Decline of the Left?

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

I was inspired to make this thread by a comment from Parrotguy in another thread where he mentioned that "the left" seems to be barely alive in many countries. This struck me as to some extent basically true--the fate of the major center-left or left-wing parties in the UK and Germany for example--but also as very ironic. At least in the US, the cultural divide between those identifying with "the left" and others seems to be widening by the day, and it seems that by-and-large a substantial amount, at least among younger voters, identify with this set of values. Moreover, in formal political terms, we recently had Bernie Sanders come in second in two Democratic primary battles and are observing the rise of "Democratic Socialist" politicians.

So I guess I have a few questions, which could be umbrella'd under the bigger question, "Is 'the left', internationally in the democratic world, generally ascendant, or generally in decline?":
1) Is increasing left-wing ideological identification a trend only among the young?
2) Are other countries experiencing similar movements to that in the US?
2a) Are the "objective conditions" driving the growth of "socialism" in the US distinct from those experienced in Western Europe?
3) Does the lack of left-wing success in some countries reflect (a) genuine "conservative" popular opinion, or (b) a simple disparity between popular sentiments and electoral results?
4) Should we meaningfully differentiate increased left-wing or liberal social values from left-wing political preferences? (At least among my age group, it's rather easy to run into nominally "right-wing" folks--usually dudes--who express generally tolerant views but think that sh#t's gone too far, and/or are more aesthetically right-wing than anything reflecting policy preferences)

(EDIT: apologies for liberal use of scare quotes--I don't really think most of these terms mean what they're intended to communicate, which leads to this type of useless prose)

[dead0man]

Also, Biden is the most progressive major party nominee in US history.

[PSOL]

1. I suppose, Youth are more predisposed to change to what they believe is right compared to their older peers. That takes the form of being against the establishment in what they see as radical.

2. Well that is a tricky answer. It really depends on the material conditions of the country. To focus on on the resurgent left right now; Nepal, Belgium, a host of countries in Africa that most notably includes Sudan, and others are seeing a resurgence of what can be described as the old school, yet also niche left. Western Europe and America are often similar, containing democratic socialist outfits growing in membership like Red-Greens, DSA, GPUS, momentum, pre-2015 Syriza, and others be present while more Marxist or Anarchist orthodox groups either stagnate or grow very slowly. Meanwhile in the East things are even more dire, but I’d say that can be blamed more on increased state suppression then in Western Europe. What’s different is that while Social Democratic ideas and organized movements are actually on the rise in the United States, they aren’t in Western Europe as either they are dying for not adapting to the times or they poisoned their own well by being austerity pushers.

3. It represents how well a combination of state suppression and cultural hegemony has over our society. Social Democracy is actually popular to many if you don’t say the words, but in America it’s socialism just the same. Meanwhile, the culture media has not appropriately supported the necessary solidarity, ideals, and methods of the left over what is accepted in Capitalism. Tell me, are strikes a common thing to see in mainstream media? Anyway, the fact that the FBI has said in the past that they work to keep progressive and socialist politicians out of government and still do is kind of a hamper on things. Same thing outside the US too.

4. Yes, as sadly many are suffering from false consciousness and a lack of class realization, unlike those who run the show now.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Thanks for your response, PSOL. So would you say that the situation is more one of underlying conditions and opinions butting up against inertia-laden institutions (be it the media, the electoral system, etc.)? And if so, what's the trajectory?

[PSOL]

Thanks for your response, PSOL. So would you say that the situation is more one of underlying conditions and opinions butting up against inertia-laden institutions (be it the media, the electoral system, etc.)? And if so, what's the trajectory?

