In our time, pragmatism is ruling politics more than ideology and values. Well, save for the populists and right-wingers who are quite ideological, but sometimes without knowing it and not in a very sophisticated way. Social democrats, too, have reduced their emphasis on ideology, especially after the fall of the Soviet Union. Earlier, they would proudly speak about socialism and communism, and sing ‘The Internationale’ (‘L’Internationale’ in French) at party meetings, even wiping off a tear from the corner of their eye.
The Internationale was written for the First International Workers Congress in 1864 by Eugene Pottier, an Anarchist who attended the conference, and the melody was composed by Pierre de Geyter, a Marxist. The official version of the lyrics is from 1871, written in French and translated into countless languages. Some even thought it should be sung to the tune of the French national anthem, ‘La Marseillaise’, with references to the French Revolution, starting in 1789, and its fundamental democratic principles of ‘liberty, equality, and fraternity.
The Internationale has since been used by political parties on the left, all the way from communists and socialists to radical as well as pragmatic social democrats. I remember it being used by the Norwegian Labour Party in my youth, with its catchy sound and lyrics. I believe even conservatives were a bit moved.
It was a time when religion still played a major role in the West, in everyday life, and to some extent in politics. Today, religion has a lesser and more subtle influence. Earlier, it was more direct, and the Internationale emphasizes the goals of the workers’ struggle and all people’s unification in justice and equality, almost in a religious sense. It was to be a struggle for freedom for all people in a march toward victory.
In Norway, I remember when Einar Førde (1943-2004) 1979 became the Minister of Education and Church Affairs (the country had a state church till 2012), the newly appointed minister on the left in the social democratic Labour Party and not a church-going man, had to explain why he thought he could be a minister of religion and church affairs. He said that since he was interested in ideology and foundations of politics, he might even become a useful minister of religion too. Besides, he was born and bred in a village on the country’s west coast ‘Bible belt’, and his primary school years had included Bible studies and the learning of the catechism, hymns, and more, and together with his classmates, he had read the ‘Lord’s Prayer at the beginning of every school day, attended prayer house meetings, which were as much a center of the social as the religious community cultures.
Yet, it is also true that leftists and the Labour Party in general, in power most of the time after WWII till the 1970s, often wanted to reduce the role of religion in society, and they succeeded as for much of the public role of religion. But even today, a clear majority of the Norwegians say they have a religious faith, but, in line with democratic ideals, they also want to interpret dogma and traditions their way, not necessarily following the religious leaders. Today, Islam and other religions have become quite visible in the country, especially in large cities. The time of a single monolithic religion is also over as the country has had massive immigration in the recent 50 or 60 years, many of whom belong to Islam and other religions. Also, many church congregations have had a revival of their activities thanks to immigrants.
And now from religion back to ideology. The term ideology means a system of ideas, thinking, and opinions, and it is especially used in economics and politics. Words like philosophical outlook, with doctrines and principles, also help define the term. In religion, different faiths have different moral traditions and practices, and that is also the case with ideologies. It is interesting to note that terms like moral standards and values are more often used by conservatives than socialists.
In politics, the left has a more defined and universal ideology than the right. The right would often not like to use the word ideology about its thinking and principles, not even about capitalism. Capitalists define their thinking and foundations in more practical terms. Since it is the world’s ruling economic system, currently unchallenged, the capitalists find it less necessary to define it in detail, even in a time of globalization. Furthermore, the right finds the word ideology to mean that one should succumb to the set of thinking of somebody else. On the liberal right, one would emphasize the individual’s right to find his or her ways. But on the far right, conservatives would be more orthodox and allow fewer individual freedoms.
The right-wing, not just the moderate and liberal right, has in certain ways become more principled about ideology, and it is often a nationalist ideology, even with ethnic overtones. In the West, right-wingers want fewer immigrants, indeed from far away, and people of non-Christian religions. They want immigrants to assimilate and give up their original cultures. They also want to protect traditional and sometimes old-fashioned values for family and social life.
In recent politics in Europe, there has been an increased influence of very conservative leaders, notably in Italy, Sweden, and the UK. This week, the new conservative Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson was installed, supported by the right-wing Sweden Democrats. In the UK, Prime Minister Liz Truss has suggested right-wing policies, although to major resistance. In Italy, Giorgia Meloni, Prime Minister-designate, will soon form her government. In Hungary and Poland, very conservative governments have ruled for some years. These governments have clear ideological foundations, more typical for the far right than the moderate conservatives.
The social democrats and other more moderate parties in the political center rule in most other European countries. Unlike what I have underlined above, these parties have become more pragmatic and less ideological than before. This is said to have to do with the current situation in Europe, including electricity shortages, high inflation, and price increases, forcing politicians to be pragmatic rather than ideological. Even the famous young Swedish environmentalist Greta Thunberg has recently criticized Germany for not allowing continued expansion of electricity production in nuclear power plants. In these cases, there is less ideology than in practical cases. But as for the West’s support of Ukraine against the Russian invasion of the country, there is a clear ideological dimension.
Finally, let me make a reference to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights from 1948, which is principled, but not ideological. It is important to realize that certain foundations are universal, although even in such cases there may be questions about some aspects. As for international organizations, the United Nations is an organization above ideologies, based on values above ideologies. However, also in the UN, some aspects are not neutral and universally democratic, indeed as regards the composition of the Security Council and its permanent members with a veto. Ideologies and principles should be used to change the situation. Old traditions about what is practically preferable should not prevail.