"The Left Can Win"

[Velasco]

That's the title of a transcription (it's not an "essay", as Ms Naomi Klein wrote in her FB) in the Jacobin site. Podemos secretary general Pablo Iglesias offers his thoughts on how the left can win or, in other words, on "radical politics and how to build mass movements".

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/12/pablo-iglesias-podemos-left-speech/

I think this excerpt of a meeting in Valladolid (Spain) by the new Messiah of the European left may give some clues on the Podemos' "transversality", its discourse and strategy to take power: accessible speech, "people's empowerment", "the highly placed vs the common people", etc.

"Bread and Peace".

_{Off topic. I find amusing the love of Robespierre in certain circles in the radical left. If it was my online magazine, it'd be called Margaret in the Guillotine. Mozzer must be as controversial in pop music as Maximilien in historical discussion}

[Velasco]

The left sometimes fail to talk to the emotions of the people they want to convince, while the right and the far-right are good at it. For example, humans tend to be afraid of unknown and unusual things, and the far-right connects with that.

True. Far-right and right-wing populist parties appeal to people's emotions better than the left (both "radical" and "moderate") and they connect with the fears of the common people. However, that "fear of the unknown" is clearly instrumented into a "fear of the otherness". The usual suspects are immigrants, as you know well. There's a ghost flying over Europe called xenophobia, with a singular variant named islamophobia.

Just to clarify things -not because of your post, but because some people and media like to establish comparisons with the FN or the 5 Stelle- , there's a radical difference between far-right populism and the new Spanish "movement party" called Podemos on the subject of "otherness". Also, I think that it's possible to deduce that there's an ideological background and motivation behind that speech. That's a huge difference with 'protest' parties like that of Beppe Grillo. Once that's been established, it's fair to criticise platform, discourse and strategy (for good and for bad).

[Velasco]

Aside a specific type of xenophobia, what do you think islamophobia is?

According to a British organisation, islamophobia is characterised by:

1) Islam seen as a single monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to new realities.

2) Islam seen as separate and other – (a) not having any aims or values in common with
other cultures (b) not affected by them (c) not influencing them.

3) Islam seen as inferior to the West – barbaric, irrational, primitive, sexist.

4) Islam seen as violent, aggressive, threatening, supportive of terrorism, engaged in 'a clash
of civilisations'.

5) Islam seen as a political ideology, used for political or military advantage.

5) Criticisms made by Islam of ‘the West’ rejected out of hand.

6) Hostility towards Islam used to justify discriminatory practices towards Muslims and exclusion of Muslims from mainstream society.

7) Anti-Muslim hostility accepted as natural and 'normal'

http://www.runnymedetrust.org/uploads/publications/pdfs/islamophobia.pdf

I would not like to deviate the discussion, but feel free to start another topic on this particular subject. In what concerns the left and Islam...  In my opinion, it'd be an analytical error de-contextualise legitimate criticism and condemnation of certain extremist manifestations of Islam (ISIS, burka, etc) in order to disqualify anything related with Islamic peoples and societies.

I'd agree on that certain naivety and well-intentioned 'good vibe' attitudes towards Islam and immigration may have been costly for the left. However, my impression is that the huge strategical error on the part of political advisers is trying to compete with the far-right on the grounds of appealing to the fear of the other. People use to prefer the original to the copy (Le Pen better than Sarko or Valls).

I think that focusing on this perceived danger distracts the attention from the real problems. In what regards the South of Europe and Spain in particular, the diagnosis made by the Podemos' strategists has proved a success as it's largely identical to that of the Spanish society. The last part of the swl's post mentions some of these concerns. This has been achieved without resorting to foreign scapegoats. Another question, the tougher one, is the proposals and the practical measures to address problems and challenges.  

[Velasco]

Why would I want to read something from Jacobin?

I don't know because, aside that transcription, I haven't had the pleasure of reading Jacobin. I only know what people wants: Bread and Peace.

I think you have just shown why the Left will keep losing elections.

Do you have the correct diagnosis and the recipe to save the European Left from disaster? It'd be a good thing to know both. Out of irony, it'd be good a comeback of socialdemocracy... or a reinvention which doesn't imply losing its former spirit into some kind of third-way socio-liberalism or, even worse, a carbon-copy of right-wing xenophobic populism. I wish to see tyranny overthrown one day, if possible.

[Velasco]

You don't get it. Being "correct" on the diagnosis concerns those who design the strategy. Being clear and convincing to common people concerns those who play on a stand. In other words: academic jargon is for academicians, "Bread and Peace" is for speakers. Is it difficult to understand?

[Velasco]

There is no recipe for victory, there is only hard work, luck and political fingerspitzengefühl, but that you showed in your post is a recipe, a recipe for defeat.

Hard work, sure. A bit of luck doesn't harm. Sure instinct (fingerspitzengefühl) is rare amongst European politicians, especially those aligned in the socialdemocracy. It's a gift for a party having a solid leadership, is it enough? Can the decadent European environment provide political animals like Lula or Pepe Mújica? Also, what is what I showed in my post? I only said that in my opinion is a big mistake copying the far-right agenda.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

First of all, I don't make recipes and don't have remedies. Second, why do you say I lump islamophobes together? I copied the commonly accepted definition of islamophobia, a concept coined in 1991 by a Britsh organisation called Runnymede Trust. That characterisation is recognized by the EU Observatory on Racism and Xenophobia. Do you think it's offesive? Why?

