New York Chooses A Dash of Liberalism

The US has had its first spate of elections since the Presidential vote in 2012. The governorships of New Jersey and Virginia were contested, as was the Mayoralty of New York City. There were no great surprises: the moderate Republican Chris Christie (who is to the GOP what Ken Clarke is to the Conservative Party) was comfortably re-elected in Democratic-leaning NJ, whist the Democrats secured victory in Virginia.

But, as the title suggests, this post is centred on New York, where Bill de Blasio (D) defeated Joe Lhota (R) with a majority of about 45%- that’s right: de Blasio has won an astounding 72% of the vote. What makes this even more surprising to an outsider is that de Blasio is about as leftwing as it is possible to be in American politics, described as an old-fashioned tax-and-spend liberal. Although genuine liberals are all too often out of fashion in the Democratic Party, it seems that de Blasio’s positions on issues such as the eye-watering inequality that exists in his city (and a police force that’s slightly too trigger happy with its anti-terror powers) have struck a chord with New Yorkers.

In my country, New York is seen as a city of glamour, towering apartment blocks, busy and often aggressive people, and a bustling metropolis where millionaire bankers and the downtrodden working class live and work in startling proximity. In many ways, NYC is simply a reflection of London twenty years or so into the future.

(By the way, the original York is infinitely better than both its namesake and London: it’s a leafy, people-shaped city in which there is a calmer approach to life.)

So when de Blasio talked of “two cities”, communities of rich and poor who share the same physical space but live entirely lives, he has identified an awful trend which is fracturing our societies as they have never been divided in the modern age. It’s the sort of ‘soft segregation’ that will make harmonious democracy impossible if we allow it to grow and reinforce itself unchecked.

Of course, there are severe limitations to the powers of the Mayor of New York, and the progressive tax rises de Blasio has pledged will need the approval of New York state in Albany. Even then, the “two cities” cannot be bridged by fairer taxes and homebuilding alone: no, the national and international corridors of power will have to be stormed to tackle inequality. But we have to start somewhere, and where better than the Mayor’s office?

America’s New Social Liberalism

The United States is famed for the contrast between its socially conservative “bible belt” and the handful of bohemian pockets like San Francisco (to which Brighton is Britain’s more compact, slightly colder, and yet better alternative). It seems daft that one part of the country causally permits, or at least used to permit, public nudity whilst homosexuality or abortion is all but taboo in most others. Remember “Don’t ask, don’t tell”? But that’s America for you. But in a number of referenda held last month, several states voted in favour of progressive measures that show a fairer and a more realistic approach is being adopted by a considerable faction of the Republican movement (or rather, lack of movement) in addition to the tolerant Democrats. Maine, Maryland, and Washington all voted last month to introduce same-sex marriage, despite fierce opposition from many (but not all) religious groups. They join Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York and Vermont, and Washington DC in taking this massive step towards equality. This leaves Britain in the arkward position of being behind the times, though legislation will be brought before Parliament in the new year. The US Supreme Court will shortly consider if the Defense of Marriage Act, a neanderthal-era law banning federal government recognition of same-sex marriage is in breach of the Constitution, and if so whether this means equal marriage must be enacted in the remaining 41 states. I’d like to think that we’ll end the week with the happy news that the Constitution rules out archaic discrimination of this kind. But it’s not only homosexuals who are being affected by this wave of social liberalisation. Washington has also voted to legalise ownership of an ounce of marijuana for personal use. Personally, I take the view that we are better off allowing the use of softer drugs, cleaning up supplies, removing the influence of criminal networks and eliminating the gateway effect. The War on Drugs has been nothing but an expensive failure. As with sex education, there is little point in advocating draconian measures to stop something that will happen anyway. Education, safety, and an informed approach is key. Hopefully Washington will become yet another example of the better alternative. A revolution is taking place in the US. Just ten years ago, would we have envisaged a black President, genuine equality for homosexuals, or a modern approach to drug consumption? Imagine what could be achieved in another decade.

“Stand In The Middle Of The Road And You Get Run Over”

The then Liberal leader after an historic defeat in 20122

Here in Britain, many of us on the left like to think of the Liberal Democrats as a doomed political party that is trying to eke out the two and a half years it is committed to spending propping up the Conservatives before being all but wiped off of the electoral map. With any luck, they will find themselves entirely eliminated from the political scene within another General Election or two. The shrinkage of the political centre is not unique to Britain, as it might appear. In Germany, the Free Democrats no longer enjoy the role of kingmakers. In Greece, the formerly socialist Pasok government fell to third place, leaving the left-wing Syriza as the Opposition. In Canada last year, the Liberal Party (the natural party of government since the 1920s) won just 19% of the vote, while their left-wing counterparts the NDP have become the main opposition to Stephen Harper’s appalling Conservative government.

Let us focus on Canadian politics for a while. Canada is often heralded as an example of how the United States could be improved if they packed in their annoying habit of giving power to idiots. Canadians benefit from universal healthcare, a reasonable welfare system and an economy built on (relatively) sound foundations, including a valued industrial sector. This was built by a series of centre-left Liberal governments placing emphasis on social and economic “evolution, not revolution”. The governments were not as progressive as a number of Canadians would have liked, but it worked sufficiently well to keep their then socialist counterparts, the New Democratic Party, locked into the third party mould. The system largely worked quite well until the 1990s, when the party moved sharply to the right in order to secure three consecutive election victories (sounds familiar, doesn’t it?). Spending on social services fell, as did taxation on big business and high earners.

By eating into the centre-right’s core vote to such a great extent, they left the opposition virtually non existent for a decade, until the Conservative Party was formed from a merger in 2003. At the same time, the Liberals were rocked by a sponsorship scandal (advertising agencies supporting the party received unduly large payments for government work), resulting in the party leaving office in 2004. As with New Labour, when the gloss came off, people didn’t like what they saw beneath it.

To cut a long story short, the political landscape was turned on its head last year when the NDP pushed the Liberals into 3rd place, as part of a polarisation of Canada’s politics. Now a clear left/right divide exists, with the NDP advocating greater employment and health protection, and the Conservatives pursuing privatisation and deregulation. I see this as being part of a trend, with electorates worldwide beginning to reject the sold-out “progressive” politicians in favour of parties and leaders who want to re-establish a degree of principle, vision, and (whisper it) idealism into their activity.

In Britain and France, such changes are starting to happen within the rigid two party system, and in Canada they’ve realigned their party framework. The global 99% now see Third Way politics for what it is: ideological whitewash that is past its use-by date. It never served our interests, and we now see that this the case. For a while, it was fashionable to believe in trickle-down economics, in the value of the free market, and in the dangers of redistribution. The world is moving on now, and the centre is finding that it has no role left. Which isn’t too say that there is a future for extremism; merely a bit of honest, old-fashioned vision. An that is something to celebrate.