On 7th May 2026 the Guardian published the following article by its regular correspondent, George Monbiot, a supporter of the Green Party: “Imagine a technique that can heal Britain of division and keep out the hard right. I call it ‘radical listening’”
He says,
Further work by the same scientists along with other people’s studies show that persuasive methods do exist. They don’t change everyone’s minds, but they can make enough difference to win elections and build a kinder, fairer, greener country. These techniques are known as “deep canvassing”.
Deep canvassing works only if you have a large army of volunteers, ideally from the community you’re trying to reach. Instead of delivering a message then scuttling away, as conventional canvassers do, their role is to connect and listen. Across conversations that might last for 10 or 20 minutes, they let people discuss their feelings. Then, without arguing or judging, they share their own experiences and ask questions (“have you ever been treated unfairly?”) that might reveal common ground.
Done honestly, non-judgmental listening is an excellent idea. “We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak”, as the Stoic philosopher Epictetus once said.
Far though Mr Monbiot’s political beliefs are from mine, I acknowledge that on several occasions he has demonstrated both honesty and a willingness to listen, by publicly stating that he had changed his views in directions that made him unpopular with his fellow Greens. In the aftermath of the Fukushima nuclear accident, he surprised many by saying that he had changed his mind in favour of nuclear power, and, so long ago that I cannot find the reference, he realised that the policy of autarky that the Greens then recommended for the UK was equivalent to the sanctions on Iraq that they were denouncing, and said so in public. Unfortunately, as it did for a lot of people, the Covid-19 pandemic de-magnetised his moral compass and in 2021 he came out in favour of censorship, writing an article called “Covid lies cost lives – we have a duty to clamp down on them”.
Censorship and seeking to listen “without arguing or judging” are matter and anti-matter; they cannot coexist. To censor is to judge certain opinions as so pernicious that they must be suppressed. In the world that Mr Monbiot has said he wants, if one of the people “exhausted with politics” to whom he is listening were to express the anti-vax views that a lot of such people hold, his next action would be to report them to the police. In our world – in our Britain – there are plenty of opinions about migrants and transgender people that are widespread among the alienated masses that when expressed have resulted in state punishment, ranging from sending the police round to issue a “friendly warning” (for most of my life I thought that sort of thing only happened in dictatorships), through people being forbidden to access social media without the permission of their police minder and having their devices seized, up to arrest and jail. Even if Mr Monbiot were to bind himself during his radical listening sessions by something like the seal of the confessional, the mind that holds it to be desirable to legally suppress certain bad opinions cannot hear expressions of those opinions without categorising them as crimes that it is not convenient to punish right now.
Three quarters of a century ago in 1956, Chairman Mao Zedong – whose name was then usually romanised as Mao Tse-Tung – launched the “Hundred Flowers campaign”. Under the slogan “Let a hundred flowers bloom; let a hundred schools of thought contend”, the communist authorities proclaimed that from now on they would no longer punish critics. All would be free to speak, the better to promote new ideas to improve China.
Tentatively at first, some did offer their criticisms. When nothing bad happened, the trickle became a flood. Then, having established who their critics were, the communists arrested them and sent them to labour camps.
Monbiot’s collection of “volunteers” doorstepping people for 10-20 minutes sounds like how the Jehovah’s Witnesses work.
Difference is if you tell the JWs you’re not interested then they politely leave…
What matters is indeed NOT just “listening” – but being open to the possibility that the “bigotted” “racist-sexist-homophobic-transphobic-Islamophobic-Climate-Denier-Covid-Idiot” person may be CORRECT – that you, the “Progressive” person, may be WRONG.
I am glad that Mr Monbiot has changed his opinion and is now supportive of nuclear power – hopefully he will be open to argument and evidence on other matters as well.
The title shows that division is alive and well in Britain if certain groups are to be ‘kept out’.
I much prefer that we keep out the lefties who have been destroying the country since the late 90s. I do so very much hope that the good people of Makerfield ruin that cunt Burnham’s day.
If we kill all of our enemies, we’ll have peace!
Monbiot’s faith in climate science took a hit when the Climate Gate email leak occurred but it wasn’t enough to make him change sides. At the time I was confident that the game was up, that the alarmists had been exposed as a bunch of charlatans, incompetents and crooks, but here we are years later still having to deal with their crap.
bobby b – yes, he will not accept the possibility that the “hard right” might be CORRECT.
Stonyground – the anti Carbon Dioxide establishment will use anything for their political (political and cultural – not really environmental) objectives – watch how they use the emerging drought in the United States.
There is no link between higher Carbon Dioxide levels and drought – but that will not stop the establishment blaming the drought on higher Carbon Dioxide levels, and blaming higher Carbon Dioxide levels on “Trump”.
Monbiot, troubled soul that he is, is a quite high intensity busybody. Often wrong, but never in doubt, as the saying goes. Rod Liddle wrote an excoriating piece about him in the Spectator. A Google using ‘monbiot, bovine certitude, spectator’ can track it down.
“Instead of delivering a message then scuttling away, as conventional canvassers do”
That’s not canvassing. Canvassing is *GATHERING* information, not converting people. Find out if they’re going to vote for you, make a note, thank them, go to next address.
Monbiot isn’t wrong – spending lots of smart, individual time on each possible voter would be a very effective tool for a party – but the sheer numbers of persuaders you would need for that makes it a pipe dream.
Imagine a technique that can heal Britain of division and keep out the hard right.
But no mention of the hard left of course.*
I encountered Monbiot early on during my time in London in the first decade of the 2000s and that was enough, thank you.
* Reminds me of the Spanish Civil War and all the constant billing and cooing over the Republicans and the International Brigades.
I inevitably get into hot water over this because my view of the Republicans and Nationalists in that conflict is: a pox on both your houses.
Fascism and communism, the two great mental diseases of the 20th century.