Identity Politics: Vaccinations in the USA

Governor Chris Christie and Senator Rand Paul. Presidential material?

Over the last few days I’ve been watching the strange debate over vaccinations unfold in the USA. Senator Rand Paul, libertarian and potential Republican Presidential nominee, fired the opening shots by claiming that vaccinations should be voluntary and to make them otherwise is an infringement of the parents’ freedom of choice. This stance is in fact nothing new for Senator Paul who has previously stated his belief – widely discredited by the medical profession – that vaccinations can cause mental disability. Perhaps he is talking from personal experience.

Not to be outdone however is his rival for the Republican nomination, Governor Chris Christie, who was confronted during his bizarre PR trip to London over his comments that there should be “some measure of choice” in whether children are vaccinated against measles and other contagious diseases.

For many of us in Europe it seems incredible that individuals holding such discredited and, some would say, uninformed views would get anywhere near the top of the political tree. (Not that European politicians are necessarily any more sensible, they just hide it better!) It only reinforces the belief that political power is bought rather than earned. However, there are two interesting factors at play in a situation like this. First is the seemingly unbreakable bond between America’s citizens and its Constitution. The Constitution has a mystical, almost religious quality in American life which allows it to maintain a dominant position over any ruling government. The belief and respect for this document cannot be understated and it was interesting to hear that Edward Snowden chose to become the world’s most high-profile whistleblower out of a desire to defend the Constitution. It is revered for its guarantees of individual liberty and the limits it puts on government power and is thus frequently cited by libertarians to support a freedom of choice and action. It is a document that has influenced not only national democracy but has also shaped what it means to be American. Any political reference to individual freedom is thus an appeal to both the Constitution and the heart of American identity.

Where is Portugal’s radical left?

Why has Portugal’s leftwing failed to garner the popular support of its counterparts in Greece and Spain?

It has been a tumultuous couple of weeks in European politics. From a socialist perspective these are encouraging times and the victory of Syriza in Greece, along with the quarter of a million people marching for change with Podemos in Spain, have shown that there is a real possibility of political change on the horizon. But as always in politics things are far from certain and these popular leftwing movements need to defend themselves from attacks from both inside and outside their own countries. It is already clear that the leaders of these parties recognise the importance of solidarity and support for each other, with Pablo Iglesias’ pre-election appearance in Athens being a notable example. But it is not evident yet how pan-European this revival of the radical left is. At some point in the future I plan to write down a few thoughts on why radical (or in some cases revolutionary) spirit can catch on in one country but not another. In other words, what are the forces containing or spreading this political awakening of the people? But in the meantime, I thought I’d take a quick look at Spain’s neighbour on the Iberian Peninsula to consider why the left has failed to capture the public imagination in Portugal in the same way that Podemos has in Spain.

Why are we not talking about German reform as well as Greek?

As the new Greek Finance Minister, Yanis Varoufakis, travels through Europe to set the ball rolling on Greek debt negotiations, now seems like a good time to remind ourselves that there are more problems within the Eurozone than southern European debt. One of the things that stands out from reading the popular media and internet discussions is that debt reduction is a polarising issue. On the one hand are those who recognise the madness in continuing austerity policies and acknowledge that flexibility on publicly held debt is a pre-requisite for recovery. On the other are those who claim that it is morally and financially unacceptable that hard-working northern Europeans should have to continually bail out southern Europeans from a mess that was of their own making.

My aim here is not to rehash the many, many reasons why this type of austerity policies has been proven to be politically, economically and morally bankrupt. Instead, with Varoufakis in Europe, I’m going to bring up Germany’s colossal current account surplus and ask why Germany feels able to call for structural change in Greece when it refuses to address the imbalances in its own economy.

Syriza and the Propaganda War

Predictably, after last week’s Greek election it has not taken long for the aggressive war of words to begin in the rightwing media’s attempts try to undermine Syriza. Today’s Economist magazine sets its stall out in no uncertain terms with this pearl of wisdom:

“This newspaper’s solution: get Mr Tsipras to junk his crazy socialism and to stick to structural reforms in exchange for debt forgiveness…A very logical dream until you remember that Mr Tsipras probably is a crazy left-winger.”

