Bernie Sanders

Politics & The World

“Never before have I seen national governments so weakened by the forces of populism and paralysed by the risk of defeat in the next elections,” Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission, worriedly expressed in the State of the Union Speech on September 14, 2016. And it is truly worrying. The far-right anti-establishment movement, characterised by nationalism, racism and egoism, is not merely an overdramatized political statement, but a hard fact. The proliferation of far-right parties such as the AFD (Germany), the Front-National (France), the PVV (the Netherlands), the FPÖ (Austria), the five star movement (Italy), the SVP (Switzerland) and the shocking developments in Hungary, Poland and Turkey are just some broader examples reflecting the new forces of populism across the continent. Additionally, unthinkable events such as the Brexit-vote could become much more frequent if the right-wing can continue to play their game with the fear of people. And this won’t be the only consequence of the rise of the far right wing if not stopped on time.

The need for a counter movement

But there is hope. The risk of an overruling populist movement in Europe can be prevented: Europe needs to feel the Bern. The ‘Feel the Bern Challenge’ named after its founder Bernie Sanders, the Vermont Senator and democratic socialist who ran for the democratic presidency nomination against Hilary Clinton, has unleashed a political revolution in the USA. This revolution has to swap over to Europe.

The movement build upon progressive ideas to attain social justice – not coming from the political elite but from the grassroots. Yet most importantly, it has also one key similarity with the far-right populist movement, namely the anti-establishment characteristic. This characteristic is the main element appealing to voters. It reflects the citizen’s feeling of disillusion with the bourgeois elite politicians who fail to understand the concerns of the lower and middle class.

However, there is one clear difference between the two movements. The far right populism movement looks at the past and uses fear, sweet anger and post-truth politics to mobilise its voters, particularly those that did not go to the polls before. Sander’s movement suggests future oriented ideas coming from the informed grassroots level to tackle the ever-growing inequality. And with a strong left-wing supported progressive agenda the movement could become the foundation of a new post-capitalism society.

The Progressive Agenda

The suggested progressive agenda is based on the political ideas of Sanders yet also Jeremy Corbyn (UK Labour Party Leader). Combining these thinkers with Paul Mason’s seminal book ‘Postcapitalism – A guide to our future’ the progressive agenda should set the following key political priorities: (1) policies for a new corporate design (2) regulations to directly tackle cooperate greed and (3) the development of policies based on research and wider human terms.

Let me briefly explain the ideas: first of all, policies for a new corporate design promote sustainable business models that make social contributions as corporate citizens. Put differently, businesses need policy support to fulfil their private interest but also contribute to the greater public good e.g. developing labour rights, tackling anti-corruption or providing education. This leads me to the second point: cooperate greed needs to be tackled effectively by closing down offshore businesses, stopping special taxation for multinationals and breaking up monopolies. This goes hand in hand with stabilising and socialising the financial system. The last point is straightforward, policies have to take into account research results and the needs of the lower and middle class. In short, politicians and policy advisors ought to think outside of the political bubble.

In fact, the progressive agenda foresees a stronger interaction between society, business and politics that potentially benefits the entire socio-economic system. There are two key results envisaged when following this agenda: (1) narrowing the wealth gap and (2) a stronger lower and middle class.

Wake up before it is too late

Unfortunately, the left wing in Europe has not yet understood the potential of joining this progressive agenda. Critics towards these utopian post-capitalism ideas are still too prevalent and the fear of political damage too great. Risking political damage could mean losing the electorate completely to right wing parties. However, it is time for the left wing to wake up before it is too late. The left should not merely protect the labour-class anymore – instead they should take on both big players and the elites in the system with greater conviction – as Sanders or Corbyn do. The latter two receive great support among the lower and middle class voters, especially among the youth, proving the success of their progressive agendas. The latest victory of Corbyn for the labour party leadership illustrates that the left wing does not need a marketing campaign but a movement.

In the suggested progressive society tools like fear, sweet anger and post-truth politics would no longer thrive. Still, as long as the left wing opposition in Europe does not start to restructure its agenda, it creates the political vacuum that the far right-wing forces from Warsaw to Paris happily enjoy as their playground for political propaganda.

