The political paradox of UX professionals
The clash of modern and postmodern design while balancing universal accessibility with subjective perspectives.
The tension between modernism and postmodernism is more than a philosophical debate — it is a cultural and political contradiction that plays out daily in the UX domain. On one hand, modernism champions clarity, function, and universal accessibility — principles that are central to the discipline. On the other hand, postmodernism thrives on skepticism, irony, and the dismantling of conventional structures. This paradox becomes glaring in the UX arena, where practitioners who often espouse progressive, postmodern ideologies paradoxically adhere to modernist methodologies in their work.
UX Design’s Modernist Foundation
At its heart, UX design is unapologetically modernist. It seeks to simplify complexity, reduce cognitive load, and create interfaces that serve everyone — ideals rooted in a belief of universal truths and functionality. The field’s commitment to accessibility and usability echoes the rationalist optimism of modernism.
This philosophy, however, is politically aligned with pragmatism and incrementalism — values often associated with traditional liberalism or moderate conservatism by today's standards. UX’s reliance on order and structure starkly contrasts with the ethos of postmodernism, which questions whether universal solutions can exist at all. This clash is especially striking given the political leanings of many UX professionals.
If you doubt that most designers lean left, take a look at their profiles, articles, or social media posts. You’ll often notice a political undercurrent reflecting progressive or postmodern ideas, such as identity politics, gender fluidity, and decentralizing power structures. Creative professionals, as a whole, tend to align with progressive political ideals. Not all, of course — no need to point that out in the comments.
The Postmodern Critique of UX
Postmodernism, with its skepticism of grand narratives and preference for individual perspectives, directly challenges the foundational principles of UX. Postmodern designers reject the notion of universal accessibility, instead favoring ambiguity, subjectivity, and a critique of existing systems. In this light, the modernist UX approach could be seen as complicit in reinforcing the very structures postmodern ideologies seek to dismantle.
For postmodern thinkers, UX’s emphasis on usability and clarity might appear naive, if not outright oppressive. By focusing on universal design principles, UX risks ignoring the diverse experiences and cultural contexts of users, perpetuating norms under the guise of inclusivity. The commitment to accessibility may, in some cases, mask a deeper complicity with technological systems that reinforce existing hierarchies and power dynamics.
A Political Contradiction
The real paradox lies in the politics of UX designers themselves. Many align with progressive ideologies that embrace postmodern critiques of authority and tradition, yet their professional practice relies on modernist principles of function and universality. This contradiction raises uncomfortable questions such as are these designers betraying their political ideals in pursuit of practicality? Or does their work reveal a deeper inconsistency in the application of postmodernism itself?
One could argue that this paradox is less about reconciling two design philosophies and more about the limits of postmodern thought when confronted with real-world problems. Postmodernism’s critiques of universality and objectivity are compelling in theory but often fail to offer viable alternatives in practice. UX design, with its emphasis on serving diverse audiences, illustrates this failure. Ambiguity and irony may challenge norms, but they do little to create functional, inclusive tools for users.
The Limits of Pragmatism
On the flip side, the modernist foundation of UX is not without its flaws. By proritizing usability and clarity, it risks sidelining more radical design approaches that could challenge the status quo. The relentless pursuit of function and accessibility can sometimes lead to bland, homogenized solutions that lack cultural specificity or artistic depth.
Moreover, UX design’s alignment with modernist ideals may inadvertently reinforce the systems that postmodern critiques aim to disrupt. By working within the constraints of existing technologies and societal norms, UX designers may perpetuate biases and inequities, even as they strive for inclusivity. This tension raises an ethical dilemma at the heart of the profession — whether it is truly possible to innovate within a framework that prioritizes universal solutions over meaningful engagement.
Reconciling or Accepting the Paradox?
Perhaps the greatest failure is the lack of genuine reconciliation between these two philosophies in UX design. While some designers attempt to integrate postmodern critiques into modernist frameworks, these efforts often feel superficial, prioritizing aesthetics over substance. Incorporating playful irony or cultural references into an otherwise rigidly functional interface does little to address the deeper contradictions.
This failure points to a larger issue — the reluctance to fully critique or rethink the systems UX design operates within. Rather than challenging the structures that drive technological development, designers often settle for incremental changes that maintain the status quo. The result is a discipline that aspires to inclusivity and empowerment but remains bound by the constraints of modernist thought.
The rise of artificial intelligence amplifies this paradox, as AI inherently reinforces modernist principles of efficiency, consistency, and universality. While invaluable for streamlining workflows and usability testing, AI prioritizes functionality over nuance, leaving little room for the ambiguity and individuality championed by postmodern design.
Toward a Critical UX Practice
If UX design is to evolve, it must confront this paradox head-on. Designers need to ask hard questions about the role of their work in reinforcing or challenging existing systems. Can UX embrace postmodern ideals of subjectivity and critique without sacrificing functionality? Or is the field destined to remain a modernist process at its core?
A critical UX practitioner would not shy away from these questions. They would recognize the limitations of both modernist and postmodernist approaches, seeking to create designs that are not only functional but also deeply reflective. By challenging the systems they operate within, designers could move beyond surface-level inclusivity to address the underlying power dynamics that shape technology and its use.
A Call for Self-Reflection
It’s not uncommon for philosophical or political leanings to vary depending on the context. A well-known saying humorously captures this idea: “Nationally, I’m libertarian; locally, I’m liberal; at home, I’m authoritarian; and when it comes to my dog, I’m a full-blown communist.”
However, the paradox of modernist UX design within a postmodern political framework does reveal potential tensions within the discipline. While designers may strive for inclusivity and accessibility, their work is often constrained by the very systems they aim to critique. To move forward, UX must embrace a more critical, self-reflective approach — one that acknowledges and engages with these contradictions rather than merely accommodating them. Only then can the field begin to reconcile its ideals with its practice, crafting designs that are not only usable but also transformative.
Don’t miss out! Join my email list and receive the latest content.
