If what we’re against, above everything else, is cruelty and the abuse of power… then are we for kindness?

But before I get into this article, I want to address a few points.

I’m talking about a kindness that is radical in the change it demands. A kindness that fights when facing down cruelty and those looking to concentrate and abuse power.

We also need a vision of what a kind society could be. I’m not only talking about the how of doing politics. That radical, standing-up-to-cruelty type of kindness must flow into our policy and campaigns.

I don’t think I’m suggesting kindness as a slogan or headline message. And we don’t have a monopoly on kindness in our party, policies, members, or voters.

What I do think, is that there is space for a politics that grasps and leads with that strong, radical kindness.

“What do the Liberal Democrats stand for? I don’t know”

That most of the public don’t know what we stand for has become a dominant and tiring narrative. But we must keep addressing it.

We stand for so many things. And that’s often the problem.

Liberal Democrats struggle to create an instinctive subconscious reaction where people feel connected with an overarching story.

I wrote recently about that challenge and the idea of a platform. I’ve come to view my own liberalism as trying to give people the platform to thrive and live their unique version of a best life. Genuine freedom and opportunity. Without accepting that there must be winners and losers in society.

But despite standing by that platform as a guiding beacon for politics, policymaking, and as a vision for society, I wasn’t fully convinced in it as a clear answer to what we’re for.

That’s where kindness comes in.

I have Jacinda Ardern’s autobiography A Different Kind of Power partly to thank. For some time, kindness has been my simplest explanation for why I’m a Liberal Democrat. But more recently something else crystalised that belief.

On “Time”

Like many of you, I’ve been watching Time, the BBC prison drama. I hope you shared the same revulsion at what we’re capable of doing, systematically as a society, to other people. And it’s not only the justice system. We’ve seen similar visceral reactions to (both deliberate or unintended) cruelty in TV depictions of the Post Office scandal, factory farming, environmental destruction, and beyond.

Of course, it’s not only injustice on screen that causes that reaction against cruelty.

Our welfare system forces the least advantaged to constantly justify their meagre support. Our housing system absolves itself of responsibility for families in danger, including from life-threatening domestic violence or maintenance failings, because boxes aren’t ticked. Our economic system concentrates power in the largest firms and wealthiest individuals. They are rarely kind.

If we’re against cruelty, then is kindness “what the Liberal Democrats are for?”

In Being Liberal, David Howarth lists hating cruelty, bullying, and the abuse of power as perhaps the deepest, most consistent tenets of British liberalism.

So, at our best, do we stand for kindness above anything else?

Jacinda Ardern proved that a kind approach – combined with strength and standing your ground – in politics is possible and popular. Despite the subsequent rightward shift in New Zealand politics, my interpretation is that it was not due to her approach, and rather, like so many countries, a broken economic system leading to a desire for change.

We therefore need kindness to flow into politics and policies that work for people.

What does a politics based on kindness look like?

If kindness is the opposite of cruel politics, then let’s consider again our welfare, housing, and economic systems.

A kind society would have a welfare system that actively supports individuals to thrive, not trap them in an endless cycle of poverty.

A kind society would provide safe, secure, and affordable housing as well as the resources for local authorities to empathetically and enthusiastically help every resident with their individual problems.

A kind society would mean an economy providing the platform individuals need to thrive within a stable, ideally flourishing, environment.

Back on Time

“A society should be judged not by how it treats its outstanding citizens but by how it treats its criminals.”

This quote is usually (it seems with some uncertainty) attributed to Fyodor Dostoyevsky. Variations touch on judging societies by their treatment of animals, and the most vulnerable more widely.

To finish with another brief outline of what a society based on kindness would look like, I want to come back to Time and our justice system.

In this piece published by The Conversation, the authors argue for forward-looking justice. A system that centres on the future. That doesn’t mean ignoring what has happened. It doesn’t mean de-prioritising victims. It doesn’t mean excuses. But it does mean understanding. And it means a justice system that asks what is best for individuals and society moving forward. Not revenge. But kindness in the hardest of circumstances.

We’re all trying, in our different spaces, to decipher what we stand for – and how to communicate it

Whether you agree with kindness being what we ultimately stand for, or that a variation of the phrasing might work better… or that kindness exists somewhere else in our values. Or even if you disagree totally… I would love to hear your thoughts.

Just be kind about it!

* Josh works on climate and sustainability across research, consulting, convening, and advocacy, focusing on systems change and new economics. Josh is a member of the Lib Dem Federal Policy Committee (FPC). He is a former PPC and Cambridge City Councillor with the opposition portfolio for Climate, Environment, and the City Centre.