Human rights: Food for a failing to live-up-to thought ‘HR and the political Left’
HRR 739
[TLDR (too long didn’t read): If you are reading this, chances are you care about HR. This Reader is about a hopefully constructive critique of the political Left that does not seem to align with HR imperatives. For a quick overview, just read the bolded text]. Traducir/traduire los/les Readers; usar/utiliser deepl.com
[Much has-been and is-being said about the political Left. I gathered just a sample here of these critiques (in no particular order) for you to ponder as food for thought asking you to think about how this affects the activists’ work on human rights].
1. The Left is unfortunately lagging in disarray. Center-left social-democracy has accepted neoliberal policies and the Radical-left too often remains sectarian. The messages it generates are simply far too complicated for the wo/men in the street who are seeking simple, yet drastic enough, solutions to their everyday problems. (Francine Mestrum)
2. A political Left that thinks it can resolve conflicts in a modern world relying on a lost past is obsolete. Left ‘liberalism’ easily loses itself in such moderation so that it no longer achieves anything at all. (Robert Misik)
How many righwings is the Left divided into? (Louis Casado)
–When thebetrays the dreams and illusions of a people, the magnitude of the deception (and defeat) is profound.
3. The Left, that for all practical purposes, disappeared with the fall of the socialist countries in 1991, has regrouped in organizations and movements of diverse nature. Its distinct political struggles of the past have practically disappeared from the scene of political and electoral struggles.*
*: Do note that, nevertheless, in many a country, the anti-communist struggle has not disappeared in its classic forms! It is all too frequent to observe how the Right attacks the Left, or political sectors that question them, accusing them of being communists, resorting to the sentiments and fears unfounded during the cold war. Against this language there is still no effective opposition; those affected feel attacked, cornered and unable to respond. The most dangerous thing is the instrumentation of this language, which the Left has not effectively-enough used to confront the national oligarchic groups. Rather, the Left uses a deceitful populist language.
4. Many leftists are still struggling to transcend the legacy of the 20th century’s authoritarian socialism. Some once-powerful parties of the left have simply disappeared into thin air (as in Italy). In countries where democracy itself is not under threat, leftists have learned to make broad alliances** in order to remain politically relevant. (Arash Azizi) [One can criticize the Left for joining so-called democratic governments; does Azizi have a point considering that some leftists would be very willing to agree with the capitalist Right on an ideological armistice?].
**: For the Left, ‘unity’ seems not to be a priority, but is it asking too much to have talks and look for common concerns, to stop the useless competition, and to develop a common discourse on some basic policies for people? It is the most difficult task, yet so very necessary. The call is and has always been: “Never look up, never focus on the wealthy, but always on the poorer ones!” The tragedy is that the middle-class is caught in the middle. (F. Mestrum)
5. In contrast, a new type of right-wing populism has been manifesting itself trying to organize itself politically towards the future. As a matter of fact, new oligarchic groups, the nouveau riche, impose on traditional groups the fear of state action against their interests and their procedures. (They have already done this penetrating and using the media and other information systems…). (Vladimir de la Cruz de Lemos)
To change, says the Right ‘is not bad, as long as the change does not turn to the left’. Today, the shift to the right is total
6. Not only has relevant criticism of the discourse that brought the Right to power been abandoned, but more seriously, substantive aspects of the model that until recently were questioned by the Left have ended up being validated. The consequences are unimaginable; the damage to the confidence of those who believed that progress could be made towards a better country is irreparable, not so much because the right wing intransigently obstructs any reform, but because the weakness of those who govern the country makes it easier for this minority right wing to achieve progress in the direction of its interests. Only time will tell how deep the disenchantment in the ranks of the Left will be given the damage already done, and how long it will take for its cadres to get back on their feet; it will depend on how and when the people, disenchanted and betrayed, will set up a fight and struggle for their rights. (Luis Mesina)
Questions we are left-with (no pun intended)
7. Would it not be better for popular movements and leftwing parties to tone down so much interest in elections –that lead to nothing or to more of the same? Would it not be more productive for them to center their actions in fostering a just rebellion starting with championing the banners of democratic education, democratic income distribution, democratic justice, universal health coverage, women’s youth and LGBT issues, a solidarity economy and social protection? Does it not seem fairer to encourage civil disobedience, popular mobilization as the most effective remedy to achieve justice and equity and so proclaiming it? (Juan Pablo Cardenas)
So let us then talk about political parties
–We do not need them to give us a hand; we need them to take their hands off us. (Mapuche slogan)
8. Parties of the Left have spent the last couple decades mired in niche subcultures of activist groups; they have remained marginal and yet still abhor forming coalitions that risk adulterating their ‘ideological purity’. (A. Azizi) They talk about freedom, but not equality, not HR.
