"New Left" and the "revolution" of 1968
In the previous part of the material notedthat the outbreak of student protests, dubbed the "revolution" of 1968, was closely linked to the "new left". The new left tendencies popular among young people advocated the values of maximum personal freedom, and the old system of values was not only questioned, but became the main object of criticism. As the French philosopher Jean-Francois Lyotard later noted:
“For more than a quarter of a century we have been living in a state where all our great narratives have collapsed. One by one they were refuted, unpopular and difficult to maintain. Religion gave us the explanation for our existence that fell apart first, from the 5th century onwards. Then, in the XNUMXth century, it was followed by the secular hopes of political ideologies. At the end of the XNUMXth century, we entered the postmodern era. This era defined itself and was defined by others through its suspicion of all great narratives [XNUMX]."
In this part of the material, the author will try to answer the questions - how do the "new left" differ from the old ones and what is their political program? And why is it precisely thanks to them that political correctness and a culture of cancellation have become the norm in the West? Why have anti-racism, anti-colonialism and the cultivation of guilt about one's past become the norm in the West? What are the results of anti-colonialism and anti-racism?
The New Left, Political Correctness, and Cancellation Culture
The concept of "new left" appeared in 1960 at the suggestion of the sociologist Wright Mills. His famous "Letter to the New Left" became a source of inspiration for the left, in particular, for the policy document of the "new left" of the United States - the Port Huron Declaration on June 15, 1962 [1].
The main difference between the new left and the old was the loss of faith in the revolutionary potential of the working class, which in the West has become part of the middle class and has lost faith in the inevitability of the collapse of capitalism [1]. The New Left saw the Soviet system as repressive as the Western capitalist system.
The starting point of the "new left" was the thesis about the impossibility of achieving economic democracy within the framework of the traditional political system: when the right is in power, private privileged groups are fed, and when the left is government and state officials [1]. As Oleg Plenkov notes, the “new left” was separated from the old by the following:
“Firstly, a return in theory to the young Marx, who emphasized the alienation of man in the process of capitalist development, and not exploitation, as the “old left” did. The theory of alienation created opportunities for rapprochement with Freudianism, which made similar emphases. Secondly, according to the "new left", socialism should not be limited to political and social revolution, but should ensure the real liberation of a person, his free time, the change of the family in sexual and social terms. Thirdly, the individual must be freed from subordination to the traditional institutions of society, new forms of life organization must be available to him. Fourthly, it is not the organization that should dominate, but spontaneous actions. Fifth, the bearer of social change will not be the proletariat, which has merged with the middle class, but the intelligentsia, all kinds of outsiders in society [1].”
In addition, the "new left" demanded a break with the bourgeois past, which was declared obsolete and "generating fascism." The theorists of the Frankfurt School constructed a definition of "fascism" that could be extended to anything that seemed not progressive enough.
The Frankfurt School philosopher of Jewish origin Herbert Marcuse believed that industrial capitalism and communism are the direct heirs of Nazism and are totalitarian regimes ruled by soulless technocrats [2]. Paradoxically, it was the "denouncers" of Nazism who took care of the continuation of its existence and even strengthened it in the form of a myth - they see Nazism everywhere, like a rapist to an old maid behind every door [1].
As British historian David Priestland points out, at its core, the conflict between the new and old left was about equality and power: for the thinkers of the 1960s, economic equality alone (the core value of the old left) was not enough. The most important ideas were relations with the authorities, the cultural revolution and the end of all forms of hierarchy [2].
The New Revolutionaries were an alliance of social groups subjected to legislative, political or racial discrimination in a world dominated by the United States - an alliance of students, African Americans, Third World revolutionaries, women and homosexuals [2].
“In the fight against alienation, the New Left broke taboos, norms and traditional values. They broke the rules for the sake of provocation and in order to make the actions of the punitive bodies ridiculous [1]”,
- notes, in particular, the historian Ingrid Gilcher-Holtey.
At the same time, interestingly, it was the “new left” that became consistent adherents of the culture of political correctness. This led to the fact that, first, at the end of the 1980s, a left-liberal monopoly arose on radio, TV, and print media in Germany, which continues to function to this day. This system does not work as a conspiracy or a strict Mintrop, but as a combination of channels that communicate with each other, complementing each other according to the “hand washes hand” principle [1].
Deviation from the general line is undesirable, and uncomfortable people are isolated or subjected to moral ostracism. Long before the concept of “political correctness” appeared in the United States, in Germany there was already coercion to the left-liberal point of view, tabooing of topics and personalities [1]. As Oleg Plenkov notes, Angela Merkel was able to realize the goal of 1968 - the social hegemony of the “left”. And everything that belongs to the “right” is now taboo in Germany. But any hegemony in democracy is fraught with retaliatory opposition [1].