What, I wonder, is so crazy about Syriza trying to implement the policies  that brought them to power? Clearly the Economist thinks that it is ridiculous that the Greek people should be allowed to have a say in their own destiny. And the type of language used adds nothing to the discussion and only serves to belittle anyone who thinks that there may be an alternative vision of European politics. Maybe its time to face the fact that if Greece were to ultimately leave the Eurozone, NOBODY knows for certain what the medium-term political and socioeconomic outcome would be. We can be sure of some of the short(er)-term economic impacts such as:

The Inner Class Divide (Part 3)

To round things off after Part 2 yesterday, here is the third and final part of this essay looking at our internal class conflict and its implications for radical left-wing political alternatives in Europe and beyond…

The Inner Class Divide

That we as individuals are subject to various stimuli contributing to development is nothing new. Much has been written on child development and much of this can extend also into adult life in terms of continuous learning and development. Where things have changed in recent years is in the increased intensity and aggression of stimuli relating to late stage capitalism. On the one hand we possess a social brain, allowing us to feel empathy and make emotional connections, and a character forged through a myriad of social connections and interactions. Many of us experience a fundamental need to share our lives with friends, family and community. But on the other hand, we are bombarded with advertising signals and media messages telling us that consumption is the ultimate goal and that this must be driven by aggressive, competitive activity in the market place. Much of what we experience through advertising relates to consumption or the adoption of an idealised version of self to which we should aspire. We are told that that we can have everything as long as we consume. In a ‘post-religious’ world it is salvation through consumption. Our participation in society can be bought instead of fostered through genuine social interaction.

But we are the recipients of contradictory messages. Identity formation through the solitary pursuit of commodities in order to satisfy a conditioned super ego is at odds with our more basic needs as social animals. Capitalism relies on competition whereas our early development engenders the value of cooperation. The (cultural) super ego tells us that to succeed at life we need to compete in the market place, earn money as efficiently as possible, and construct our idealised identities. But our innate characteristics and our basic human needs show us the importance of people over the market. This is class warfare in every sense, with the mind being the battleground. Many individuals therefore experience a subconscious, inner class tension, with a consuming, competitive, aspirational self striving to keep up in the market, and a social self yearning for cooperation and interaction. This ideological battle is internalised and fought daily in a way that has far greater implications than the debate in the political arena.

Can Podemos Win in Spain? (an article from the Nation)

This Saturday thousands of supporters of Spain’s Podemos party will meet in Madrid to participate in a ‘March of Change’. I will be joining them and I will try to share some thoughts here  afterwards on the experience and the mood among the people.

In the meantime, although I don’t intend to do much reposting of other people’s work on this blog, I thought it would be interesting to share the article below. There clearly is a discussion emerging about whether Podemos is beginning to compromise on some of its original principles. However, the success that they have had in creating the citizen ‘circles’ and offering genuine citizen participation in shaping the political debate means that this party will live or die by its accountability in front of the people. If this is really a new era of politics in Spain then the working class and the electorate will hold them to their word. How much of this is possible still remains to be seen but it will be very interesting to see on Saturday how things are shaping up.

The Inner Class Divide (Part 1)

Like many people I am fascinated by the political changes taking place across southern Europe. Syriza’s victory in Greece has taken us into unchartered political waters and it remains to be seen what the impact of this will be in Greece, Europe and beyond. In thinking about this I have found myself wondering what it is we are really witnessing here – does the Greek election signal a change in the political landscape and a long-term shift to the left or is this just a temporary backlash against corruption and austerity which may be swept away within a matter of months? Is this movement backed by a change in mindset of the electorate or are the people just voting for the most tangible change due to widespread desperation?

This train of thought motivated to write an article on the psychological issues around these emerging left-wing political movements. Although I have already submitted this for publication elsewhere I would like to share it here also, with any feedback being welcomed! Due to its length I’ve decided to post this in several sections over the next few days so today I start with the first two sections…

The Inner Class Divide

Language and the Left

One of the things I’ll be pondering on this site will be resurgence of the political Left across Europe. With the demise of the traditional political ideology of the Labour party, I’ve found myself wondering whether Left Unity can tap into the strong anti-austerity sentiments in the UK and finally offer voters the chance of socially driven change. With this in mind I will start this blog off with an article that I originally wrote for the Left Unity website …

Language and the Left

“When I give food to the poor they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food they call me a Communist.”
Helder Câmara, former Archbishop of Olinda and Recife, Brazil

In today’s world of 24 hour media and internet access we are bombarded with information. Little of this is neutral in terms of value judgements. A war is therefore constantly waged in order to win our support or our patronage for products and ideas. Politics has become increasingly depoliticised and commoditised. With the arrival of Tony Blair’s ‘third way’ into British politics, the centre ground underwent a dramatic shift to the right with the result that the electorate finds it hard to distinguish between candidates from the leading parties. When Francis Fukuyama pronounced the ‘end of history’ at the close of the cold war, he was implying the death of political choice as much as the end of an ideological war.