Monday, February 20, 2017


303. Populism and the political right

The notion of the political right is confused. There are at least two forms. They have been called old versus new or alt(ernative) right, and economic versus cultural right. In the preceding item in this blog I distinguished two forms of liberalism, and the question now also is how the two rights are related to the two liberalisms.

One right is the old, libertarian, economic right. It is focused on the identity of the individual, who is seen as autonomous, and responsible for its own future. It is based on laissez faire, maximally untrammelled markets, with next to no government intervention, apart from liberal-democratic constitutional safeguards. It does uphold those. Thus, the old right is a combination of libertarian and democratic liberalism discussed in the preceding item in this blog.

The new right, or alt-right, is cultural, in a re-emergence of nationalism. This is appropriated by rightist populism. The focus is on cultural, not individual identity. As I argued in the preceding item, while it challenges free market liberalism it also carries threats to democratic liberalism. It appears to be becoming illiberal in two ways. 

Rightist and leftist populism, such as that of Jeremy Corbyn and Bernie Sanders, have a number of things in common. They both aim to ‘do  right’ to the ‘ordinary’, or ‘real’ people, claiming that those have been betrayed, neglected and damaged by ‘the elite’. Both are against free markets and excesses of the financial sector. The free flow of labour is seen as threatening to employment, at least for rightist populism.

However, I do not see populism on the left as gravitating towards a destruction of liberal democracy, rather the contrary, in trying to practice it more fully. It seems to be more radically reformist concerning markets than rightist populism. This may be utopian, but that is a different matter. Later in this blog I will discuss possible ways of preserving markets while preventing their perversities. I suppose that left populism can be classified as anti-libertarian, economically illiberal, and democratically liberal. 

Rightist populism, at least in the form of president Trumps plans, does aim to limit trade to protect low-wage jobs, but on the other hand maintains free markets, in renewed deregulation of the financial industries that he criticised heavily during the election, lower taxes for the rich, lifting environmental regulation, in a denial of human-made climate change, and stopping a rise of the minimum wage. Could one say that it is libertarian domestically and anti-libertarian internationally? That would fit with its nationalist pre-occupation.

‘Right’ is generally associated with conservatism, and left with progressiveness. How does that fit, if at all? These categories are also mixed-up and ambiguous. Is defending the constitution of liberal democracy conservative? Then the old right, the old left and the new left are conservative. Is an attack on libertarianism progressive? Then both the new left and the new right (more or less) are progressive.   

The old right is very much nested, in one country more than the another, in the elites of politics and business. So is the old left. They both seem conservative in trying to preserve the elite. But that applies equally to leftist elites (take communist regimes). The elite is the revolution grasping power, and then entrenching and maintaining itself. Clearly, both right and left populism are anti-conservative in attacking the incumbent elite, to craft a new one. Is that progressive? 

 There are also different forms of romanticism involved. Libertarians have the romanticism of the Homeric, Nietzschean, lone, transgressive hero from the work of Ayn Rand, who thrashes out his own future, with determination, strength of purpose, against the lethargy and moral blackmail of the masses.

The new, nationalist, populist alt-right, reverts to the romanticism of transcendent, superior cultural or ethnic roots, blood and soil, exemplified in a largely illusory, mythical past.  

How about leftist populism? The romanticism of utopia, if that is romantic? How romantic was More’s utopia? Arcadia? As the classical saying goes (‘et ego in Arcadia’) mortality is there as well. Imperfection on the move.    

No comments:

Post a Comment