Left-wing politics

Left wing is also a term used in several sports; see winger (sport).

In politics, left-wing, the political left or simply The Left are terms that refer to the segment of the political spectrum typically associated with any of several strains of socialism or social democracy, or in the United States, American liberalism. In addition it is considered the opposite of right-wing politics.

Communism, as well as the Marxist philosophy that many base it on, and most currents of traditional anarchism are often considered to be radical forms of left-wing politics. Most left-wingers however reject any association with communism or anarchism.

The term comes originally from the legislative seating arrangement during the French Revolution, when republicans who opposed the Ancien Régime were commonly referred to as leftists because they sat on the left side of successive legislative assemblies.

As this original reference became obsolete, the meaning of the term has changed as appropriate to the spectrum of ideas and stances being compared, and the point of view of the speaker. In recent times, the term almost always includes some forms of socialism or social democracy.

Some consider it to include secularism, especially in the United States, India, the Middle East, and in many Catholic countries, although some atheists, such as Ayn Rand, were not part of the left, while religion and leftism have at times been allied historically, such as in the U.S. civil rights movement.

See political spectrum and left-right politics for further discussion of this kind of classification.

History of the term

Although it may seem ironic in terms of present-day usage, those originally on 'The Left' during the French Revolution were the largely bourgeois supporters of laissez-faire capitalism and free markets. As the electorate expanded beyond property-holders, these relatively wealthy elites found themselves clearly victorious over the old aristocracy and the remnants of feudalism, but newly opposed by the growing and increasingly organized and politicized workers and wage-earners. The "left" of 1789 would, in some ways be part of the present-day "right", liberal with regard to the rights of property and intellect, but not embracing notions of distributive justice, rights for organized labour, etc.

In some countries, such as the Netherlands, the left had for a long time the meaning of the non-religious side of politics. This gradually changed into the more general European meaning of the word.

The European left has traditionally shown a smooth continuum between non-communist and communist parties (including such hybrids as eurocommunism), which have sometimes allied with more moderate leftists to present a united front. In the United States, however, no avowedly socialist or communist party ever became a major player in national politics, although the Social Democratic Party of Eugene V. Debs and its successor Socialist Party of America (in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century) and the Communist Party of the United States of America (in the 1930s) made some inroads. While many American "liberals" might be "social democrats" in European terms, very few of them openly embrace the term "left"; in the United States, the term is mainly embraced by New Left activists, certain portions of the labor movement, and people who see their intellectual or political heritage as descending from 19th-century socialist movements.

The New Left refers to left-wing movements from the 1960s onwards who claimed to be breaking with some traditions of the left. Where earlier left-wing movements were generally rooted in labor activism, the New Left generally adopted a broader definition of political activism, commonly called social activism. The New Left has had varying degrees of unity since its rise in the 1960s, mainly existing as loose coalitions of numerous distinct movements, including (but not limited to) feminists, greens, some labour unions, some atheists, some gay rights activists, and some minority ethnic and racially oriented civil rights groups.

Many Greens deny that green politics is "on the left"; nonetheless, their economic policies can generally be considered left-wing, and when they have formed political coalitions (most notably in Germany, but also in local governments elsewhere), it has almost always been with groups that would generally be classified as being on the left.

Left-wing issues

The left has historically opposed the preservation of wealth and power, especially in an institutionalized form, in the hands of those who have traditionally had them. Outside the United States, which lacked an explicit ruling class or nobility, this often included at the most basic level demands for democratization of the political system and land reform in agricultural areas.

With the spread of the industrial revolution, leftism became concerned with the conditions and rights of large numbers of workers in factories and of lower classes in general. Partial or full socialism, the welfare state, or trade unionism have been specific ways in which some leftists have tried to advance the interests of the poor.

In modern times the left also adopted opposition to some forms of aggressive nationalism, such as imperialism, offensive wars, intolerance of non-traditional or foreign cultures, and perceived or real violations of civil and human rights. However, the specific means of achieve these ends are not agreed upon by all who consider themselves leftists.