Subsequently, the culture of political correctness spread to other Western democracies. As Professor Olga Leontovich notes, in particular, political correctness has a complex relationship with science, literature and art. Scholars refuse to explore "dangerous" topics, such as juxtaposition of men and women; problems associated with single mothers, the homeless, obesity, alcohol and drugs; speak in favor of evaluating scientists on their merits, and not on the basis of the principle of equality, since they can be accused of political incorrectness, ostracized by colleagues, and dismissed from the university [12].
Scholars with traditional views are concerned that "politically correct" university professors are depriving students of the opportunity to get acquainted with the views of the greatest scientists of the past - "dead white men" such as Aristotle, and instead include the works of modern women and representatives of ethnic and sexual minorities in the programs, not because of their significance, but for the sake of multiculturalism and other political trends [12].
Despite the fact that political correctness is ostensibly aimed at protecting discriminated social groups, in fact it establishes prohibitions that come into conflict with the human right to freely express one's thoughts.
In addition, a new kind of communicative practice has emerged that involves boycotting celebrities, refusing to pay attention to their work for expressing politically incorrect views, called cancel culture (cancellation culture). In essence, cancellation culture is a modern manifestation of ostracism.
Speaking about the culture of cancellation, one cannot fail to mention such a concept as the spiral of silence proposed by the German political scientist E. Noel-Neumann. According to it, a person will be afraid to express his opinion if he is sure that he is in the minority, and in this regard, he may face public condemnation. If a person cannot speak freely or act as he sees fit, without taking into account the positions and attitudes of his environment, so as not to be in social isolation, we are talking about the manifestation of public opinion. The possibility of being isolated frightens people more than the inability to express their opinion on a particular issue [11].
This is one of the reasons why the practice of cancellation culture works successfully in the West.
Anti-colonialism and the cultivation of guilt as the new normal
Under the influence of the generational confrontation, in 1968, a previously unknown phenomenon of the West's repentance to its past arose - the repentance of the United States for the extermination of the native inhabitants of America and the oppression of African Americans during the years of slavery, the repentance of the former European metropolises for colonialism, the Germans and Europeans in general - for the extermination of Jews, the Italians - for the colonies in North Africa, the French - for Indochina and African possessions [1].
The French left cultivated a sense of guilt even about the reburial of Hector Berlioz in the Pantheon. Since Berlioz wrote the opera Les Troyens based on the epic poem Aeneid by the Roman poet Virgil, dedicated to the origins and glory of the Latin tribe, it turned out that the honoring of Berlioz is identical to the honoring of Mussolini and fascism [1]. Interesting question, isn't it? According to the current left, since Berlioz adhered to right-wing views, he does not belong in the Pantheon of the Republic.
In principle, the duty of repentance is a common sign of modern Europe. Feelings of guilt for their colonial past and revision of some pages stories, which may be perceived by society as politically incorrect, the need for "repentance" and redemption have become the new normal. This is especially true in Germany.
As the French writer Pascal Bruckner pointed out, the Third Reich eventually became the matrix of the entire history of Europe: everything connected with it - from the mass destruction of Indians in America, black slavery, all the troubles of colonialism - all this is the legacy and forerunner of the Third Reich. Now any massacre in history - from the Albigensians to the Vendeans, the devastation of the Rhenish Palatinate by Louis XIV or the Thirty Years' War in Bohemia - all herald the SS [6].
As historians note, the consequences of the liberation of African states from colonial dependence played a large role in the youth movement of the West. Of particular importance was the struggle for independence against the French colonialists in Algeria. It is these events that appear to have largely shaped the views of the "revolutionaries of 68" on the nature and consequences of European imperialism. Against this background, undoubtedly, the book of the revolutionary and philosopher F. Fanon "Curse Branded" caused a special resonance; he borrowed this phrase from the first verse of the communist anthem "The Internationale" [7].
This work belonged to those opuses that are not very rich in meaning. Here are her main ideas: firstly, Europe has committed unthinkable crimes against blacks; second, Europe is dying; thirdly, the colored population of the Earth can only be “liberated” through violence. Fanon wrote that "the purifying power of cruelty will rally the masses together in the struggle for national liberation” – a struggle that will change the consciousness of the people. Nevertheless, this book made an impression on the student environment: for students it was a suitable vehicle for justifying a radical opposition to capitalist society [7].
The youth of 1968 was convinced that the West was to blame for the troubles of the Third World countries, therefore, developing countries, firstly, should be left alone, given complete freedom of choice, and secondly, they should be given the means to develop the economy. However, both turned out to be a tragedy for Africa. The expected rise and triumph of democracy under conditions of self-determination resulted in endless military dictatorships, and the money that the West gave was simply stolen. Young radicals in 1968 did not take into account the factor of culture, believing that simple positive decisions and a willingness to change everything were enough [7].
