Suchergebnisse

Based on research in the social sciences, this article suggests new directions and compromises that might make it possible for liberals and leftists to work together in the hopeful post-9/11, post-Bush/Cheney era. There are five basic issues—electoral strategy, the role of social movements, the need for a new model for the economy, the need for a reframing of who is "us" and who is "them," and the creation of a new organizational structure. It first explains why leftists should organize themselves into Egalitarian Democratic Clubs within the Democratic Party, followed by an analysis of why social movements are more valuable than many liberals have acknowledged but only when they embrace strategic nonviolence as their sole method of social disruption. It then suggests a new framework for thinking about an egalitarian economy that would allow liberals and leftists to work together even while disagreeing about how egalitarian that economy could become. Finally, it suggests a reframing of "us" and "them" in terms of people's values and policy prescriptions, not their class, race, gender, or sexual orientation, and the creation of a network of organizations that share a commitment to the proposed electoral, social movement, and economic strategies.

As the European Parliament elections loom, with the populists rising, progressives need a liberal-left narrative.

We gathered survey data on journalists' political views in 17 Western countries. We then matched these data to outcomes from national elections, and constructed metrics of journalists' relative preference for different political parties. Compared to the general population of voters, journalists prefer parties that have more left-wing positions overall (r's -.47 to -.53, depending on the metric used), and that are associated with certain ideologies, namely environmentalism, feminism, social liberalism, socialism, and support for the European Union. We used Bayesian model averaging to assess the validity of the predictors in multivariate models. We found that, of the ideology tags in our dataset, 'conservative' (negative), 'nationalist' (negative) and 'green' (positive) were the most consistent predictors with nontrivial effect sizes. We also computed estimates of the skew of journalists' political views in different countries. Overall, our results indicate that the Western media has a left-liberal skew.

Liberal & Left interpretations of the events of September 11 (2001) are answered. It is contended that the American Left must continue to detail problems with the US war on terrorism while maintaining its stance that terrorist acts cannot be tolerated. However, several leading members of the American Left, especially Alexander Cockburn, James Petras, & Michael Parenti, are heavily criticized for offering insensitive or ill-timed commentaries on the September 11 terrorist attacks. Although additional criticism is levied against several other liberal & Left journalists & intellectuals, Michael Walzer's responses to the terrorist attacks are received with severe disapproval. Multiple difficulties or inconsistencies in Walzer's various writings on the terrorist attacks & the US's counterattacks against the suspected terrorists are highlighted. Similarities & differences between human rights violations that occurred during McCarthyism & the US's capture & detainment of suspected terrorists are then discussed. It is concluded that the foundation of a radical Left response to the present-day American political system exists in the nation's past. J. W. Parker