The riots that have rampaged across Greece may have many causes, but one that is rarely mentioned is the fracturing of the Greek left into Foreign Minister George Papandreou’s traditional socialist party, PASOK, and an increasingly radicalized faction that refuses all accommodation with either the EU or modern economics. To varying degrees, this divide is paralyzing Socialist parties across Europe.
That the traditional left is so inert in the midst of today’s economic crisis is more than strange. Instead of thriving on renewed doubts about capitalism, Europe’s Socialist parties have failed to make any serious political inroads. In countries where they hold power, such as Spain, they are now very unpopular.
Where they are in opposition, as in France and Italy, they are in disarray — as are Germany’s Social Democrats, despite their being part of the ruling Grand Coalition. Even Sweden’s out-of-power Social Democrats, the country’s dominant party for a century, have failed to capitalize on the crisis. The UK may be the exception, though the pro-market Labour Party shaped by former prime minister Tony Blair may not count as a party of the left anymore.
European socialists have failed to address the crisis cogently because of their internal divisions. Born anti-capitalist, these parties all (to greater and lesser degrees) came to accept the free market as the foundation of the economy. Moreover, since 1991 and the collapse of the Soviet system, the left has lacked a clear model with which to oppose capitalism.
But, despite paying lip service to the market, the European left remains torn by an inner contradiction between its anti-capitalist origins and its recent conversion to free-market economics. Is the present crisis a crisis of capitalism or just a phase of it? This controversy keeps left-wing intellectuals, pundits, and politicians busy on television talk shows and in cafe debates across Europe.
As a result, a struggle for power has erupted. In France and Germany, a new far left — composed of Trotskyites, communists, and anarchists – is rising from the ashes to become a political force again. These rejuvenated ghosts take the form of Oskar Lafontaine’s Left Party in Germany, as well as various revolutionary movements in France; one of them has just named itself the Anti-Capitalist Party. Its leader, a onetime postman, says that in the present circumstances, he is part of a “Resistance,” a word resonant of the anti-fascist struggles of the Hitler era. The actual alternative to capitalism that this far left seeks is anyone’s guess.
In the face of this new radicalism, which is attracting some traditional Socialists, what are the more established socialist leaders to do? When they bend towards the Trotskyites, they lose “bourgeois” supporters; when they seek the middle ground, like the SDP in Germany, the Left Party grows. As a consequence of this dilemma, Socialist parties across Europe seem paralyzed.
And they are. Indeed, it is hard to find any persuasive analysis of today’s crisis from the left beyond anti-capitalist slogans. The Socialists blame greedy financiers, but who does not? In terms of remedies, the Socialists do not offer anything more than the Keynesian solutions that are now being proposed by the right.
Since US President George W. Bush showed the way towards bank nationalization, vast public spending, industrial bailouts, and budget deficits, the Socialists have been left without wiggle room. French President Nicolas Sarkozy tries to rekindle growth through the protectionist defense of “national industries” and huge investments in public infrastructure, so what more can Socialists ask for? Moreover, many Socialists fear that excessive public spending may trigger inflation, and that their core constituencies will become its first victims.
When the right has turned statist and Keynesian, the free market’s true believers are marginalized, and old-style anti-capitalism seems archaic, one wonders what Socialism in Europe can possibly mean?
The future of European Socialism is also hampered, strangely, by the EU. To build Socialism in one country is impossible nowadays because all of Europe’s economies are now interdependent. The last leader to try go-it-alone socialism, former French president Francois Mitterrand in 1981, surrendered to the European institutions in 1983.
These institutions, based on free trade, competition, limited budget deficits, and sound money, are fundamentally pro-market; there is little leeway within them for doctrinaire Socialism. This is why the far left is anti-European. European Socialists are also finding it hard to distinguish themselves in foreign affairs. They used to be reflexively pro-human rights, much more so than conservative parties. But ever since Bush included these ideas as part of his democracy-promotion campaigns, European Socialists have become more wary of them.
Moreover, without the Soviet Union, European socialists have few foreign causes to take to heart: few understand Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s Russia, and today’s totalitarian-capitalist China is too far and too strange. And, since US president-elect Barack Obama’s election, anti-Americanism is no longer a viable way to garner support. The good old days when Trotskyites and Socialists found common ground in bashing the US are over.
The ideological weakness and division of the left will not, of course, exclude them from power. It can cling to office, as Prime Minister Jose; Zapatero is doing in Spain and Prime Minister Gordon Brown is doing in the UK. The left may ultimately win general elections elsewhere if the new Keynesian right proves unable to end the crisis. But whether in opposition or in power, the Socialists have no distinct agenda.
The lesson from Greece, however, is that what European Socialists should fear most is the far left’s taste and talent for disruption. For the hollowing out of Socialism has a consequence. To paraphrase Karl Marx, a specter is haunting Europe — the specter of chaos.
Guy Sorman is a French philosopher, economist and author.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
Taiwan aims to elevate its strategic position in supply chains by becoming an artificial intelligence (AI) hub for Nvidia Corp, providing everything from advanced chips and components to servers, in an attempt to edge out its closest rival in the region, South Korea. Taiwan’s importance in the AI ecosystem was clearly reflected in three major announcements Nvidia made during this year’s Computex trade show in Taipei. First, the US company’s number of partners in Taiwan would surge to 122 this year, from 34 last year, according to a slide shown during CEO Jensen Huang’s (黃仁勳) keynote speech on Monday last week.
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
RSS