Crisis of the "radical left" IN THE MAY 21 parliamentary elections, the right again got a comfortable majority. With 81 out of 150 seats, the Christian Democrats of the CDA and the "free enterprise" right of the VVD embarked on their second four-year period in government.
The fact that the government of millionaire Ruud Lubbers could continue after the elections was a shock to a lot of the left. But it was as much of a shock that the social-democratic PvdA grew primarily at the expense of the parties to its left. (1) ROBERT WENT tion, which had the backing of a lot of authoritative workers' leaders and of a fourth of the 120 delegates, was also unable to lay out a consistent overall alternative to the adjustments that were made.
Something more was needed than oppositional contributions to the debate and critical statements about the impossibility of pushing the VS's new line in the workplaces.
What was needed was an offensive proposal for a practical unity initiative that would build on the experience of the recent years' struggles and growing mobilization around unifying workers' demands - for an end to social cutbacks and a state incomes policy, freedom to bargain and the right to strike, a 35-hour workweek with no cut in pay, protection for wages against increases in the cost of living, and so on.
VS is facing a decisive crossroads. It has taken a big step in the wrong direction. But the final destination is not yet irrevocably determined.
The VS is a party with many roots and tentacles in Danish society. That also made the debates - despite the critical comments made here - concrete and meaningful. The VS also has, despite its organizational jumble, a positive, non-sectarian attitude to the other Danish left organizations.
Thus, the VS is strongly affected by broad social developments. If the contract negotiations that have now begun develop into a new mass protest against the government's anti-labor policy the VS, along with the entire left, will again be thoroughly shaken up. That would mix up the cards and then, we have to hope, the result the result would be a new deal at the next VS congress, whether it is a "special whether ts "scal"
one or not.
The three parties generally classed together as the "radical left" lost five of their eight seats in parliament. The Communist Party (CPN) disappeared from the lower house of parliament for the first time since the 1920s. It lost every one of its three seats. The Peace Socialist Party (PSP) lost two seats, retaining only one. And the Political Party of Radicals (PPR) held two seats but lost tens of thousands of votes. These losses by the radical left on May 21 are not an isolated event. In recent years, the CPN, the PSP and, to a lesser extent, the PPR have lost thousands of members. The PSP now has about 6,000 members, 4,000 less than three years ago.
Moreover, the ability of these parties to mobilize and their role in action have declined dramatically. In the course of a few years, the CPN lost the bulk of its intervention in the working class and the trade unions. All three parties have the greatest difficulty in mobilizing their members and their branches.
The results of the May parliamentary elections confirmed what had been clear for a good while. The radical left parties are in a grave crisis, one that is both organizational and a crisis of perspectives. And no end is in sight.
Next March, there are regional elections. And despite the government's brutal attacks on education, social services, social security, the health services, the elderly and public workers, it is expected that the radical left will suffer further losses and be unable to profit much, if at all, from the broad resistance to the government's policy.
There are various reasons for the crisis of the radical left. In recent years, the room for left-reformist answers, for militant reformist policies, has shrunk. This is because of the crisis, because there are less possibilities for getting results and due to the pull of the PvdA on the radical left voters.
After a few years of crisis management by a right-wing majority, the indignation against the government's policy has tended to polarize strongly around the biggest opposition force.
Even though there is little confidence that a PvdA government would change much, many people vote for the party in the hope of getting a bit of change. They choose to do that rather than cast a more principled vote, since the radical left has no chance of getting into government. Failure of national collaboration
This attitude is a product of the hard times. There is greater will for collaboration, for unity and for moving in a powerful way because it is very difficult to get results with actions and in struggle. The radical left has not managed to combine its forces. For years, closer collaboration has been discussed. • Locally, cooperation got off the ground in many cases, although for the most part this did not go much beyond the local elections (a common slate, a common fraction after the elec-
Richard Bastians, 'International Viewpoint' 1. See "How the right got back," by
11 LL
International Viewpoint 24 November 1986
tions). But nationwide it got absolutely nowhere.
cooperation one the national level n fact the discussions about themselves led to two splits. The
VCN (Verbond van Communisten in Nederland - League of Communists in the Netherlands) split off from the
CPN. In the parliamentary elections, this "new Communist Party" formed on the Moscow line got less than 5,000 votes.
The PSP also suffered a split.
The PSO (Partij voor Socialisme en
Ontwapening - Party for Socialism and Disarmament) was set up by
PSP members who thought that there was a threat that the party's principles would be too watered down.
The PSO blew apart within three months, and did not participate in the parliamentary elections.
