Tuesday 9 June 2009

Left Out

In The First Post, Neil Clark writes:

With global capitalism in crisis and Europe in the midst of its worst economic depression for 70 years, one might think that it would be the parties of the Left who would have reaped the electoral dividend in last week's European elections. But with one or two exceptions, they fared badly across the continent.

Candidates of the centre-Left who enthusiastically embraced globalisation, free markets and privatisation were annihilated - the British Labour Party polled its lowest share of the vote for a century and the German Social Democrats slumped to their worst ever showing. While parties espousing more traditional socialist policies did better, even they did not make as much progress as they ought to have done, given the severity of the economic crisis.

What went wrong?

It's clear that a large percentage of working-class protest votes across Europe have gone to populist parties of the 'far-Right', who combine traditional left-wing anti-capitalist and anti-globalist economic policies, with unequivocal opposition to mass immigration and an uncompromising stance on law and order.

In Britain, the BNP gained votes not from the Conservatives, whose share of the vote was virtually unchanged from five years ago, but from Labour. In the Labour stronghold of Barnsley, for instance, the BNP won as much as 16 per cent.

In Hungary, Jobbik 'The Movement for a Better Hungary', which is denounced as 'neo-fascist' by its opponents, became the country's third largest party. It had attacked finance-driven globalisation and the 'unpatriotic' pro-globalist elite, in a way which clearly resonated with ordinary people. In Austria, far-right parties polled an unprecedented 17.7 per cent of the vote.

If the European Left is to claw back working-class votes from the far-Right, it not only needs to oppose the neo-liberal model of globalisation, but to jettison its politically correct approach to issues like immigration and law and order and adopt policies which are popular with its core constituency - the working class.

Since the 1960s, as European Left parties have gradually become more middle class, they have gradually lost their link with their indigenous working-class voters. Just how out of touch the British middle classes are with working-class opinion can be seen by their utter bewilderment at the rise of the BNP.

For years, working-class concerns about immigration levels have been denounced as 'racist'. Working-class displays of patriotism - such as flying national flags -areregarded with deep suspicion.

"The ersatz English pride expressed by the entirely bogus St George's Day celebrations is deeply creepy. I hate it," wrote leftist commentator Martin Bright in the Spectator. "Wandering through London this week and bumping into people wrapped in red and white flags or dressed as knights has made me feel deeply embarrassed to be English." For middle-class leftists, large scale immigration means cheap Polish plumbers and some great new ethnic restaurants. How on earth, they wonder, could anyone be opposed to it, let alone vote for a party which promises an end to immigration?

The middle-class takeover of the Left has also meant a lack of focus on the basic problems which most concern ordinary people. Instead it's middle class issues and preoccupations - civil liberties, identity politics and human rights, which come to the fore.

Post-1968, the European Left, dominated by the middle-classes, has preferred to put cultural leftism before economic leftism and now it has paid a huge penalty.

This year's Euro elections make it clear that the Left will never make significant electoral headway unless it rethinks its stance on immigration and other important issues. It needs to oppose the free movement of both capital and labour - not on racist grounds, but because neither are in the interests of ordinary working people.

It has to acknowledge the innate social conservatism of most working-class voters and drop its aggressively liberal approach to social issues which anger so many. And it needs to become more openly patriotic - and not be ashamed of occasionally wrapping itself in the national flag, even if it does make smart media commentators like Martin Bright feel "deeply embarrassed".

In the last few weeks in Britain we have been bombarded with articles from the liberal elite and Church leaders lecturing the plebs on the dangers of voting for the BNP. In spite of that - or possibly partly because it - the BNP now has two seats in the European Parliament.

Patronising ordinary people is not going to stop the rise of the far Right: unashamedly populist left-wing parties, putting forward policies that the working class actually support, might.

6 comments:

  1. It's not much of a revelation to say that if the European Left is to do better in future then it ought to become more rightwing.

    Bush has now gone. The old Soviet-inspired Left used him as a hate figure to unite against. In doing so they artificially prolonged their lifespan long after the Soviet Union they fondly remembered was gone. Now that Bush has gone, and with no chance of a nice-looking black man becoming leader of any mainstream leftwing party in Europe, the old Euro-Left is finally starting to disintegrate.

    Whether the European Right now unites against Obama, as it ought to, remains to be seen.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bush? Get a grip! No one ever took HIM that seriously!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Most of the European RIGHT was anti-Bush.

    ReplyDelete
  4. For the very good reason that Gaullists and Christian Democrats really are conservatives, whereas entryists like Sarkozy and Merkel are not, just as entryists to the Republican Party (the Trots who had become the neocons) were not, and are not.

    They have destroyed the Republican Party. For that matter, they have destroyed the Labour Party. And now, they are destroying Gaullism (in all its patriotism) and German Christian Democracy (in all its moral and social conservatism).

    ReplyDelete
  5. Except that this is simply not the case! The Euro election results rather suggest, on the contrary, that it is the Left that is in its death throes and the European parties of the Right are doing comparatively well.

    In real terms much of the European "Right" of course is only rightwing when compared with the Socialists and Communists of the European Left.

    The hatred of Bush on the Left in both America and Europe, because of his stance on abortion, wasn't just "serious". It was positively demented. It's a matter of public record that no one seriously disputes. For virtually the whole of his term of office he was, without a doubt, the most hated politician in the world. The European Left exploited this. The German and Spanish Socialists both built successful election campaigns around anti-Bushism. The Liberal Democrats in this country put pictures of Bush and Blair together on almost all of their leaflets when campaigning in Labour areas - and they too are now doing very badly.

    It's easier to scare leftists to the polls than to woo them. And President Abortion just isn't inspiring the Euro-proles in the same way as President Bush used to.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The Republicans briefly won elections on a neocon platform. But look at them now. Furthermore, most people voting Gaullist or Christian Democrat could not be further from that position. They will wnat their parties back sooner rather than later.

    As for abortion, neither Bush nor any Republican has ever done the first thing about it. Whereas Democratic America now has the pro-life majority that Republican America never had, and President Obama has not only called the Freedom of Choice Act "not a high priority" (we all know what a politician means when he says that), but pretty much said that the Pregnant Women Support Act IS a high priority.

    The PWSA, of course, is as such things always are, a Democratic initiative. Indeed, a Christian Democratic initiative in the Old European sense.

    ReplyDelete