The Revolutionary Center: Adrian Wooldridge on the Lost Genius of Liberalism
“Liberalism was founded in the middle of the eighteenth century as a revolutionary philosophy — a philosophy that tried to subvert the old world. That set of beliefs has continued to be radical and revolutionary. When liberalism fell into decadence, it examined itself, subverted itself, and became once again a revolutionary faith.” — Adrian Wooldridge
We’ve lost our revolutionary center. At least according to Adrian Wooldridge, the distinguished British political writer. That revolution, Wooldridge insists, is the genius of liberalism — the radical eighteenth-century ideology that shaped the modern world. Today, however, he argues in The Revolutionary Center: The Lost Genius of Liberalism, “liberalism” has become conservative, perhaps even reactionary, in its senescent infatuation with cultural identity. Meanwhile, the biggest threat to liberal individualism is big tech: fragmenting attention, spreading misinformation, manipulating choices through algorithms designed to excite emotion rather than inform reason. Rather than making us geniuses, Silicon Valley is turning all of us into idiots.
To the ramparts then, Wooldridge pronounces. Liberals need to seize back the revolutionary center. Or, as Wooldridge, a Fellow of All Souls, would spell it, centre.
Five Takeaways
• Erasmus and the Liberal Way of Life: Liberalism begins not as an ideology but as a way of living. Erasmus, charting a middle path between the Reformation and the counter-Reformation, offers the founding insight: a good life involves reading books, drinking wine, having discussions, and not bullying people to adopt your faith. What liberalism adds to this is intellectual skepticism — the recognition that you can’t be absolutely certain of your beliefs, and therefore that power must be constrained by constitutions. When liberalism became purely associated with political philosophy, Wooldridge argues, it lost this sense of liberalism as a way of life — and that loss is part of what needs to be recovered.
• Bobo Orthodoxy and Its Wounds: The liberalism of the last forty years has been Bobo liberalism — bohemian bourgeois, David Brooks’ term. Maximum individual freedom in both the marketplace and personal conduct; no judgementalism on lifestyle choices; celebration of diversity and immigration as ipso facto goods. It did a great deal of good. Gay marriage. The dismantling of corporatist economics. But it also created problems it couldn’t see, because its own philosophy prevented it from acknowledging them. In Britain: the Bobo establishment’s inability to confront the grooming gangs, because its multiculturalist assumptions made it terrified of accusations of racism. In America: tent cities, drug addiction, the social costs of choices that nobody felt entitled to criticize.
• Big Tech Is a Bigger Threat Than Putin: Wooldridge’s most provocative claim: the biggest threat to liberalism is not Putin or Xi but the tech oligarchy. Putin is a dictator; that system will eventually collapse. But big tech is dismantling liberal individualism from within. Liberalism’s foundational premise is that individuals, as the building blocks of society, must be well-informed, capable of self-control, and able to act as rational agents. What information capitalism is deliberately engineering — through algorithms designed to excite emotion, fragment attention, and spread misinformation — is the destruction of all three of those conditions. These companies need to be broken up. Not on socialist grounds. On liberal ones.
• Liberalism as Senescence: Biden and Harris: Exhibit A for the Bobo orthodoxy’s exhaustion: the 2024 election. Biden, visibly too old to lead, unable to string sentences together; a whole liberal establishment around him, imprisoned by its own assumptions, running a candidate nobody could defend. Then Harris — chosen, in Wooldridge’s blunt phrase, as an affirmative action candidate. The old liberal establishment — Pelosi and the rest — had been in power since the 1990s, had accrued all the defects of the establishment, and had no blueprint to address the real problems people were encountering. The last time British liberalism looked this dead was the 1890s. Then a new programme and new talent arrived: Churchill, Lloyd George, Asquith.
• The Revolutionary Center: Save Capitalism from Itself: Wooldridge’s prescription is not to destroy capitalism but to reform it, as Teddy Roosevelt and Louis Brandeis did. Break up vast conglomerations of economic power. Tax inherited wealth. Recreate the conditions for a mass middle class. Brandeis’s argument: if people can buy votes, you can’t have democracy. If people have vast fortunes, you can’t have democracy. You need to save capitalism in order to make it the best version of itself. Mill understood this too: once he saw that factory owners and workers had structurally different choices, he began supporting trade unions and moved left on economics. A radical center is not a soft center. It is a center that is willing to blow up the orthodoxies that have calcified within liberalism itself.
About the Guest
Adrian Wooldridge is the global business columnist at Bloomberg Opinion and former political editor and Bagehot, Schumpeter, and Lexington columnist at The Economist. He is the author of The Revolutionary Center: The Lost Genius of Liberalism (Pegasus Books, 2026), The Aristocracy of Talent, and Capitalism in America (with Alan Greenspan). He holds a DPhil from All Souls College, Oxford, and lives in London.
References:
• The Revolutionary Center: The Lost Genius of Liberalism by Adrian Wooldridge (Pegasus Books, 2026).
• Episode 2880: Gal Beckerman on How to Be a Dissident — the companion conversation on liberalism, dissidence, and the question of the revolutionary center.
• Episode 2869: Jacob Mchangama on The Future of Free Speech — the free speech crisis that contextualises Wooldridge’s argument about liberalism’s lost genius.
About Keen On America
Nobody asks more awkward questions than the Anglo-American writer and filmmaker Andrew Keen. In Keen On America, Andrew brings his pointed Transatlantic wit to making sense of the United States — hosting daily interviews about the history and future of this now venerable Republic. With nearly 2,900 episodes since the show launched on TechCrunch in 2010, Keen On America is the most prolific intellectual interview show in the history of podcasting.
00:31 - Are we all liberals swimming in the same water?
02:11 - Putin and Xi: the first articulate opponents of liberalism in decades
03:02 - The revolutionary center: a contradiction in terms?
03:24 - Liberalism as revolutionary philosophy: the eighteenth century origin
05:23 - Is Wooldridge sounding like a tech bro?
06:35 - Meritocracy captured by plutocracy: the Harvard cosplay problem
08:58 - Mill, Bentham, and the utilitarian foundation
10:40 - Mill’s miserable education and his nervous breakdown
11:13 - Harriet Taylor, poetry vs. pushpin, and Mill’s drift left on economics
13:33 - Liberalism as a way of life before it became an ideology
14:54 - Erasmus: the first proto-liberal
15:28 - The middle way between the Reformation and the counter-Reformation
17:37 - Anglo-Saxon liberalism vs. French sad liberalism: Tocqueville, Constant, Aron
19:47 - Thomas More, utopia, and the critique of utopianism
20:33 - Patrick Deneen’s Why Liberalism Failed: a good book, but wrong
22:46 - The alternatives to liberalism: patrimonialism, the Gulf model, theocracy
26:51 - Keir Starmer and the senescence of the liberal center
27:40 - Bobo orthodoxy: how it worked and where it failed
33:32 - Is socialism an alternative? The left-liberal vs. identitarian distinction
35:34 - The real threat: big tech dismantling the individual from within
39:01 - Putin vs. big tech: which is the bigger threat?
40:29 - Teddy Roosevelt, Brandeis, and reforming capitalism from within
43:30 - Does Wooldridge sound like Bernie Sanders?
43:53 - Biden and Harris: liberalism as senescence
45:28 - Does the revolutionary center need to come from below?
48:43 - Mamdani and the need for heroic figures
49:22 - Bill Clinton, Churchill, Lloyd George: when the center revived
00:00 -