What constitutes centrism and how do centrists view communists?

 

On a superficial level, it is widely assumed that centrists would maintain a comparatively diplomatic and neutral position in situations of debate and political decision making, generally supporting liberal and democratic values as opposed to encouraging the implementation of radical far-left proposals. They would be considered to likely have a selection of both socially orientated policies and those related to promoting economic growth and security of the markets. However, there appears to be a lot more to these centrists than can be observed here. As well as this, I would argue, it appears that a lot of the ideas of a true people-led communism, without the barriers of state and corruption of power, would appear to have a lot more in common with democratic centrist politics than one might assume.

Whether this is as a tactical vote, a preference for more pragmatic and less ideologically orientated leadership, having a wide variety of values that span different areas of the political spectrum, or the attractive image presented by many centrist candidates to voters, it is clear that there has been a rise in support of centrist political parties in recent years with the Liberal Democrat Party in the UK having experienced a 655% increase in seats in the 2024 general election (at 72 compared with 11 in 2019). This was likely due to the lack of transparency in policymaking, ineffective decision making, and corruption of interest observed under the past Conservative government, as well as the disappointment with other supposedly more leftist political groups' values. It, is therefore, clear that strong governance and stability in political leadership is considered a priority and gives a clear representation as to the likely characteristics of many centrists, be they newly converted or consistently keeping to these values.

This strong governance observed links to the emphasis on state involvement and adoption of liberal (as opposed to libertarian or anarchist) ideas regarding its presence and influence within society. This opposition to any radical or authoritarian governance as examined here is not a new phenomenon in that the 1950s (after and during several global conflicts and the rule of several authoritarian dictatorial leaders), strong anti-communist sentiment was evident globally leading to a rise in support for liberal, moderate left or right, and centrist political organisations. This distaste of communism and presentation of centrism is described through the sentiments of a 1950s Harvard undergraduate presenting for the "Ideal Centrist Man" to be a "balanced, prudential, rationalist who was tolerant of ambiguity, distrustful of absolutes, the perfect antithesis to the sadomasochistic, mildly paranoid, rigid Communist". Sentiments such as these then appeared to be responsible for the widespread attack to centrists by individuals on both sides of the political spectrum during and after this period.

Furthermore, it also proves to be important to note the clear influence of class on what values one has, and therefore, how far from the central region of the political spectrum they appear to be positioned. Class and typical perceptions of specific social classes prove to have proven to lead to conflict as to what constitutes effective leadership, and present for classism to act as a clear barrier to the preservation of adequate and just legislation influencing this. This is shown through many leftists perhaps considering those in positions of power to be supported more and given greater rights and privileges under this legislation, as well as people on the right perhaps favouring greater economic organisation and efficiency, or not agreeing with this greater emphasis observed regarding social policy and wealth distribution. This might mean that centrist legislation would prove to be a clear cause of tension between individuals on both sides of the political spectrum, and ironically, perhaps mean that centrist governance does not always appear to effectively provide more transparency and better organisation in policymaking and legislation, the main reasons for many to support it as a means of governance.

Finally, while much criticism of communism appears to be evident in centrists, as a liberal communist myself, and as is apparent in many of my previous posts, I would consider many of the liberal and libertarian values adopted by centrists to be at the foundations of a true communist society. These relate to panarchy, the support of individuals of all opinions on the political spectrum, communitarianism, egalitarianism and freedom of expression. While this may perhaps appear to be a contradiction of terms and like a potentially impossible claim to make considering how communists and centrists lie on vastly different positions along the political spectrum, and evidenced by the emphasis of the importance of the state in a centrist society, it appears that a communitarian society led by the people in which all contributions are valued would be favourable in both a centrist and communist society. After all, true communism was never intended to be authoritarian and the first libertarians were in fact communists. This would, therefore, explain the tensions between centrism and communism being largely down to presentation of these perspectives in common societal viewpoints as well as also being heavily influenced by past experiences and perceptions of societies under specific forms of governance.

