In the increasingly brutal culture wars between the Left and the Right across the democratic West, both sides are flawed, proposing not just who we should vote for but how we must live. A moral philosopher calls for fresh thinking on the great questions of our time

I’ll put it bluntly. Politically, I don’t like my options. Growing up in this giddy world (b.1981) I’ve become increasingly dissatisfied with the alternatives on offer. Because there aren’t very many. Deep polarisation has delivered unacceptable options. And not just at a party-political level – the dearth of boxes on the ballot paper.

The real source of my frustration is the way every conceivable position on controversial moral issues has been bundled up into package deals that I’m supposed to choose between. This clustering of causes across the political spectrum is the legacy the boomers bequeathed to us, and it’s got me all riled up. My political identification is supposed to determine every view I take on the most fundamental questions I face.

Say I’m on the Left. Because of the way positions have been packaged, the way I vote means I’m urged to press “Accept all” to the terms and conditions of the whole deal: to sign off on every part of the platform. So, I passionately opposed the invasion of Iraq and defend affirmative action to the hilt. Am I simply to inherit an affirmative view of the legalisation of drugs? Or maybe I am conservative. I worry about levels of immigration. I bemoan the rise of identity politics. Why am I then supposed to support greater sanctions on welfare for the unemployed?