Almost all leftists however would agree that some form of government or social intervention in economics is necessary to advance the intersts of the poor, and it is this means which often puts them at odds in principle with advocates of the free market, though in practice the most effective opposition to leftism often comes through the influence of corporations if they see their interests threatened by leftist policies. On the other hand, leftist positions on social issues, such as opposition to social hierarchy and authority over moral behaviour, strict adherence to tradition, and monoculturalism, often makes them allies with advocates of individual freedom in that sphere.

Many on the Left describe themselves as "progressive", a term that arose from their self-identification as the side of social progress.

The above strands of left wing thought come in many forms, and individuals who support some of the objectives of one of the above stands will not necessarily support all of the others. At the level of practical political policy, there are endless variations in the means that left wing thinkers advocate to achieve their basic aims, and they sometimes argue with each other as much as with the right.

Communism and left-wing politics

Despite the important differences from other left-wing ideologies, communism is almost universally considered to be a part of "the left." This is somewhat parallel to the customary inclusion of fascism (and, in particular, that of Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy) in "the right." Nonetheless, communism differs significantly from other politics that are usually classified as left wing, and most left-wingers (even many far left groups) reject any association with it on the grounds that communism is too totalitarian to be politically humane or egalitarian. The argument that communism should be viewed independently of the conventional left-right spectrum has perhaps been made most eloquently by Karl Popper, through his development of the concept of totalitarianism. Most right-wingers (even many nationalists) reject any association with Nazism and fascism as well.

Some say that leftist welfare state reforms in many non-communist countries, such as the establishment of social security and recognition of labor unions helped to stave off communism by alleviating the excesses of capitalism, hence protecting and preserving social support for capitalism.

The Soviet Union

In the days of the Soviet Union, left-wing movements worldwide had different relationships with Moscow-line communist parties, ranging from enthusiastic support to outright opposition. Lincoln Steffens, in 1919, said of having visited the Soviet Union, "I have seen the future and it works", while others, increasingly numerous over the years, loathed the perceived crimes of those regimes and denounced them at every turn.

Throughout the history of the Soviet Union, the large social-democratic parties of Western Europe were largely opposed to what they saw as its totalitarianism. A large majority of members of the British Labour Party, the West German SPD, and the French Socialists were never supportive of the Soviet regime, and nor were their respective leaderships. The American Democratic party took a strong anti-Soviet stand, especially at the height of the Cold War.

One example of an internal dispute within communism is that most Trotskyists adhere to some variant of Leon Trotsky's view of the post-Lenin Soviet Union as a "degenerated workers' state" and denounce Stalin as a traitor, some even claiming that the Soviet Union was actually a kind of 'monopoly capitalist' state. Large segments of the left never took inspiration from the Soviet model and actually rejoiced to see the USSR's system collapse—as Michael Albert of Z Magazine put it, "one down, one to go" (referring to Stalinism and capitalism).

China

Chinese neo-leftism, embracing postmodernism and Chinese nationalism, and opposed both to democracy and to what they see as a return of China to the capitalist world, arose as a political idea during the mid-1990s.Neo-leftism is seen as being more appealing to students in mainland China today than liberalism, as problems faced in mainland China during its modernisation such as inequality and the widening gap between the rich and the poor are becoming more serious.

The Left and postmodernism

As Barbara Epstein notes, "Many people, inside and outside the world of postmodernism (and for that matter inside and outside the left), have come to equate postmodernism with the left" . It is also the case that some postmodernists, such as Francis Fukuyama, are widely identified with the right. Generally although most postmodernists would describe themselves as on the left, postmodernism is far from being widely accepted within left-wing political movements, it has been most widely accepted amongst left-wing academics.

Left-wing Postmodernism claims to reject attempts at universal explanatory theories such as Marxism, deriding them as grand narratives. It tends to embrace culture and ideology as the battle grounds for change rejecting traditional ways of organising such as political parties and trade unions, instead it focuses on critiquing or deconstructing existing society.

