this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2024
50 points (96.3% liked)

Socialism

5272 readers
140 users here now

Rules TBD.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The political landscape in the West has shifted dramatically in recent decades, with increasing numbers of people becoming disillusioned with mainstream liberal politics gravitating toward the right. This trend is not accidental but rooted in systemic, cultural, and psychological factors that make the right a more accessible and appealing alternative for those feeling alienated.

The left’s historical strength lay in its ability to articulate a clear critique of the capitalist system, centered on the exploitative relationship between workers and owners. Class, as a concept, derives its significance from the process of surplus extraction: the transfer of wealth from those who labor to those who own. This dynamic is the engine of inequality, enabling a small elite to extract wealth from the working class majority who toil with little to show for it. Yet, the left in the West has largely moved away from class analysis, instead focusing on social issues and identity politics.

While issues of race, gender, and other forms of identity are undeniably important, the left’s emphasis on these concerns has often come at the expense of addressing the broader economic injustices that affect all working people. By treating these issues as separate from class struggle, the left has fractionalized its base, creating a patchwork of identity groups that often emphasize their distinctiveness rather than their shared interests. As such, the left is unable to present a unified front to the capitalist system and the ruling class.

In contrast, the right has adeptly tapped into the economic anxieties of working-class people. While the solutions they propose are misguided or outright harmful, the right acknowledges the very real frustrations of those who feel left behind by the system. When right-wing figures argue that the economy is rigged against ordinary people, they resonate with the lived experiences of many who see their wages stagnate, their costs of living rise, and their opportunities shrink.

The right’s message is effective because it doesn’t require a radical rethinking of the world. Instead, it builds on the capitalist and nationalist ideologies that people have been steeped in their entire lives. By blaming immigrants, government overreach, or cultural elites, the right offers scapegoats that align with preexisting prejudices and fears. This makes their ideology not only accessible but also emotionally satisfying.

On the other hand, moving to the left requires questioning the very foundations of the system. Socialist thinking runs contrary to the ideas of capitalism, individualism, and the myth of meritocracy that most people have been taught to accept as natural and inevitable. For many, this is a daunting prospect. It involves rejecting deeply held beliefs and confronting uncomfortable truths about the world and their place in it. While some are willing to make this leap, most find it easier to retreat into the familiar narratives offered by the right.

If the left hopes to counter this trend, it must reclaim class analysis as a central pillar of its politics. This doesn’t mean abandoning the fight against racism, sexism, or other forms of oppression but rather recognizing that these struggles are interconnected with the broader fight against economic exploitation. The forces that perpetuate class inequality are the same ones that propagate racism, sexism, militarism, and ecological devastation. These issues must be framed as part of a unified struggle that unites all working class people.

The left needs to provide a compelling narrative that's able to compete with the one that the right peddles. It has to be accessible and relatable to those feeling alienated from the political mainstream.

all 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] freagle@lemmygrad.ml 15 points 3 days ago (1 children)

There's a material reason (set of) that the left in the West abandoned building a critical narrative - persecution. In America they drove the left out and down. We're not in a position in America for a left movement to succeed until we can actually build a left movement from the ashes. Said another way, we can't win until we're in a position to lose, and we're not there yet.

And while I love the PSL for what they are doing, they have a very long way to go to build an actual movement that can lose.

Also, I know you don't do this normally, but it really feels like your conflating liberals with The Left in this piece, and they haven't been Left for 200 years.

The PSL is articulating a clear class analysis. And the reason it isn't resonating widely is because the left was suppressed for 5 generations so very few people have parents, grandparents, or great grandparents that they could have learned from. So the PSL message is fighting against the deeply ingrained fear of social isolation, government oppression, and international evil demons.

This is a deep psychological problem and not one that can be overcome by better messaging. It can only be overcome through human relationship building over time and being ready to help people through crises in real time. When a person is in crisis they are most capable of trading one deep fear for another, but they will only do it if they have the support of others to make that trade. Right now, many people are trading their fear of being a bad person for the fear of the other being a bad person and hurting them. The Left needs to be there to help them see that communism does not make them a bad person but also that acting out of fear that "the other" is bad leads to bad outcomes for them. This is the trade that most people need to make. They fear accepting class analysis because they genuinely believe that it will harm them to believe it: they will become "evil", their friends and family will abandon them, they will lose their jobs and be reld-listed, the government will oppress them, and bad communist people will take advantage of them.

