20th century political dinosaurs are tackling 21st century problems with obsolete ideologies from the 19th century, writes Tim Dean. Where is the party of the future?

As a plethora of pundits have recently pointed out, the Abbott Government is in something of a funk. The Libs have even been criticised by their own cheer squad for lacking a narrative and for an inability to sell their vision.

Lack of narrative and crappy sales pitch ... sound familiar? You don't need an elephantine memory to recall the same charges being levelled at the recent Rudd and Gillard governments.

And it's not like Shorten has changed his tune from his predecessors enough to look much different. I mean, could you articulate Labor's vision for the Australia of tomorrow?

So it's not just the Liberals who are in a funk. It's politics in general. And I'm not alone in thinking that the problem is not just with the sales pitches, it's the products themselves that are on the nose.

A lot has been said about the malaise afflicting contemporary politics, but most of it is tactical. It's also probably true, but I reckon there's a deeper dimension to our political ennui that isn't being talked about nearly enough.

Simply put: we're currently governed by 20th century political dinosaurs that are offering ill-fitting solutions to 21st century problems based on obsolete ideologies from the 19th century. It's not just about a lack of narrative or vision, it's that whatever vision either party can muster is tailored for the wrong century.

I suspect that many of us have sensed a growing disconnect between the ideologies of the major parties and the challenges we face today, even if we might not all frame it in this way.

This fundamental disconnect could account for some of our perpetual dissatisfaction with both side of politics. It might account for why we keep switching between the two parties at both state and federal levels, only to become disillusioned with who we've placed in charge shortly thereafter.

It might also account for why so many people under 30 have simply tuned out the major parties - after all, both parties are at odds with their very 21st century values and worldview.

This is the generation that grew up with the internet expanding their world beyond their national borders. They grew up with multiculturalism, with friends and relatives of all sexual orientations, and with casual (and largely harmless) recreational drugs. Few go to church and even fewer belong to unions.

This is also the generation that will bear the burden of climate change, and they are sick of Baby Boomers eating their carbon cake and having their grandkids pick up the bill.

So maybe what we need now is not just more of the same with a few tactical tweaks. Maybe what we really need is a genuinely 21st century party - preferably more than one - that understands the dynamics of this century and is willing to offer better solutions to the social and economic problems of tomorrow.

And I doubt that's going to be in the guise of the Labor or Liberal parties, at least not without some existential revisions to their underlying ideologies.

It's worth remembering that both the Labor and the Liberal parties were born in the first decades of the 20th century, and both have ideologies that were forged even earlier in the 19th century.

Both came into being in response to the social and economic dynamics that emerged following the industrial revolution, when rapid economic growth came at the cost of the welfare of low-skilled workers.

Simply speaking, where Labor favoured the rights of workers over unbridled economic growth, the Liberals emphasised economic growth with a conviction that it would eventually benefit all.

The good news is they both won. Over the last 100 years our civilisation has enjoyed explosive economic growth and many of the protections fought for by unions in the 19th and early 20th centuries are now enshrined in law.

So, in a sense, both the Labor and Liberal parties have lost much of their core raison d'être. Their very relevance has been eroded by their own success. And yet, while they have fiddled around the edges in an attempt to modernise, they both tout economic visions true to their origins: vote Labor for workers; vote Liberal for economic growth.

However, it's not what they disagree on that is even terribly relevant any more. We all agree that a healthy economy is a good thing and that workers ought to be treated fairly. It's actually the things that both parties agree on that puts them out of touch with this century.

The thing is, the 21st century is shaping up to be not just slightly different to the 20th century but radically different.

For a start, economics has grown up. It no longer assumes that resources are effectively limitless or that the Earth has an infinite carrying capacity. It no longer ignores all those inconvenient externalities like pollution or climate change.

And, possibly most important of all, it is starting to adapt to the fact that we've virtually solved the problem of material scarcity. Consider that our world produces enough food and material goods to satisfy the needs of every human on the planet. So our problem now isn't one of staving off scarcity, it's of fair distribution and how high we can elevate standards of living.

Yet both our major parties remain wedded to the outdated notion that GDP growth is of primary importance, that it somehow represents our progress as a nation. That is a problematic notion. And the longer they remain obsessed with GDP, the harder it will be to shift the economy to a more sensible and sustainable footing that actually serves our wellbeing rather than the other way around.

Furthermore, both Labor and the Liberals continue to be obsessed with jobs. Labor because of its commitment to a rather Marxist idea that work is intrinsically fulfilling, the Libs because of its view that hard work is a signal of solid moral fibre - hence their "lifters and leaners" rhetoric.

Yet, whether we like it or not, the 21st century will come to be defined by rising unemployment. Automation has already eaten many unskilled jobs, but that's nothing compared to what artificial intelligence and robotics are about to do.

ATMs instead of bank tellers and self-service machines instead of checkout operators are only the beginning. Imagine the number of unemployed truck, bus and taxi drivers there'll be once driverless cars have a better safety record than humans. Or the number of GPs out of a job once Watson moves into the clinic.

The thing neither the Labor or Liberal parties understand is that this is actually a good thing. It means technology will produce wealth for us and we can afford to work less. We might even be able to afford a universal basic income. And we'll still work, but it'll be doing the stuff we love rather than toiling for a wage. Even Marx would be happy with that.

However, if we continue to obsess over jobs, we'll actually resist this shift rather than help it along. We'll end up working longer and harder than we need to just because our political leaders can't shake the idea that life must centre around paid employment.

And it's not just economics that have changed over the last century. Social dynamics have changed as well.

When the Labor and Liberal parties were in their infancy, the world was yet to be globalised. People typically lived their entire lives within walking distance of where they were born. Society was more class-based and stultifyingly conformist. Cultures and religion didn't intermix. No-one admitted they were gay.

The social policies that were considered appropriate in that world simply don't gel in today's globalised, cosmopolitan and multicultural world. Tolerance and pluralism are the watchwords of the 21st century. Abortion and euthanasia are seen as rights rather than offences against god. On this count, at least Labor is more in line with 21st century values, although elements of the Liberal party seem to want to return to the middle ages.

So what I reckon we need now is some 21st century political parties. Ones that are based on modern notions of economic sustainability, wellbeing and tolerance. Parties that are not wedded to unions or churches, or in the pocket of the big businesses who were the beneficiaries of the 20th century economic paradigm.

There remain some tremendous political, economic and social problems to be solved as we transition our society into one fit for the 21st century. It we continue to apply 20th century solutions to these problems, it will only end in disaster.

Maybe it's time to let the dinosaurs go extinct and find a new species of political party to take their place.

Tim Dean is a science writer and philosopher with a PhD in ethics. View his full profile here.