Left-wing politics
:
Left wing is also a term used in several sports; see
winger (sport).:
Leftism redirects here. For the album of the band
Leftfield, see
Leftism (album).
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, to varying extents,
socialism,
anarchism,
communism,
social democracy,
progressivism,
American liberalism or
social liberalism, and defined in contradistinction to its polar opposite, the
right.
The term originates from the
French Revolution, when
liberal deputies from the
Third Estate generally sat to the left of the president's chair, a habit which began in the
Estates General of 1789. The nobility, members of the
Second Estate, generally sat to the right. It is still the tradition in the French
Assemblée Nationale for the representatives to be seated left-to-right (relative to the Assemblée president) according to their political alignment.
As this original reference became obsolete, the meaning of the term has changed, and is now used to denote a broad variety of political philosophies and principles. In contemporary Western political discourse, the term is most often used to describe forms of
socialism,
social democracy, or, in the sense in which the term is understood in the
United States,
liberalism.
The left-wing attribution is very broadly employed as a political descriptor, and a single definition is elusive. For example, the use of the phrase in the democratic West is quite distinct from the usage in most
Communist states - where the term has connotations associated with
Bukharin and the democratization of all human activities (see also
deviationism).
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. Though some left-wingers reject any association with communism or anarchism, others say that those who don't follow strict socialist or communist philosophies can't possibly be leftists.
The left claims to be dedicated to
personal liberty,
social justice and
secularism. The left is often seen to include
secularism, as in the United States,
India, the
Middle East, and in many
Catholic countries, although religion and left-wing politics have at times been allied historically, such as in the
U.S. civil rights movement, or in the cases of
liberation theology and
Christian socialism.
Many on the Left describe themselves as "
progressive", a term that arose from their self-identification as the side of social progress and openness to change.
Old Left refers to the strands of left politics current in the first half of the twentieth century, such as the
Communist parties. These tended to emphasise
class, sometimes in an
economic determinist way, and tended to follow rigid organisational forms.
New Left refers to the strands of left politics that emerged in the 1950s and especially 1960s, which tended to follow more
democratic organisational forms, emphasise the
cultural and personal as well as the economic, and were open to the
new social movements. Examples of the new left include
Students for a Democratic Society and
New Left Review.
Centre-left,
left of centre and
left liberal refer to the left side of
mainstream politics. These tend to support
liberal democracy,
representative democracy,
private property rights and some degree of
free market, as well as high social spending, universal provision of
social welfare and some state
regulation of the economy. Examples would be the British
Labour Party, some of the American
Democratic Party or the German
SPD.
Soft left refers to
socialist rather than
liberal positions, but thoroughly
reformist,
democratic or
parliamentary forms of socialism. Examples would be
Irving Howe or
Michael Foot.
Hard left refers to socialists who are more explicitly in favour of fundamental change in socieity, but often through existing democratic structures - e.g. the
Militant Tendency.
Ultra-left refers to more extreme forms of left politics, often
Marxist, which are particularly intransigent - e.g. Italian
autonomism.
See political spectrum and left-right politics for further discussion of this kind of classification.See the Left-Right politics article for more detailed discussion of the history and development of the termAlthough it may seem counter to 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 meant 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 continuum between Communist and non-Communist parties (including such hybrids as
eurocommunism). 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 19th and early 20th centuries) 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 radical left-wing movements from the 1960s onwards who claimed to be breaking with some institutions and traditions of the left. Where earlier left-wing movements were generally rooted in
labour 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, losing some of its initial radicalism and 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.
The left has historically opposed the concentration of
wealth and
power, especially in an institutionalized form, in the hands of those who have traditionally controlled them. As such, the left often works to eliminate high levels of inequality. Outside the
United States, which lacked a historical 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.
The left has traditionally been concerned with the
lower classes and with combating
oppression. Thus the
industrial revolution saw left-wing politics become associated with the
conditions and
rights of
workers in the new industries. This led to movements around
social democracy,
socialism and
trade unionism. More recently, the left has criticized what it perceives as the exploitative nature of current forms of
globalization, e.g. the rise of
sweatshops and the "
race to the bottom", and either has sought to promote more just forms of globalizations, such as
fair trade, or has sought to allow
nation-states to "delink" or break free of the global economy.