Sources:

Mason P., (2015). Postcapitalism – A guide to our future. Allen Lane

cover image from flickr: flickr_cclicense

 

Politics & The World

by Eoin Keane

From the outset, it seemed that the race for the Democratic nomination for U.S. President would never be as entertaining, as nasty or as unpredictable as the race on the Republican side.

The tone, however, has changed. It is clear that Hillary Clinton is the presumptive Democratic nominee for President, but this doesn’t sit well with supporters of her rival,  Bernie Sanders. It remains to be seen if Sanders will mellow in his criticism of the former Secretary of State, or even if the two candidates’ supporters will unite to elect the eventual Democratic nominee in November.

Indeed, vitriol for Clinton is now commonplace in the Sanders’ campaign. A brief mention of her name at one of Sanders’ rallies continues to incite boos and whistles from the crowd. Bernie Sanders points out that Clinton is a member of the establishment, artfully painting her as beholden to financial interests, as someone not worthy of the American public’s trust. While the phenomenon of the “Bernie Bro” is exaggerated, but there is considerable backlash on social media for those professing an admiration for the former Secretary of State. Bernie Sanders has alleged that she is “unqualified” to be President. He has repeatedly dismissed her landslide wins in the Deep South as the electorate there is “conservative”, and his supporters have alleged electoral fraud in other States where Clinton has won easily, including New York and Arizona. Dr. Paul Song, a health-care activist and Sanders surrogate, criticised the “Democratic whores” in Congress, mentioning Clinton in the next sentence. A loud group of protesters picketed a San Francisco Clinton fundraiser hosted by George and Amal Clooney on April 16, while Clinton’s motorcade was showered in dollar bills as she arrived, the protesters then stamping on the money after she had passed.

Where does this hatred for Hillary originate?

Hillary Clinton has been in the public eye since her husband Bill’s election in 1992, and has remained a controversial figure since. She originally drew conservative ire by trying to introduce universal health-care in the early years of her husband’s presidency.  She has often been painted as driven and ruthless. Her evolving positions on subjects such as gay marriage and TTIP make her seem duplicitous. She has caused controversy over her “racist” comments made in support of her husband’s 1996 crime bill. Clinton’s use of a private email server while serving as Secretary of State is a controversy of her own making, and one that raises questions about her judgement. Although she has built a diverse coalition of support, encompassing black voters, Latino voters, older voters and white women, the millennials and white men flocking to Sanders seem to hold contempt for her.

This is perhaps one of the most interesting developments of the campaign – the fact that millennials and white men seem so disgusted by Clinton. Many compare the candidates as a fight between idealism (Sanders) and pragmatism (Clinton). Sanders wants to remove moneyed interests from politics, introduce socialism across the States and provide free healthcare and free college education by taxing Wall Street. Clinton is far more cautious, with policy-heavy plans that promise incremental change. It is possible that millennials are dismissive of pragmatism – and would rather see sweeping change in the form of a political revolution as Sanders promises. Many millennials believe she is tainted by political donations, is too hawkish on foreign policy, is untrustworthy and overly cautious, and should be reprimanded for racially tinged comments made in the past. Hillary, once a villain for the right-wing in America compared to an ambitious Lady Macbeth figure, is now the target for the progressive left-wing. Even she must be surprised at this volte-face.

With the Democratic nomination within her grasp, Hillary Clinton is preparing to pivot to the general election in November, and the likely challenge from Donald Trump. Bernie Sanders’ supporters may not be ready to pivot just yet.

Some Democratic politicians have expressed concern that it may be difficult to convince Sanders’ supporters to coalesce around Clinton as the Democratic nominee. Susan Sarandon, the actress and Sanders supporter, demurred when asked if she could eventually support Clinton. “Some people feel Donald Trump will bring the revolution immediately,” she replied.

Will those expressing hatred for Hillary find an unlikely home as part of Trump’s coalition?

 

Image by Marc Nozell, taken from flickr