Socialists + Social Democrats Flashcards
2 types of left-wingers early 19th century
Came about due to industrialisation and capitalism
1. Utopians –> wanted to create Utopian communities where people would transform market/ society
2. Early reformists: trying to improve worker rights, provide prtoection for workers
Context behind socialism
Rise of industrialisation and capitalism
Rise of working class
More people could vote. Emergence of groups that wanted to protect workers from capitalism
Party politics emerging
Scientific marxism
Concept of history:
believed history went through stages, believed change would happen through class conflict.
Marx was positive about Capitalism in 2 things:
1. capitalism simplifies class conflict
2. made society richer.
Marx believed in change and technology. The problem with the way Capitalism is organized: poer + technology in hands of the few.
Marx is against utopians: as they believe in primitive society
Conditions had ot be right for a revolution.
Revolution could not happen before the contractiction was there, or before industrialisation was so far along that it created more poverty, but actually freed workers.
Core problem of social democracy/ communism is that the ‘‘how’’ is not explained
2 ways of thinking how revolution/ reform should happen
By political parties that emerged in 19th centrury
- Reovlutionarists:
The conditions had to be right for revolution.
They believed in a revolution h=
Idea –> this cannot happen in a liberal democracy
it can not happen in confines of capitalism
–> they became the communists - Reformists:
Social democrats.
Believe they can fefrom capitalism, rather than complety overthrowing it.
Participation in elections was okay
Reform would/ could happen through parliament and through liberal democratic state
2 ways of thinking how revolution/ reform should happen
By political parties that emerged in 19th centrury
- Reovlutionarists:
The conditions had to be right for revolution.
They believed in a revolution h=
Idea –> this cannot happen in a liberal democracy
it can not happen in confines of capitalism
Pre WWII socialists
- Tended to be more reformist
- They wanted to reform capitalism
3, Reform through more state regulation + social programs. - state would remain - no withering away of the state
- Control capitalism now and socialist state later
- Reluctant relationship with democracy
Pre WWII communists
- Communism only through true abolishment of capitalism and market economy.
–> revolution - Production in hands of proletariat
- state not necessary
- reluctant relationship with democracy
Post WWII context NATO versus USSR
Division between socialists and communists but becomes more pronounced.
Context of Cold War + Soviet Union:
Communist parties loyal to USSR
Socialist parties to west (NATO) as marker.
Nato becomes dividing line.
Many social democratic parties pledge alliance to West and to liberal democracy.
Post WWII context : the influenceof fascism and WWII
Most western democracies rather have authoritarian regime than communist influence.
Social democrats accept liberal democracy due their not strong enough support before the WWII.
This did not help with the cause of rise of fascism.
‘‘we are all liberal democrats now’’.
Social democrats still liberal democrats, but more critical
Post WWII conext Keynesian economics
State is there to regulate capitalism.
–> Keynesian socialism.
Accept that state is going to be reformist.
Accept Keynesian economics
Keynes was not socialist, but liberal.
He saw rise of uncontrolled capitalism and following depresion.
He stated that the state needed to be more active –< socialist ideology.
The core of the problem of social democracy
Post WWII compromise left-side
The left:
we accept liberal democratic state + capitalist economy.
We accept principles of market economy, but want:
- labour rights, social rights and regulation.
Radical
Left does this because they see necessity for democracy and to reform capitalism.
Post WWII compromise right side
the right:
also afraid of unctrolled capitalism. Rise of facism was part of this.
Also afraid of communism.
if capitalism was not tamed: communism would spread to Euroep.
- Wanted market economy: so must accept liberal democratic state.
in turn had to agree for labour and social rights.
Post WWII compromise result
This led to rebuilding of economy: Marshall plan
showed that West was stronger than SU.
prevention of social unrest and kept communism at bay
Construction of Welfare state
- Regulation of capital: through state control over capital
—> Taxes, tariffs, nationalisation of industry.
protect production through tariffs, coal and steel nationalised. - Construction of social programs:
pensions, education, child care, health care - Keynesian welfare state.
State plays active role by taxation and spending to guide capitalism through ups and downs of economy.
Also proetcs its citizens and those who are less well off.
Social democratic ideology
- support of social programs
- support of progressive taxation
- support of state nationalisation
- Support of better working rights for workers
Two most important points: - Keynesian welfare state becomes more or less social democratic ideology
- Competition primarily on economic dimension instead cultural.
1970s and economic changes
Economic crisis –> rise of neoconservatism –> economic restructuring 1970s.
Rise of stagflation meant it was harder to adhere to Keynesian solutions
Economic restructuring 1970s:
* Growth slows down (already in 1960s)
* Inflation
* Both equal stagflation
* Also oil crisis: 1973 OPEC and oil embargo as a
* result of the Yom Kippur War (Arab-Israeli War)
* Long and short of it: old solutions no longer working (or appear not to)
1970s and globalisation
International trade, regulated by state.
This allowed states to keep control over spending and welfare state.
In late 1060s and 1970 state becomes less embedded.
Procss of economic development and politics becoming more intertwined.
increase international trade, partly due to capitalism
Capital power over the state, causes the process of de-regulation.
capital has more leverage over state
Social democratic parties in 1970s
Keynesian economics no longer works.
Debate if its true or just ideological.
Argument is that it creates stagflation.
Capital doesnt like regulation.
Capital flight becomes more possible.
Paralysis due to debate.
