Search results

Since the fall of communism far-left parties have begun a long process of change, which has transformed their position in the European political systems. Indeed, far-left parties are now important actors in most of the E.U. However, they present different characteristics than in the past. Communist parties have almost disappeared from parliamentary arenas, and, in many countries, new forms of far-left parties have emerged (i.e. social-populist and populist-socialist parties). The aim of this article is to describe the ideological framework of far-left parties in Europe. More specifically, it aims to examine both the demand-side and supply-side factors on which scholars focused in the attempt to explain the birth of these parties and the interactions that led to the development of specific forms of far-left parties. This article concludes with an analysis of three national cases, namely Spain, Portugal and Italy. The three countries belong to a similar context characterised by a profound economic crisis. However, despite many common features, in the three cases different forms of far-left parties have developed.

A commentary on the current crisis in & future of leftist politics, with particular reference to the decline of socialist states in the former Warsaw Pact & the USSR. The future of the Left in Western societies is discussed, emphasizing the contradictory nature of the Left's attempt to examine its own history & re-invent itself. The results of the attempt to devise a New Left thematically opposed to what the Left had historically represented are noted. Two future pathways of socialism are emphasized: the struggle for a social economy to supplant the economy of profit, & the democratic organization of social institutions. It is concluded that socialism persists because it continues to stand in contradiction to current processes of globally mobile capital. 33 References. Adapted from the source document.

The United States is home to a newer Left. Its political hopes repose not in a man able to muster less than 40 percent of the vote nationwide, but in the convincingly reelected president of the United States, Barack Obama. This newer Left is confident in itself, united both in its description of the problems the country faces and in how to go about addressing them. This Left is conscious of itself as a movement, and believes it is on the rise. It has already managed to reshape American politics, and its successes so far have hardly exhausted its promise. Policies are changing under its influence. And its opponents do not seem to have found an effective way to counter it politically. Adapted from the source document.

THE AUTHORS SUGGEST THAT THE PROBLEMS OF REPRESSING ANY MEMORY OF A RELATION TO SOCIALIST POLITICS IS NOT FOREIGN TO THE PRESENT SITUATION OF THE LEFT IN THE UNITED STATES. THEY ATTEMPT TO MAP CERTAIN OF THE WAYS OF THINKING ABOUT THE LEFT AND ITS HISTORY THAT CAN ULTIMATELY IMPEDE THE LEFT'S OWN PROGRESS IN DEVELOPING A THEORETICAL ORIENTATION ADEQUATE TO UNDERSTANDING ITS OWN PRESENT POLITICAL CHALLENGES AND PROSPECTS. SPECIFICALLY, THE AUTHORS SHOW HOW CERTAIN CALLS FOR PROGRAMMATIC UNITY ON THE LEFT CAN THEMSELVES OPERATE IN A MANNER THAT IS DISUNIFYING.

This article places the Labour Party's present post-Corbyn renewal in the context of previous periods of renewal in the party's recent history, associating with the new leadership of Keir Starmer a potential to rediscover the strategic project of the pluralist 'soft' left as an alternative to the 'programmatic' character of the hard left. After assessing the Corbynist hegemony established in the Labour Party between 2015 and 2019, it considers the current absence of any clearly defined set of principles or values underpinning 'Starmerism'. It then looks back to the Kinnockite ascendency in the 1980s, and the Blairite ascendency in the 1990s, as possible templates for how the party reassesses its positioning with reference to changing electoral, social and economic circumstances. A critique of Corbynism's left populism culminates in a consideration of the possible grounds for a new pluralist agenda attuned to the policy and electoral challenges Labour faces today.

Abstract
Are the limits of psychoanalytic politics the limits of the politics of psychoanalysis's founding father, Sigmund Freud? This article offers an answer to this question by discussing Freud's political affinities and then recounting a short history of the "Left Freudians," psychoanalytic thinkers who broke with Freud's old-style liberalism. Freud was neither a communist nor a political radical, but he was the figurehead of a tradition of inquiry and body of knowledge that lent itself to radical political thought and practice. How does psychoanalytic thinking justify this ideological break? Beginning with anarchist Otto Gross, this article traces a genealogy of radical psychoanalytic thinkers through the historical depoliticization and repression of political psychoanalysis, unearthing its more radical proponents and critiques and substantiating Gross's assertion that psychoanalysis is preparatory work for the revolution. At the end of the genealogy, the article turns to psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan's infamous and emblematic encounter with provocateurs from the radical student movement. Neither as domineering nor paternalistic as he seemed, Lacan's diagnosis of the revolutionaries as hysterical helots should be read as his own provocation for them to clarify their desire, because the purpose of political psychoanalysis is to understand the unconscious desire involved in political acts.

The politically effervescent Frene Ginwalla has had to relinquish the editorship of The Standard in Tanzania, sacked by President Nyerere. The revolutionary wing of the student body of the University of Dar es Salaam has had its political claws blunted. Militantly zealous expatriates in Dar es Salaam have declined in influence. And those who used Uganda's problems following the January 1971 coup as an additional excuse for radical slogans have now been forced to cool down following the official rapprochement between the Governments of Tanzania and Uganda.