In recent years, the CPN has rapidly lost its base in the working class and in the trade-union movement. (2)
The traditional industries, where the
CPN had support, have been hard hit by the economic crisis. In the new industries, such as petrochemicals and chemicals, the CPN has failed to gain any foothold. Moreover, the attention given within the party to trade union work has been steadily declining.
The PSP never had much of a base in the working class but rather drew its primary support from the youth radicalization.
The PPR - which came out of the
Catholic People's Party (KVP), one of the parties that set up the CDA in
1980 - has from its outset had some links with sections of the Catholic workers' movement. But these ties have always been fairly minimal.
All in all, this means that the radical left does not have much of a presence in the industrial workplaces or the trade-union movement and does not play much of a role there. There may well have been changes in the working class, but the radical has no answer for that.
In the CPN, PPR and PSP there are few workers to be found from the key sectors of the economy. That is even more true for the leaderships of these parties. The result of this is that the CPN, PPR and PSP are more and more vulnerable to the moods in the mass movements that are having to contend with enormous problems.
The possibilities for the radical left to build campaigns and actions in the working class that could throw the greatest weight onto the scales are minimal.
Altogether this led in recent years to the radical left being less and less able to play an important role in the struggle. That also has a lot to do with the discussion over the perspective that the radical left has to offer. Because actions are producing little 12 and because it is very hard to get the members of the CPN, PSP and PPR themselves to go into action, the attention given by these parties to struggle and mobilizations has sharply declined.
Together, the CPN, PSP and PPR still have around 20,000 members, but nothing is being done with this potential. No initiative has been taken for a campaign or action against the government's policy. Even when the radical left gets itself in gear, it pays no attention to building the movement in the working class or for strengthening the critical currents and groups within the trade- union movement.
Parliamentary work dominates the radical left
For the radical left, the gap between working in parliaments (national, regional, and local) and action has become very wide. Work in local councils and in the national parliament is more and more becoming the main activity of the radical left parties.
With regard to the political perspective it offers, the radical left is in no better a position. Social democracy has shifted to the right, and the radical left has followed. It is becoming more and more "realistic"
in its propositions, that is, more and more social democratic. The gap between the fine speeches about socialism and day-to-day practice is getting wider and wider and it is not in any way being bridged.
Strategically, these parties aim to be a sort of left-wing of social democracy outside the social democratic party. The PvdA is seen as an "ally" that "must be pushed further to the left" by the radical left. In practice, this often leads to adaptations to social democracy.
For example, at the end of September, the CPN leadership published its resolutions for the party congress to be held at the end of November. In them, it says that the CPN must orient more to the PvdA because in recent years the party has shifted to the left! So, the goal is no longer to build an alternative to social democracy. For the CPN, social democracy is an ally that can be pulled further to the left by good arguments and initiatives.
Since the 1960s and 1970s, the radical left has not been able to profit from a new wave of radicalization, because there has not yet been one. Where there have been some signs of a new radicalization, as in the peace movement for example, it has let the possibilities for making gains actually slip through its fingers because it has followed a policy of tailending the social democrats who predominate in the leadership of the peace movement.
The way the radical left looks at the moment raises the question of whether, with its present policy, composition (the 1960s generation mainly) and its nostalgia for the good old days of the 1960s and
1970s, it will be able to profit from new radicalizations among the youth and the working class.
The radical left's chance to play a role in the radicalization of new layers with new concerns and new characteristics seems, given the crisis of these organizations and the underlying causes of this crisis, to be very small.
The Socialistiese Arbeiderspartij
(SAP - Dutch section of the Fourth
International) is taking part where it can in the discussions of the radical left about where to go from here.
In Rotterdam, the Netherlands' second largest city, the SAP participates in the city-council fraction "Links
Rotterdam" ["Left Rotterdam"], which is made up of the CPN, the PPR the PSP and the SAP. In general in elections, the SAP is for combining forces with the radical left. Initiatives have also been taken in this direction in anticipation of the 1987 regional elections.
But unity with the radical left is not an end in itself. It has to serve to reinforce the struggle, to improve the position of the left wing in the workers' movement.
In substance, in discussions and initiatives, the SAP proposes the following guidelines:
* An orientation toward action, taking initiatives for struggle.
Building a base and campaigns in the working class, in the workplaces and in the trade-union movement.
* For class independence on all levels, in action and in parliamentary bodies, for socialist answers to problems.
The SAP's perspective in actions and discussions is to build a socialist alternative to the right and to social democracy.
The political approach of the SAP has produced results through has growing role for the party in action a and through a successful parliamentary campaign. And that has attracted attention in some quarters of the radical left.