Belief in the media and institutions are collapsing worldwide, and it can take a while for things to start popping up in the mainstream.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

We see a decline in the traditional left because both third way politicians and the right eat support from the social democrats, while the greens and alternative left are getting increasingly more popular, taking support from the social democrats who had too big of a tent coalition. They can't satisfy the wealthy suburbanites, as well as the working class at the same time, and that's what we're seeing, but more importantly immigration became much more a debate in the last decades, as well as rising terrorism which made people more racist in general or tougher on immigration as they notice the left doesn't have an answer for that

[parochial boy]

Doing a bit of a rambling answer, but like PSOL said, it really depends on which country you are looking at. Overall, you could say there is a structural decline in the electoral viability of Social Democratic parties - and at some universal level that links to a change in the social structure and economics of most industrialised countries. Whereas people used to work the same job, with the same people for most of their lives; the building blocks of the socialisation that underpinned traditional Social Democracy - nowadays people tend to change jobs more often. Working class people especially tend to increasingly flit between several part time or short term contracts, often working alone, which kind of inherently means never building the sense of solidarity and familiarity that used to exist. Of course, that is a very, very big generalisation that by no means applies to everyone everywhere and the specific circumstances of the "decline" of Soc Dem parties reflects far more than just that.

Whether or not that factors into a wholesale decline of the left really depends on the circumstances within a country, there is no overarching trend. In some countries, they seems to be on life support - but recently won majorities in Spain and Portugal, are at a historic high in Wallonia, have regained power in most of the Nordics and left parties have been fairly steadily progressing in Switzerland since the beginning of the 90s (the 83 seats currently held across both chambers of parliament is the highest ever). Of course, that the left is fractured might make it harder to actually hold power, even in those cases, but doesn't reflect an actual wholesale rejection of left wing politics.

I'm minded to disagree that there is some great progression (or necessarily untapped support) for radical left wing politics - in some countries with specific economic or social contexts, maybe - but not generalisable.

Like, being a bit parochial - young people in Switzerland do vote for, and identify with, the left far more than older people. But that is principally because they feel very strongly about climate change and green politics. Added to that, there is a very strong rejection of nationalist and right wing politics among younger people here that tends to drive them towards the socially progressive parties on the left. So it is a left wing movement that can look quite different to the US version. Some things are similar; a more urban, highly educated and diverse younger generation; but other things aren't -  student debt doesn't exist here, the housing and jobs markets are different - those kinds of issues don't really make sense here in the same way. Whereas climate change is very visible in an alpine country that has suddenyl discovered it now has a mediterranean climate. And young people, nearly half of whom have an immigrant background, who have grown up in the shadow of SVP nationalism often have that as a formative experience. So all that, added to the fact that the two mainstream left parties are already quite radical on economic issues, means there isn't really any space opening up for a radical left outfit (same with Germany and Austria in many ways).

In contrast, young people tend to vote strongly for the left in France and the UK, but driven by factors like the precarious jobs or housing markets (and student debt in the UK), which more closely resemble the US - but even then they aren't identical, nationalist posturing isn't as off putting for younger people in France (cf Mélenchon).

I think it's the same with the question of electoral success. I think there is a large degree of the new far right parties just filling an electoral demand that was kind of always there ("the Italians are racist" isn't exactly a new stereotype); whereas parties on the left often struggle to find an offer that actually responds to what society in the 21st century looks like. But even there it depends on where you are, the Swiss electorate is clearly more left wing than it was 20-30 years ago, but the Israeli or Italian ones would seem to have clearly moved in a different direction - different countries have had different experiences, and different demographic changes, over the last few decades. Switzerland is a country that is far more at ease with itself than it was in the 90s - which has created a bigger space for progressive or environmentalist movements to grow; while Italy... isn't.

[Former President tack50]

Well, for Spain in particular I can say that there is a slight trend to the right, despite the left wing victories recently.

This trend however seems to be based mostly off the Catalonia issue, with the "culturally Spanish" parts of the country trending right; the biggest example being Andalucia, which in a decade has gone from left wing stronghold to tossup region.

This trend, while noticeable, is smaller than it could be for several reasons:

1: The rise of the extreme unionist Vox and the general radizalization of the right on the issue, while helping their poll numbers, has hurt their chances at forming a government. Aznar was able to form a government with as little as 156 MPs, and even Rajoy as late as 2018 was at least able to pass a budget with the support of the Basques. Nowadays I even have doubts that the Canarian parties, traditionally the only nationalists that preferred the right to the left, would even support a hypothetical PP government

2: The Spanish right has dropped, albeit to a lesser extent, in the "non culturally Spanish" regions to put them some way. Rajoy's home region of Galicia has gone from safe right, to tossup to likely left now. A similar story has happened in Navarra. Valencia, a PP stronghold throughout the 2000s, is now a tossup/tilt right region. The right has also declined slightly in the Canary Islands.