Against the backdrop of cultivating guilt for bygone times in the West, it is forgotten that the "heart of darkness" of the last half century was not the colonial era, but independent Africa. The cruel reign of the “red negus” Mangistu Haile Mariam, the sinister buffoonery of Sekou Toure and Bokassa, the madness of the Liberians of Samuel Doe and Charles Taylor, the endless conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea, the civil war in Chad, Sudan, Somalia, Uganda, the practice of cannibalism in the Congo, the Rwandan genocide that claimed 1988 million lives in 4 . Yesterday's slaves in the process of decolonization in just a few years caught up in atrocities with their former masters [1].
They did not even just equal, but, according to the author, surpassed them. In Uganda, for example, the so-called Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) appeared in the 1980s, whose fighters are brutal killers, cannibals and kidnappers of tens of thousands of people, mainly children, who are made into militants, porters and sex slaves. Military coups became the main means of changing the direction of politics. All this can be called the results of decolonization.
The relatively rapid material progress characteristic of the last phase of colonialism has reversed since the mid-1960s. Wars, crises, conflicts, border closures, the destruction of highways and rail links, the failure to update rolling stock: all this led to the fact that the nature of travel in Africa became the same as in the 1982th century. The devastation was universal - in 1970, the Chadian ambassador to Belgium complained that the government could not contact him for a year. In Africa in the late 1950s, even malaria eradicated in the 1s began to return [XNUMX]. These were the results of decolonization.
Anti-racism as a new form of racism
As mentioned earlier, in 1968, young people protested not only against colonialism and imperialism, but also against racism, racial differences. The “new left” (which, in particular, Wright Mills wrote about) believed that the new carrier of revolutionary changes would not be the working class, but ethnic groups oppressed by the state, social outsiders. In the United States, for example, the struggle for the rights of the black population became part of the "revolution" of 1968.
For the heirs of 1968, immigration does not seem to be a chance for those who come and the countries that receive them, but a banal restitution: France, England, Spain pay off their debts to Africa by accepting her sons. Meanwhile, India and China have put their past in its place, become masters of their own destiny, and are not trying to get something for nothing [1].
The noble struggle against discrimination against the black population leads to the development of "reverse racism", or reverse discrimination directed against whites (anti-white racism). In particular, the BLM (Black Lives Matter) movement does not recognize the slogan White Lives Matter (White Lives Matter). In the United States, there are statements like: “The problem in this country are whites” (“The problem in this country is whites”). In the UK, XNUMX-year-old TV presenter Jon Snow was forced to apologize after commenting on anti-Brexit rallies:
"I have never seen so many white people in one place, it's an extraordinary story"
The anti-racist theme in its radical interpretation presents the white man as a "privileged creature by nature", which means that he can be suspected of racist behavior. Paradoxically, such an understanding of anti-racism gives rise to an inherently racist assertion that the white man is guilty, which contributed to the radicalization of protest movements. For example, meetings began to be held at a state university, to which whites were forbidden to enter [10].
It was the BLM movement that became the driving force behind the riots that have swept the United States and Western Europe in recent years. Their activists attack whites, rob shops and destroy monuments. The founders of the Black Lives Matter movement Patrice Cullors, Alicia Garza and Opal Tometi call themselves Marxists. The most radical conclusions of the "new left" socialist discourse on racial inequality were made within the framework of the so-called. Critical Race Theory (CRT). According to the CRT, race is not a biological reality, but a kind of social construct, supposedly “specially created for the oppression and exploitation of the colored population».
The widespread political correctness in the West, which is supposedly aimed at protecting socially vulnerable groups of the population, in fact, has led to reverse discrimination against whites and the restriction of freedom of speech.
The French writer M. Houellebecq in his novel Submission (2015), written in the genre of political fiction, wrote that
"Cuffed in the shackles of ideological anti-racism, the left is deprived of the opportunity not only to fight against the Muslim candidate, but even to criticize him."
Another French writer and philosopher, Alain Finkelcrot, noted that immigrants burned cars and buildings because they hated France.
“Of course there is discrimination and there are French racists, French people who don't like Arabs and blacks. They will love them even less when they realize how much they are hated by immigrants… The idea of a war against racism has gradually turned into a monstrous ideology of lies [9].”
What happens is what the German philosopher Oswald Spengler wrote about - the words about "humanity" and eternal peace, "colored" perceive this as a lack of will to protect themselves.
“Colored people are not pacifists. They will raise the sword if we put it down."
