Fresh Thinking is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

In an era of political fragmentation and cultural tension, it is tempting to seek stability. We long for certainty in our leaders, clarity in our values, and control over our communities. Figures like Donald Trump, movements like Brexit, and the rise of nationalist politics across Europe and the world all reflect a common impulse: to resist change, to hold the world still.

* But what if this impulse itself is a kind of illusion?

* What if the desire for fixity and control runs against the grain of reality itself?

In this essay, I will explore how our political instincts are often shaped by a material philosophy that sees the world as a collection of fixed things, identities, borders, ideas. I will contrast this with a process philosophy that understands reality as relational, unfolding, and co-created. Through this lens, we will examine Trumpism and Brexit as metaphysical attempts to solidify what is inherently fluid and explore how an ethic of care might offer a more grounded, hopeful way forward.

The Material View: Control and Certainty

Material philosophy sees the world as made of things. It views people, nations, and values as fixed entities that must be protected. In material politics, the goal is to maintain stability by defending what is known and certain. Political rhetoric often reflects this mindset: it speaks of borders to be defended, enemies to be defeated, and values to be preserved. Such a worldview thrives in times of uncertainty, offering the comforting illusion that some things never change.

This mindset is not limited to conservative movements; it permeates much of mainstream political thought, regardless of ideology. Whether on the left or right, the focus often remains on holding onto fixed identities and protecting established norms. In this sense, both progressive and conservative politics can fall into the trap of treating political life as a struggle to secure static truths.

The Process Alternative: Embracing Becoming

Process philosophy, rooted in thinkers like Alfred North Whitehead, challenges this view. It sees the world not as composed of static entities but as a dynamic interplay of events. From this perspective, reality is constantly in the process of becoming, and our task is not to hold it still but to engage with it creatively and relationally.

In politics, this means moving away from binary thinking, winners and losers, patriots and traitors, and toward dialogue, emergence, and co-creation. Process politics values responsiveness over rigidity, care over control. It asks us to consider politics not as a fight over fixed ideas but as an ongoing conversation, where our understandings and relationships are continuously evolving.

Trump, Brexit, and the Resistance to Change

Trumpism, Brexit, and similar movements are best understood not just as political phenomena but as ontological ones. They reflect a desire to resist the flow of change, to return to an imagined past when identities were more stable and social roles more clearly defined. Trump’s rhetoric is built on the promise of making America great “again”, restoring a past reality that, for many, never truly existed.

Likewise, Brexit’s slogan of "taking back control" was less about policy than about metaphysical security: the belief that Britain could somehow reclaim an identity that globalisation had disrupted. In both cases, the resistance to becoming is not merely nostalgic but deeply existential. It is a refusal to accept that the world, and our place within it, is always evolving.

Care as Political Practice

Joan Tronto’s ethic of care offers a counterpoint. To care is to be attentive, responsible, responsive. It is a practice grounded in relationality rather than control. In political life, care means creating spaces for dialogue rather than dominance, listening rather than asserting, and co-creating rather than dictating. It means understanding that political solutions emerge through collective effort rather than unilateral action.

When politics is approached as a process of becoming, the goal is not to restore a mythic past or dominate the present but to cultivate the conditions for creative and ethical emergence. This kind of politics requires humility and courage, especially when faced with the seductive simplicity of authoritarian rhetoric.

Conclusion: Finding a Political Home

If you feel politically homeless, torn between the rigidity of the left and the reactionary nature of the right, you might find a home in a process-oriented politics. The Green Party, with its commitment to subsidiarity, ecological justice, and participatory democracy, embodies this ethos. It seeks not to dominate but to engage, not to control but to care.

The work ahead is challenging, but it is also hopeful. Embracing a politics of becoming means letting go of certainty, opening up to relationship, and daring to co-create a future that honours complexity. It is not about holding the world still but participating in its unfolding.

If we can embrace that challenge, we might just discover that the politics of care is not only possible but necessary for our collective survival.

Get full access to Fresh Thinking at freshthinking.substack.com/subscribe