Part of the intellectual and political left has changed location. The summarized and simplified agenda in the term ‘woke’ constitutes an abrupt break with the past of universalist illustration.
This is the argument of Mark Lilla in the United States of America, Caroline Forest in France, Massimo Cacciari in Italy, Félix Ovejero in Spain and other prominent intellectuals who, located on the left, have made fierce criticisms of the degeneration of their political space. Left-wing criticisms of the left, made from the left. In form and content, nothing similar is known in Portugal.
Ovejero, for example, identifies a reactionary drift on the left – it is, in fact, the title of a book he published in 2018. He recalls that democratic socialism was based on the defense of science against religious dogmas, on the use of reason against sentimentalism, on advocating general and abstract laws against the privileges of tradition. Freedom overcame resentment, pride and ideas of tribal uniqueness, natural drives in the human species.
However, in recent decades, equality has been replaced by the demand for specific identities, be they gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation or nationality. The emancipatory project was fragmented, replacing class solidarity with the defense of micro collectives. The republic, where everyone was free and equal before the law, ended in an infinite number of taifas.
In the name of diversity, criticism of oppressive practices existing in certain cultures and certain regimes was abandoned. Once universal, human rights and feminism became relative, dependent on specific cultural and political contexts.
Take the recent Nobel Peace Prize winner: for the radical and extreme left, before being a woman, Maria Corina Machado would be a ‘fascist’. Machado is disqualified and Nicolás Maduro is legitimized, as, it is inferred, he only protects Venezuela from ‘fascism’.
Less discussed, but much more important, is the way in which the progressive left reduced democracy to an exercise in plebiscitary agitation, carried out outside the institutions, an error that is now working against it.
In 2017 and in the following years, intellectuals and politicians in the Iberian Peninsula fought for the “right to decide” of the Catalans, as the simple popular will,
even if cyclical, it was enough to derogate from the Constitution, compromise the separation of powers and attack the independence of the Judiciary.
The fact that the Catalan separatist campaign was based on historical misrepresentations, ethnic hatred, sentimentalism and fallacies similar in every way to those used by Trump or Brexit was of little interest – in fact, the expression “right to decide” is, in itself, a sophistry.
The same logic applied to dissatisfaction with the austerity implemented in several Western European countries. The resentment of the populations and the indignation in the streets were, for the radical left, enough impetus to transform countries and reinvent political communities. Emotions were legitimate, they had deep causes, which overrode enlightened reason.
Slogans and burning garbage containers were worth more than the institutional forms and procedures of democracy. Here is the biggest fallacy: if the rules – written and unwritten – do not fit the popular epic, then the rules are contrary to democracy. Borrowing Fernando Savater’s irony, the people – simply because they are so – do not need to submit to laws, nor to numerical controls, nor even to alcohol tests.
Part of European social democracy, feeling persecuted by the left, adopted this discourse and, where it governed, translated it into public policies. The axiom was simple: the people are sovereign and nothing overrides them.
Now, these same people are demonstrating today at the polls in favor of populist radical right parties. The left was left without a north. Memory is short, which works in favor of those who are lost. Even so, the supreme will of the people now justifies nuances, limitations and even illegalizations.
By fearing crime and feeling insecure, the people went from sovereign to irresponsible. By wanting limits on immigration, the people are now cave dwellers. By shrugging their shoulders at the festive flotilla to Gaza, the people became complicit in barbarism. The popular will, which was previously glorified, must finally be protected, as it is urgent to protect voters from perceptions and opportunists. Wanting is no longer power.
More interesting is seeing the center-left accusing the center-right of giving in to radical right parties to hold onto votes and guarantee access to power. All things considered, what was the Portuguese ‘contraption’ and what is the Spanish ‘Frankenstein’ government?
The innovations of the populist left set useful precedents for right-wing populism. First of all because, as Mark Lilla wrote, presenting an issue in terms of identity encourages opponents to do the same.
At the time of writing, the Portuguese are still voting. Whatever the result, it is interesting to note how several left-wing mayors have distanced themselves from the precedents and innovations created by their political space in recent years – the socialist Ricardo Leão, in Loures, is the best-known example. Proximity to voters makes them realize what often escapes party elites. We will see if the results help to extend understanding.
Politologist. Write without applying the new Orthographic Agreement.