FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Learning From Las Europeas

by

Zaragoza.

Podemos, a new political party, has recently swept into public view in the Spanish state. Striking successes such as placing five members in the European parliament, winning more than a million votes in the European elections, and polling as the second political force in the country speak for themselves, as does Podemos’s charismatic leader Pablo Iglesias, who has become a most-wanted (most hated for some) public personality. Yet what is Podemos? And what lessons does it bring for those aiming to construct an alternative in other parts of the world?

One key to Podemos’s success is that it is popular and even populist in the best sense of these terms. The party systematically refuses to let any single fetishized issue of the traditional Left sideline a truly people-oriented project. A sharp contrast is offered by Left parties in France, which seem to have allowed the immigration issue to displace the problem of workers’ oppression – the historical focus of socialist parties – and have thereby offered a fertile terrain to the Right-wing populists. Not so with Podemos, which though a Left party is unafraid to say it is patriotic, that it defends work and workers, women and mothers, and that it aims to provide a basic income to all citizens.

Podemos has also abandoned a time-honored leftist tradition: defeatism. When Partido Popular leader Esperanza Aguirre attacked the new party for programmatic unclarity on Spanish television, Iglesias replied with wonderful limpidness about what his party was seeking – to preserve social rights, guarantee health care, tax the rich, and limit campaign financing – but he also came forward saying that he had every intention of taking the “caste” that she represents out of power, while cautioning that they had better think about whether they prefer to step down with dignity or without it. This is a refreshingly direct and optimistic attitude in a leftist, reminiscent of the fighting spirit of the late Hugo Chávez.

The intention to vote for Podemos, which translates as “we can,” seems to grow nonstop. Curiously, twice as many people remember having voted for the party in the last elections as actually voted for it. At the same time, Podemos is beset by the very political caste it questions and also criticism, sometimes sectarian, that comes from the traditional Left. These latter sectors doubt that a party lacking in organized bases can actually pressure the state even if it assumes power. They also criticize its leaders for ambiguity about such issues as the public debt, the right of nationalities (Catalan, Basque, Galician) to decide about independence, and the future relation to the European union.

What seems to be lacking in much of this criticism is a reflection on the mediatic context that conditions contemporary politics. Today, mass media saturation makes it almost impossible to distinguish clearly and consistently between maximum and minimum programs, or even between tactical and strategic positions. In fact, nothing indicates that Podemos will not be able to assume positions on all of these issues that would leave the traditional left wholly satisfied. After all, it was none other than Fidel Castro who affirmed that revolutionaries should never lie but do not always have to say the whole truth.

It is common to point to Podemos’s roots in 15M movement of “indignados.” This is correct. Nevertheless, the party’s admirable skill in navigating contemporary politics is in a great measure an achievement of political theory that comes from leftist circles, including those that operate in the Universidad Complutense de Madrid and the webpage rebelion.org. A key component in their updating of the Left is the recognition that capitalism has not only entered into mortal combat with democracy (an idea one can find in such thinkers as Ellen Meiksins Wood and Atilio Boron) but also with the much-touted empire of law (“Estado de Derecho”).

This theoretical discovery is extremely productive: Since capitalism cannot play by the very rules it ostensibly espouses, Podemos’s leaders easily destroy their opponents by showing how it is the parties in power – and by no means the Left opposition – that are anti-system and anti-common sense. Today the Right-wing can only offer a failed state, one so rife with corruption and irrationality that even the slickest ideological whitewashing cannot cover up its patent barbarity. The Right-wing has also become so madly “revolutionary,” if that means willing to destroy all that exists and embrace even the most dangerous novelties, that it remains for the left to say Stop, “ya basta,” and slow down. When capitalist power turns radically destructive, the Left opposition can become “conservative” and constructive.

Of course, the precariousness of the Spanish state’s subimperialist condition – the fact that it constitutes a weak link in the imperialist chain – makes it an especially fertile territory for an opposition party of the Podemos kind (cfr. Greece’s Syriza). When a country undemocratically subordinates itself to the economic dictates of Germany, many of the contradictions that are much less explicit in other developed countries – say between a meaningful patriotism and the attitude of the governing class – come to the forefront and make work easier for the opposition. However, this does not mean that many of Podemos’s central features, such as its firmness in avoiding fetishized single issues as well as its putting at center stage the conflict between democracy and common sense on the one hand and the conduct of government on the other, are not relevant to a renovation of the Left that goes far beyond the borders of the Spanish state.

