In the wake of the much celebrated Arab Spring - the revolutions which toppled political regimes all across North Africa and the Middle East - there's been something like a souring of hope: not democracy, but a resurgence of authoritarian and hardline Islamism seems to have taken over many of the countries involved. An 'Arab Winter', as some have said. Exactly why this happened is an interesting question, but one compelling reason that has been fourth is a lack of any alternatives; specifically, any alternatives which would provide a compelling vision of life, of what 'life well led' might consist of.

In their wonderful To Our Friends, The Invisible Committee write, for instance, that "what is at issue in contemporary insurrections is knowing what a desirable form of life would be. But recognizing this would immediately mean recognizing the ethical inanity of the West. And this would rule out attributing the victory of this or that Islamic party after this or that uprising to a presumed mental backwardness of the populations. It would have to be admitted on the contrary that the strength of the Islamists lies precisely in the fact that their political ideology presents itself as a system of ethical prescriptions first of all. To put it differently, if they were more successful than the other politicians, it's precisely because they didn't situate themselves mainly on the terrain of politics."

This passage warrants some comments: the first is that the use of 'ethics' here harkens back to an old use of the term, one concerned less with 'good and evil' - what I'd prefer to call moralism - than with what it means to live, and to live well. As the Committee write, the problem is a matter of making avaliable 'a different idea of life', which, as a set of examples, might consist of "sharing rather than economizing, conversing rather than not saying a word, fighting rather than suffering, celebrating our victories rather than disallowing them, engaging rather than keeping one's distance". It's worth recalling at this point that the Greek term ethos refers to 'habit', or better, a 'habitual dwelling place'.

---

I think this idea, that people will mobilize themselves first and foremost for the advancement of an ethos - a way of life - to be incredibly powerful. It's helped me make sense, for example, not only of the failures of the Arab Spring, but of the success of the gay marraige push here in Australia. I was somewhat astounded at the level of political mobilziation here on the topic given that, on the balance of things, gay marraige only really affects a small percentage of the population, especially when placed side by side, with say, economic policy. On the other hand, what the debate over gay marraige offers, however, is precsiely a 'vision of a way of life': it crystallizes, in a way immidiately identifiable, a 'way of living' - an ethos - that goes beyond strictly 'political' concerns.

It's on this ground too, that so-called traditionalist politics have had a massive advantage over the left. For all its myriad failings, traditionalist politics provides, at least, a vision of a life well lived (the Committee speak of "a certain Protestant idea of happiness - being hardworking, thrifty, sober, honest, diligent, temperate, modest, reserved") that the left is sorely lacking. And moreover, that "as long as being of the left will mean denying the existence of ethical truths and correcting for that impairment with a morality that's as feeble as it is expedient, the fascists will continue to look like the only affirmative political force, being the only ones who don't apologize for living as they do. They'll go from success to success, and will go on deflecting the energy of nascent revolts back against themselves."

This need to cultivate a new vision of what it means to live well is, perhaps, one of the most enduring challenges facing the world today. And interestingly, I think there's a nascent understanding of this emerging here and there: one can see it in say, George Moboit's recent Out of the Wreckage - with it's focus on belonging and community - or indeed, in the Committee's own emphasis on communal living. Christopher DeWolf's recent book on street organization in Hong Kong is also a wonderful portrait of what it means to have a politics focused on a way of life and a manner of living that is exemplary for anyone interested in what one might refer to as the form of politics to come.