Socialist Parties in Western Europe and the US - Report Example

Why have socialist parties been successful in Western Europe Compared to the United s? Introduction: It is considered that people’s inclination toward a particular political philosophy or their appreciation of an ideology relies to a great extent over their respective or mutual socio-cultural and socio-political approach, which has been identified by Michael Newman as choosing the best form of governance by the human nature (Newman, 2005). The comparatively greater success of the socialist parties (believers of socialism) in Western Europe, compared to the rate of success in the United States, primarily, it can be said that root cause of the variation remains within the approach of people in these two domains. Additionally, the basis of such difference was formed due to predominating socio-cultural and socio-political approaches of these two regions. Socialism, as a political philosophy, is interpreted in three ways: first, it aims at ending the inequalities resulted out of wealth and power because socialism suggests that social hierarchy and deprivation of people belonging to different classes of the society happen due to unequal distribution of power and wealth; second, socialism wishes to develop “an alternative egalitarian system based on the values of solidarity and cooperation” (Newman, 2005, p. 3), where there would be no legal or social hierarchy and social communities also will be provided with the opportunity for self-governance in order to provide best possible form of existence for their inhabitants; finally, the advocates of socialism are of opinion that it is possible to create the situation of mutual cooperation among common people by creating an appeal to their consciousness and generate their benevolent support for each other (Newman, 2005). Socialism: A Basic Idea The anthropological and ethnographic studies have shown that oppression from ruling classes and elite political systems play a major role in the development of socialism as a major political ideology. While one of the major aims of humanistic politics is to assure a better existence to common people, socialism, ideally widens the path with its essence, namely, creating a situation of human cooperation, equal distribution of power and wealth, and giving adequate opportunity to common people to exercise their power in such a way so that it helps in creation of a self-governed ruling system (Hann, 2004). Thus, since 19th century onwards, after the Industrial Revolution, while Capitalism emerged as a powerful device in the hands of ruling class, in order to assert their demand for better existence, people from various parts of the society opted for socialism and mass revolution in the Soviet Russia is an important example that to which extent socialism can protest against political and economic tyranny over common people. However, despite such strong humanist approach and ideological support, the decline from supporting socialism, especially in the post Second World War era has stated due to several reasons: first, lack of commitment on part of the socialist leaders to fulfill their promises and second, rise of capitalism as a dominant form to control the international political system (Hann,2004). In the Eastern and Western Europe, since later half of the 80s, acceptance of socialism and support for socialist parties altered drastically. Apart from the fact that Eastern Europeans have a conscious tendency to observe themselves differently from their Western counterparts, they express an attitude to enjoy the “‘freedom of living outside the system in which they lived’” while Westerners tend to “‘accept things, and their lives, as they are’” (Hann, 2004, p. 13). While this socio-political outlook of the Western Europeans act as a major factor behind comparatively higher success of socialist parties in this region, in case of the United States, the reason for failure can be found in political outlook of the civilians, fused with the fact that in the post Second War time, when the United States emerged as a superpower in the global context, especially with the help of its capitalist aggression, simultaneously application of the principles of socialism was widely failing across the globe. Socialism in Western Europe: The primary basis of socialism was established in Europe and most of the socialist parties have elaborated the principles of social democracy in the International context, have evolved from Europe (May, 1978, p. 412). While the issue of European integration has remained one of the major issues of concern, the socialist parties have played an important role in this situation. Socialist parties of the Western Europe have remained successful in this arena, as they, besides enhancing the scope for Europeanism, also attempted to convey the principles of socialism in international platform: “At the center of the theme of socialist Europeanism … lies the definition of the relationship between socialist Europeanism and socialist internationalism: a theme that dominates the whole of European socialist culture” (Nolfo, 1993, p. 90). While attacks against socialism in Western Europe were taking a stronger form and it was widely argued that encouraging socialism more can lead to development of Fascism, Andrea Caffi, one of the leading figures of anti-Fascist movement opined that it would be more important to unify Europe than only to blame Fascism for leading the continent to war: “What brings Europe to war is not Fascism, but the structure of Europe, divided into sovereign States” (Cited in Nolfo, 1993, p. 91). In the post Second World War situation, the aspect of European unification was realized in a stronger way and more importantly, to spread the message throughout the world for the sake of preventing further destructions that widely affected Europe as well as the entire world: “In the post-World War II decades, the claim that socialism was the ideology of progress was so strong that it influenced even parties in the direct competition” (Lemke, and Marks, 1992, p. 10). In the United Kingdom during 50s and 60s, socialist prescriptions in case of “economic planning and universal welfare rights” were shared by conflicting leaders (Lemke, and Marks, 1992, p. 10). The contemporary West Germany governance also adopted socialist suggestions to develop their social market economy. Societies like, France, Ireland and Sweden agreed that socialist principles are required for the development of welfare state, economic development and change capitalist social structure to socialist ways (Lemke, and Marks, 1992, p. 10). Clearly, while socialism was one of the predominant forms both for the purpose of socio-economic development in the Western Europe and consequently, for the unification of the entire continent, it is natural that later development of political ideologies will also be influenced by