Retreat into its comfort zone has been the stock centre-left response across Europe, but it could be technocratic leaders who forge a way
forward, says Olaf Cramme

Across Europe, social democrats are occupying the moral high ground. After a decade spent wrestling with self-doubt about whether the left had entered a far too uncritical relationship with the intellectual hegemony of neoliberalism, the time has come to go on the offensive. The global financial crisis of 2007-8 turned out to be the liberator: by admitting past mistakes and apologising for a perceived failure of social democratic output while in government, the way was paved for heralding the end of an era and a new chapter of progressive ideology. At last, the political opponent, accused of sticking to outdated thinking, could again be clearly defined. And, in ‘paradigm shift’, a new buzzword was created.

In the last few years, however, social democrats in Europe have also learned that ‘being right’ (about the flaws in the economic order) does not necessarily lead to ‘reward’ (at the ballot box). To be sure, the dismal picture of the left’s electoral performances has many causes, often related to particular national circumstances. But the pattern is unequivocal: since the collapse of Lehman Brothers in September 2008, social democratic parties have only won five out of 23 elections (excluding volatile Latvia) on European Union territory. Of these five, Portugal’s has since been reversed, while the centre-left government in Slovenia is on the brink of collapse. Greece does not look much better and even in Denmark Helle Thorning-Schmidt’s victory in September came despite her party achieving its worst share of the vote in a century.

This pattern has at least one simple, but far-reaching, explanation: in defiance of all benevolent rhetoric about the arrival of a ‘new politics’ (or economics), we are living, at best, in an era of transition between the political orthodoxy of the past and something new, which remains extremely ill-defined – challenged not only by revisionist social democrats but above all by populists and radicals from both the left and the right. At worst, we are witnessing what Colin Crouch has called the strange ‘non-death of neoliberalism’ that might cement, rather than question, some of the intolerable practices which brought about the financial crash in the first place. This should not come as a surprise: as history tells us, paradigm shifts can take a very long time, not least because they rely on the emergence and then breakthrough of a new, compelling economic philosophy. So far, social democrats have misjudged the question of time, and do not possess a credible economic alternative.

Interestingly, some on the centre-left in Europe have begun to draw lessons from the experience of the past three years. They realise that the public remains extremely concerned about the future of their country (and not just of themselves), deeply confused about what direction to take, and sceptical of grand promises which have little chance of success. They value prudence, competence, sincerity and statesmanship. It is precisely for these reasons that social democratic politicians like Peer Steinbrück in Germany and François Hollande in France enjoy such a high regard among their respective electorates, and indeed within their own parties. Both are dry, technocratic, versatile and centrist managers, preaching pragmatic reform before ideological change – but they are also now a serious threat to the incumbent centre-right leaders.

All this does not bode well for the European left initiating an era of policymaking which can radically break with the past in the short term. It seems that centre-left technocracy currently represents the best chance for social democracy to get back in the game.

—————————————————————————————

Olaf Cramme is director of Policy Network and tweets @OlafCramme

—————————————————————————————

Photo: nrwspd