KEY FIVE: itszyx nsh 9055

Social Futurism is the political philosophy of positive social change through technology. Internationally, the primary vehicle of Social Futurist ideology is the Social Futurist Party (SFP).

Social Futurism is closely aligned with Technoprogressivism, but primarily distinguished in this early phase of its evolution by a deliberate distancing from Liberalism, which is commonly cited as a core characteristic of Technoprogressivism.

Liberalism is a very broad, multi-faceted phenomenon, both historically and in contemporary international politics. In the USA, the term “Liberal” connotes Left-wing or Progressive views, whereas “Classical Liberalism” and “Libertarian” refer to a nexus of ideologies ranging from Centre-Left to extreme Right-wing economic positions. The confusion between social and economic Liberalism carries across the Atlantic to Europe and the rest of the world, where “Neo-Liberalism” is a right-wing free market ideology sometimes known as “Globalization”, and the entire Establishment paradigm of the ‘post-war consensus’ is referred to as “Liberal Democracy” (leading to certain mainstream centrist political parties using the term, such as the UK’s Liberal Democrats).

In short, to think of “Liberalism” as occupying a particular place on the political spectrum is severely misguided. Liberalism essentially represents the entire gamut of pre-approved Establishment positions. You can find avowed “Liberals”, “Classical Liberals”, “Neo-Liberals” or “Libertarians” anywhere from the Left wing to the Right. Once Liberalism and (so-called “Representative”) Democracy are married in a single meme, the resultant brand – Liberal Democracy – essentially defines the “Overton Window” of political ideologies acceptable to the Establishment. This is exactly the reason why a pointedly centrist party would use the name, or something similar such as “Social Democrat” in Germany, to signal its by-definition acceptability to the voting public.

Social Futurism is not a-priori opposed to Liberalism per se, but it does identify the Establishment paradigm as severely dysfunctional and objects to a label – Liberal – which is clearly used to deliberately muddy the waters in support of “business as usual”.