Here indeed there are lessons to be learned. For while the U.S. left stumbles over such issues as gun control – perhaps an important but far from central problem – a new European Left advances with the banners of common sense, rights to housing and health care, and (yes, surprisingly) even patriotism. Also important is the repositioning of the Left in favor of the defense of society and the construction of substantial democracy. This notable theoretical and practical shift is an almost straightforward consequence of the extremist, undemocratic and destructive character of the ruling classes in all of the Global North.

Chris Gilbert, professor of Political Science in the Universidad Bolivariana de Venezuela, is passing July and August in the Spanish state.

Chris Gilbert is professor of political science in the Universidad Bolivariana de Venezuela.

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

Weekend Edition
March 24, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Michael Hudson
Trump is Obama’s Legacy: Will this Break up the Democratic Party?
Eric Draitser
Donald Trump and the Triumph of White Identity Politics
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Nothing Was Delivered
Paul Buhle
The CIA and the Intellectuals…Again
Andrew Levine
Ryan’s Choice
Joshua Frank
Global Coal in Freefall, Tar Sands Development Drying Up (Bad News for Keystone XL)
Anthony DiMaggio
Ditching the “Deep State”: The Rise of a New Conspiracy Theory in American Politics
Rob Urie
Boris and Natasha Visit Fantasy Island
John Wight
London and the Dreary Ritual of Terrorist Attacks
David Rosen
Why Did Trump Target Transgender Youth?
Vijay Prashad
Inventing Enemies
Ben Debney
Outrage From the Imperial Playbook
Michael J. Sainato
Bernie Sanders’ Economic Advisor Shreds Trumponomics
Bill Willers
Volunteerism; Charisma; the Ivy League Stranglehold: a Very Brief Trilogy
Lawrence Davidson
Moral Failure at the UN
Pete Dolack
World Bank Declares Itself Above the Law
Nicola Perugini - Neve Gordon
Israel’s Human Rights Spies
Patrick Cockburn
From Paris to London: Another City, Another Attack
Ralph Nader
Reason and Justice Address Realities
Ramzy Baroud
‘Decolonizing the Mind’: Using Hollywood Celebrities to Validate Islam
Colin Todhunter
Monsanto in India: The Sacred and the Profane
Louisa Willcox
Grizzlies Under the Endangered Species Act: How Have They Fared?
Norman Pollack
Militarization of American Fascism: Trump the Usurper
Pepe Escobar
North Korea: The Real Serious Options on the Table
Brian Cloughley
“These Things Are Done”: Eavesdropping on Trump
Sheldon Richman
You Can’t Blame Trump’s Military Budget on NATO
Carol Wolman
Trump vs the People: a Psychiatrist’s Analysis
Stanley L. Cohen
The White House . . . Denial and Cover-ups
Farhang Jahanpour
America’s Woes, Europe’s Responsibilities
Joseph Natoli
March Madness Outside the Basketball Court
Bruce Mastron
Slaughtered Arabs Don’t Count
Ayesha Khan
The Headscarf is Not an Islamic Compulsion
Pauline Murphy
Unburied Truth: Exposing the Church’s Iron Chains on Ireland
Ron Jacobs
Music is Love, Music is Politics
Christopher Brauchli
Prisoners as Captive Customers
M. Shadee Malaklou
An Open Letter to Duke University’s Class of 2007, About Your Open Letter to Stephen Miller
Robert Koehler
The Mosque That Disappeared
Franklin Lamb
Update from Madaya
Dan Bacher
Federal Scientists Find Delta Tunnels Plan Will Devastate Salmon
Barbara Nimri Aziz
The Gig Economy: Which Side Are You On?
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
Marines to Kill Desert Tortoises
Louis Proyect
What Caused the Holodomor?
Max Mastellone
Seeking Left Unity Through a Definition of Progressivism
Charles R. Larson
Review: David Bellos’s “Novel of the Century: the Extraordinary Adventure of Les Misérables”
David Yearsley
Ear of Darkness: the Soundtracks of Steve Bannon’s Films
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail