Tag Archives: social democracy

Why Identify with Left-Wing Politics?

“A young person who isn’t a socialist hasn’t got a heart; an old person who is a socialist hasn’t got a head.” Is this true?

This old adage suggests that an attachment to the left is merely a romantic and naïve phase that should eventually pass as we mature and gain a more “realistic” understanding. Realism from this viewpoint involves the acceptance that There is No Alternative (TINA) to presently-existing capitalism and liberal democracy, that the most we can expect is some minor tinkering.

But this conservative viewpoint is unconvincing for two reasons. Continue reading →

Interview with Richard Sandbrook on Reinventing the Left

Ali Burak Guven (ABG): What was your motivation for writing Reinventing the Left?

To be honest, I never set out to write such an ambitious book. I originally conceived the project as a critique of neoliberal development doctrine. But one thing led to another, and my inclination to move beyond critique to the central question of “what might be done” came to the fore. This, to my mind, raised the issue of the viability and promise of the democratic left. Continue reading →

Does Social Democracy have a Future? A Debate

With both statist and market-based models of governance having failed at a time of enormous challenges, especially #climatechange, where do we turn? Socialism remains a grand idea, but its transformational nature ensures that the struggle to achieve it would be lengthy, divisive and highly conflictual. Even then, the outcome of a struggle for socialism would remain uncertain – would the new model avoid the excesses of the old? And so many progressives turn to #socialdemocracy. But of course social democracy is in crisis too, discredited in many countries by its semi-conversion to neoliberalism. What is the best path forward to reclaim the earlier promise of social democracy in an age of widespread cynicism and withdrawal from politics?

A recent debate between Martin O’Neill and Neal Lawson on this subject is highly illuminating. Both are committed to building a future for the democratic left. Their implicit frame of reference is Europe. However, with the old distinction between developed/less developed, First World/Third World increasingly irrelevant, the debate is of broader significance. It indeed mirrors similar differences of opinion within the democratic left of the global south as well.

The debate begins with polarized positions, but what is particularly interesting is that the differences narrow as the exchange draws toward its end. O’Neill adheres to a more traditional statist/top-down approach in which social-democratic parties regain their self-confidence in pressing their vision. Lawson adopts a “post-materialist” conception that is essentially a society-centric, bottom-up and participatory model. But as the debate continues, the positions converge in what is close to a synthesis of the two outlooks. Interestingly, the recent experience of Podemas (Spain) and Syriza (Greece) enters into the discussion, as it should in any debate about the future of social democracy. (Whether the two parties should be understood as social democratic at all is an important question; regardless, these experiences are central to the future of the democratic left.) The debate concludes in a balanced view of the role of the state and society in any social-democratic experiment that is capable of regaining the commitment and enthusiasm of citizens and constructing a more egalitarian, sustainable and secure future.

The Left’s Central Dilemma

Sometimes it appears that the democratic left is engaged in the labour of Sisyphus. Sisyphus, according to the Greek myth, was condemned by the gods to spend eternity in an utterly futile task: to push a boulder to the top of a hill, only to see it roll down to the bottom each time. Leaders of the left have their own peculiar burden to shoulder. When progressive parties pursue a moderate strategy of accommodation with capitalism, they may achieve egalitarian gains but rarely enough to satisfy their militant followers. But if they pursue a more confrontational stance vis-à-vis inherited structures of privilege and power, they risk instigating an economic crisis that may usher in a crushing political crisis as well. This pattern is evident in the Global South, the focus of this post, but it probably applies also to the Global North. Continue reading →

What or Who is the Left?

Who constitutes the political left? Continue reading →

The NDP’s “Socialism” Debate: Guest Post

Guest Post by Frank Cunningham, Emeritus Professor of Philosophy & Political Science, University of Toronto
Premised on the philosopher, George Santayana’s often-proven adage that those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it, this intervention in the (Canadian) New Democratic Party’s current debate over the “S” word situates these deliberations within the history of socialist and social-democratic movements. Continue reading →

Can Moderate Social Democracy be Progressive? A View from the Global South

3 Replies

Progressive movements divide into two types. On the one hand, there are leftist parties with a moderate strategy that aim, or at least resign themselves, to implement redistributive programs with the acquiescence of the elites. On the other hand, we find parties that believe that only unrelenting confrontation of existing power structures and inherited privilege will bring the desired results. The division between class compromise and class struggle is fundamental. Continue reading →

The Viability of a Radical Social-Democratic Path