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
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.