Thg big change however here is how the Spanish right has almost disappeared from Catalonia and the Basque Country. They were never all that large to begin with (though Aznar came close to winning a narrow plurality in 2000), but now they are close to extinct on those regions.

Interestingly, unlike in many other places in Europe, while they have taken a hit, the Socialdemocratic PSOE is still the strongest party of the left. For a while it seemed like UP was going to overtake them but aparently not.

[Meclazine for Israel]

The short answer is the left wing parties are in decline.

Australia, UK, and many parts of Europe have moved to the right.

And Corona-virus will accelerate that movement.

The election in November will be very interesting as you have a different situation in the US to anywhere else.

The theatre of the theatre if you will.

[PSOL]

The short answer is the left wing parties are in decline.

Australia, UK, and many parts of Europe have moved to the right.

And Corona-virus will accelerate that movement.

The election in November will be very interesting as you have a different situation in the US to anywhere else.

The theatre of the theatre if you will.

I disagree that this virus will make anyone shift further right. If anything, the failure to properly respond is souring or is going to sour on them going further.

I do agree that the United States is in a different situation, and there is a rise of reactionary politics in Europe, but that’s why we gotta look globally to really assess this situation.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The short answer is the left wing parties are in decline.

Australia, UK, and many parts of Europe have moved to the right.

And Corona-virus will accelerate that movement.

The election in November will be very interesting as you have a different situation in the US to anywhere else.

The theatre of the theatre if you will.

I disagree that this virus will make anyone shift further right. If anything, the failure to properly respond is souring or is going to sour on them going further.

I do agree that the United States is in a different situation, and there is a rise of reactionary politics in Europe, but that’s why we gotta look globally to really assess this situation.

Worldwide, I can't think of any government that has truly shown competence, just varying levels of incompetence. This most generally will be an a anti-incumbent effect rather than any particular direction left or right.

[Meclazine for Israel]

The short answer is the left wing parties are in decline.

Australia, UK, and many parts of Europe have moved to the right.

And Corona-virus will accelerate that movement.

The election in November will be very interesting as you have a different situation in the US to anywhere else.

The theatre of the theatre if you will.

I disagree that this virus will make anyone shift further right. If anything, the failure to properly respond is souring or is going to sour on them going further.

I do agree that the United States is in a different situation, and there is a rise of reactionary politics in Europe, but that’s why we gotta look globally to really assess this situation.

Worldwide, I can't think of any government that has truly shown competence, just varying levels of incompetence. This most generally will be an a anti-incumbent effect rather than any particular direction left or right.

Australia's response was not as good as the numbers suggest. We just got lucky and timed everything on Trump's timetable. We had a 2 week headstart in the middle of summer.

Although the Corona-virus produced a socialist response and left-leaning approach from many Western countries, you will find the desire to get the conveyor belt restarted may in fact be causing the shift to the right to occur faster.

Just from the Corona-virus, it is obvious now that the US needs:

• Proper immigration policies;
• Less reliance on China;
• Less useless global institutions that look good on CNN;
• More US money spent in the US

Global trade made the US China's play thing. The US ran up a 500 Bn trade deficit with China. If you watch the first statements of the first Presidential Debate, Donald was all over this like a suicide bomber.

These are the exact nationalist isolationist populist policies Trump served up in 2016.

The US needs to be the No 1 economy without China suckling at its teet.

Then again, this could be a misread version of events and Joe Biden wins in November.

It's not possible to say at this stage until we see how the US heads out of the pandemic.

[Santander]

Just from the Corona-virus, it is obvious now that the US needs:

• Proper immigration policies;
• Less reliance on China;
• Less useless global institutions that look good on CNN;
• More US money spent in the US

What the hell do those things, aside from perhaps reliance on China, have anything to do with corona?

What is obvious is the need to replace Trump and develop public health strategies and capabilities to deal with future crises.

