💾 Archived View for sysrq.in › article › en › kagarlitsky-2024-07.gmi captured on 2024-08-24 at 23:48:41. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2024-08-18)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
This is unauthorized translation of an interview with sociologist Boris Kagarlitsky, which he gave in 2024 using prison mail to answer the questions.
Interviewer: Both left-wing and liberal media outlets in Europe and the USA talk more and more about the emerging threat posed by the far-right, which can also be seen in multiple successes achieved by the far-right in Europe where they are either likely to come into power, or have already done so. To what extent is "fascization" of society and politics a real threat nowadays? Is it true that the modern far-right can completely destroy what's left of democracy to build new totalitarian system, as it happened in the 20th century?
Boris Kagarlitsky: For the past several years I've been telling that we shouldn't panic about the rise of far-right populism in Europe (and the USA). In fact, the "far-right threat" became a bug-a-boo used by the liberal center in order to force the left to give up its own agenda (even when it's only reformist) and support liberals, the moderate right, to "save democracy". The left has been following these instructions in precise, and what is the result? The left's influence has been reduced to a historical minimum, it was transformed to a mobile reserve of the "progressive" bourgeoisie, which is even more reactionary than many hardcore conservatives with regard to economic issues. Yet the far-right's influence in contrary has been growing strictly proportional to the degree in which the left retreated from its class politics of the past. A significant portion of the lower classes votes far-right now because they feel that the left betrayed them. Meanwhile, thanks to successes of national-populists, a part of the bourgeoisie begins to see them as a perspective force and starts funding them. Although, as a side effect, this makes the far-right give up on social populism, theoretically opening an opportunity for the left to reclaim such electorate. But so far, this is only an opportunity, and the situation is getting worse.
Interviewer: Rassemblement National, a French far-right party, has reached high ratings. Shortly after Macron called parliamentary elections it seemed that the far-right could win absolute or relative majority of seats but in the end they came third. The New Popular Front placed first in the elections. Will it be able to achieve success of the historical Popular Front, or is this alliance doomed?
B.K.: In "Between Class and Discourse" I predicted some of the things that happened recently in France. I wrote that Macron and his politics would lead to forming an image of the far right as an anti-establishment alternative in the eyes of a significant fraction of the masses and making them real contenders for power or, at least, for the majority. Also, I wrote that Mélenchon's left populism is an alternative, although other leftists do everything possible to prevent such an alternative, both to macronists and the far right, being formed. Some of them have learned from their past defeats and have accepted to build electoral coalitions with Mélenchon, nevertheless continuing a pattern of making political alliances with the center. This is a disastrous policy, but it is very hard to overcome until the radical left confronts the moderates with a fait accompli of massive grassroots mobilization. The results of electoral struggles also depends on its successes. Mélenchon has to make concessions for now because his movement lacks such mobilization. It's there, but it is not enough. Essentially, he tried to break into the Hôtel de Matignon on the shoulders of demoralized centrist electorate, but the defeat of the center wasn't total. Now, "the dead" holds "the living": centrist agenda, which is already lost, is forced upon the left, which haven't won a complete victory.
Interviewer: Is there an opportunity for the radical left led by La France Insoumise to turn the tide in their favor now?
B.K.: The LFI not only can turn the tide in their favor, they have to. But will they succeed? I can't predict precisely from afar.
Interviewer: Elections in the UK brought the Labour to power. Wouldn't moderate government of Kier Starmer lead to mass disappointment among the people and potential rise of Farage's far-right Reform party, which got more than 4 million votes already on these elections.
B.K.: The failure of Kier Starmer in the future is a common place in predictions of all left-wing analytics, and not only. This comes from an assumption that Starmer has neither clear agenda nor a clear programme, and he is, as comrades from "Wheat Fields of Theresa May" put it, "boring as non-alcoholic beer". It is likely that these forecasts are justified. But let's try, at least for the sake of intellectual balance, to examine another option. The fact that Starmer has neither his own political face, his own ideas nor his own programme could be not only a weakness but also sort of advantage: he can turn in any direction like a weather vane. Coming to power, he has "purged" the left wing because it messed with his plans to consolidate control over the party and guarantee positive coverage of his activities in the bourgeois press. If he for some reason needs to turn to the left, he will do it with the same indifference and unprincipledness as he did while turning the party to the right (I'll remind you that while Corbyn was the leader, Starmer was quite loyal to him – not out of ideological considerations but just because it was more convenient). So the question is not in Starmer's personality or programme, that does not exist, but in the general situation. Could anything force opportunists in the party leadership to change its direction to the left (e.g. under the pressure of social and economic crisis) and, the second question, who are these 410 Labour MPs elected in 2024. In most cases, we don't know them. But most importantly, they do not know themselves yet. How are they going to interact with voters, how are they going to build their careers. The success of Tony Blair hasn't prevented the return of the left into the Labour Party leadership and the rise of Corbyn.
Drift towards the left is theoretically possible even under Starmer, and especially after he goes. Is it really necessary to wait for the Labour failure to bring changes into the party? What if a shift begins on municipal and regional levels? Don't forget about the revival of Labour in Scotland (Anna Collins, my grandmother, would be happy). There are interesting opportunities for regional politics emerging in the UK. And how could we forget about the success of Sinn Féin in the Northern Ireland. They are turning from catholic nationalists into left populists, and their prospects depend on their ability to win the trust of protestant workers. To sum up, there are opportunities for left-wing politics in the UK right now, and it's not necessary to wait 3–5 years. And finally, let's return to Starmer. He's an apparatchik and a manager. Most likely, not a bad one. The question is, will he be able to cope with government tasks. It's a different kind of thing than intra-party intrigues, but he could. So, let's give a boring man the benefit of the doubt. I am by no means certain the described possibilities will be fulfilled, especially considering lots of factors that will work in the opposite direction. I just invite everyone to pay more attention to little things and details and not to miss opportunities where they may appear.
Interviewer: New York Times published Bernie Sanders' article "Joe Biden for President", where Sanders voices support for Biden and urges Democrats not to demand his replacement during the election campaign. In general, should leftists think in the terms of "the lesser evil" on the eve of elections, or even insist on choosing a single bourgeois candidate in the face of the far right threat?
B.K.: Sanders tries to save the Democratic Party by giving concessions again and again, but that fails badly. In 2016, he surrendered to the party apparatus and Hillary Clinton to not let Trump win – and Trump won as the result. Bernie also refrained from criticizing Biden, which did nothing. Bernie tries to prove to the Democratic Party establishment that he is their friend, and they shouldn't fear him, but he's still not allowed into power. Let's see how it turns out this time. Could it be, Bernie will be treated with more condescension, but his agenda won't. Anyway, the same logic applies as in France and, in part, Germany: the left moves to the center, the center loses influence and support of society. On the contrary, radical mobilization is needed. The left should not to concede but to dictate the terms. In war – as in war. If democracy is indeed in danger, then even more tough and strong we need to be.
* * *
This interview first appeared on Rabkor on 2024-07-26.
Want to fix poor English? Email me a patch
More links:
"Free Boris Kagarlitsky" campaign website