Divides and deadlock in the US

The Labour movement column

By Anthony Painter

The world’s developed nations are experiencing an identity crisis. This plays itself out in the field of international relations as the rise of new economic powers threaten domestic economies. It plays out in the security field as the US, NATO and ad hoc alliances of the willing no longer hold sway. It is also played domestically as the shape and texture of our societies change. Nowhere is this identity crisis more keenly felt than in the US and it was for all to see in the mid-term election results.

In analysing an enormous House of Representatives defeat for the Democrats it is important not to lose sight of the obvious. At a press briefing this morning, Ruy Teixeira of the Center for American Progress pointed to the as yet jobless recovery as the major contingent factor in the Republicans success. As the economy recovers, as long as the Obama administration constructs a convincing argument tying its actions to recovery then the Democrats’ political fortunes will recover also.

The obvious economic explanations certainly suffice in understanding the immediate and medium term political context. Equally, culture and identity create unique and broader challenges for the left. To fundamentally change society, there is a level of legitimacy for collective action beneath which a nation can’t fall. Increasingly consistently, we are seeing solidarity loosen: in the UK, the Netherlands, Sweden, Germany, and, despite a moment that hinted at something more optimistic two yeas ago, in the US also.

These deeper divides play out differently from context to context. The political movements and leaders who tap into them vary also. In the US, it is the Tea Party. Fortunately for the Democrats, the Tea Party denied the Republicans a shot at taking the Senate. Christine O’Donnell, Sarah Palin, and Sharron Angle, hubble, bubble, toil and trouble, may have saved Senate leaders such as Harry Reid who they despise. Personality wise they often suck but beyond they have motivated the Republican base. What they lose the Republicans through personal insanity they gain for them in energy.

They understand the intersection of economic fear, loss of national pride, and cultural anxiety that afflicts much of white, middle class America. The same forces are at play across the western world.

The staggering success of the Tea Party creates challenges for the Republicans in crafting political unity. Its umbrella now shelters isolationists and neo-conservatives (with Iran rumbling in the background), pragmatic centrists and ideological minimal statists, social conservatives and those of a more compassionate disposition. In a sense it always has. What Republicans now have to confront is that the inert nature of these conflicts could become radioactive.

The older, whiter, angrier voters attracted to the Tea Party bear the hallmarks of the economically and culturally dispossessed. As a matter of fact they are not but that is not the point. There is a powerful political psychology to dispossession. The Tea Party understands the emotional wiring of politics in a way that mainstream politicians are less able to. These emotions aren’t new. The conservative movement has been playing upon them ever since the expansion of civil and social rights from the 1950s onwards. There are still valuable minerals near the surface of this particular mine.

It would be a mistake though to misread the Tea Party’s rise as a simple replay of the conservative movement’s successes of yore. This shifting global economy and geo-politics is felt in lost industrial jobs and national pride. The changing demographic shape of the country challenges settled notions of national identity. Unity and solidarity are replaced with polarisation and division. This is all perpetuated through a media culture that thrives on conflict. When Americans say they want a return to fundamental American values they are expressing the same anxiety as Germans who are worried that their country is doing away with itself. Change can mean many things but what is absolutely certain is that there will be perceived winners and losers. Those who perceive loss get despondent or angry and often resentful. They turn on those they perceive to be initiators of their loss: big finance, immigrants, politicians, welfare recipients, China, Muslims, and so it goes on.

Meanwhile, social democrats and progressives reach for the foundation on which collective action is built: a sense of togetherness and shared identity. It is no longer there so they wait for conservative economic and social failure and then legislate as quick as they can before the consensus breaks again- as it most certainly will. And this is the reality of this new politics: inertia and capricious change simultaneously. It is a hung parliament in the UK and gridlock in the US. It is a tug of war with neither side breaking. It is voters hoping one year and fearing two years later.

Economic calamity is one part of the story. What the global financial crisis has laid bare is faults in our cultural foundations. Few western societies seem immune. We can muddle through and probably will. The US left was an exceptional case it seemed. Last night shows it is facing similar challenges to its sister parties in Europe. And time and time again the same question arises: how do we achieve greater freedom in dividing societies? The Tea Party and others have the answers. They just don’t have the solutions. The left often has the solutions but rarely the answers. The deadlock is set to endure until someone can marry the answers to the solutions. We are holding our breath.