Abstract:
This paper sets out three theoretical positions regarding centrism and ideology: 1) that centrism cannot be a ‘thick’ ideology, for its lack of ideational concepts; 2) that ‘centrism’ can be a ‘thin’ ideology, understood as a strategic and spatial addition to ‘thick’ ideologies like conservatism or social democracy; 3) through introducing the idea of centrism as an ‘artificial’ ideology – inspired by a discussion of ‘artificial agents’ from the political scientist David Runciman – that ‘centrism’ can also be entirely artificial, with political actors often associating themselves with a ‘non-ideological’ label, while continuing to present the dominant ideological bearings of the time.
Except in its ‘thin’ condition, with actors adapting ‘thick’ ideologies to more ‘centrist’ varieties, centrism does not exist as an ideology. It is an imagined political identity that, ideologically, is non-substantive. It does not follow that ‘centrists’ are non-ideological, however. Rather, ‘centrism’ is an avowed ‘thin’ accompaniment to a pre-existing ‘thick’ ideology – e.g. ‘centre right’ – or it is employed as an artificial ideology, obscuring the presence of pre-existing ideological positions.
Having set out the theoretical argument, the paper then applies this understanding to contemporary European politics, including Emmanuel Macron’s presidency and trends within British politics towards a more ‘centrist’ and ‘moderate’ politics after a (perceived) spell of radicalism on both the left and right. It asks what future ‘centrist’ politics has in Europe – and what merits and flaws, as a political strategy, centrism has offered European politics.