[PSOL]

Just from the Corona-virus, it is obvious now that the US needs:

• Proper immigration policies;
• Less reliance on China;
• Less useless global institutions that look good on CNN;
• More US money spent in the US

What the hell do those things, aside from perhaps reliance on China, have anything to do with corona?

What is obvious is the need to replace Trump and develop public health strategies and capabilities to deal with future crises.

The problem is that the best optimal care and infrastructure in place to deal with pandemics on this scale require massive investment and time, something that doesn’t bode well for most of the people who own enough money to influence politics far exceeding some average individual and even huge sections of the population at times. We’ve seen that Trump and many other nations dismantle and privatize key areas in their healthcare systems for a conservation of these ultra-Rich’s taxdollars.

Anyway, for many people looking onward and seeing that the status quo isn’t working out well for the vast majority of people in the worst of times, I’d say that would push the majority of people to the left instead of the right, as the right in most cases have dismissed these concerns entirely while bubbling up the response to the pandemic, or have blamed poor migrants while bungling the response in the same way.

[Meclazine for Israel]

What is obvious is the need to replace Trump and develop public health strategies and capabilities to deal with future crises.

I won't ever get involved in your little spats.

What about George W Bush? He seemed to have an idea about responding to a pandemic.

George W Bush

Preparing for a Pandemic

https://youtu.be/uSDC5L7qYUc

Maybe his experience with September 11 gave him a crystal clear understanding of how quickly and how real these things could become.

[T'Chenka]

The way I see it, the left and center-left are extremely strong and not in decline in North America, BUT there are two major things happening that are preventing anything from coming of it.

1 - The oligarchy and the corporations that have tge major political parties in their pockets know that they can't run the show backing only right wing parties. Therefore, they buy left wing parties - Democrat (USA) and Liberal (Canada) - and ensure that they move to the right and stay to the right, but not as much as the right wing parties. Justin Trudeau, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama are center-left or centrists, just like these political parties. The REAL left is marginalized because very few of their policies can co-exist with profit for the rich and maintaining the status quo of of corruption.

2 - The SJW movement and the more radical wing of the Black Lives Matter movement are authoritarian leftists that get lots of attention and turn off your average Joe/Jane voter. The non-authoritarian left has lot a lost of attention and momentum ever since these groups came on the scene, with the notable exception of Bernie Sanders and his movement. Going forward, Ocasio-Cortez (and Jagmeet Singh) MAY be able to lead the left to better days, but her loyalty to the non-authoritarian left and rejection of SJW policies has not been loud and clear. If she runs for POTUS, we will perhaps see how she feels in that regard.

[Brother Jonathan]

My answers to your questions, just my general impressions right now

1) Is increasing left-wing ideological identification a trend only among the young?
I think it is wrong to say the movement is restricted to the young, but I do think it is fair to state that any increase in identification with the left-wing over the past few years can largely be attributed to the young. Historically students and the youth have been the activists, so it's not really that surprising. I also don't think people change ideologically as much as they get older, and when they do it is generally to the right.

2) Are other countries experiencing similar movements to that in the US?
Yes, to varying degrees as their political systems will allow. Broadly speaking, any nation that was hit by the 2008 Recession and then shared the roughly US recovery trend has seen some political radicalism on the left. In some places this left wing trend is obscured and fused with other movements that are unique to the country in question. In Mexico, for example, the left has found common ground with some disaffected social conservative groups, while in Scotland the left has been absorbed in the Scottish Nationalist movement. It's hardly consistent from country to country, and the different structures in each country can reflect the general trend in different ways. In the US, with two dominant parties with a near complete monopoly on political discourse, the left operates within the largest center-left party, while in France a looser domination and more widespread proliferation of parties makes creating a left wing splinter party is not that difficult. So different structures result in different manifestations of the same trend. 

2a) Are the "objective conditions" driving the growth of "socialism" in the US distinct from those experienced in Western Europe?
On the one hand, they represent the same general dissatisfaction with existing economic systems, largely shaped in the aftermath of the 2008 recession, and express the economic anxieties of the young in particular. The United States and Europe have not had a uniform economic experience since 2008, but  the same frustration clearly exists. Western political discourse has been injected with a general sense of anxiety (be it economic or cultural), and that has fueled the rise of both the populist left and right.

