Here's a fun little diagnosis of our current era.
Both the left and right have no vision for the future that's based in reality
The only difference between the two in terms of path seeking is that the right is ostensibly aligned with capitalism, which still retains enough dynamism that despite the right's descent into madness allows to keep on keeping on. The broad right (including the democratic party circa 2016) can easily align itself with whatever futurism comes out of the tech sector. It'll still pathfind largely through the imposition of violence but it has enough cultural and institutional momentum that centrist policy will suffice. Who knows, maybe fossil fuels will die out and we'll get ourselves a Green New Deal that will push back issues surrounding automation and resource scarcity for a decade or so giving the powers that be and the various pet intellectuals time to figure out a solution.
The recent resurgent left is still recovering from the speed at which the 21st century has hit them. The slow crawl towards "postcapitalism" by mainstream figures with media reach and the degree to which it still falls short of articulations by figures like Michel Bauwens or Kevin Carson shows how far we have to go. Those who are mainstream on the modern left who still see the welfare state as something to return to are lost in the past.
But the problem is that everyone involved has a shit map of what's actually possible. The conservative (and even libertarian) inclination to lionize large scale institutions has resulted in Hayek's radical critique being lost in an endless back and forth over whats possible. The left is unable to acclimatize to the 21st century because one of the most important problems of the 21st century, what exactly can cybernetic systems actually achieve, is buried in the two-faced approach the right takes towards organization. The brutal stupidity of large scale organizations is seen as proof (as proof!) by the left that we can achieve a cybernetic centrally planned economy. The failure to get to grips with the problem of information, of information flows and incentive problems by everyone has left us facing a future in which those questions are vitally important to a world in which superempowered individuals interface and create highly complex systems and yet we still little meaningful discussion of such.
Consider for example Zizek's call to the Occupy protesters that they should think instead of act and the admission in doing so that he (and speaking more broadly the left in general) have no fucking clue what's going on and what's possible. The frameworks that served the left so well over a hundred years ago have now left it adrift. Lately it seems the left has largely become synonymous with cultural analysis (which is all fine and well) and has little to say in terms of meaningful alternatives. Critiquing capitalism is easy (as is with any social system). Building something, or at the very least sketching out the limits of what might be possible is something else entirely.
Because here's the thing, in terms of possible configurations for society the amount of space we've explored is minuscule. In terms of possible feedback mechanisms we currently exist in a limited space, mass adoption of various tools stifled by large social media corporations that make alternative platforms difficult to get going (to give just one example). In terms of whats possible of material, energy and informational flows we simply have no idea how far we can scale various approaches.
Should such exploration occur its likely that in doing so we will rip apart any notion of left or right as politics is freed from petty associations and instead becomes the kaleidoscopic array of complexity that it truly is. Whether we shall see eventual convergence after that is beyond me, just please, give me meaningful debate and courageous pathfinding as opposed to this insipid discourse.