Why This Manifesto and Platform Exists
The pace of change in the world is accelerating. Political division is deepening. Technology is reshaping economies and societies faster than our ability to adapt. In such an environment, it is essential to be clear about the personal manifesto values, or personal platform, that one will not compromise. Yesterday, I wrote about not waiting for permission. Today, I am not waiting for anyone to say it is acceptable to post my red line pledge.
This document is my pledge. It is not a campaign for political office. I am not seeking power because power often corrupts those who hold it. Instead, I am setting out the principles that guide my thinking and my actions. These are the lines I will not cross, even when it is unpopular or inconvenient.
Different people will have different values. That is normal and healthy in a democratic society. The challenge is not to erase those differences but to find areas of agreement and compromise that allow us to work together. This manifesto and platform is my contribution to that process.
The Values I Will Not Cross
1. Classical Liberalism: Freedom with Responsibility
Classical liberalism is the belief that individuals have inherent dignity and rights, and that government exists to protect those rights, not to override them. It supports:
- Freedom of speech and thought.
- Equality before the law.
- Limited but accountable government.
- The rule of law as the foundation of civil society.
Freedom does not mean the absence of rules; it means the ability to live according to one’s own conscience without infringing on the rights of others.
Many advances in modern society, from universal education to public health systems, have their roots in liberal reforms. These changes were not the result of revolution or extremism but of deliberate, reasoned policy-making that improved life for millions.
2. Stoic Resilience: Replacing Chaos with Discipline
Stoicism teaches that while we cannot control every event, we can control our response. In an age where political debate is often reduced to outrage and blame, this mindset is essential.
Stoic resilience means:
- Remaining calm under pressure.
- Focusing on facts rather than emotions.
- Acting on reason, not impulse.
Populist movements often gain power by exploiting fear and anger. A disciplined, measured approach is the best defence against this cycle of instability.
3. Environmental Stewardship: A Practical Obligation
Environmental sustainability is not an optional extra; it is a requirement for long-term human survival. This involves:
- Protecting biodiversity.
- Restoring damaged ecosystems.
- Treating environmental maintenance as essential infrastructure.
History offers examples of business leaders who recognised this connection. The Rowntree and Cadbury companies invested in clean housing, green spaces, and fair working conditions for their employees. They understood that a healthy environment and a stable community benefit everyone. Today, with far greater scientific understanding, we have no excuse for inaction.
For a modern framework on responsible technology that supports sustainability, see the W3C’s Ethical Web Principles.
4. Human-Centred Technology: Managing the Fourth Industrial Revolution
Automation, artificial intelligence, and biotechnology will continue to change the nature of work and society. These changes can bring benefits, but they also risk leaving millions without employment or purpose.
Technology policy should:
- Ensure automation benefits society broadly, not just corporations.
- Include safeguards against misuse.
- Prioritise human dignity and well-being in design and deployment.
5. Post-Work Dignity: Expanding the Definition of Contribution
If machines increasingly perform work that once required human labour, society must adapt. That means:
- Providing universal access to lifelong education.
- Recognising creative, volunteer, and community work as valuable contributions.
- Funding social safety nets from the economic gains of automation.
The Star Trek vision of a society free from economic scarcity is not a current reality, but it is a useful guide. Technology should enable people to live purposeful lives beyond wage labour.
6. Moderate Centrist Governance: Reclaiming the Middle Ground
Centrism is not indecision; it is the recognition that lasting progress requires balance. Extremes rarely deliver sustainable solutions.
The UK’s National Insurance system, introduced by a Liberal government in 1911, is an example of this approach. It was a significant reform that provided workers with protection against sickness and unemployment, yet it was implemented in a way that built public support and avoided destabilising the economy.
Moderation is the practice of advancing progress while maintaining stability. It requires compromise without abandoning core principles.
Replacing Chaos and Blame
Populist leaders often offer simple villains instead of realistic solutions. Blame divides, while constructive problem-solving unites.
Replacing chaos requires:
- Leaders who prioritise competence over spectacle.
- Citizens who reject manufactured outrage.
- A shared commitment to evidence-based policy.
The Dystopia to Avoid
Without these values, we face predictable outcomes:
- Erosion of rights in the name of security.
- Concentration of wealth and power in a few hands.
- Environmental collapse.
- Large sections of the population excluded from meaningful work and stability.
These are not distant threats. They are visible trends that must be addressed now.
The Path Forward
- Base policy on evidence, not ideology.
- Preserve cultural diversity while fostering global cooperation.
- Treat environmental restoration as essential infrastructure.
- Expand lifelong learning to prepare for multiple careers.
- Share the benefits of automation to reduce inequality.
An Invitation to Others
This manifesto and platform is my personal pledge. Yours will be different, and that is expected in a free society. What matters is that you define your principles and live by them.
I invite you to write your own manifesto or platform, to share it, and to use it as a guide for decisions. Differences in values should be the start of discussion, not the end of cooperation.
Closing Reflection
These principles are not negotiable for me. I will not abandon them for popularity, profit, or power. They are the foundation for the kind of world I want to help build. Every person on this planet has a role in shaping that world. Whether through our daily choices, our work, our communities, or the example we set, we all contribute to the future. That future must be one where both humanity and the wider biosphere can thrive. A place where future generations inherit not just the remains of what we have used, but the benefits of what we have protected, restored, and improved.
The question is not whether we can agree on every detail. The question is whether we can agree on the kind of future worth working toward.
What kind of world do we want to live in?
