Euston Manifesto is Great, But...

Earlier this year a bunch of left wingers and progressives in Britain wrote the Euston Manifesto, in which, according to Martin Walker, they hammered out

a statement of principles in support of democracy, freedom of speech and ideas, and firm opposition to terrorism, all forms of totalitarianism and all soft-headed apologies for it.

Which is nice. Now the manifesto has moved to the United States where

a number of leading academics and intellectuals have signed the Euston Manifesto, and issued their own statement on American liberalism that endorses it.

This is great. I guess.

'Drawing the lesson of the disastrous history of left apologetics over the crimes of Stalinism and Maoism, as well as more recent exercises in the same vein (some of the reaction to the crimes of 9/11, the excuse-making for suicide terrorism, the disgraceful alliances lately set up inside the 'anti-war' movement with illiberal theocrats) we reject the notion that there are no opponents on the Left,' the manifesto says. 'We reject, similarly, the idea that there can be no opening to ideas and individuals to our right.'

But you know, after 30 years of pushing conservative reform against a hail of reckless rhetoric from the left, I have my doubts.

The problem for the left is that its political power depends on the continuing dependency of the poor and the government workers on continuing government spending.

So it can never really emerge from its love affair with government power and domestic government spending, or slough off its hatred for the market and its freedom from government dependence.

The Euston Manifesto is great. But don’t expect it to change anything.