Sunder, are you also predicting that democracy will prosper forever, ar that authoritarian centralised state like Russia and China represent an advance on western-style democracy?

Without answering that question we have no way of judging the accuracy of your insight or your personal preference.

Thomas

That seems to me a different, much much broader debate than the relative prospects of the democratic west European left.

Of course, I don’t think Russian or Chinese authoritarianism is an advance on western democracy. I doubt you can find me anybody who sincerely does think so – even if there is the sprinkling of SWP-fringe voices prepared to argue the toss as a debating point to prove how the west is ultimately culpable or worse in the end.

Ah, Sunder, this is a vital point because in your article you seem to be able to use the terms ‘left’ and ‘centre-left’ almost interchangably, as if no part of the left was capable of authoritarianism.

By ignoring this point you have rendered discussion futile, which is probably why there have been no follow-up comments here.

For the benefit of discussion it would be helpful to articulate praise for aspects of Russian and Chinese society, of which I could mention many with some legitimacy, such as the vibrancy of social debates ongoing through non-democratic channels including the arts and literature, as well as how this enables a culture of inclusivity and stability (relevant to times of economic turmoil) by redirecting any challenges to the political leadership.

The downside of this is the inevitable conformity consequent of apparent harmony which marginalises important issues until it can be too late for them to be defused in a manner which satisfies all. So Tibet remains a sore on the soul of China, as does the inability to prevent widescale destruction from natural disasters, for example, while rural poverty, human rights and accountability remain majorly problematic issues.

My feeling is that your strategic alliance with left-wing means is over-riding your firmly-held ambition for the achievement of liberal principles at this point in time and that while your analysis is based in solid intellectual capacity your conclusions are being biased by material considerations.

I suggest you would be able to increase your audience and the influence of your views if you were able to establish a firm precedence of political priority before reconciling yourself to activity. I say this because I hear conflict between your words and the thinking which inspires them and I think I would be interested by how you develop your conclusions and whether you think it is possible to fix them with any certainty.

Thomas,

Do you stand for anything? It is not at all clear, to me at least, that you do.

Sure I do Dougie. I stand for pregnant women on the bus and I stand for pensioners and war veterans, I stand up to bullying and inappropriate use of violence and I stand up for remembering what other people are all too willing to forget. I’ve also stood for election several times – what else would you like me to say?