Great stuff. I wish that most voters on any point of the political spectrum, especially younger voters, had the patience and attention span to read this.
The working class long ago discovered that the objectives of social democracy, fairness in a merit based system that preserves the middle class and freedom, has not disappeared. It's home is the Republican Party under Donald Trump. If the Democrat Party is the party of the Brahmin Left...let them go form their own country and watch it collapse like academia is.
I think you miss one important point: the goals of Social Democracy were largely met. All rich countries have reasonably comprehensive welfare states. In the US, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are not only alive and well, but they've grown more generous over time. Non-discrimination was codified in law.
Economically, in some countries, and in some states in the US, Social Democracy objectives have been over-achieved. Welfare benefits have become generous enough that non-employment is a viable alternative to working-class employment for some. Employment security has been formalized in methods that make employment unattractive to employers. In France and Italy, it is nearly impossible for employers to fire workers unless they commit serious misconduct, or the survival of the company is in jeopardy. In California, there is an entire legal industry dedicated to suing employers over violations of the state's Byzantine employment regulations - to take one example, an employee who begs to work through a mandated lunch break can sue an employer who consents for massive damages and penalties. This over-achievement has reduced prosperity and swallowed all government spending capacity, at the expense of new infrastructure projects, maintenance of public works, and national defense, let alone any significant new social initiatives.
Politically, I think you're right that Social Democrats lost influence within the Left. Another way to say this is that the Left lost confidence in Social Democracy in favor of performative virtue-signaling. The issues you identified are real and important, but I think you miss another important one: Left parties in the US and especially in Europe have supported giving more and more power, with less and less democratic accountability, to technocratic and especially transnational groups that are deeply committed to the unpopular policies you identified. This leads the Democratic Party in the US, and left-oriented parties in many other western countries, to support agendas that are very unpopular with clear majorities of voters. The Democrats remain politically viable because Republicans, given the chance, have shown themselves to be largely uninterested in good government, and incompetent in execution.
I generally agree, however I don’t think it’s correct to state that the Republicans in general, as opposed to Trump specifically, are uninterested in good government. The mass migration we’ve been seeing from blue states to red states is almost entirely due to people fleeing bad government for good government at the state level.
1) Social Democratic policies did not create the economic growth of the 1947-73 period. More accurately, they redistributed the gains from that growth in popular ways.
2) The neoliberalism of the 1980s and 1990s was much less successful in rolling back Social Democratic policies that you claim: government spending on social programs and regulations are both significantly higher today than in 1980.
Though I generally agree with this analysis I also tend to be a bit more optimistic than RT. When a party wanders into mediocrity like the Dems have in the last 20 years and the country is in crisis there is an opportunity for an individual to emerge with the courage and intellect to reset the narrative. Think FDR or Teddy Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton for that matter. Maga is clearly not the path forward. Nor is the DSA. There is an opportunity here.
I, too, am an optimist. But I fear that such a person is not yet in a position to take the reins. We may have more weak/corrupt/mislead leaders before such a person steps up. But I am also optimistic that such a person might not be evident initially.
Yes, and to fill that role we should be considering people with considerable experience in high level positions in the armed forces, such as Dwight Eisenhower then or James Stavridis now, but not Pete Hegseth.
It is worth noting that Samuel Gompers, generally considered the founder of the American labor movement was adamant that the focus should be on the workplace-both wages and protection from arbitrary actions by management-and not on the larger social issues. This is why we have the Labor Day holiday rather than working class celebration on May Day, like in Europe. This has changed in recent years beginning with the advent of the CIO and accelerating with the takeover of the labor movement by the public sector unions. Of course, the public sector unions are hypocritical on this. Just try threatening their rice bowl in the interest of some social justice initiative they claim to support. The teachers' unions are probably the worst.
I came out of South-Central LA so voting Gop has never occurred to me and I still won't. But I finally abandoned the Democratic has a bad deal over Immigration. I graduated high school diploma and all with a fourth-grade reading level... Not too much hope out there for that I suppose. But I managed to claw myself into an apprenticeship in a construction Union. Which 2 years later died with take a 50% cut in pay or we replace you with Illegals. We didn't they did... that Union no longer exists. While the Democratic Party proclaimed (Loudly) Immigrants don't take American Jobs. Really?
And not once but twice I have had to train my own H1B replacements when the Companies replaced the whole section with outside Contractors. Doing Jobs Americans wouldn't do? Jobs Americans can't fill? Really? I got 2 weeks' pay and an Immigrant got my job. But according to the Democratic Party they're all here to pick fruit... and do jobs Americans "Won't Do" Really? Or H1B's are all the best & brightest and don't take American jobs. I won't even mention the silly illusion that we can import millions without causing rents to go up.
I will say has a child of South-Central LA that yelling Racist at anybody & everybody you disagree with doesn't help. And I will say the DEI presentation at my work at the time made things worse, much worse. Starting the presentation with all Whites are inherently Racist and should shut up & listen didn't really help things. Caused troubles we didn't have before? Yes. Help not really.
