​

​

​

45-Degree Change Framework 2.0: Navigating the Progressive Dilemma

 

 

Introduction to the 45-Degree Change Model

 

Political life in the UK and globally is characterized by a 'progressive dilemma' - a contradiction between a failing, top-down exclusionary politics of successive governments - Labour and Conservative - and the fragmentation of progressive radical civil society. Protest movements often erupt and then subside, and small progressive organizations struggle to influence wider change.

 

In response to this, Neal Lawson's 2019 publication, 45-Degree Change: Transforming Politics from Below and Above, introduced a model for a new progressive politics. What is termed here the 45-Degree Change Model 1.0 proposed a reciprocal relationship between horizontal civil society movements and vertical institutional structures. The key idea is to democratize the state through interaction with radical civil society, while horizontally organized groups could achieve more durable impacts with support from reformed institutions.

 

 

From Model 1.0 to Framework 2.0

 

The 45-Degree Change Framework 2.0 elaborates on the original model by expanding its conceptual toolkit. The new framework was developed to address a fundamental twin crisis : the global poly-crisis driven by neoliberalism, and the historical failures of both authoritarian socialism and centrist social democracy.

 

The 2.0 Framework is informed by the Gramscian concept of the 'historical bloc'. It suggests that the dominant, regressive historical bloc is sustained by vertical assemblages of hierarchical power. In contrast, the potential for an alternative, progressive historical bloc lies in the horizontal assemblages of civil society.

 

 

Key Dimensions of the 2.0 Framework

 

The 2.0 Framework is built on four interconnected dimensions illustrated in the figure below.

 

• Vertical assemblages of the dominant bloc - these comprise the hierarchical forces and activities—such as the governmental state and transnational institutions—that support the dominant, regressive historical bloc.

   

• Horizontal assemblages of the alternative bloc  - these include the multiple forces and activities in civil society, such as grassroots movements, NGOs, and community groups, that have the potential to form the basis of a progressive counter-hegemony.

   

• 45-Degree zone of mediation and bloc contestation - this is a dynamic space where the two historical blocs compete for power and influence. Strong progressive mediation in this zone involves building a new bloc by connecting horizontal and vertical elements.

​

• Transitioning times - a temporal dimension that conceptualises the construction of a progressive bloc over time and transitioning to a new progressive settlement.

​

​

​​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​Dominant and alternative counter hegemonies 

​

The interaction of the horizontal and vertical assemblages is seen as the contestation between dominant and alternative counter hegemonies that at any particular moment can produce complex and hybridised outcomes that are analysed through 'Double Shuffle analysis'​.

​

​

The Role of Organic Intellectuals

 

The concept of organic intellectuals, originally theorized by Antonio Gramsci, is central to the 2.0 Framework. These individuals or groups act as 'bridge-builders' between the horizontal and vertical assemblages.  These 'organisers' can be either regressive, working to sustain the dominant bloc, or progressive, working to build the alternative bloc. The 2.0 Framework emphasizes the need for a diverse range of progressive organic intellectuals to apply a blend of horizontal political consciousness and vertical specialist knowledge to the mediation process.

 

 

Building the Progressive Bloc

 

According to the Framework, building a progressive historical bloc requires several strategies, which constitute 'strong progressive 45-degree mediation':

 

1. Unifying progressive mediation capacities - this involves uniting diverse actors around foundational principles such as greater equality, democracy, sustainability, and peace.

    

2. Expanding collaboration in the horizontal assemblage - the fragmentation of radical civil society is a key challenge. Collaboration can be expanded by mapping the landscape of key actors, facilitating cross-movement dialogue, and building bridges between protest movements and civil society innovators.

    

3. Democratizing the vertical assemblage - radical civil society cannot be sustained without a reformed vertical world. This includes democratizing the voting system, devolving powers to local and regional government, and making political parties less hierarchical and more receptive to grassroots input.

    

4. Creating socialized transitioning times - involves unifying the different timescales of change—from the urgency of climate action to the slower process of rebuilding community bonds—through a shared narrative of a "New Settlement".

​​​​

​​​​​​​​

 

 

​