Left or Right?

The muddled economics underpinning modern politics.

“When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?” 

Many of us hold strong opinions about politicians: their competence, their character, and their leadership. What is striking, however, is that, even in these polarized times, parties are drifting away from their traditional ideological roots. Nowhere is this clearer than in economic policy. 

Polling shows the economy remains a top concern. 81% of Americans called it “very important” to their 2024 vote, while, in the UK, it continues to rank among the “big three issues,” alongside healthcare and immigration. Yet despite this salience, economic policymaking has become increasingly scattershot and inconsistent, with parties of both the left and right borrowing, abandoning, or contradicting their own orthodoxies.

Take my home country, the United Kingdom. The incoming Labour government in 2024, the first in almost 20 years, came with a strong majority but a weak economic inheritance. Its solution has been to employ a mix of cutting pensioner allowances, reforming benefits, increasing public sector wages, engaging in infrastructure spending, and prioritizing fiscal responsibility above all else. Elements feel like they are part of an economic manifesto from Thatcher in 1979, with (albeit few) others coming out of the Jeremy Corbyn playbook.

Or consider the United States. Whether you are an ardent supporter of the theory of comparative advantage or believe that protectionism is critical to support domestic jobs, the scale and extent of the shift in tariffs are hardly part of the free-market Republican orthodoxy post World War II.

France offers another example. The recent resignation of Prime Minister Gabriel Attal underscored the fragility of Emmanuel Macron’s coalition, which stretches from pro-business centrists to reluctant socialists and Greens. Trying to appease such divergent forces inevitably leads to governing on an issue-by-issue basis, leaving little room for long-term maneuver. Without a unifying vision, each faction defaults to short-term calculations and self-preservation. This dynamic has defined much of Macron’s presidency, whether in his attempted pension reform, which sparked mass protests; or his climate policies, which have swung between ambitious targets and concessions to industry. The result has been a muddled policy record: pro-market in rhetoric, but often protectionist or statist in execution.

So what is the reasoning behind this muddled policy mix on both sides of the Atlantic? I see three forces at work: Constraints, Control, and Culture.

Constraints. Governments face impossible trade-offs: geopolitical instability, rising military conflicts, record debt burdens, high interest payments, fraying social cohesion, and little public appetite for sacrifice. As Mike Tyson once said, “everybody’s got a plan until they get punched in the face.” Against such headwinds, governments often make haphazard decisions, hoping none collapse the system. But eventually the contradictions are exposed, as Keir Starmer’s declining domestic poll ratings demonstrate.

Control. Modern politics prize the image of control. “Take back control” was the rallying cry of Brexit, and across the West, leaders seek to project command through intervention. Direct state action, whether nationalizing steel in the UK, Washington investing in Intel, or maneuvering around foreign direct investment, offers leaders a visible way to demonstrate authority. While these moves can have a socialist flavor, they often coexist with neoliberal impulses like privatization or budget cuts. The result is a messy hybrid of left and right.

Culture. More than ever, cultural identity is shaping economic choices. Policies are made less on the basis of long-term optimization and more on what “feels right” or plays well in a 15-second soundbite or 280-character tweet. Whether it’s left-leaning redistribution or right-leaning deregulation, cultural signaling is often the real driver. And this explains why today’s politics cannot be easily mapped onto a left-right axis.

For us as future leaders, the takeaway is clear: political labels are less predictive than ever. The question is not whether policy is “left” or “right,” but whether it is coherent and whether we are prepared to navigate the uncertainty it creates.

Pranav Bharadwaj (MBA '27) is from London, UK. He studied Economics & Management at the University of Oxford before beginning his career in consulting at OC&C. He then moved into healthcare operations, most recently serving as Head of Strategy & Operations at Cera, one of Europe’s fastest-growing health tech companies. He is passionate about health policy, economics, and the role of technology in transforming public services.