The Left finally takes a beating

http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13805596&fsrc=nwl

Let's hope we're paying attention here in the States.

 

Let's hope the same thing happens here in 4 years, and Obama is swept out of office.

 

Not really surprising, I suppose. Conservatives were punished in the US for the economy. Liberals were punished in Europe.

If you are in charge when the shit hits the fan, a lot of that feces will be stuck on you.

Seems like the US and Europe are on opposite cycles. When it's conservative here, it's liberal there. When it's liberal here, it's slightly less liberal there.

 

Read more closely. Much of Europe has been going rightward for a few years, Sarkozy and Merkel are the best examples. Yet the Left still got hammered. I guess they're finally realizing that their mollycoddling of Islamic extremists, their endless growing of the government and their relentless march toward Europe being one country is not what many people want.

 

states rights!

 

"Conservative" is a bit misleading, though, if one wants to compare Europe to the US. The political axis is different and more liberal. Most mainstream conservative parties in Europe are equivalent to the Democratic party in the US.

 

Really? Sorry but if you are still buying that Left vs. Right thing then you have lost. That used to mean something in the 1950's perhaps, but not for the past 30 years. Look at the core policies by both parties and you will see that their favored rich buddies are helped often the same rich guys regardless of which party is in power. It's ever more globalization at the expense of american industry and jobs (Budwiser is owned by the Belgians now!). The easily whipped into a frenzy social issues blind people to the more important issues of personal freedom (privacy, choice of religion, freedom of speech basically the bill of rights) and personal economic freedom (a truly free market not crony capitalism/monopoly capitalism/Facism or Socialism all of which are different attacks on the free market that end in the same result centralized power).

Didn't Bush say he didn't believe in an interventionist foreign policy? Yes he did! Didn't Bush say he believed in smaller government? Yes he said he did but the Homeland Security Act was the biggest expansion of government since World War 2! It's not the just the right its the supposed Left as well! Is Obama out of Iraq? No! Is he out of Afghanistan? No! Did he reverse the Bush Administration's assault or personal freedom and the bill of rights? NO! Did he stop the policy Bush had of TARP and instead allowed failed businesses and banks to fail and let the free market do it's work? NO!

The Right and Left is a joke! It's the individual and poor and middle class that are getting slaughtered by rich elite that have NO LOYALTY to a party. Not all Rich people have that mindset there are good people out there, and they are in both parties. For too long Democratic and Republican people have been tricked by Democratic and Republican politicians. Look to the real voices for change guys like Ron Paul, Jesse the Body Ventura, Dennis Kucinich and Cynthia McKinney. Those four stand up to abusive centralized power. If you let Bush set up domestic spying you reap the harvest of Obama using it to crush independant thinkers on the Right. If you let Clinton pass the 1996 Telecommunications act you get to watch Fox use it to destroy indpendant thinking on both the left and right. My point is don't let the government get more powerful by blidnly supporting a party regardless of their actions. US vs. THEM in politics leaves the average person out in the cold as they are cynically manipulated by the politicians of BOTH parties.

 

Ah, yes. The Devil's Theory of Imperialism. I remember intro to Poly Sci in college.

 

THe relative center doesn't matter. Europe as a whole moved rightward with this election. Don't forget, the article referenced was from a British-based periodical. What I found most interesting from the article was the schism of the right wing of the UK's delegation, following the path of increased autonomy along with Eastern European countries.

 

I'd say the article's argument is overblown for a few reasons:

1. This was for the EU parliament, not national parliaments. EU parliament is seen as much less important to most Europeans, the voter turnout is much lower and there's a lot more "protest voting."

2. The big right-wing parties went from 264 seats to 264 seats. Which specific right-wing parties did well changed (nationalistic ones did much better than normal) but there really wasn't a big rightward shift overall.

3. One of the biggest rising parties was the Green party, a very liberal party. They got 16% of the vote in France, a huge increase in a country where they've typically done poorly.

So, I'd say that the more correct conclusion is that nationalism (various parties around Europe) and the Green party were the big winners. Not "conservatism." And even that is limited to the EU parliament. National parliaments are still very left-wing across Europe.