Kelman, M (1991). Dunwody Distinguished Lecture in Law: Emerging Centrist Liberalism. Published in Florida Law Review 43(3). https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/uflr43&collection=journals&id=425&startid=425&endid=452

7/1922. Theses on Relations to the C.P. to an L.L.P. Published in The Communist. 1(9) https://www.marxists.org/history/usa/pubs/thecommunist/thecommunist6/v1n09-jul-1922-com-CPA.pdf300- 1

https://www.statista.com/statistics/716971/general-elections-seats-won-by-party-uk/

Egalitarianism: The place of equality in both capitalist and socialist rhetoric

"A school of thought in contemporary political philosophy that treats equality as the chief value of a just political system"

This is how the Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy defines an egalitarian system, essentially considering equality as the core priority for the successful functioning of a just society. While on first observations this principle doesn't seem vastly different to some of the core ideals advocated within Marxist and socialist doctrines (i.e. in relation to equality in distribution of wealth, land and opportunities, as well as the view meritocracy and meaningful work being the main reason for greater status being awarded to someone), this principle is often far from left wing in practise. This begs the questions: can an individual possessing great wealth (yet not showing any inclination to distribute it amongst others) still be considered as an egalitarian, and why do capitalists in particular like the egalitarian school of thought?

Linking back to the idea that meritocracy and hard work as opposed to class, inheritance and exploitation of others should give others the right to greater wealth, it is clear that this is a principle favoured by many hardworking and wealthy capitalists (although many are not particularly highly-skilled or hardworking), and have proven instrumental in the development of the crude and inaccurate (as well as particularly being adopted by the right-wing) view that people who are of low-income will remain so because they are lazy. The current capitalist economic systems very much assume that employees within a business will begin as proletarians of limited power within the workplace and "work their way up" to bourgeois and managerial level through hard work and promotion. This viewpoint clearly disparages the hard work, stress, and poor health and standard of living amongst the working classes, and disguises the fact that it is down to unfair wealth distribution, devaluation of certain economic sectors and employment types, and the overruling vested interests of the wealthy that they often remain of a low income. It is clearly not the fault of the workers involved that they had had to seek employment from the owners of the means of production to gain income, and "working their way up" may not be possible depending on the ways in which businesses operate. This distaste for certain groups might, arguably, potentially hinder complete egalitarianism from being achieved in this capitalist society .

Equally, many left-leaning bourgeois individuals and those that engage in managerial roles in society would sympathise with socialist ideals may also appear to support equality in pay and treatment of workers, or would contribute to supporting others of low income yet still live a privileged and upper-middle class lifestyle. This is how "champagne socialists" have come about to exist and have proven to challenge the incorrect and clearly misguided view that all poor people are egalitarian and socialist [it also being clear to note that a lot of working class people become drawn to right-wing ideas of improved economic growth through capitalism, anti-immigrant ideals and advocacy of the middle classes (hence the seats for Reform UK in British parliament being primarily deprived working class areas)] and all wealthy people are right wing and oppose egalitarianism.

What are often presumed as socialist ideas which appear to promote egalitarian principle (such as the creation of worker owned cooperatives and Basic Income grants standardise the treatment of workers and the conditions they live and work in, as well as increasing the relative influence and 

involvement in decision making in the workplace) are often used and exploited by capitalists for their own gain and made to operate in such a way so that they fulfil what would be least damaging to the capitalists' own vested interests and would mean that limited income could be detracted from these. This could mean by lowering basic income and capital, or using attempts to curb the influence of workers in the cooperatives.

Overall, while superficially there appears to be clear similarities between liberalism, libertarianism and egalitarianism meaning they likely effectively work in conjunction with each other and effectively support other stereotypically socialist ideals, it would be incorrect and misinformed to associate egalitarianism purely with the left. Like with most political schools of thought, ideology can evolve and be heavily influenced by specific individuals and governments functioning as key decision makers. This consideration of egalitarianism as largely favoured by both sides of the political spectrum and individuals in all aspects of the hierarchy in the workplace would thus prove to explain why the lines between capitalist and socialist philosophy from a social perspective might appear blurred, and that a distinction must be made between equity, equality and freedom of expression within society.

References:

Meadowcroft, J (2023) THE SOCIALISM OF THE RICH: EGALITARIANISM, WEALTH, AND PRIVILEGE IN ACADEMIC PHILOSOPHY. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265052523000262

Putterman, L et. al (1998) Does Egalitarianism Have a Future? Published in Journal of Economic Literature , Jun., 1998, Vol. 36, No. 2 (Jun., 1998), pp. 861 902. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2565124

Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (2025). Egalitarianism. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/egalitarianism/

Wright, E.O (2015) Eroding Capitalism: A Comment on StuartWhite’s ‘Basic Capital in the EgalitarianToolkit’ published in Journal of Applied Philosophy. Doi: 10.1111/japp.12128

From pints to protests: the German bar scene and its political significance

Me enjoying a pint of beer (aka progress and liberation) in a pub.

