😅😅

My pleasure :)

Black and British by David Olusoga
Although the book is not about politics but you can draw inferences that borders social marginalisation and how it interweaves with politics.

You should read
1. Why we get the wrong politicians by Isabel Hardman.

2. British political ideologies by Robert Leach - An old-ish book but the fundamentals are unchanged and applicable to contemporary politics.

itself but the rigidity and tribalism that comes with it. A flexible and adaptive ideology grounded in shared values and willingness to compromise might be the closest we can get to a non polarising ideology.

an injustice to another. Then we have issues of identity politics where a party may reject a policy, not because it's not fair for all but because it's associated with a rival party, fearing it undermines their own influence. It's a whole plethora of issues.
I don't think the problem is ideology...

ideology aligns with their economic interest.
Even if a non polarising ideology looks good on paper, it will be difficult to implement because we all have differing values, priorities and experiences that shapes our perspective of what is fair or what is necessary, so equity for one may feel like...

if you meant "equity for the masses" in an economic context, I don't think there will ever be non-polarising economic policies because of the echelon of classes that exists in our society and people who identify with a particular class will more often than not support a political party whose...

I guess your question of "if it works why not" is where the issue lies. Though there are bipartisan consensus on policies that cuts across political parties such as Net Zero commitment and the core principles of the NHS which you would agree, supports our basic needs. But...

principles, how we navigate inherent conflicts in decision-making process, ensuring that the meal serves a cohesive purpose rather than a random assemblage of dishes.

philosophy helps decide if they should focus on locally sourced ingredients (sustainability), should they prioritise low cost meals (accessibility), should they put liver in the jollof, should they make it smoky (equity).
So ideology isn't just about the outcomes we seek but also the guiding...

never, unilaterally agree on outcomes sought (the food).
Ideology provides the framework for evaluating which outcomes are most important, the ethical considerations in achieving them, and the trade-offs we're willing to accept. A chef might have multiple recipes to choose from but their culinary

I see your well-meaning intent but despite a recipe (policy) addressing a particular type of hunger (outcome), without an overarching culinary philosophy (ideology), we can't decide which recipes to prioritize, adapt, or develop for the diverse tastes and needs of the diners (the masses) who will...

Politics w/o ideology is like a chef cooking w/o an idea of what they’re making. They’re cooking jollof rice one moment, the next they’re grilling steak, then they toss it all in a blender cuz someone shouted, “Make a smoothie!” Nobody wants the smoothie cuz it's a mess then the blame game begins.