Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Does the progressive left need to be more radical?

I normally bat for the progressive team on SW but my political traditions are somewhat different (though overlapping) to American liberals.

I think mainstream liberal parties across the West made a big mistake abandoning the social democratic models of the 70s. By the 90s there were only minor differences in economic policy between them and their Conservative rivals. This may have made electoral sense at the time but the long term cost has been disillusionment of their working class and or left leaning base support. When an economic and political crisis hit post 2007, they have been seen as part of a failing establishment.

That for me is the biggest reason why Hillary lost to Trump and why Brexit happened. The nationalist right offer something different and offer answers. Now these answers made be castles of sand and the sales pitch may involve an appeal to reactionary instincts but for this to have happened, the left has done something badly wrong. The rust belt should be a Democrat heartland and northern England should similary not have shot themselves in the foot by voting for a Tory Brexit.

I am aware this is not clear cut. Jeremy Corbyn is a radical but his Uk Labour party are struggling badly, though there are many factors involved.

The German SDP is having a renaissance though and is doing so by tacking to the left. When you have a united party, a capable leader and an economically progressive program, the left can succeed. Opinion polls had Sanders beating Trump by ten points during the Primary season and I think this is what the left should learn. Economic populism can stop the nationalist right.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
SteelHands · 61-69, M
Socialism:
Replaces the family with the state as the central unit in society
Undermines the family by redistributing its wealth and indoctrinating its children in government schools
Allows legalized theft in the name of redistributing wealth
Encourages sloth instead of productivity
Rewards irresponsibility, laziness, and poor accountability
Encourages self-indulgence instead of self-reliance
Encourages finger pointing and shifting of responsibility to others
Replaces the self-discipline of delayed gratification with the need for instant gratification
Undermines the values that are the foundation of the traditional work ethic (i.e. thrift, diligence, self-reliance, self-discipline, responsibility, accountability, deferred gratification, and hard work) and replaces them with an entitlement mentality
Treats those who contribute to the betterment of society the same as those who do not, even when they are capable of doing so
Promotes a get-something-for-nothing mentality that undermines the moral character of the individual and society
Robs people of initiative, drive, and ambition
Undermines the spirit of entrepreneurship, innovation, and competitiveness
Promotes totalitarianism, thereby undermining freedom and liberty
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
Yawn
SteelHands · 61-69, M
And the insiders, the haves.. they become even more cockey and arrogant.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@Noahkahol: Which countries do you consider to be socialist?
SteelHands · 61-69, M
Hopefully there will never be another. Nazi Germany was a perfect example if there ever was one.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@Noahkahol: Nazism is not socialism. Pfff
SteelHands · 61-69, M
That is precisely what Nzism was. Exactly, definitively, and the word name Nazi is derived from the National Socialism it was the name for. Can't lie to me kid, I know better than you.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@LvChris: But he knows better than me! 😂 Socialists and trade unionists were the first against the wall when Hitler took power but there is clearly no difference. 🙄