There is no doubt that the pub is widely regarded as a place of relaxation, socialising and entertainment that is appreciated by many globally in its various different forms and by people of many different ages from students to seniors, and anyone in between. What is less well known, however, is its major political importance and position as the site of revolution, debate and emancipation of the working classes in which it was influential in the German labour movement in the 19th century.

At this time, the country was undergoing rapid industrialisation like much of Europe and more efficient work and production by the proletarians employed in the factories was needed. This was responded to through the capitalist factory owners attempting to improve this by dulling workers' senses and making them lose track of time and their feelings of exploitation by serving them alcohol in the form of schnapps during their workdays. This use of alcohol was strongly condemned and disapproved of by socialists who developed the plan to use public bars as a place for workers to drink instead of on the factory floors, and encourage beer (with its lower alcohol content and therefore reduced impact on the workers' minds and ability to work) to be consumed instead of schnapps (this being very much associated with capitalism and considered by prominent German socialist Karl Kautsky as "the enemy"). Workers also began to decline the schnapps offered to them preferring to go to the bars after work to drink beer as opposed to drinking alcohol during their working days. Equally, these bars, although admittedly primarily frequented by working class male proletarians, also had a role in providing refuge for working women who were working in the factories to relieve their stress using alcohol. This then led to them, like the male proletariat workers, seeing this as an opportunity to escape the constraints of societal norms and protest against these forming their own political discourse and assisting the female suffrage movement. Many suffrage meetings were held in these bars. This became a global phenomenon with suffragette meetings and riot points for feminist demonstrations famously being evident in bars in the UK. Moreover, considering the overcrowded and often inadequate living conditions of these workers being unpleasant to live in as well as providing limited space for socialising and entertainment, the bars became popular with them for these reasons.

H.R Giger's 1993 artwork depicting the Bierkrieg in 19th century Germany.

This also led to the proletarian workers and political activists that frequented these bars using them as a site of planning future activism and debating political issues. Community organisations and local political groups also held their meetings. This led to much hatred of the bars by the governments of this time and there was much consideration of having the meetings that took place within them restricted or even banned, as they were considered to be a significant threat to society. Anger from the capitalists of the time in regard to their concern that the bar owners and brewers were developing socialist values and rejecting the governments taxes and regulations on their businesses leading to the Bierkrieg or "beer wars". Yet this didn't deter the socialists and only further encouraged them to continue meeting in this way, albeit more discreetly.

In the present times, beer and bars continue to very much remain associated with social progress and political discussion with brewers (particularly craft beer brewers) creating names, marketing campaigns and labels for their beers to reflect current society using these to attract a politically minded audience and raise awareness of the need for social change. These include several US brewers' anti-trump beers with names such as "Class War", "March On" and "Makin' Noise, A Pussy Riot Beer". 

For this, readers, I will present you with the key takeaway from this post: go to the pub and have a pint. It's your socialist duty.

Hoffrogge, R (2018). Booze and Socialism. Published in Jacobin (30/8/2018). Translated by Loren Balhorn. https://jacobin.com/2018/08/schnapps-working-class-alcohol-drinking-bars

Clark, M (2024). Exploring the Unexpected Intersections of Beer and Political Movements. Published in The Up and Under Pub (11/7/2022)  https://theupandunderpub.com/exploring-the-unexpected-intersections-of-beer-and-political-movements/

Herzog, K (2017). The Stories Behind Five Anti-Trump Beers. Published in Punch (3/4/2017) https://punchdrink.com/articles/stories-behind-anti-trump-beers-political-beer-5-rabbits/

In memory of Karl Marx

 Today would have been Karl Marx's 207th birthday. In his honour, I thought I would post these lesser known photographs.

What is supposedly the earliest known photograph of Marx. Taken in 1861 in London. He would have been 43 years old.

https://marx200.org/en/fotografien/index.html

The last known photograph of Marx taken in 1882 in Algeria. He sent it to his daughter Laura with the dedication "To my dear Cacadou. Old Nick (as he was known amongst his family), Algiers, end of February".

A painting depicting Marx and his comrades.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/photo/marx/index.htm

Karl Marx and his daughter Jenny taken in Margate in 1866. When he arrived there, he wrote this letter describing his arrival and accommodation and showing his love of the sea, walking along the coast and the coastal air. Little did he know that two centuries later, a 19 year old communist student and great admirer of his work (who also enjoys living by the sea and going on long coastal walks) would be reading and blogging about this letter from her room in her hall of residence (aka "boarding house") in Portsmouth!

https://marx200.org/en/fotografien/index.html

The link between gender and political orientation: why female politicians continue to remain underrepresented

After a short break from posting and sorting out some university stuff, I am back online and will continue posting more fire soon. Enjoy.

