McGill-Queens University Press.
Fuller, S. (2011). Humanity 2.0: what it means to be human past, present and future. London: Macmillan.
Fuller, S. (2012). Preparing for life in humanity 2.0. London: Macmillan.
Fuller, S., & Collier, J. (2004). Philosophy, rhetoric and the end of knowledge (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Erlbaum. Orig. 1993, by Fuller.
Fuller, S., & Lipinska, V. (2013). The proactionary imperative. London: Macmillan.
Funkenstein, A. (1986). Theology and the scientific imagination. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Garcia, S. M. (1996). The precautionary approach to fisheries. In FAO Technical Fisheries Papers (No. 350). Rome: United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization. http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/W1238E/W1238E01.htm#ch1. Accessed 30 July 2012.
Goodman, N. (1955). Fact, fiction and forecast. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Grundmann, R., & Stehr, N. (2001). Why is Werner Sombart not part of the core of classical sociology? Journal of Classical Sociology, 1, 257–287.
Harrison, P. (2007). The fall of man and the foundations of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280–1300.
Hirschman, A. O. (1991). The rhetoric of reaction. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Jacob, M. (1996). Sustainable development: a reconstructive critique of the United Nations debate. Ph.D. dissertation. Göteborg: Göteborg University Department of Theory of Science.
Kirby, D. (2008). Hollywood knowledge: communication between scientific and entertainment cultures. In D. Cheng, M. Claessens, T. Gascoigne, J. Metcalfe, B. Schiele, & S. Shi (Eds.), Communicating science in social contexts: new models, new practices (pp. 165–180). Berlin: Springer Science and Business Media.
Knight, F. (1921). Risk, uncertainty and profit. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Kurzman, C. (2009). Democracy denied, 1905–1915: intellectuals and the fate of democracy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Lippmann, W., & Merz, C. (1920). A test of the news. The New Republic, 4, 1–42.
LSE Mackinder Programme (2010). The Hartwell Paper: a new direction for climate policy after the crash of 2009. London: London School of Economics. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/27939/. Accessed 30 July 2012.
Mannheim, K. (1936). Ideology and Utopia. (Orig. 1929). New York: Harcourt and Brace.
Mason, P. (2012). Why it’s kicking off everywhere: the new global revolutions. London: Verso.
McCloskey, D. (1975). The economics of enclosure. In W. Parker & E. Jones (Eds.), European peasants and their markets (pp. 123–160). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Milbank, J. (1990). Theology and social theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
More, M. (2005). The proactionary principle. http://www.maxmore.com/proactionary.htm. Accessed 30 July 2012.
Morozov, E. (2011). The net delusion: how not to liberate the world. London: Allen Lane.
Newey, G. (2012). I have £2000, you have a kidney. London Review of Books, 34(12), 9–12.
Polanyi, K. (1944). The great transformation. Boston: Beacon.
Popper, K. (1957). The poverty of historicism. London: Routledge.
Popper, K. (1972). Objective knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rawls, J. (1972). A theory of justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Read, R. (2012). Guardians of the future. Weymouth: Green House Publications. http://www.greenhousethinktank.org/files/greenhouse/home/Guardians_inside_final.pdf. Accessed 30 July 2012.
Runciman, D. (2008). Political hypocrisy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Sandel, M. (2007). The case against perfection. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Sandel, M. (2012). What money can’t buy. New York: Farrar.
Schumpeter, J. (1942). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. London: Allen and Unwin.
Scott, J. C. (1998). Seeing like a state. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Silver, L. (1997). Remaking Eden: cloning and beyond in a brave new world. New York: Harpercollins.
Standage, T. (1998). The Victorian internet. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
Van Fraassen, B. (1980). The scientific image. Oxford: Clarendon.
Whately, R. (1963). Elements of rhetoric. (Orig. 1828). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fuller, S. Precautionary and Proactionary as the New Right and the New Left of the Twenty-First Century Ideological Spectrum. Int J Polit Cult Soc 25, 157–174 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10767-012-9127-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10767-012-9127-2