Left-wing critics of postmodernism generally see it as a reaction of the failure of socialist movements of the 1960s (both in Europe and Latin America and the USA) and the disillusionment with the old Communist Parties. They claim that disconnected from any mass movements, and pessimistic about the possibility for any mass activism these academics justified their retreat into cultural studies courses by inflateing the importance of culture through denying the existence of an independent reality.

Right-wing critics have generally seen acceptance of post-modernism as an indication of the poorly thought-out, fashionable nature of the academic left. Some right-wing critics mirror the idea that left-wing postmodernism is a product of the 'failure' of Marxism to bring liberation. For example Gary Jason claims that "The failure of socialism, both empirically and theoretically, ... brought about a crisis of faith among socialists, and postmodernism is their response."

The Left and Opposition to War

While anti-war movements have never been exclusively left-wing, they have generally been led, inspired, organised, and (critics would argue) manipulated by those on the left. While some on the left are inspired by pacifism, most left-wing opposition to war is inspired by anti-imperialism which leads them to reject specific wars because they see them as being in capitalist interests rather then being morally against all violence. Left-wing opposition to war is also often characterised by the internationalist belief that the world's workers share common interests with one another, rather than with the powers governing their respective countries. Until the First World War, there was broad agreement among those on the left on opposition to imperialist wars. Few left-wingers supported their nation in conflicts such as the Boer War.

The First World War

Before World War I there was a fierce debate among members of the Second International as to the position socialists should take towards the impending war. On the 25 July 1914, the executive of the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) issued an appeal to its membership to demonstrate against the coming war, only to vote on 4 August for the war credits the German government wanted. Likewise the French Socialist Party and its union, the CGT, especially after the assassination of the pacificist Jean Jaurès, organised mass rallies and protests until the outbreak of war, but once the war began they argued that in wartime socialists should support their nations against the aggression of other nations and also voted for war credits.

In 1915 members of the Second International holding what was by then a minority anti-war position within their respective national parties, met at Zimmerwald to try to work out a joint platform of opposition to the war that was in progress. The Zimmerwald Conference failed to end the War, but did bring together a left wing that supported the Russian Revolution and laid the basis for the Third (Communist) International. Leon Trotsky argued at the time that the failure of the Left to oppose the war led to the destruction of the Second International.

In Russia, opposition to the war led to soldiers also establishing their own revolutionary committees and helped foment the October Revolution of 1917, with the call going up for "bread, land, and peace". After the revolution, the Bolsheviks called for an armistice, but the world powers refused, worried about the possible spread of revolution.

The Second World War

World War II was largely seen as an anti-fascist war, and thus not resisted by many on the left. The positions of many of the communist parties vacillated in line with the vacillation of the policies of the Soviet Union. However, some socialists analysed it as being fought in the interests of capitalism, rather than those of workers. Their responses ranged from unqualified criticism of both sides, in the case of the LSSP of Sri Lanka, through the focus on support for strikes and calls for workers to take control of the fight against fascism of the Workers International League and anarcho-communists in the UK, to the abstentionism and alignment with pacificts of the London Bureau groups.

Vietnam War

The Vietnam War was opposed by many socialists, but there was argument within the left over the nature of and the level of support to be given to the Communist Party of Vietnam. The movements in the U.S. were largely co-ordinated by the left but involved much wider forces. There was also tension within some organisations: for example the far-left Revolutionary Communist Party attempted to organise a more left wing group 'Vietnam Veterans Against the War Anti-Imperialist' (VVAW-AI) in opposition to the more mainstream (and far larger and more successful) Vietnam Veterans Against the War. As of 2005, both organizations survive to this day.

The Left and the response to the September 11 attacks

The vast majority of people on the left agreed with the majority of people that the September 11, 2001 attacks were carried out by Al-Qaida, though a small segment of the left—along with many Muslims in the Middle East and some on the far-right—placed the blame elsewhere. However these beliefs or speculations were much more widespread outside the United States, such as on continental Europe.

There was, however, disagreement over the correct response to the attacks. On the centre left many went along with the political consensus that the acts were merely the product of unexplainable fanatical hatred of the "West". However, others disagreed and put the blame on U.S foreign policy, specifically its imperialist nature.