3) Does the lack of left-wing success in some countries reflect (a) genuine "conservative" popular opinion, or (b) a simple disparity between popular sentiments and electoral results?
It depends on the country, and even within each country both factors can be present to an extent. In the United Kingdom, it is clear that conservative popular opinion has a certain edge, but it also benefits from the electoral system. In the United States, the primaries showed a preference among voters for more moderate candidates over more left ones, but it could be said that this is reflective of a desire to nominate candidates who can win in the existing political structures (electoral college, generally FPTP congressional elections, etc). So in general, both factors are at play in some sense where the left is unsuccessful. I think it is important to note, though, that disparities between election results and popular sentiments is most often the result of voters willingly (or at least consciously) voting for candidates or parties that do not best reflect their ideology but may have a better chance of winning. However, the populist right has hollowed out some traditional left wing areas, so it is difficult to deny that the left hasn't lost ground in some places.

4) Should we meaningfully differentiate increased left-wing or liberal social values from left-wing political preferences?
Yes, as they represent very different trends that are largely unrelated.

[cris01us]

I think the measuring stick has moved, and what you call “Left” today is far more progressive than what would have been defined as such say 40 or even 20 years ago.  Why is this?  Quite simply, progress has been made, and therefore continued “progress” requires a further shift to the left. Or more directly – the Left has won and continues to win.  When current victories stall or fail people see it as a decline in the Left, or even when a party fractures.  In fact that is not true, the yard stick has simply moved from where it was or you’re using a new one.  For instance the Left leaning policies that people support now have a wider group of supporters than they used to.  i.e. in America how many folks on the right are trying, in a serious way, to modify social security?  Only 20 years ago the discussion was revolving around partial privatization of it, and now…? Nothing, no one dares mention it.  When holding all three parts of the American government to effectively change the ACA, as promised back in 2010, what was the GOP response? Nothing, and now they dare not.  It has to broad of support now – why because people have accepted it, it has become the norm.  The policy is won, the yard stick has moved.

Far from decline, the Left has become ascendant. After 62 years of congressional power in America, the left became (by today’s standards) not so easily distinguished from the right on many issues.  Once out of power, once faced with defeat and policies that were not of their choosing (Bush tax cuts to name one) the Left has been reenergized in America.  It is the power struggle over the past 24 years (since Gingrich was Speaker I would put at) that we have seen this shift.  All the while, progress has been made, and continues to be.  Marriage legislation, drug legalization, the abridgment of the 2A in a number of states (at least in terms of MORE 2A legislation being passed), energy transitions, just to name a few issues.  In almost every category of policy issues the victories have been stacking up for the Left not the Right.  The only three exceptions I find worth note are taxes, “right to work laws”, and abortion issues.  In these two areas the GOP has made some, if only temporary, headway and one of those only within a few states.  In the case of “right to work” laws this is short sighted, because the Left will shift to the federal level to counter.  What’s more the Right has had to shift its’ stances and agendas to the Left in order to make any lasting progress (think of the appeal message circa 2000 vs now). Otherwise you would have seen GOP immigration legislation, and you wouldn’t have seen Bush’s No Child Left behind but rather robust school voucher legislation. The “radical right-wing” appeals you do hear are 1) done to garner headlines, 2) are aimed at the base 3) are always softened by the majority of GOP candidates. They should not be taken as the overall norm.

The idea that because unions or worker organizations have become weaker, thus so to has the Left, just doesn’t play out.  Instead, it is because those traditional institutions have become weaker we find the increased collectivist call from the Left (more federal programs).  For instance, instead of turning to unions to be the brokers for personal security and leverage the Left has skipped right ahead to the federal government.  This is why you see the rise in calls for free college tuition, free healthcare, federally mandated wage increases ($15/hr.), and so forth.  Where before there were institutions able to provide some of these things (at least the ends if not the means), we now find those institutions gone or no longer able to do so. However, we see the demand hasn’t gone away.  As a result those on the Left seek to use the levers of the federal government to replace who the provider is.  What alternative do they have, because the end goal is still the same.  Where before there were unions and pensions and healthcare provided by a steady job, now there is market fluctuation, an erosion of certainty, job instability, and so forth. 

