Does Agora support the modern left or right?
The great misunderstanding
A great misunderstanding has permeated Western society, in that the left and the right should be diametrically opposed forces; two camps by nature at war with one another.
In reality, every society needs to harness different perspectives to create progress.
The left has historically been better at:
Pioneering social reforms
Expanding rights
Challenging outdated systems
Pushing new ideas
Advocating for the poor
Questioning orthodoxy
Compassion and inclusion.
The right has historically been better at:
Preserving cultural traditions
Maintaining social stability
Fiscal discipline & budgeting
Supporting military prowess
Growing the economy
Law & order enforcement
This divide is not a recent phenomenon but one that has plagued societies to their own destruction a myriad of times over.
Historical division
Rome - The Populares fought the Optimates in the Caesarian Civil Wars
The left: Fought for expanded citizenship for all Italians and land distribution
The right: Fought against dictatorship and for being a republic.
The balance: The Left was correct in fighting the injustices of the oligarchs, but failed to hedge against dictatorship resulting in subjugation to Caesar.
Athens - The Democracts fought the Oligarchs during the Peloponnesian War, tearing the city from within whilst Sparta watched.
The left: Fought for expanded political power for the poor and paid civic duties.
The right: Fought against the impulsiveness of mob rule.
The balance: The Left was on to a powerful idea in democracy but direct democracy tore apart their society through mob rule.
The industrial revolution - In a realm of new opportunities, new ideas came to blows.
The left: Championed the labor movement, fighting for the weekend, child labor laws, and safe working conditions to prevent human exploitation.
The right: Championed property rights, free enterprise, and the accumulation of capital, which drove the unprecedented technological innovation that ultimately lifted billions out of poverty.
The balance: The right’s push for individual rights helped propel the industrial revolution while the left was essential to ensure no one was left behind by that prosperity.
Unfortunately, when societies begin to love their ideals and not their countrymen, they divide into partisan camps which fight each other, usually to the destruction of the society or civil war.
Japan's example
A cautionary tale from history provides a clear example. During its feudal period, Japan's Tokugawa shogunate enforced a rigid, conservative social structure and a policy of near-total isolation. This approach brought over two centuries of peace and stability. However, this inwardly focused conservatism also caused the nation to stagnate. While the West was undergoing rapid industrial and technological revolutions, Japan remained locked in its old ways. When U.S. warships arrived in 1853, the country found itself technologically outmatched and vulnerable, forcing it to modernize rapidly to avoid colonization. The initial success of its conservatism ultimately became its greatest weakness.
Needing each other
People throughout the world find themselves drawn either to upholding tradition and values or discovering new paths. These two forces have been diametrically opposed to one another. Discovering new paths and upholding tradition are by instinct opposites. Those who are good at one are typically not those who are good at both. And those who are inclined to one are usually not inclined to both.
Understanding that differences in perspective are necessary in order to create a functioning society, and creating a means by which the natural friction between these two forces can happen in a controlled fashion for the betterment of society is essential for society's flourishing.
Agora: A celebration of different perspectives
Agora strongly condemns the tenor of the conversation modern Western societies are having with themselves. We as Agorans Recognize that different groups of people have different perspectives and that those differences should be harnessed for progress, not weaponized for conflict.
Agora asks; “what if, rather than destroying societies due to the difference in perspectives, each side's insights could be combined into working systems that created better results for the people?”
This is why Agora focuses heavily on creating an environment in which the best ideas can rise to the surface by being proven at a smaller scale and adopted by leadership.
Does Agora support the modern left or right?
In summary, it supports neither.
Cyber Sovereignty: Monolithic paradigm shift
Cyber Sovereignty encourages everyone to think in a new paradigm in which people don't try to impose their views on others. By and large, traditional politics is all about seizing power and imposing one's will on the opposing parties. Cyber Sovereignty believes this violates the principle of consent as those citizens born in a nation are imposed upon without reasonable alternatives.
Not only does this system lead to resentment, it leads to inefficiency, as systems are not competing for consenting citizens but using the instruments of state to destroy the other side by weaponizing the judiciary, legal system, regulatory system, etc. to the detriment of all those that oppose their will.
Cyber Sovereigntists strongly believe that the best way to preserve harmony is to allow different communities to live by their own moral codes rather than imposing values and beliefs from the top down.