Although specific means of achieving these ends are not agreed upon by different left-wing groups, almost all those on the left agree that some form of government or social intervention in economics is necessary, ranging from
Keynesian economics and the
welfare state through
industrial democracy or the
social market to
nationalization of the economy and central
planning.
As
civil and
human rights gained more attention during the twentieth century, the left allied itself with advocates of
racial and
gender equality and cultural
tolerance. Most of the left has been opposed to
imperialism,
colonialism and
war, and much of the left has allied itself to movements for national
self-determination, especially in the
colonial world. The left has also been both challenged and renewed in the later twentieth century through the emergence of the
new social movements, such as the
nuclear disarmament,
feminist and
green movements.
Advocacy of government or social intervention in the market puts those on the left at odds with advocates of the
free market as well as
corporations (who oppose democratic control of the markets but not necessarily all control) if they see their interests threatened.
Many on the Left describe themselves as "
progressive", a term that arose from their self-identification as the side of social progress and openness to change.
Left-wing positions on
social issues, such as opposition to social hierarchy and authority over moral behaviour, strict adherence to tradition, and monoculturalism, may make them allies with
right wing advocates of "individual freedom", though their solutions are very different.
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.--
The left and feminism
Main article: the left and feminism
Early
feminism in the nineteenth century was closely connected to radical politics. However, there was also a right-wing current which rejected alliances with other radical movements such as for the
abolition of slavery and
workers' rights. Contemporary
feminism emerged alongside the
New Left and other
new social movements as partly within and partly a challenge to the left. Today,
socialist feminists,
Marxist feminists and
liberal feminists are, to a greater or lesser extent, on the left of the political spectrum, while
radical feminists reject this axis.
Despite the important differences from other left-wing ideologies, the Communism of the former
USSR (and its satellites) and of the
People's Republic of China during and shortly after the time of
Mao Zedong is widely 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) believe Communism violates core left-wing principles like
justice,
human rights and
democracy. The argument that Communism should be viewed independently of the conventional left-right spectrum is perhaps supported by the work of theorists like
Karl Popper and
Hannah Arendt, through the development of the concept of
totalitarianism, as a form of politics common to
fascism and
Stalinism.
There are political currents which describe themselves as communist who criticise the states created by Communist parties.
Trotskyists and
council communists, for example, regard the totalitarianism of the former Soviet Union to be the result of
Stalinism and its betrayals of genuine communist ideology. Many of these critics, however, recognise a kinship between Communism and the left. Likewise, most right-wingers (including many nationalists) reject any association with Nazism and fascism, although many recognise these are right-wing ideologies.
Some say that leftist-inspired
welfare state reforms in many non-Communist countries, such as the establishment of
social security and recognition of
labour 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
Social Democratic Party of Germany, 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. Other
Marxists who adopt an analysis associated with
Maoism regard the Soviet Union as fully
State Capitalist from the late 1950s onward. Others, such as the American activist
Hal Draper, argued that the USSR was neither capitalist nor socialist but
bureaucratic collectivist.
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).
[Revolutions In The East, Michael Albert and Robin Hahnel, Z magazine, Date=?]China
In recent decades China has undergone a transition from a classically Communist state to what is, in many ways, a "right-wing" authoritarian regime, though still under the control of the
Communist Party. Chinese
neo-left-wing politics, 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-left-wing politics 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.
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"
[Postmodernism and the Left, Barbara Epstein, New Politics, vol. 6, no. 2 (new series), whole no. 22, Winter 1997.]. While some postmodernists, such as
Francis Fukuyama, are widely identified with the right, 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.
Critiques from within the left
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 inflating the importance of culture through denying the existence of an independent reality.
