"The Truth is in the Middle" - The Liberal Ideal in an Era of Nationalism

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > "The Truth is in the Middle" - The Liberal Ideal in an Era of Nationalism

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

What caused the world to abandon Keynes and capitalism with a robust safety net? I keep hearing about stagflation and oil crises as the prods that rose neoliberalism out of the muck, but were those crises inevitable?

This is a really naive question, but was postwar capitalism always doomed to collapse, with Milton Friedman and his pack of ghouls simply giving the system a few more years by crushing its victims to feed the top? Or could we still be living in a less racist 1963 with a big middle class and lots of work for all of the welfare state hadn't been disassembled?

I know that's a dumb question, but I'm inarticulate.

# ¿ Jan 20, 2017 17:53

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 9, 2024 21:56

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

White Rock posted:

There are two more major reasons social democracy failed.

1. It only works when labor is actually in high demand, as workers strikes, lockouts are a real threat and labor is not easily replaceable. There is a real benefit to capitalists to cooperate. With a globalized economy workers from all over the world can take your place if your too much of a hassle, or they can just move production aboard. Secondly, demand for labor in genera has steadily been decreasing due to productivity gains. Combine this with new labor laws that makes the workforce more "flexible" (ie fireable) and any strike can essentially be met with a giant middle finger and little to no concessions.

2. Most social democratic parties were reformist socialists, split of from their revolutionary comrades. Their end goal was communism, but through democracy, which their many of their party programs stated. But both due to having to win elections this goal was pushed back and back and instead making smaller, more popular progressive reforms that still moved society towards the goals of their ideology. Finally the nail in the coffin was the fall of the USSR which meant that , at least in one aspect, communism had failed. End of History and all that, no more ideologies necessary other than global capitalism and representative democracy. Thus leading to parties striking their goals in of socialism (see Blairs edit in 1995) and implementing the lovely piss weak third way socialism we have today.

This is fascinating. Thank you and others who replied. Are there any good reads covering this ground--books or scholars somebody could pick up for more detail?

# ¿ Jan 20, 2017 21:36

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Typo posted:

The Black Panthers appeared after the civil rights act was passed, MLK was killed only 2 years after its founding

I never bought the idea that radical leftists make the moderate left more palpable to the electorate, at least in America it's quite the opposite. Students demonstrating and putting up pictures of Lenin and screaming about how America is evil in their protests is what brought the reaction by the silent majority against the center-left 1968-1992. Even labor unions were alienated by the far left of the 1960s when they actually existed in the US. When faced with the fear of far left violence the electorate flees to the right for protection, not to elect the center-left to appease them.

My mother inevitably slips into calling protests "riots" by like the third sentence and wept when I told her that I participate in peace marches because "the people who do those things are trouble-makers and they don't care who they kill."

She self-identifies as a moderate.

# ¿ Jan 21, 2017 01:43

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Tiny Brontosaurus posted:

Tamping down my here because it's not like she's unusual. Have you had any success changing her mind on anything political?

Never. She believes that she's reasonable because when she was in her 20s there were some race riots in her town and she was open to listening to Those People explaining why they did it, but still believes that the only acceptable possibility for Those People resolving their problems is to sit down at a table with "the other side" and compromise. But they have to listen too and not just make demands, you see.

To her this is a moderate position because apparently my father and her parents believed that the national guard should have blown up the rioting neighborhoods.

Segregation is a hell of a thing. I'm convinced it ruined all the boomers by making them all crazy. But I can't even convince my mom to stop watching Dr. Oz, and she's a loving nurse.

Also Those People are just using me to get legitimately but only care about getting what they want.

# ¿ Jan 21, 2017 01:58

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Phyzzle posted:

An interesting new term is "politiphobia". It seems to sum up so, so many people I know IRL.

Chapo Trap House took a guy with this perspective to the woodshed a few months ago--I forget his name, but basically an idiot who writes opinion pieces and thinks that there is a united American People who know what they want and evil politicians simply refuse to do it because they're the ones with the agenda.

# ¿ Jan 27, 2017 16:29

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > "The Truth is in the Middle" - The Liberal Ideal in an Era of Nationalism