Cap on labor (Sweden, Austria, Germany)
They begin to adapt (United Kingdom)
Debates: structural or ideological?
Rise of New left
- Society changes
- Material growth
Younger generation more educated
The rebellions in the 1960s and 1970s
the Green Revolution
The rise of the cultural left (identity politics rather than just economics)
Gender
Gay rights
the environment
Being left is not only defined along economic lines
(hated social democrats and the right → focus on economic growth was not enough)
Mitterand route Third Way 1980 (aim: break with capitalism)
1981- Francois Mitterand and the socialist win presidential elections and gain majority in the National Assembly
* Socialist in power and socialist policies
* Turned more to the left
* First time socialist in power in the 5th Republic
* Break with capitalism?
* Opposition to globalization?
* Mix of socialism, French republicanism (even De Gaulle)
Socials U-turn France
- Socialist U-Turn
- Instead of focusing of wages, full employment, fighting
inflation became the key - This means that wages and prices were frozen
- And public spending was cut
- Question: was social democracy (Keynesian style) still possible?
Jacques Delors, Single European Act, Maastricht etc.
Others, need to become more radical
Social democracy needs to change
The Bennites within Labour
Movement within Labour party.
They were a radical wing here.
Labour party struggling with what it shoudl do.
Debate between radical and more market right wing group.
Ideological not strucutral battle: according to the Bennites a more radical form of social democracy was possible.
* We need to return to the grassroots
* We need to fight for the left
* We need to fight for social democracy against the hegemony of the right
Fight for defining reality: won by the right, convinced the people this radical form of social democracy didnt work
1990s Third Way
- There is a movement among the left to become more
electorally attractive - The idea it to become more market oriented
- To move away from Keynesianism
- To incorporate other issues from the left and the right
Examples:
* Tony Blair and New Labour in the United Kingdom
* The Purple government in the 1990s in the Netherlands
* The 1998 German SPD-Green coalition
Tony Blair years
- Leader of the Labour Party 1994
- Prime Minister 1997 to 2007
- Clearest articulation of the Third Way
- How to make Labour electable again
- Moved away from the unions
- Abandonment of Keynesian policies
- Combination of state spending and market reforms
More market reforms in terms of education and health - Introduced minimum wage and parental rights
- Also a focus on non-material issues:
- Gay right (Civil Partnership Act 2004)
- Scottish devolution took place under his term
- Support of multicultural policies
Purple Cabinet (the Netherlands)
Prime Minister Wim Kok
* The Kok I cabinet (1994-1998)
* The Kok II cabinet (1998-2002)
* Broad coalition consisting of PvdA and the two liberal parties
(VVD and D66)
- Tried to combine market economic policies with social policies
- Introduced more active labor market policies, as opposed to outright spending
Highly controversial. Many left the PvdA during this period as they felt they were abandoning social democracy, too market oreineted.
Same as UK, rethink nature of welfare state.
* More focus on equality of opportunity
* Non-material issues:
Same-sex marriage
Euthanasia
Red-Green government Germany
- Large focus was on reducing the spending of the welfare state
- Reducing taxes for business
- Reducing the cost of labor
instead of just giving people welfare: you gave the money to retrain.
Summary Third Way
Need to abandon Keynesian economics: supply side
* Move from a demand philosophy, i.e. that you increase demand to increase employment, to a supply side that you need to focus on supplying labor and capital to the markets.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
* Supply side citizenship:
state creates framework to enable individual to realize their opportunity
* It is less based upon creating the very opportunity by the actions of the state, i.e. it is about enabling (education)
* Or said another way, it is about providing the goal and not about the right of social citizenship
but also…
Focus on socio-cultural issues: multiculturalism
* The environment
* Move to the political center
* Renew democracy: local democracy etc.
* Also within the party, less role for unions and other internal organizations
* Don’t be afraid of center right issues: law and order
Third Way failure of success?
Initial success.
As we saw a series of important left-wing governments.* United Kingdom
* The Netherlands
* Germany
With periodic revivals
* Rutte II (VVD-PvdA) (2012-2017)
* Current Scholz cabinet Germany
BUT: it has not been sustainable.
Their electroal success has not increased to what it was.
It often declined or leveld out at best
Still an era of the Third Way?
- Less of a clear dominant focus
- Most social democratic parties still practice some form of the Third Way
More centrist economically
Cultural issues important - In some cases a backlash against the Third Way
- Jeremy Corbyn leader of Labour (UK) (2015 to 2020)
- Rise of the populist left
Three dilemmas for social democracy:
- The soft center voters who do not stay (Karreth et al., 2013)
- Welfare success (Loxbo et al., 2021)
- The triangle of choice (Oesch and Rennwald, 2018)
The soft center
Many social democratic parties have turned to the “soft middle”
* To the middle class
* They have done this especially regarding their economic issues
* However, research atones the degree to which this support is less loyal (Karreth et al., 2013)
Argument here is that this is much more volatile. Problem of Third way: abandon social democratic voters
Welfare success
Social democratic parties are the victims of their own success
* Since much of their ideology was based upon the Keynesian welfare state, there is ceiling effect
* In societies that have a more established welfare state, they are less successful (Loxbo et al., 2021
Triangle choice
Politics has become two dimension: The economic and the cultural dimension
* The cultural dimension is particularly difficult for the social democratic parties
* They are pulled between the more culturally progressive and the less progressive voters.
* This is part and parcel of the re-definition of what it means to be left-wing.