[p][Postmodernism, commodity fetishism and hegemony, Néstor Kohan, International Socialism, Issue 105.][Chomsky on Postmodernism, Noam Chomsky, Z-Magazine's Left On-Line Bulletin Board.]The Sokal affair
Probably the most famous critique of postmodernism from within the left came in the form of a 1996 prank by
physicist and self-described leftist
Alan Sokal. Concerned about what he saw as the increasing prevalence on the left of "a particular kind of nonsense and sloppy thinking… that denies the existence of objective realities, or…downplays their practical relevance…"
[A Physicist Experiments With Cultural Studies, Alan Sokal], Sokal composed a nonsensical article entitled "Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity"
[Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity, Alan Sokal, first published in; Social Text, issule 46/47, 1996], in which a mix of mis-stated and mis-used terms from
physics,
postmodernism,
literary analysis, and
political theory are used to claim that physical
reality, and especially
gravitation, do not objectively exist, but are psychologically and politically constructed.
The journal
Social Text published the paper in its Spring/Summer 1996 issue, whereupon Sokal publicly revealed his hoax. While some saw Sokal as attacking leftism in general, he was very clear that this was intended as a critique from within:
Politically, I'm angered because most (though not all) of this silliness is emanating from the self-proclaimed Left. We're witnessing here a profound historical volte-face. For most of the past two centuries, the Left has been identified with science and against obscurantism… epistemic relativism betrays this worthy heritage and undermines the already fragile prospects for progressive social critique. Theorizing about "the social construction of reality" won't help us find an effective treatment for AIDS or devise strategies for preventing global warming. Nor can we combat false ideas in history, sociology, economics and politics if we reject the notions of truth and falsity.… The results of my little experiment demonstrate, at the very least, that some fashionable sectors of the American academic Left have been getting intellectually lazy.[A Physicist Experiments With Cultural Studies, Alan Sokal]
Critiques from the Right
Right-wing critics have generally seen acceptance of post-modernism as an indication of what they perceive as the poorly thought-out, fashionable nature of the academic left. Some right-wing critics state 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."
[Socialism's Last Bastion, Gary Jason, Liberty]Many opponents of the left,
David Horowitz for example, critique methods by which they claim leftism is disseminated, especially in
academia. They claim that researchers who align themselves with the left select facts favorable to their cause, and demonize the values of those who oppose their cause. Because academia is a body of experts which the public respects, these critics argue that academics should give equal weight to all viewpoints.
The left's relationship with
Darwinism has historically been congenial on the scientific front, with the exception of
Stalin's support of
Trofim Lysenko's
Lamarckian views. It has been hostile on the philosophical front because the left was resisting various non-scientific right-wing political theories using evolutionary language, such as
Social Darwinism.
In
1875 Friedrich Engels wrote a letter to Pyotr Lavrov saying
"I accept the theory of evolution, but Darwin's method of proof (struggle for life, natural selection) I consider only a first, provisional, imperfect expression of a newly discovered fact. ... The interaction of bodies in nature â€" inanimate as well as animate â€" includes both harmony and collision, struggle and cooperation. When therefore a self-styled natural scientist takes the liberty of reducing the whole of historical development with all its wealth and variety to the one-sided and meager phrase "struggle for existence," a phrase which even in the sphere of nature can be accepted only cum grano salis, such a procedure really contains its own condemnation."[Engels to Pyotr Lavrov In London, Marx-Engels Correspondence 1875, Marx/Engels Internet Archive (2000)]
In
1902 the
anarchist philosopher and scientist
Peter Kropotkin published the book
Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution, which provided an additional means for the natural selection and evolution of species, beyond claims of 'Survival of the Fittest.' Written partly as a response to
Social Darwinism and in particular to
Thomas H. Huxley's own Nineteenth Century essay
The Struggle for Existence, Kropotkin drew on his experiences in scientific expeditions during his time in
Siberia to illustrate the phenomenon of cooperation in animal and human communities. After examining the evidence of cooperation among the animals, the "savages", the "barbarians", in the medieval city, and in modern times, he concludes that cooperation and mutual aid are as important in the evolution of the species as competition and mutual strife, if not more important.
Historically, various groups on the Left have been either enthusiastic supporters or high-profile opponents of various
wars.
While
anti-war movements have never been exclusively left-wing, they have generally been led, inspired, and organised by those on the left. While some on the left are inspired by
pacifism, most left-wing opposition to war arises from
anti-imperialism which leads them to reject specific wars because they see them as being in
capitalist interests rather than 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.
