Do you prefer the Old Left or the New Left in America?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Old Left and these descriptions are terrible.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Pretty much every definition of these terms that's been advanced in this thread so far has been tendentious in one way or another but I think we all know what the general shape, contours, and ~vibes~ of this divide are. All I'll say is that there are certain issue areas on which the New Left is "more correct", sure, but the Old Left actually managed to participate in governing the country for a third of a century straight whereas the New Left has presided over setback after setback for leftist values on almost everything but LGBT rights and weed legalization, both of which are areas in which significant components of the Republican coalition are sympathetic to the leftist position anyway. It's hard to argue with results, here.

Indeed, I'd argue that the biggest distinction between the Old Left and the New Left has nothing to do with issue positions or even issue focus, as both labels encompass a wide variety of ideologies that are all over the spectrum in these respects. Rather, what strikes me as the biggest difference is that the Old Left was primarily concerned with taking control of the state apparatus and wielding its coercive and constructive powers to materially change society for the better, whereas the New Left has tended to be critical of state power (if any person is the New Left's ideological forefather, it's got to be Foucault) and as such has focused on bottom-up activism with the goal of effecting cultural change in society.

And as you point out, a comparison of the two's respective achievements makes it quite clear which strategy was sounder in hindsight.

[Antonio the Sixth]

The basic problem here is that while 'New Left' refers to a particular political tradition with a fairly clear meaning and definition, 'Old Left' really doesn't except in a sense so broad as to be completely useless. You're basically lumping together all shades of Social Democrat and Communist together as one discrete category and while, yes, they share some ancestry, so do whales and dogs.

You're right, of course, but these days I might actually play the devil's advocate and argue that the commonalities between old-school Social Democrats and Communists are actually underrated, and that they do share a lot in common that distinguishes them from newer currents of leftist thought. There is the common strategic focus on controlling the state apparatus, as I mentioned, and a lot that goes with it such as the organization into parties (with, whenever possible, organic ties with labor). There's the Marxist lineage, as you mention, which even with all the revisions and innovations and reneging, remained clearly present in both. And there is, and I hate to be reductive here but that's honestly the only way I know how to phrase this, a certain seriousness about political power and what it takes to seize it and wield it effectively that is completely lacking among "new left" types.