Politics globally, regardless of sovereignty and international influence of governments and the political leaning of politicians, continues to remain a primarily male dominated field and one that is not without its stereotypes amongst voters. There tends to be a misconception that the typical characteristics of female politicians are similar to those of stereotypical females in general (Scneider, M.C and Bos, A, 2014). In spite of this, this is rarely the case with females perhaps entering politics with their main intention being perhaps to go against female stereotypes and further encourage women to enter a field which continues to have a workforce consisting largely of males.

The stereotypes associated with males generally relate to their strength, virility and perhaps lack of sensitivity with greater assertion and more likely use defence and force to protect themselves and their influence. This would likely result in them potentially being more likely associated with aiming to gain authority and submit to positions of power. These contrast starkly with those associated with women who are more likely to have greater empathy, compassion, and sensitivity to others needs. What the genders perhaps both have in common, according to Schneider and Bos, is that they would likely have clear values which they would remain faithful (although women may be perhaps more diplomatic and willing to compromise if the situation requires this). While these all appear to be characteristics that would, in different ways, prove important in developing competence in political leadership, which of these traits that would appear more attractive to voters would vary and it could lead to them developing preferences of genders when deciding which candidates to elect. This can come from not only misogyny and chauvinist views amongst males in society considering women as not being strong enough to fulfil these roles, but also the views that females may be a lot more desirable in engaging in political activity or as candidates for governance of specific positions on the political spectrum.

  This map clearly shows mainly left wing political orientation (with the unclassified leaders i.e. New Zealand, Iceland                   and others also leaning more to the left) amongst the female political leaders globally (maps made using https://www.arcgis.com/index.html

Furthermore, there is the common view that women are more likely to support more socialist environmentalist and liberal political ideas (see above) and so less likely to advocate right wing, authoritarian and totalitarian ideology than men. This may reflect why there have been significantly more authoritarian regimes led by men than by women, and the stereotypes associated with both genders might reflect these perceptions. This conclusion is supported by Allison Wu in his analysis of the subject in that he considers women as appearing more environmentally informed and more conscientious about implementing environmentally friendly decisions into their policymaking, this being considered mainly for humanitarian reasons and as a result of growing concerns for sustainability of social and economic practises rather than for capitalist reasons as might more likely be observed for male politicians in support of green agenda. He also proved that women in positions of power had a significant negative impact on the state's net carbon dioxide emissions and that carbon dioxide emissions in general appeared to have been reduced in these governments compared to governments led by men thus proving to further evidence this point. Considering that green agenda (although only in recent years having  appeared a significant priority for policymaking internationally) is a significant vote winner for female politicians and could perhaps increase their representation and presence in global politics. However, this may be limited in that is mainly considered important by a more select demographic (mainly females and younger generations).

Moreover, as can be observed in the map above, the highest percentages of women in parliament appear to be in countries that are either highly developed with more progressive left wing governments or those that are less developed but comparatively socially stable with low levels of corruption whose governments support similar ideas. These governments are primarily constitutional monarchies. This would, therefore, present that the levels of political corruption of the governments of these nations, their  ideology and values, and their main demographic observed within society to prove to be the primary influences on the political representation of female politicians in parliament. This also explains why they appear to in a lot of cases remain largely underrepresented.

Bullough, A et al, 2012. Women's political leadership participation around the world: An institutional analysis. Published in The Leadership Quarterly 23 (2012) pp. 398–411 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.09.010

Ferreira, F and Gyourko, J, 2014. Does gender matter for political leadership? The case of U.S. mayors. Published in Journal of Public Economics 112 (2014) pp. 24–39 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2014.01.006

O'Brien, D.Z, 2019. Female leaders and citizens' perceptions of political parties https://doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2019.1669612

Paris, L.D, 2009. Preferred leadership prototypes of male and female leaders in 27 countries Published in Journal of International Business Studies (2009) 40 DOI:  www.jibs.net

Schneider, M.C and Bos, A, 2014. Measuring Stereotypes of Female Politicians. Published in Political Psychology, Vol. 35, No. 2, 2014 DOI:  10.1111/pops.12040

Wu, A, 2023. Do female political leaders make the environment greener? Evidence from the United States https://www.emerald.com/insight/0368-492X.htm