9. Although the leading political parties are obsessed with economic growth, it is not more wealth we need, it is greater equality and disparity reduction. As things are, a few hundred billionaires worldwide have commandeered half the world’s total loot and use it to satisfy their own whims –and the anomaly is getting worse. But the main parties, including in the Left, do not want to know. (Colin Tudge)
10. In many parts of the world, the struggle of the working class for power remained the banner of communist parties. But, today, it is expressed in a multiplicity of political parties and electoral orientations.
And then, how could I not talk about the party bosses
–Politicians change, policies do not so easily.
–It is wrong to focus on what politicians say; how they say it is as much or more important.
11. For politicians like Milei or Bolsonaro, Modi, Orban or Trump (pick your choice) it is not their policy proposals that are attractive to the populace, but their style: their Extreme right style. Leaders like them promise to take the country’s institutions by the throat and make them cough-up solutions. Their boldness sends a shudder through society, a jolt that masquerades as a plan for the future. (Vijay Prashad)
12. As for their social messages, one might wonder if these political men (and women) with their odious language, want to exclude people from society or to reinforce already extreme security measures they stand for. It often looks as if they just seek popularity, and votes, saying the things they believe people want to hear. It can help for some electoral success, but the question remains if it will help to build cohesive societies. As we have seen in the United States and elsewhere, Extreme-right presidents also polarize societies making the peaceful co-existence of people much more difficult. (F. Mestrum)
13. The possibility of finding one of these politicians who does not practice double standards is as difficult as finding a needle in a haystack. It hurts to admit it, but in all countries of the world, rulers, legislators and top leaders act according to their own interests rather than according to their convictions. Right-wingers and left-wingers live in double standards. [And, by the way, this also applies to those who proclaim themselves to be in the ‘Extreme’ center (who, in themselves, live in a dreadful ideological zigzagging)]. ***
***: In international matters, the champions of double standards are those who govern the United States, as well as those who are its allies and accomplices.
14. What a paradox: the Left today can be seen in the pursuit of business; the Right, in the pursuit of safeguarding democracy… A huge manifestation of double standards here in which HR, genocide and crimes against humanity are ignored. Double standards are accompanied by an ideological decomposition that ignores the violations of people’s rights and dignity. It would seem that politics everywhere, and throughout history, has been more of the same and that, truly, as before, we now lack solid moral referents.**** (J. P. Cárdenas)
****: Let us note that part of double standards is not hesitating to bribe judges and other politicians.
Claudio Schuftan, Ho Chi Minh City
Your comments are welcome at schuftan@gmail.com
All Readers are available at www.claudioschuftan.com
Postscript/Marginalia
—Immanuel Kant was fully aware that his proposals for a ‘Perpetual Peace’ (1795) would face the skepticism of ‘practical’ politicians: The practical politician assumes the attitude of looking down with great self-satisfaction on the political theorist as a pedant whose empty ideas in no way threaten the security of the state, inasmuch as the state must proceed on empirical principles; so the theorist is allowed to play his game without interference from the worldly-wise statesman. (quoted by J. Sachs)
—It is said that when Fidel Castro met Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Fidel asked him: Gabo, are you a Marxist? To which he replied: Me a Marxist? Too much to read…