Take heart, liberals: The Democratic Party is bad, but Britain's Labour is even worse

Why has there never been a lasting and substantial socialist movement in the United States?

It's a good question, one that has frustrated American leftists for years. American socialism's less than glorious history can be attributed to a variety of factors: an exceptionally long period when land was nearly free; the poisonous legacy of slavery and racism; the two-party system; the Cold War and its attendant demonization of anything that even hinted at communism; and longstanding attachment to the idea that this is a "land of opportunity."

However, there is one area in which the American left is doing pretty well: combating the austerity cult. It hasn't been a crushing victory by any means, but compared to most of Europe — and especially Britain — the advantage is clear. This is particularly striking given the fact that left-wing ideas are generally far more acceptable across the Atlantic. American leftists, a sometimes grudging part of the Democratic Party, can at least be thankful they aren't represented by Britain's Labour Party.

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

How did we get here? Back around 2008, a near-universal consensus developed in favor of Keynesian economics. With credit collapsing, hundreds of thousands losing their jobs every month, and no relief in sight, a massive depression was clearly looming without strong action. Governments around the globe passed huge stimulus packages to fill the hole in GDP created by private collapse — in America, President Obama's Recovery Act was the major example.

Even Republicans were on board: George W. Bush signed a moderate stimulus in 2008, during a campaign year in which Mitt Romney ran on a $250 billion package. In 2009, Republicans put together a $713 billion employment package.

But by 2010, that consensus suddenly evaporated, and was replaced with exactly the opposite idea: that the deficit needed to be cut immediately, unemployment rates be hanged. Despite the fact that this idea made just as much sense (i.e., zero) as it would have a year previously (indeed, unemployment would not peak until November 2010), a sudden fixation on austerity and Hoovernomics swept the world elite. It was as if someone had poisoned the water at Davos that year with parasitic brainworms.

For a time, the Western world, worried about nonexistent "bond vigilantes," was utterly gripped by the austerity cult. Political news was dominated by "catfood commissions" calculating how best to cut social insurance while increasing taxes.

There are a couple lessons to be drawn here. The first is the amazing degree to which policy is driven by sheer groupthink. The entire policy orientation of most of the developed world turned 180 degrees, for no good reason. The second is how much political reporting turns on what is perceived as "responsible" (as opposed to "true").

However, that's not the end of the story. Though the U.S. is still quite far from accepting the basic logic of Keynesian economics, the austerity fever has slackened quite a lot. Alan Simpson — subject of fervent, worshipful press attention in 2011, as he drew up a plan to ritually disembowel the welfare state with a spoon — has virtually disappeared from the political landscape. Now we've got Democrats agreeing, in principle at least, that Social Security needs to be expanded, not cut.

Compare that to the U.K. There, the media is every bit as gripped by deficit reduction as the U.S. press was five years ago. And this after years of anemic economic growth, which likely would have been worse if the Conservative government of Prime Minister David Cameron had not quietly eased up on the austerity. This has all been exacerbated by the major center-left party, Labour, which has completely surrendered on the austerity front. As George Monbiot writes:

This discrepancy between the U.S. and the U.K. surely has many roots, not least of which is how the U.K.'s parliamentary system has allowed anti-austerians to abandon Labour for the Greens or other parties. However, the broad American left can also claim some credit. Though it is not so great at consistently winning elections, it has managed to flagellate much of the media into backing off its mindless austerity leg-humping (though not all). It has also confronted many Democrats with the obvious fact that running on austerity is a political loser.

So good job, American lefties. There is still very much to be done, but things could definitely be worse.