Within weeks, it became clear that Bush intended a set of changes to U.S. criminal law and immigration law and an invasion of Afghanistan. While these measures initially had broad and unquestioning support, especially in the atmosphere of national unity and solidarity in the months following the attacks, many soon began to criticize elements of the USA PATRIOT Act, as being what were perceived to be assaults on civil liberties and immigrant rights.

Many Islamists and Arabs, and a few leftists, saw the military campaigns as battles in a religious war—a crusade—against Islam. This was the obverse of the ideas expressed, for example, by Samuel P. Huntington in The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. This was largely rejected by those on the left who saw the war as a clash between capitalist powers and those responding to it. Tariq Ali mocked the notion of a clash of civilisations in his book "Clash of Fundamentalisms".

The issues raised by the war on terror would be similiar to those adopted by various anti-war movements.

U.S. anti-war movement in the 21st century

The primarily (but not exclusively) leftist U.S. anti-war movement in the 21st century arose primarily to oppose the proposed and actual invasion of Iraq in March 2003. A much smaller group also opposed the invasion of Afghanistan as bringing unnecessary suffering on local population or not being the most effective way to dislodge or isolate al-Qaida. The primary objections to the Iraq war were related but distinct from objections to the war in Afghanistan. The vast majority of leftists in the United States supported the war in Afghanistan as a response to the September 11, 2001 attacks while opposing the Iraq war on a broad variety of grounds.

Some of the reasons for the anti-war movement were simple and others complicated, and not all of which were adopted by every anti-war advocate. These grounds included claims or beliefs that Iraq had no real connection to the attacks, that it posed no real threat to American security, that the war was not in American interests, disbelief in the sincerity of the Bush administration's stated war aims, including belief that the war was motivated by neocolonialism, that it was motivated by petroleum politics, or that it was motivated by neoconservative supporters of the state of Israel, that the war violated international law, or that it was a manifestation of imperialism. A minority who were pacifists rejected the idea of war in general. On a more basic level many objected to the war due to the claim or belief that there was no justification for the inevitable cost in Iraqi civilian lives or the lives of U.S. troops; a small group of people travelled to Iraq before the war to act as human shields on the belief that it would be morally more difficult for military leaders to endanger members of Western societies. Some of these reasons were also used by the small minority that opposed the war in Afghanistan.

In response, supporters of the war focused on claims or beliefs regarding Iraq's violation of United Nations resolutions, its alleged possession of Weapons of Mass Destruction, the need to avoid a perceived policy of appeasement, the brutal nature of Saddam Hussein's regime, or the need to establish democracy in the Middle East as a part of the War on Terror, especially as connected with democratic domino theory. As with objections to the war, these reasons ranged broadly in complexity and not all supporters of the war supported it for the same reasons.

In these anti-war movements, left-wingers formed loose coalitions with pacifists and others with long-time associations with global peace movements, and with Arabs and Muslims, including, but by no means limited to, Islamists. The most prominent U.S.-based movement groups were Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (ANSWER), Not in Our Name (NION), and United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ).

ANSWER and (to a lesser degree) NION have been targets of much criticism from within the left for their associations with the Workers World Party and the Revolutionary Communist Party, respectively. Right-wing critics have also seized on these relationships, pointing at them to claim that these small parties "dominate" the anti-war movement.. Critics of ANSWER and NION from within the anti-war movement (such as Michael Albert and Stephen R. Shalom writing in Z as well as Chuck Munson writing for Infoshop.org) generally urged support for these groups' rallies, despite their qualms, arguing that most people at a "...demonstration will in fact be unaware of exactly who said what and whether any particular speaker omitted this or that point. What they will experience will be a powerful antiwar protest. And most of the public will see it that way too."

The groups have collaborated at times on events, although collaboration has not always been easy. In perhaps the most infamous incident, Rabbi Michael Lerner was banned from speaking at a February 16, 2003 anti-war rally in San Francisco, less than a month before the U.S. invaded Iraq. It was generally believed that this was done at ANSWER's behest, because Lerner had been critical of what he perceives as ANSWER's anti-Israel politics. Lerner, though irked that NION and UFPJ did not stand up for his inclusion as a speaker, continued to encourage people to attend the rally.