Spengler wrote in Years of Decisions. His prediction turned out to be accurate.
Conclusion
The traditionalist philosopher Julius Evola, who after the youth protests of 1968 became the idol of the youth of the right, as Marcuse was for the left, in his book Riding the Tiger, speaking of the current crisis in the field of morality and worldview, noted:
“Rejecting the recognition of an absolute internal basis for “good” and “evil”, we are offered to justify the existing moral standards to be guided by the same considerations that are resorted to in everyday life to achieve personal gain or public material good. This morality already bears a persistent imprint of nihilism. Since there are no longer any internal bonds, one can try to circumvent any external social and legal sanction; any action or deed becomes permissible if they do not directly conflict with the law [8].”
This can be attributed to the "revolution" of 1968 - "revolutionaries" and "new left" rejected the old traditions, morality, but did not offer anything in return. The moral and cultural consequences of 1968 include a change in the style of dress, a change in sexual morality, the recognition of sexual minorities, a change in behavior, the rejection of discipline in everything. In addition, within 10 years after 1968, the process of divorce of married couples was facilitated, abortion and contraception were allowed, and 18-year-olds received the right to vote [1].
Farid Zakaria, in The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy in the United States and Beyond, uses the film Titanic as an example to show how the reality of mass society and mass culture has significantly distorted the perspective, leveling ideas about everything. In the movies, when the ship is sinking, first-class passengers try to climb into the limited number of lifeboats, and only the determination of the sailors, who drive away the "plutocrats" clinging to the sides of the boats, allows women and children to get there.
However, according to the stories of survivors of that disaster, in fact, representatives of the upper classes almost without exception observed the rule "women and children first." This is irrefutably evidenced by statistics - in the first grade, all the children and almost all of the 144 women were saved (with the exception of five of them, and three themselves preferred to die with their husbands), and 70% of the men died. In the second class, 80% of the women were saved, and 90% of the men drowned [3].
At the same time, among the less wealthy passengers, almost only men were among the survivors. This indicates that in those days, the upper class adhered to an unwritten code of honor. James Cameron had reason to distort history - if he had shown the truth, no one would have believed him.
The "revolutionaries" of 1968 wanted the democratization of the elites, and they did democratize, just like ordinary citizens. However, they did not have more moral qualities from this. According to the same Farid Zakaria, just the opposite - the upper classes were freed from any sense of responsibility and became "like everyone else." After all, it is precisely “to be like everyone else” that the “new sincerity” requires from politicians.
As a result, 1968 marked a rejection of the old moral values, for the sake of "democratization of everyday life”, but in their place there was a vacuum, a void that was not filled with anything. As D. Priestland notes, in essence, the speeches of 1968 marked the beginning of the end of the post-war social order [2].
Использованная литература:
[1]. Plenkov O. Yu. "Revolution" of 1968: era, phenomenon, legacy. - St. Petersburg: Vladimir Dal, 2023.
[2]. Priestland D.P. Red Flag: A History of Communism; [per. from English] / David Priestland. – M. : Eksmo, 2011.
[3]. Farid Zakaria. The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy in the US and Beyond. from English, ed. V. L. Inozemtseva. - M. Ladomir, 2004.
[4]. Patrick J. Buchanan. Death of the West. – M.: AST, 2003.
[5]. See Jean-Francois Lyotard (trans. Geoff Bennington and Brian Massumi), The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, Manchester University Press, 1984.
[6]. Plenkov O. Yu. National repentance for Nazism in Germany in the context of today's European integration / O. Yu. Plenkov // Vestn. St. Petersburg. un-ta - 2014. - No. 4. - P. 91-100.
[7]. Baryshnikov V.N., Borisenko V.N., Plenkov O.Yu. Cultural results of the youth revolution // Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. Story. 2021. V. 66. Issue. 3. S. 1012–1026. https
[8]. Evola Y. Saddle the tiger. St. Petersburg: Vladimir Dal, 2016.
[9]. Taylor J. Race against time: Racial heresies in the 2016st century. – M.: Kuchkovo field, XNUMX.
[10]. Burmo D. Two France through the prism of social movements. [Electronic resource] URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/dve-frantsii-skvoz-prizmu-sotsialnyh-dvizheniy
[eleven]. Subbotina M.V. Cancellation culture: a manifestation of social justice or a new manipulation tool // Society: sociology, psychology, pedagogy. - 11. - No. 2022. - P. 3–34. – URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=37
[12]. Leontovich O.A. Political correctness, inclusive language and freedom of speech: the dynamics of concepts. Russian Journal of Linguistics. 2021. V. 25. No. 1. S. 194–220. DOI: 10.22363/2687-0088-2021-25-1-194-220.
Information