On the TG thing? Personally, I don't care. But the left spends a lot of time proclaiming that teens who commit Armed Robbery & Murder have undeveloped brains and aren't aware the consequences of their actions... But kids younger, much younger are aware of the consequences of gender reassignment? Anybody see a contradiction in terms there?
In the end a plague on both sides, not that it matters Voting hasn't accomplished anything in fifty or more years... And that don't look like to change.
Excellent overview. I would add another factor that has led to the demise of social Democrats (which I think a a better term than "social democracy"). The Brahmin Left has rejected the social Democrat's belief in the power of government to smooth the rough edges of capitalism in favor of broad, centralized government power over the economy and the social welfare state. We've seen this transformation before - for example Harold Wilson's labor policies in the 1960s and mid 1970s - which were, subsequently, roundly rejected by British voters. The opportunity for the Republican party is to advance a political philosophy centered around individual rights and prosperity (vs "affordability"). A philosophy that believes in capitalism and free markets, but also the need and wisdom of targeted government regulation. That believes in equal opportunity and merit, but also believes government can play an important role in providing safety nets for the needy and elderly. That advances policies directed at ensuring safe and well-run communities and promotes ecomonic policies that work with private entities to invigorate commerce and industry. These were all features of the successful policies formerly advanced by social Democrats. I agree with Ruy that the Braham Left will not soon relinquish power within the Democratic party. They control the institutions and the finances. So Ruy and like Democrats have two choices: to continue to push the rock uphill, or to migrate to the Republican party and become a strong voice for policies supported by the working class.
The Soc Dem economic model, like, Soc Dem electoral and governing strength, may have faded, but Soc Dem extensions of social wage and safety net policies remain both in once strongly Social Democratic states and in the many place where they were imitated.
You are absolutely correct about what has happened. What I would like to know is what caused so many supposedly educated people to ignore the successes of the mid-20th century and instead fall for such a dystopian view of America’s past and Future.
Low Information voters will decide the election. The information they have available to them is on a sign at their local gas station. Many of those voters probably won’t even know the names of either candidate, just that they’re voting against the party that’s currently in power, because of inflation.
Great stuff. I wish that most voters on any point of the political spectrum, especially younger voters, had the patience and attention span to read this.
The working class long ago discovered that the objectives of social democracy, fairness in a merit based system that preserves the middle class and freedom, has not disappeared. It's home is the Republican Party under Donald Trump. If the Democrat Party is the party of the Brahmin Left...let them go form their own country and watch it collapse like academia is.
Yes, the MAGA GOP had replaced Democratic quasi-Social Democracy what might
have been called. Social Demagoguery, but the interloper no longer can put two clear or popular sentences together..
TDS is a feature of the Brahmin Left.
I think you miss one important point: the goals of Social Democracy were largely met. All rich countries have reasonably comprehensive welfare states. In the US, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are not only alive and well, but they've grown more generous over time. Non-discrimination was codified in law.
Economically, in some countries, and in some states in the US, Social Democracy objectives have been over-achieved. Welfare benefits have become generous enough that non-employment is a viable alternative to working-class employment for some. Employment security has been formalized in methods that make employment unattractive to employers. In France and Italy, it is nearly impossible for employers to fire workers unless they commit serious misconduct, or the survival of the company is in jeopardy. In California, there is an entire legal industry dedicated to suing employers over violations of the state's Byzantine employment regulations - to take one example, an employee who begs to work through a mandated lunch break can sue an employer who consents for massive damages and penalties. This over-achievement has reduced prosperity and swallowed all government spending capacity, at the expense of new infrastructure projects, maintenance of public works, and national defense, let alone any significant new social initiatives.
Politically, I think you're right that Social Democrats lost influence within the Left. Another way to say this is that the Left lost confidence in Social Democracy in favor of performative virtue-signaling. The issues you identified are real and important, but I think you miss another important one: Left parties in the US and especially in Europe have supported giving more and more power, with less and less democratic accountability, to technocratic and especially transnational groups that are deeply committed to the unpopular policies you identified. This leads the Democratic Party in the US, and left-oriented parties in many other western countries, to support agendas that are very unpopular with clear majorities of voters. The Democrats remain politically viable because Republicans, given the chance, have shown themselves to be largely uninterested in good government, and incompetent in execution.
I generally agree, however I don’t think it’s correct to state that the Republicans in general, as opposed to Trump specifically, are uninterested in good government. The mass migration we’ve been seeing from blue states to red states is almost entirely due to people fleeing bad government for good government at the state level.
An outstanding essay!
I would only quibble with a few key points:
1) Social Democratic policies did not create the economic growth of the 1947-73 period. More accurately, they redistributed the gains from that growth in popular ways.
https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/upward-mobility-in-the-usa-1947-1965
2) The neoliberalism of the 1980s and 1990s was much less successful in rolling back Social Democratic policies that you claim: government spending on social programs and regulations are both significantly higher today than in 1980.