Let us leave that I didn't call "islamophobe" to anyone, just posted what is "islamophobia". When you say, "they don't like the values, behaviour and problems", what are you referring to? Aren't you lumping all Muslims together as problematic and misconducted people? What do you mean with "values"? What are "Islamic values"? Here you have a part of the problem, Islam seen as "monolithic", "barbaric", "primitive", "sexist", etcetera. That is exactly how populist xenophobes portray those communities. The reality of "Islam" is actually too complex and varied to talk of "Islamic values" in a general sense. On the other hand, many immigrants come from socially conservative countries. It's not easy to deal with that, but it should be clear that "assimilation" to western "civilised" values is only possible through a gradual process. Our authorities and decision-makers should have a better knowledge of the cultural backgrounds of our immigrant communities.  

Instead of echoing the claims of populist xenophobes, dealing with conflicts between immigrant and local communities requires a lot of hard work in education, social services and many other areas. The problem is complex and I don't have a magic solution, but common sense tells me that it's needed a lot of pedagogy to comprehend other realities and foster tolerance, as well investment in deprived areas where immigrants and poor locals use to live, mediation in conflicts... It's important to note that problems have a clear economic background; the far-right likes to say they are the result a cultural clash. I think Arab multimillionaires never cause problems, do they? The easy way is, of course, the one exploited by xenophobes. They don't provide solutions.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This example you provide is a clear sample of counterproductive overreaction, especially if it wasn't rectified. I think such attitudes from well intentioned progressives can be costly, indeed.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think there's something more like that. What you call "hypocrisy" -my impression is that it's more an issue of not dealing with problems- may be a reason for distrust. However, I'm not sure if it's really the most important factor in play. In what regards socialdemocracy, which has been traditionally the most significant portion of the "European Left", the core of the problem is the loss of identity. It's hard to keep the trust of your potential voters when your policies are indistinguishable from those of the mainstream right. I'm talking of economy, obviously. I think the problems of the "radical" left are different, maybe more related with chronic infighting and disconnection from reality: those students complaining because "workers" don't understand them.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As for the last paragraph of your post, I'm not sure of how to deal with far-right xenophobes and right-wing populists. Luckily, they aren't strong in my country. For sure, the left must fight them by showing for what they are. I think that you may be right on that treating them as untouchables -the cordon sanitaire- is not going to work anymore. The challenge is how to fight them without losing the core values of the left -such as social justice, brotherhood or tolerance- and counter demagoguery with argumentation accesible to common people.  I doubt that if they touch power, they are going to "moderate" themselves or moving to the left. Maybe the first, to some extent, but not the latter.

  

[Velasco]

"Bread and Peace".

That's not even an original slogan.

I doubt that the guy pretended to be original in rescuing an old Leninist slogan from oblivion.

True, it's obvious that there are differences between the parties associated with 'The Left' in Europe. Does it mean that they are not facing problems that are common to them? Personally, I'm a bit of sceptical about the possibility of 'exporting' experiences to other places. However, do you think that the emergence of certain political forces in certain countries won't have repercussions in others?   

[Velasco]

Bread and Peace, a slogan made for a situation where people were literally starving en masse and watching a whole generation of their sons consumed by a war with no obvious benefit to them, is certainly tailor-made for modern countries where literal starvation is next to unheard of and (as per most European countries not named Ukraine) aren't involved in wars of any kind at the moment.

But is he literally claiming that the Left should use that as an actual slogan today? Or is it only meant to be illustrative of the argument that simple/clear messages are most effective in reaching out to the masses?

Obviously the second (bolded) option.

I doubt the intention was to compare the situation of Russia in 1917 with Spain in 2014. It'd be silly trying to establish parallelisms between so different social and historic contexts.

However, it should be noted that the economic crisis in Spain has fostered economic inequalities more than in other western countries. For example, if we compare the impact of crisis in Greece and Spain, figures are eloquent:

- Disposable income fell 29% in Greece and 14% in Spain between 2007 and 2011.

- However, in both countries incomes developed differently at the top and the bottom. Top 10% incomes fell 31% in Greece and only 5.6% in Spain. Bottom 10% incomes fell 42% in Greece and 42.4% in Spain.

- Gini coefficient rose from 0.306 to 0.344 in Spain between 2007 and 2011, the highest increase in developed countries. In Greece remained stable at 0.335 in the same period.

- Poverty rate increased from 13.3 to 15.1 in Spain (14 to 15.2 in Greece)

- In 2011, poverty between those aged under 18 nearly reached 22% in Spain. It's a rate higher than that of Greece (20.4%) or any European country.

Source: OECD.

http://ep00.epimg.net/descargables/2014/06/19/7c03beab44419d4e1d4d1b02d8b0d3ed.pdf

Those figures have an obvious impact in people's life. Among other things, child malnutrition is nowadays an actual problem in Spain. Sadly, I can't say that the word "starvation" is totally unheard in this country. Of course, things were far worse in Tsarist Russia and I have absolutely no intention to compare apples and pears. The unequal impact between socioeconomic groups means that the middle class is being destroyed in Spain, which may have the foreseeable consequence of a drag on future growth and/or recovery. My 'diagnosis' - I guess that's what most of people think here- is that it's the result of certain policies.