such approaches. Additionally, acceptance and appreciation of the socialist parties in the Western Europe was largely depended on the kind of influence that they have created socio-politically and socio-culturally over common people. Almost for a period of more than a century, socialism influenced lives of common people as well as their political consciousness or their inclination toward a particular political philosophy (May, 1978, p. 432). While the socialist parties received considerable support of common people in this regard, their mutual communication as well as cooperation also contributed to a greater extent in conveying their political ideology and communicating the importance of socialist internationalism to common people: “In the twentieth century … the parties have continued to maintain a tacit allegiance … due to the minimal demands it makes on their resources and to ‘reinforcers’ like the uses which have been formed between prominent Socialists in the course of the parties’ transitional interactions” (May, 1978, p. 422). Socialism in the United States: The basic difference lies between Western European socialism and its United States counterpart is the responsibility of the State towards its citizens, in the context of developing a welfare state or to provide a better existence for them. While the Western European Nations have expressed their concern for introducing economic development, exercising the welfare rights and turning the capitalist social approach to socialist one, the United States system of governance provided more importance toward enhancing philosophy of the Great American Dream, which states that the United States, being a land of opportunity, can provide all forms of facilities to the civilians but they are required to undertake the complete responsibility to develop their fortune. In either case of success or failure to do so, the government or the system cannot be blamed. In this context quoting an elaborate passage seems to be quite relevant as it encompasses within its scope the essence of difference between socialism as observed in the Western Europe and the United States: “The American notion of egalitarianism also differs from the European in that it restricts itself to equality of opportunity, with little concern about equality of outcome. Each person is supposed to have an equal chance to work hard and succeed - key components of the American Dream …. If, it follows, opportunities exist and each person can pursue them equally, then those who fail in this quest have only themselves to blame. There is no obligation for the society as a whole to develop welfare programs to protect them. There is also no obligation for those who succeeded far beyond the average to give up any of their excess gains for those who do not or for the general welfare of the community” (Russell, 2006, p. 50). In the introductory part of the paper, an overview of three basic features of socialism as a political philosophy was given. Another reflection of those features of socialism will clearly elaborate that mutual cooperation of among the system of governance and the empathetic human agency is highly required for the origination of a welfare state; individual effort alone cannot create the difference. Keeping in accordance with such observation if the approach or tendency of the United States system of governance is judged, it will be clear that due to the reasons socialism was appreciated to a great extent in the Western European context, does not have any single trait in the United States. Naturally, residents of the United States will differ largely to their Western European counterparts with regard to their socio-political and socio-cultural approach toward Socialism and socialist parties. However, consequences for denying the importance of socialist approach were realized in the worst form during the Great Depression and in order to combat the situation, the government was left with no other option than to initiate several welfare programs, such as, “unemployment insurance, retirement benefits, and direct assistance to various categories of unemployable people, including the blind, widows, orphans, and dependent children” (Russell, 2006, p. 51). However, once the situation came under control, the United State governance’s adoption of welfare program according to socialist prescriptions was witnessed during Baines Johnson, J.F. Kennedy and Ronald Regan administration. Subsequent period has not witnessed any attempt to enhance the capacity of welfare state (Russell, 2006, p. 52). James W. Russell has observed the drawback in social policy making as the main reason behind failure of socialist parties in the United States and also has identified that due to lack of enthusiasm on part of the common people to develop the human agency, “a greater willingness to rely upon the government” was generated so that the government can take the major initiative to “counteract the natural tendencies of unregulated private economics to generated poverty, unemployment, inequality, and other social problems” (Russell, 2006, p. 53). Conclusion: The social policies and consequent socio-political, socio-cultural approaches of common people are mainly responsible for varying success rate of socialist parties in the Western Europe and the United States. While in the Western European context development of welfare state was provided with special importance and government also intended to take adequate initiatives for exercising their welfare rights, in the United States of America the situation is quite different and the onus relies over individuals to earn their respective fortunes. While since the post World War II period there have been numerous initiative from the Western European nations’ system of governance to enhance the scope of welfare state, in case of the United States, number of such attempts are really less. Consequently, Western European citizens have realized that supporting the socialist parties would lead them to enjoyment of a better socialism or social democracy; the citizens of the United States are of opinion that with or without supporting the government, they have to bear the onus for their respective welfare, leading to failure of socialist parties in the United States. References Hann, C.M. 2004. Socialism: Ideals, Ideologies, and Local Practice. London: Routledge. Marks, G. and Lemke, C. 1992. The crisis of socialism in Europe. Durham: Duke University Press. May, J. 1978. “Co-operation Between Socialist Parties”. Social democratic parties in Western Europe. London: Taylor & Francis. Newman, M. 2005. Socialism: a very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Nolfo, E. 1993. “The Italian Socialists”. Socialist parties and the question of Europe in the 1950s. Boston: BRILL. Russell, J.W. 2006. Double standard: social policy in Europe and the United States. London: Rowman & Littlefield. Read More