During the 2004 U.S elections many on the left saw their most important task as removal of President George W. Bush for numerous reasons, but opposition to the war in Iraq was an especially motivating cause. This led many to support an "Anybody but Bush" campaign, that resulted in support for the Democrats and a large drop in support for Ralph Nader, the independent left-wing candidate. However, the failure of Howard Dean's insurgent primary campaign meant that the Democrats' platform largely supported the war because their nominee, senator John Kerry had voted along with a majority of other Senate Democrats, to give Bush authorization to use force in Iraq, making it especially hard for him to oppose the war outright. The "Anybody But Bush" campaign failed, and Bush was re-elected.

The Left and the anti-war movement in Europe

In general, the Left in Europe see the anti-war movement as reinvigorating the Left; however, there is some disagreement as to whether it should continue to been seen as a central mobilising tool. The UK political coalition Respect, which grew out of the anti-war movement, argues that anti-war feeling is key to the growth of the Left, while leading members of the French left-wing group ATTAC claim that too much focus on the war would lead the Left away from focus on economic issues.

Popular opposition to war on Iraq in Europe climaxed in an international synchronised anti-war demonstration around the world on February 15, 2003.

In Spain, the response to the Madrid bombings was an anti-war move to the left with the election of a social democratic government.

Relationship between the Left and Muslims

Many European countries have a large and growing Muslim community. From a left-wing position they are generally seen as oppressed, and are seen as taking the place once occupied by Communists, as the bogeymen and scapegoats of right-wing politics. Some on the left such as the British Socialist Workers Party (SWP) argued the necessity for those on the left to unite with Muslims in the fight against the Iraq war. They achieved this aim to a large extent leading to the British Stop the War Coalition, having Muslims take leading positions. However, some of the much more religious Muslim groups refused to work with the Left in anti-war demonstrations as they disagree with their secularism.

A pro-Palestine position is the norm amongst the Left including many on the Jewish left (See Jews for Justice for Palestinians).

Exiled Iranian writer Amir Taheri views portions of the anti-war movement in Western Europe as "an alliance between the radical Left and hard-line Islamists... built around three themes: hatred of the United States, the dream of wiping Israel off the map, and the hoped-for collapse of the global economic system." . Taheri clearly views this alliance with Islamists as compromising traditional humanist values of the Left and all "leftist" values in general; he clearly implies that this coalition could go on to embrace terrorism.

While many leftists have happily worked with Arab or Muslim groups in opposition to U.S. imperialism or the Israeli occupation of Palestine, alliances between leftists and Islamists are relatively unusual and recent, since leftist politics of civil libertarianism and secularism jar with hard-line Islamism. More typical examples of leftists working in anti-war coalitions with Muslims would be the membership of American Muslims for Jerusalem in UFPJ or of the Muslim Student Association, American Muslims for Global Peace, and Atlanta Masjid of Al-Islam in ANSWER. These are Muslim groups, but they are not hard-line Islamist groups.

The Left and Anti-Globalisation

The anti-globalisation movement, also known as the Global Justice Movement or alter-globalization movement, is a collection of social movements which are prominent in protests against global trade agreements and the negative consequences they perceive them to have for the poor, for the environment and for peace. It is generally characterised as left-wing, though some activists within it reject association with the traditional left. Certainly it is concerned with what are generally thought of as left-wing issues. From the right, the anti-globalisation movement is often caricatured as an attempt by far-left groups to repackage themselves and it might also be regarded as existing within a broader set of anti-capitalist movements and philosophies.

Political parties on the Left

Main article: Political parties on the Left

Depending on the political viewpoint of the categoriser, different groups might be categorised as on the left. One might generally characterise parties as on the political left in their respective countries, though even then they might have relatively little in common with other left-wing groups beyond their opposition to the right. However even this can cause issues. For example, the Democratic Leadership Council, an organization of centrists affiliated with the Democratic Party in which former President Bill Clinton was active, is generally considered to be the right wing of the U.S. Democratic Party. Outside of the U.S., the Democratic Party is considered by many to be right-of-centre.

