Is it better to be urban and mobile or rooted in one place? The answer may be shifting

In 2017, British journalist David Goodhart offered an enlightening read of Western politics. In The Road to Somewhere, he split our societies into two broad groups. The “Anywheres,” about a quarter of the population, were university-educated, urban and mobile. Their identity relied on degrees and successful careers. The “Somewheres,” more numerous, were less educated. They had strong roots in one place and believed in nation and family. For Goodhart, being an Anywhere meant being on the winning side of globalization, often progressive, open to change and comfortable with diversity. Therefore the Somewheres felt left behind. That’s why Brexit and Donald Trump’s first election were read as the Somewheres’ revenge. Goodhart’s framework quickly became popular with academics, consultants and politicians. Almost ten years later, however, the framework seems somewhat dated. I’m someone who has lived much of her working life thinking of herself as an Anywhere, between Paris, London and Munich. Now I am struck by how much the balance of advantages seems to have shifted. And this has huge implications for how we organize work and think about the future. {"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":…

≈