First and Second World Wars
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 Wars. The
First World War triggered fierce debate among socialist groups as to the right response to take, with the leaderships of most socialist parties of the
Second International supporting their governments, and a minority of socialists, such as
Rosa Luxemburg and
Lenin opposing the war as imperialist. Left-wing opponents to the war came together at the
Zimmerwald Conference. Part of the driving force of the
Russian Revolution was revolt by soldiers against the First World War, epitomised in the slogan taken up by the
Bolsheviks: "bread, land and peace".
The
Second World War was generally seen as a war between
fascism and
democracy and thus many on the left supported the
Allied cause. However, some groups saw it as simply another imperialist war and thus opposed it.
Spanish Civil War
The
Spanish Civil War was seen by many on the left as an important fight between fascism and democracy. In response to the outbreak of war, many people joined the
International Brigades or other left-wing
militias organized by trade unions or political parties. Others campaigned for the democratic countries to impose arms embargoes and to work through the League of Nations to stop the war.
Vietnam and the Post-September 11 Anti-war Movements
The next large anti-war movement that involved the western left was the
Vietnam War: It triggered much
opposition beyond the ranks of the left and is generally thought of as part of a growing
counter-culture movement which took up many different left-wing issues.
The American-led wars in
Afghanistan and
Iraq which came in the wake of the
September 11, 2001 attacks led to new anti-war movements forming. Though various
social democratic political parties (such as
Tony Blair's Labour Party) supported and sent their countries' troops to participate in these wars, seeing them as appropriate responses to the
terrorist threat, much of the organised left, particularly the
socialist left, opposed these wars. This opposition was generally based to a large extent on their perception of the wars as
imperialist, commonly claiming that
oil and control of the
Middle East were their goals rather than
liberation.
Some criticism has been levelled at various left-wing groups for forming anti-war coalitions with organisations that are presented as being
conservative or
fundamentalist Islamists. The general response has been to claim that such characterisations of all
Muslim groups as extremists are racist, and that broad
united fronts are positive. There has also been some controversy over the Left's use of the
Palestine issue in an anti-war context.
The anti-war movement was generally seen as re-invigorating left-wing movements, though there was a large current on the French Left (especially within
ATTAC) that saw them as detracting from the economic issues of the
anti-globalisation movement. In the U.S. much of the left-wing radicalisation was channelled into
Anybody but Bush campaigns, which effectively meant supported the pro-war
centrist Democratic Party. In the U.K, anti-war feeling lead to a drop in support for the pro-war
Labour Party and gains for the
Liberal Democrats. Some of the left-wing groups that had been involved in the anti-war movement sought to harness the increase in popular radicalism through the setting up of a new political party called
Respect.
[Unfading commitment, Simon Jeffery, The Guardian, February 15, 2005]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. Likewise, some within the left reject it being '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.
Depending on the political viewpoint of the categoriser, different groups might be categorized as on the left. One might generally characterize 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.
Encyclopedia of the American Left, ed. by Mari Jo Buhle, Paul Buhle, Dan Georgakas, Second Edition, Oxford University Press 1998, ISBN 0195120884
* Lin Chun,
The British New Left, Edinburgh : Edinburgh Univ. Press, 1993
*Geoff Eley,
Forging Democracy: The History of the Left in Europe, 1850-2000, Oxford University Press 2002, ISBN 0195044797
=Left-wing Ideologies
=
*
Communism*
Socialism*
Anarchism*
Marxism*
Marxist feminism*
Eco-socialism*
Green politics (in general)
*
Democratic socialism*
Left communism*
Libertarian socialism*
Post-left anarchy*
Progressivism*
Social democracy*
Social Liberalism*
Liberalism (in general)
*
Syndicalism=Left-wing issues
=
*
Egalitarianism*
Environmentalism*
Labour movement*
Democracy*
Trade unionism*
Secularism*
New Left*
Liberal elite*
The Left and war=Related political topics
=
*
Left-right politics*
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.
*
Political Cinema*
Christian socialismSinistrismeReference 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
*
Leftist Parties of the World List of present-day leftist parties and organizations of the world, with links to their websites.