I hope no one misconstrues the point I am attempting (but probably have failed) to make.  None of this is to be taken as derisive.  I’ve rather hoped to aim for a more historical and external view, trying to be as succinct and yet pointed as possible on a topic that frankly chapters have undoubtedly been written on.

[Grassroots]

The left has been winning the culture war for decades?

[Torrain]

I was inspired to make this thread by a comment from Parrotguy in another thread where he mentioned that "the left" seems to be barely alive in many countries. This struck me as to some extent basically true--the fate of the major center-left or left-wing parties in the UK and Germany for example--but also as very ironic.

This is kind of a misconception.

In the 2017 general election, the Tories only beat out Labour in the popular vote by 2% (42% to 40%), and the centre-left and left routinely win a plurality of the vote. The key issue here is vote splitting, and schisms within the political left, over minor policy issues.

If the Lib-dems and Greens ever agree to stand down in key Labour-Tory marginals, and Labour stand down in classic Tory-Liberal marginals, the electoral math would become far harder for the Conservatives.

Similarly, if we were using proportional representation, we would flip back and forth between minority Labour and Conservative governments on a regular basis.

[cris01us]

The left has been winning the culture war for decades?

In a word....Yes.

[Orwell]

The left has been winning the culture war for decades?

In a word....Yes.

Like.... when does the left not win the culture war? Progressives fought to end slavery, women's right to vote, etc. while conservatives fought against all of those things because they're inherently opposed to change.

[cris01us]

Like.... when does the left not win the culture war? Progressives fought to end slavery, women's right to vote, etc. while conservatives fought against all of those things because they're inherently opposed to change.

I would say that the "born-again Christian" movements in the 80s and 90s showed the GOP that they could have an impact on culture.  Nancy Reagan's "Just say no" campaign, as well as "The war on drugs".  All these things that were championed by the GOP, were accepted by the main stream, served as a pretext for the GOP to continue to fight to influence American culture. 

[Orwell]

Like.... when does the left not win the culture war? Progressives fought to end slavery, women's right to vote, etc. while conservatives fought against all of those things because they're inherently opposed to change.

I would say that the "born-again Christian" movements in the 80s and 90s showed the GOP that they could have an impact on culture.  Nancy Reagan's "Just say no" campaign, as well as "The war on drugs".  All these things that were championed by the GOP, were accepted by the main stream, served as a pretext for the GOP to continue to fight to influence American culture. 

Of course, you're right, but I mean long term. As we've seen in this past decade gay rights have become the norm when in 2008, 2004, and 2012 ballot measures passed in several states banning gay marriage. The acceptance of cannabis use throughout society, so you're right as in they were once accepted as main stream, but slowly the left is winning another issue in the culture war. 

[cris01us]

Of course, you're right, but I mean long term. As we've seen in this past decade gay rights have become the norm when in 2008, 2004, and 2012 ballot measures passed in several states banning gay marriage. The acceptance of cannabis use throughout society, so you're right as in they were once accepted as main stream, but slowly the left is winning another issue in the culture war. 

You are correct.  The Right has been consistently losing the culture war since around 2000.  George W. might have been an evangelical and softly pushed those ideas, but he didn't have any wins to show for it.  The problem is, is that there is a significant faction in the GOP who still wants to push their social agenda and they don't realize that that ship sailed about 16 years ago, and it gets weaker every year.  They, unfortunately still have enough money to have a voice at the table and provide many of the "safe seats" the party depends on. 

They should opt to have a clear and narrow message on the culture war front.  They should pick a handful of policies, have a clear message for each, and drop the charade on the rest.  Trying to take the moral high ground on every front has only under cut their overall goal.  It's vague, aimless, and ill defined - and it's to easily misconstrued by the other side.  If I could craft this for them I would say, make a clear delineation on where you want to go with Roe/Wade (nationwide and with all state legislation together; and not all the way to repeal), draw a clear line/policy stance that firms up Hobby Lobby and wedding cake judicial decisions, pick one more segment (nuclear family (not traditional)) - drop everything else.  Then again I am Libertarian, so they probably aren't interested in hearing from me.