Better messaging doesn't solve this. Building a movement one person at a time does. It is easier to accept class analysis if you see lots of people doing it, a wide variety of people doing it, people who have loving families and decent standards of living, and people who are happy, healthy, secure, confident, and welcoming.

We have to work at all levels simultaneously, but look at the PSL and ask why centering class analysis for years has not led to the outcomes you are looking for.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 days ago

I very much agree that the US nowhere close to having a serious socialist movement. I don't think I'm conflating libs with the left, as I specifically point out that libs are the dominant ideology, and this is what people are becoming disillusioned with. My argument is that the actual left has to focus on the class struggle. However, people falling out of the political mainstream are going to have liberal beliefs, and need help restructuring their world view.

I don't mean to say that messaging alone is a silver bullet, but it is an important aspect of building a movement and attracting a critical mass of people towards socialist ideas. There needs to be a clear set of ideas that people can unite around, and work towards a common goal productively. Currently, the left is incredibly fractured with many small groups fighting each other and pulling in different directions. Messaging obviously has to be coupled with material actions, such as mutual aid, to be effective. However, building a movement one person at a time, requires communicating a set of ideas and goals to that person.

Regarding, PSL, I think it's exactly as you say, they're fighting upstream against massive indoctrination. That doesn't mean that what they're doing is not effective, but rather that society as a whole isn't at a point where there is a critical mass of people who are ready to pursue meaningful change.

My whole argument is that the narrative on the right is effective precisely because it's not advocating for change. Instead, the right argues that what's happening now is not real capitalism, and if we just get back to doing it properly everything will be great again. I strongly suspect we're going to have to live through a period in the west, where the right tries to put their ideas into practice, and only after it discredits itself the way the liberals have, will there be a possibility of a worker movement forming.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The other issue is tribalism. People are rejected by parents, siblings, friends and employers when they go against the grain. This was absolutely the last holiday for visiting parent.

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

This was absolutely the last holiday for visiting parent.

same here for my family.

i get that we need to build bridges to bring us back in from the political wilderness in this country; but there's something to be said about finding a balance between trying to help the people you care about and preserving your own well being. especially when you see the a particular beloved member of a younger generation getting sucked into the overwhelming nature of that tribe for the first time and simultaneously recognizing that there's nothing you can do about it and that all of your efforts have been in vein.

this past xmas break has made me wish that i was as smart as my sister is when she warned me that it's best to keep a friendly & welcoming distance from them decades ago; permanently. i became invested in my nephews & nieces (like i did their parents and my own siblings) and now i know that i will have to watch another procession of an entirely new generation of my family members laugh & meme at the tankies while unhappily assuming their roles as capitalist cannon fodder to the point of self harm & recycling generational trauma that their grandmothers and I had to endure. all the while proudly proclaiming that everything will be fine (eventually) because they will always vote blue no matter who and will soon be the majority.

a third of us are trumpers now and the rest still won't/can't see it 🤦

[–] fatur0000new@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Actually mainstream liberal is not liberal but libcon (liberal conservatism)

Socialist thinking runs contrary to the ideas of capitalism, individualism, and the myth of meritocracy that most people have been taught to accept as natural and inevitable.

For mutualism, socialism is not contrary to individualism also meritocracy is not a myth. You just have system and social problems.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 15 points 3 days ago

Liberalism is an ideology with two primary facets: political liberalism and economic liberalism. Political liberalism emphasizes individual freedoms, democracy, and human rights, while economic liberalism is essentially capitalism, focused on free markets, private property, and wealth accumulation. These two aspects are inherently incompatible. While political liberalism may appear to champion the people’s cause against oppressive regimes, once in power, it inevitably prioritizes economic liberalism, protecting the interests of the wealthy elite at the expense of the majority.

Private property rights are central to liberal ideology, serving as the foundation of individual freedom. However, liberalism’s defense of private property amounts to the protection of minority wealth at the expense of the communal good. Liberalism justifies the use of state violence to safeguard property, which it enshrines as sacred in laws and constitutions, effectively removing it from political debate. Thus liberalism perpetuates a system that benefits the few at the expense of the many while presenting itself as a champion of freedom and democracy.

A good primer on the subject https://orgrad.wordpress.com/articles/liberalism-the-two-faced-tyranny-of-wealth/