The elections in Austria reveal the growing instability of the capitalist political apparatus

2 posts / 0 new
Last post
jk1921
The elections in Austria reveal the growing instability of the capitalist political apparatus
Printer-friendly versionSend by email

The discussion that follows was prompted by the article: The elections in Austria reveal the growing instability of the capitalist political apparatus. The discussion was initiated by jk1921.
Below is the discussion so far. Feel free to add your own comments!

jk1921
Interesting Piece

This is a very welcome and interesting analysis, which shows the value of not ignoring what is happening in the smaller countries. The analysis shows that even when the populist parties do not actually the win the election they have an effect on the rest of the political appartus of the bourgeoisie that tends to be negative in terms of managing the interests of the national capital. Moreover, it shows the general effect of decompostion on the entire political apparatus, which is more and more highlighted by a tendency towards short-term partisan or even personal interests over the broader needs of the entire captialist class (the recent revelations by a Democratic Party insider that the 2016 primary was effectively rigged for Clinton from the start are another example of how even the more "responsible" bourgeois parties are falling victim to these centrifugal forces.)

Still, the article raises continuing questions for me about our substantive understanding of "populism." Here, it is explained that the Austrian populists are mostly neo-liberal free marketers, something which is generally not the case elsewhere (but what about UKIP?), for example Le Pen's chief economic advisor was a former close aid to the leftist socialist Chevenement and even Trump--although he has little intention of following through on his promises in office--ran on something of a "welfare chauvinist" platform--closer to Bernie Sanders or Jeremey Corbyn's economic sensibilities than the radical free marketers in the Republican Party he took over. In this sense, Macron really does seem like an outlier, having appropriated a certain "populist" outsider image, while championing a mostly neo-liberal vision that seems to have quickly angered the very electorate that put him office to stop a "fascist." Of course, all of this only highlights the growing confusion and instability in the bourgeois political apparatus the world over as a result of decomposition.

Of course, as the article points out, it might be the case that these so-called "populsit" parties actually have their greatest effect when they are out of power, as once they win they quickly lose their legitimacy as crusaders against the establishment as they are forced to compromise and govern even if in a haphazard and often incompetent way.