What is most interesting about the current debt crises in Portugal, Greece and Spain, is that they all involve centre-left governments implementing neo-liberal austerity measures and facing damning poll ratings against conservative or 'popular' opponents. This reflects a wider crisis of confidence in Europe's left, that despite an economic recession caused by weak economic regulation, something often associated with the right, social democrats and similar groups are losing out throughout the continent. In March David Miliband spoke of how the European left was 'fragmenting' under this pressure, while the Economist has shown that only 5/27 of EU member states governments now consist of centre left parties. Rather than leading to a resurgence in interventionist economics and left wing ideals to protect the economy, the recession has merely lead to a further entrenchment of the ideals of the centre right, who have used the opportunity to go beyond merely meeting deficits to undermine their bugbears, such as the NHS in Britain or abortion funding in the US.
Despite leading the polls in select nations, come election time it is hardly guaranteed the centre left will win. Moreover, even if Labour or the French socialists returned to power, it is likely they would be tied down by the much more active conservatives and govern in a meek manner, fearful of backlashes from the rightist press for anything too 'socialist'. Little would be achieved, as with Labour's, in my opinion, wasted years in power wherein they essentially kept the seat warm for the right, with two wars, deregulation (or at least inactive regulation), runaway bonuses and authoritarian stances on law and order, all of which would have been done had they never been elected.
Despite leading the polls in select nations, come election time it is hardly guaranteed the centre left will win. Moreover, even if Labour or the French socialists returned to power, it is likely they would be tied down by the much more active conservatives and govern in a meek manner, fearful of backlashes from the rightist press for anything too 'socialist'. Little would be achieved, as with Labour's, in my opinion, wasted years in power wherein they essentially kept the seat warm for the right, with two wars, deregulation (or at least inactive regulation), runaway bonuses and authoritarian stances on law and order, all of which would have been done had they never been elected.
Trying to recycle the ideas of the centre right, in my view, did not work. Take the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) in Britain for example. This was implemented to try to show that Labour had shed its socialism and was willing to compromise. In the short term this seemed a good PR ploy but it is now obvious this was a failure. The guarantees to private companies that public funds would never be cut means that in a era of austerity and cuts, £267 billion is wasted on paying these companies, so that other, more important areas are cut further and faster by the Conservative-led government. Hence, this only strengthens the hand of the right accusing the left of wasteful spending, allows them to make more ideologically inspired cuts and producing less efficient public services. In all PFI did far more damage to the cause. The same could be said of university fees which undermined our argument for there being a right to education or the missed opportunities regarding freedom of information or constitutional reform.
Continuing the push to the centre is not the solution. In the short term it may win votes, but ultimately it loses supporters, the base of a political organisation. This is because the mainstream left cannot offer an alternative to ignite the electorate, if it is essentially trying to copy its opponents. In this sense the idea of making the centre left socially conservative to balance a traditional mixed economy, called 'Blue Labour' in the UK, will also fail as those that truly value social conservatism are always more likely to choose an organisation that specialises in it rather than one which has tried to mix and match. Furthermore it will alienate ethnic minorities, LGBT groups and generally liberal minded people, who are very much potential allies of the left. No, instead the future of the left lies in both new ideas and the revival of those long lost.
Key to this struggle to reclaim the notion of liberty. For too long, Thatcherites, Libertarians, etc have seen liberty purely as a product of a unfair free market, and equated any state action with tyranny. Instead we must argue the case of Berlin's "positive liberty" where enlightened state action elevates the condition of the people, giving them education, basic utilities and facilities, giving them the freedom to act beyond their natural limitations. The right's view of liberty is a paradox; because of natural advantage, the most able and rich restrict the liberty of everyone else. In the past the state was seen as a liberator rather than an tyrant and such views must be revived;
"The ultimate aim of government is not to rule, or restrain, by fear, nor to exact obedience, but contrariwise, to free every man from fear, that he may live in all possible security; in other words, to strengthen his natural right to exist and work without injury to himself or others. No, the object of government is not to change men from rational beings into beasts or puppets, but to enable them to develop their minds and bodies in security, and to employ their reason unshackled; neither showing hatred, anger, or deceit, nor watched with the eyes of jealousy and injustice. In fact, the true aim of government is liberty." (Baruch Spinoza, "Theological-Political Treatise" (1670))
Currently many different groups lose out under the system; LGBT groups, ethnic minorities, young people, environmentalists and any one with a questioning mind. These groups will only become more numerate in the future and so appealing to them will create a new base of support for the left. A progressive alliance, a federation of questioning minds is within our grasp. Thus leftist organisations must put aside their differences and work together to secure common goals. In so doing we will offer a true alternative, a different vision for the future. If we continue to offer the same compromises today, how will we answer inevitably different questions and challenges of tomorrow.
For the term 'left wing' does not describe a slavish attachment to the same ideas and institutions, as cynics have alleged, but rather those French revolutionaries who saw the need for further change. Radicals, who challenge established truths to reveal the moral rot of their foundations. At the moment the only radicalism is seen to come from animal rights fascists or narrow-minded libertarians. We cannot allow them to steal our natural position. We are the radicals, we are the left.
No comments:
Post a Comment