The left-wing concepts of Bernie Sanders in the U.S. and Jeremy Corbyn in the United Kingdom are justifiably popular and act as a counterbalance against the shift to the right in the U.S. and some European states. They are worth examining.
There are alternatives in politics. Despite what the omnipresent preachers of neoclassical economic ideologies might proclaim, a different, more socially just, and even more efficient form of politics is taking shape and is urgently needed because after 35 years of privatization, deregulation, wage restriction, tax relief and the constriction of governmental responsibilities, the results of neoliberal measures are very meager — particularly for those who don’t have much.
This is the main message that the new Labour chief, Jeremy Corbyn, as well as the Democratic presidential candidate are sending to the world. And their current success proves that the time of TINA (There Is No Alternative), which was announced by Margaret Thatcher, seems to be over, just like the time of TINO (There Is No Opposition), when Tony Blair or Bill Clinton totally capitulated to the neoliberal dogmatists and proceeded with the politics of their conservative predecessors. Leftist political concepts are once again in demand.
Contrary to some excited reports, neither Sanders nor Corbyn is a die-hard Communist. Both essentially represent traditional social democratic positions of the Scandinavian model, just like the Social Democratic Party of Germany before Gerhard Schroeder’s neoliberal change of course. But that gets lost in public debates, the more so as Sanders describes himself as “Socialist,” which makes the conservatives in the U.S. red with anger, or because Corbyn, as an anti-monarchist, once refused to sing the national anthem (“God Save the Queen”) at a memorial service commemorating the Battle of Britain.
The Clinton Camp Is Nervous
Also, supporters of presidential candidate Hillary Clinton criticize the fact that Sanders congratulated the new Labour chief on his appointment, saying Corbyn is a supporter of Hamas and Hezbollah, that he wants the U.K. to withdraw from NATO and has called bin Laden’s death a tragedy. This reveals just how nervous the Clinton camp has become, given that Sanders is ahead in the polls in New Hampshire and Iowa, the important states where the first primaries are held. On the other hand however, not everything they’ve claimed is incorrect. Corbyn has been calling for a withdrawal from NATO for years and shown himself to be a vehement critic of Israeli politics.
The upcoming debates, however, will be less about foreign policy and more about economic and social policies. In the end, those are the topics on which Labour lost the trust of many voters. In a policy paper, Corbyn demanded that Labour must “create a balanced economy that ensures workers and government share fairly in the wealth creation process.”
That doesn’t sound too revolutionary, just like some of his other ideas: The Bank of England should finance a national investment bank, which would invest money in the building of affordable public housing, infrastructure and renewable energy technologies. The required funds would be acquired through newly implemented corporate tax laws. Furthermore, he wants to renationalize train services and introduce higher taxes for the wealthy. Corbyn’s goal is thus more state responsibility and more social equilibrium. These are not absurd suggestions at a time when states have had to rescue automobile companies and banks in the face of a long-lasting economic and financial crisis — and with debates over the distribution of wealth looming large in light of the flood of refugees.
Bernie Sanders also wants more social justice and to strengthen the political system. Thus, his program calls for doubling the minimum wage in the U.S. and higher taxes for the rich, the abolition of tuition fees, and higher charges for companies where the discrepancy between the lowest and highest earners exceeds a certain limit. Just like Corbyn, he rejects the dogma of austerity, above all because it comes at the expense of low earners and the middle class.
Both proposals carry the cost of decreasing economic security, which has been burdening the people more and more since Thatcher and Reagan. In addition, not only do they offer an alternative model that has rightly received a lot of sympathy, but they also provide a counterweight to the slogans of right-wing populists who are taking advantage of the widespread discontent in many countries over a perceived lack of political alternatives. Anybody looking for an antidote to the shift to the right in the U.S. or other European countries should listen a little more closely to what Corbyn and Sanders have to say. It’s worth it.
Yes, most welcome: an antidote to FU capitalism ? As a democratic Socialist myself -and a critical supporter of Bernie Sanders here in the United States- I was amused-not surprised-by a nearly apoplectic editorial in yesterday’s PROVIDENCE JOURNAL upset about the rise of Jeremy Corbyn to the leadership of the British Labor Party. Just WHAT were the editors so upset about here ? It seems that Corbyn comes from a working class background and has a history of class struggle fervor – not quite suppressed even in British Labor.
Of course, a REAL socialist movement in Britain or the United States will ruin the ONE PERCENT plutocracy-not even try to ” save ” it.
{ http://radicalrons.blogspot.com ]