Notes

1. ^1 Postmodernism and the Left, Barbara Epstein, New Politics, vol. 6, no. 2 (new series), whole no. 22, Winter 1997
2. ^2 Postmodernism and the Left, Barbara Epstein, New Politics, vol. 6, no. 2 (new series), whole no. 22, Winter 1997
3. ^3 Postmodernism, commodity fetishism and hegemony, Néstor Kohan, International Socialism, Issue 105,
4. ^4 Chomsky on Postmodernism, Chomsky, Z-Magazine's Left On-Line Bulletin Board
5. ^5 Socialism's Last Bastion, Gary Jason, Liberty
6. ^6 Prelude To Revolution: Class Consciousness and the First World War, International Socialism Issue 76, September 1997.
7. ^7 The Second International (Social-Democracy), Marxists Internet Archive
8. ^8 The War and the International (The Bolsheviks and World Peace), Marxists Internet Archive
9. ^9 Poll: Muslims call U.S. 'ruthless, arrogant' CNN, February 26, 2002
10. ^10 Hamilton College Muslim America Poll Hamilton College
11. ^11 Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney remarks re. war, Cynthia McKinney, September 21, 2001
12. ^12 The algebra of infinite justice, Arundhati Roy, The Guardian, September 29, 2001
13. ^13 Kucinich Denounces U.S. Tactics in Afghanistan, Muslims For Kucinich (Originally published in the Washington Post)
14. ^14 Ten Q&A On Antiwar Organizing, Michael Albert interviewed by Stephen R Shalom, ZNet, October 24, 2002
15. ^15 Ramsey Clark, List of articles on Ramsey Clarke, Why War?
16. ^16 Tracking Down A Fifth Column Front, Edward Immler, FrontPageMagazine.com, September 18, 2002
17. ^17 Has anti-war movement been hijacked?, Sherrie Gossett, WorldNetDaily.com, November 4, 2002
18. ^18 Ten Q&A On Antiwar Organizing, Michael Albert interviewed by Stephen R Shalom, ZNet, October 24, 2002
19. ^19 Authoritarianism and Anti-Semitism in the Anti-War Movement?, Tikkun magazine, May/June 2003
20. ^20 The Banning of Rabbi Lerner, David Corn, Common Dreams News Center, February 11 2003
21. ^21 DON'T STOP THE WAR: Except through Islamic Politics, Hizb ut Tahrir, 22nd January 2003
22. ^25 THE BLACK-RED ALLIANCE, Amir Taheri, Jerusalem Post, June 10, 2004

See also

Leftist Ideologies

• Communism
• Socialism
• Anarchism
• Marxism
• Democratic socialism
• Libertarian socialism
• Post-left anarchy
• Progressivism
• Social democracy
• Liberalism
• Syndicalism

Left-wing issues

• Egalitarianism
• Environmentalism
• Labour movement
• Democracy
• Trade unionism
• Secularism
• New Left

Organizations

• American Constitution Society for Law and Policy

Related political topics

• New social movements
• Political spectrum -- discusses various writers' views of the usefulness (or not) of the Left/Right dichotomy and of alternative spectra.
• Right-wing politics
• Left-Right politics -- discusses the range of various writers' meanings when they use the terms "left" and "right" in a political context.
• Christian socialism

External links

Discussion sites

• It's Time for a Change: A network of progressives
• The Rebel Alliance Leftist Community
• Revolutionary Left Radical leftist discussion forum
• Marxmail Moderated discussion site
• openDemocracy Clarifying debates and discussion forums bringing together thinkers and activists from across the political spectrum.

Reference sites

• US Progressive Candidates of 2004 progressive candidates running for House and Senate races in 2004
• The Marxists Internet Archive (a free online Marxist library)
• The Political Compass an alternate view of the political spectrum
• The official website of the Socialist International

Blogs, Webzines and News Sites

• TheComIntern A Leftist Webzine
• Critical Montages Left-Green U.S. blog
• World Socialist Web Site Socialist Equality Party news site