I do agree that there's a backlash against Labour in the UK. Of course, the UK parliament seats didn't change. It'll be interesting to see if seats change significantly the next time the UK has elections and how. This blow to Labour largely amounts to polling badly, not actually losing power.

 

That sounds like an excuse.

It's not just the big parties that can claim part of the political spectrum. That's like saying those that voted for Ralph Nader weren't on the left.

And the conservatives in France trounced both.

Yep, you'd say that. Of course, others would say that this vote is a reflection of the failure of leftist policies in the EU. There's a higher priority being put on immigration, border security and standing up to extremists. Focus on labels all you wish, it's the policy difference that's important here.

Labour is at the end of its run. Blair skimmed the cream off the top and left Brown with the bitter grounds. It's akin to Thatcher/Major. The personal expense scandal is just the final blow.

 

Well, turnout was almost precisely half in the UK what it is for UK parliament elections. This was essentially true across Europe. I'd say it's fact. The EU parliament has much less power over any particular European's life than their own national parliament.

Sure, France is currently more conservative than usual. This doesn't say much about "Europe" moving to the right.

As I said, this was a "win" for nationalism, but has not much to do with social progressivism, environmentalism or the more socialistic economic policies. All these things remain essentially as popular as ever. Almost all of the nationalist parties that did so well in these elections are also for social welfare and are social liberals. They are essentially tribalist socialists.

I agree. But while Labour is falling, the Liberal Democrats are rising and the Liberal Democrats are more left than Labour. The future battles are likely going to be between the Tories and the Liberal Democrats.

To analogize this to the US, it's equivalent to the Democrats waning in influence and the Green party becoming the mainstream national party on the left. Bad for the Democrats (or Labour in the UK), but good for the "Left."

 

And regarding France, this is how the voting broke down for the largest blocs:

27.8% for the UMP (a center-right party), 16.48 for the socialists, 16.28 for the greens. 8.4 for MoDem (a centrist, socially liberal party).

The UMP (the conservatives) got 29 seats in the EU parliament....the socialists/greens/MoDems got 38. Others got 5.

Not very conservative, really. The majority is actually quite left-leaning.

 

I'm sorry were you trying to say that was a basic concept or something? I'm not sure I understand what you are saying here...

 

You understood my point just fine.

 

I note you neglected Jean Marie Pen's party, who got 6.62% but that's okay. I never said the French weren't left, it's the trend that's noteworthy in this election.

 

They took some of the 5. It doesn't really change things.

My point is that I don't think the left "took a beating" or that conservatism is on the march across Europe. In the EU parliament (a parliament that is less important to Europeans as evidenced by the across-the-board lower voter turnout), nationalism did well, as did the Greens. Overall, though, the usual left policies (social liberalism, environmentalism and socialist economic policy) remained as popular as ever. Even the nationalist parties basically champion all those things.

If you boil "the right" down to nationalism (border issues, immigration), then yes, the right did great. If you care about social liberalism, environmentalism and socialist economic policy, then the right didn't do well at all.

 

So I looked that up to see if I was missing something: "The Devil's Theory of Imperialism". Oddly, only two of your posts on two different sports blogs came up along with a defunct page from some African Americans Unite -type page. I used Google Cache to read what that site said. I see you like to consider this theory and old saw. Funny though, the definition I saw seemed to be pretty spot on and had virtually nothing to do with what I said. Nice oversimplification of my argument so you could dismiss it and go back to your tired partisan wrangling and glorious talking points. Sad really that folks continue to sit around and debate if the so called right or so called left are better, never bothering to study pre-1700's history and see the obvious continuity in human existence since ancient times. Those who lust for power will do whatever it takes to get it including mouth Republican "values" or Democratic "values" and then proceed to do what their money masters tell them to do. Try reading some pre-1700's (pre-advanced propaganda) history and then look at events and tell me if maybe your little throwaway line might be just a tad on the lightweight side of the scale.

Just for S and G why don't you enlighten us with your grand theory of political reality that you came up with for your doctoral dissertation in Political Science. I'm quite curious; I'm sure it's beautifully reductionist just like your reply to me.