Clear Leftist Thinking is Not Always an Oxymoron

In politics, there is a big difference between loyal opposition and subversive obstruction. There seems to be much more of the latter than the former lately. Political lines have been so clearly defined that there are not many examples of people from either end of the political spectrum breaking free from their dogmatic, ossified thought patterns in order to open their minds to consider new thoughts that may contradict their core beliefs. That is why it is encouraging to know that documents such as the Euston Manifesto exist.

A. Preamble
We are democrats and progressives. We propose here a
fresh political alignment. Many of us belong to the Left, but the principles
that we set out are not exclusive. We reach out, rather, beyond the socialist
Left towards egalitarian liberals and others of unambiguous democratic
commitment. Indeed, the reconfiguration of progressive opinion that we aim for
involves drawing a line between the forces of the Left that remain true to its
authentic values, and currents that have lately shown themselves rather too
flexible about these values. It involves making common cause with genuine
democrats, whether socialist or not.
The present initiative has its roots in and has found a constituency through the Internet, especially the "blogosphere".
It is our perception, however, that this constituency is under-represented
elsewhere — in much of the media and the other forums of contemporary political
life. The broad statement of principles that follows is a declaration of
intent. It inaugurates a new Website, which will serve as a resource for the
current of opinion it hopes to represent and the several foundation blogs and
other sites that are behind this call for a progressive realignment.

Whenever I see "socialist", "progressive" and "liberal" used in the same paragraph I usually recoil, but it is a small price to pay for an example of loyal opposition in this case. Besides, not all forms of socialism are equal. For example, one should not confuse the socialism of Hugo Chavez's Venezuela with that of Michelle Bachelet's Chile, or even Lula de Silva's Brazil.

B. Statement of principles (Each of these is expanded upon
within the Manifesto)

1) For democracy
2) No apology for tyranny
3) Human rights for all
4) Equality
5) Development for freedom
6) Opposing Anti-Americanism
7) For a two-state solution (re: Israel/Palestine)
8) Against racism
9) United against terror
10) A new internationalism
11) A critical openness
12) Historical truth
13) Freedom of ideas
14) Open source
15) A precious heritage

No apology for terrorism, against Anti-Americanism, against terror, in favor of historical truth, in favor of democracy. One could be forgiven for thinking that much if it came from the Neocon playbook!

C. Elaborations (See website for details)

D. Conclusion
It is vitally important for the future of progressive
politics that people of liberal, egalitarian and internationalist outlook should
now speak clearly. We must define ourselves against those for whom the entire
progressive-democratic agenda has been subordinated to a blanket and simplistic
"anti-imperialism" and/or hostility to the current US administration. The values
and goals which properly make up that agenda — the values of democracy, human rights, the continuing battle against unjustified privilege and power,
solidarity with peoples fighting against tyranny and oppression — are what most
enduringly define the shape of any Left worth belonging to.

I find it hard to argue with this document when taken in its totality.

I wonder what the subervise obstructionists that claim to speak for the entire Left have to say about this?

Even more telling than the prominent Leftists who have signed the Euston Manifesto, are the prominent Leftists who have not.