But I strongly agree with all the rest.
P.S.
Ruy,
Glad that you found a new home!
Though I generally agree with this analysis I also tend to be a bit more optimistic than RT. When a party wanders into mediocrity like the Dems have in the last 20 years and the country is in crisis there is an opportunity for an individual to emerge with the courage and intellect to reset the narrative. Think FDR or Teddy Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton for that matter. Maga is clearly not the path forward. Nor is the DSA. There is an opportunity here.
I would argue that we have that person in the White House.
I, too, am an optimist. But I fear that such a person is not yet in a position to take the reins. We may have more weak/corrupt/mislead leaders before such a person steps up. But I am also optimistic that such a person might not be evident initially.
Yes, and to fill that role we should be considering people with considerable experience in high level positions in the armed forces, such as Dwight Eisenhower then or James Stavridis now, but not Pete Hegseth.
I don't think we get to pick these people. I think they just emerge from the void. But no it won't be Pete!
It is worth noting that Samuel Gompers, generally considered the founder of the American labor movement was adamant that the focus should be on the workplace-both wages and protection from arbitrary actions by management-and not on the larger social issues. This is why we have the Labor Day holiday rather than working class celebration on May Day, like in Europe. This has changed in recent years beginning with the advent of the CIO and accelerating with the takeover of the labor movement by the public sector unions. Of course, the public sector unions are hypocritical on this. Just try threatening their rice bowl in the interest of some social justice initiative they claim to support. The teachers' unions are probably the worst.
I came out of South-Central LA so voting Gop has never occurred to me and I still won't. But I finally abandoned the Democratic has a bad deal over Immigration. I graduated high school diploma and all with a fourth-grade reading level... Not too much hope out there for that I suppose. But I managed to claw myself into an apprenticeship in a construction Union. Which 2 years later died with take a 50% cut in pay or we replace you with Illegals. We didn't they did... that Union no longer exists. While the Democratic Party proclaimed (Loudly) Immigrants don't take American Jobs. Really?
And not once but twice I have had to train my own H1B replacements when the Companies replaced the whole section with outside Contractors. Doing Jobs Americans wouldn't do? Jobs Americans can't fill? Really? I got 2 weeks' pay and an Immigrant got my job. But according to the Democratic Party they're all here to pick fruit... and do jobs Americans "Won't Do" Really? Or H1B's are all the best & brightest and don't take American jobs. I won't even mention the silly illusion that we can import millions without causing rents to go up.
I will say has a child of South-Central LA that yelling Racist at anybody & everybody you disagree with doesn't help. And I will say the DEI presentation at my work at the time made things worse, much worse. Starting the presentation with all Whites are inherently Racist and should shut up & listen didn't really help things. Caused troubles we didn't have before? Yes. Help not really.
On the TG thing? Personally, I don't care. But the left spends a lot of time proclaiming that teens who commit Armed Robbery & Murder have undeveloped brains and aren't aware the consequences of their actions... But kids younger, much younger are aware of the consequences of gender reassignment? Anybody see a contradiction in terms there?
In the end a plague on both sides, not that it matters Voting hasn't accomplished anything in fifty or more years... And that don't look like to change.
Excellent overview. I would add another factor that has led to the demise of social Democrats (which I think a a better term than "social democracy"). The Brahmin Left has rejected the social Democrat's belief in the power of government to smooth the rough edges of capitalism in favor of broad, centralized government power over the economy and the social welfare state. We've seen this transformation before - for example Harold Wilson's labor policies in the 1960s and mid 1970s - which were, subsequently, roundly rejected by British voters. The opportunity for the Republican party is to advance a political philosophy centered around individual rights and prosperity (vs "affordability"). A philosophy that believes in capitalism and free markets, but also the need and wisdom of targeted government regulation. That believes in equal opportunity and merit, but also believes government can play an important role in providing safety nets for the needy and elderly. That advances policies directed at ensuring safe and well-run communities and promotes ecomonic policies that work with private entities to invigorate commerce and industry. These were all features of the successful policies formerly advanced by social Democrats. I agree with Ruy that the Braham Left will not soon relinquish power within the Democratic party. They control the institutions and the finances. So Ruy and like Democrats have two choices: to continue to push the rock uphill, or to migrate to the Republican party and become a strong voice for policies supported by the working class.
But GOP has long been in the hands of a Brahmin Right, though never before under the thumb of such a corrupt one.
The Soc Dem economic model, like, Soc Dem electoral and governing strength, may have faded, but Soc Dem extensions of social wage and safety net policies remain both in once strongly Social Democratic states and in the many place where they were imitated.
You are absolutely correct about what has happened. What I would like to know is what caused so many supposedly educated people to ignore the successes of the mid-20th century and instead fall for such a dystopian view of America’s past and Future.
Low Information voters will decide the election. The information they have available to them is on a sign at their local gas station. Many of those voters probably won’t even know the names of either candidate, just that they’re voting against the party that’s currently in power, because of inflation.