We live in a time of untrammelled and footloose capitalism. Free market capitalism has hardened into a dogmatic and monolithic creed that brooks no opposition. The high priests of capitalism on the couch argue that it “works well for most of the people most of the time.”

Despite her policy being despotic, antisocial and an economic cul-desac, Margaret Thatcher boasted “there is no alternative” to capitalism. That has prompted many to believe we now live in the age of what political and cultural theorist Mark Fisher calls ‘capitalist realism’. But has socialist realism died? That may not be the case.

However, one thing is clear ~ that the left is yet to posit a coherent alternative political and economic model to capitalism. Given the proliferation of right-wing governments and the marginalisation of left forces in Europe and elsewhere, some analysts have begun to believe that it is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism.

That doesn’t mean one should assume that social democrats, Keynesians and Marxists would be living endlessly as history’s permanent losers. The 2008-9 economic crisis which threatened the new liberal order was a defining moment. While the lazy left failed to capitalise on the crisis, the right-wing parties and groups forged a new narrative in nativist’, ‘sovereigntist’, ‘illiberal’, ‘populist’ and ‘far-right civilisationist’ terms.

The far-right parties also took full advantage of the rise of transnationalism, liberalisation of international trade as also of deep structural and technological changes that reshaped European society. In Europe, nativism is being whitewashed into populism. The right-wing is using it as a fuzzy blanket to camouflage its failure. The identity politics and nativism have dealt a lethal blow to the left parties. It has created political cleavages and cut into the voting share of the left.

The rise of radical right populism has shifted political competition from the traditional left-right schism to a new cleavage opposing centrist parties to populist parties from the right and the left. Francis Fukuyama has written how right-wing populism has articulated issues like rejection of globalisation, hostility to immigration, Euroscepticism and Brexit to capture power.

While there has been a decline in the voting share of moderate parties like social democrats, Christian democrats and liberal parties, there is a perceptible increase in the voting share of the radical right and the Greens. According to one analyst, the traditional economic left–right dimension has been replaced by a new cultural leftright conflict called GALTAN (green-alternative-libertarian versus traditional-authoritariannationalist).

The right-wing tide across the world seems nowhere close to ebbing. Latin America is the only region that has bucked the trend. The situation in Latin America is different from Europe. In recent decades, social movements have acquired a new momentum.

Some of the leftwing governing parties have their origins in social movements and they certainly bank on their support and mobilisation. Social movements have created new terrain of struggles in Latin America. The new left views developments in a new cultural and political economy context.

As Argentine sociologist Ronaldo Munck explains, revolutionary currents ~ from feminism to ecology and from indigenous to post-structuralist thinking ~ have enriched the theory and practice of social transformation, nowhere more so than in Latin America. Julia Cagé and Thomas Piketty argue in their forthcoming book, A History of Political Conflict: Elections and Social Inequalities in France, 1789-2022, that the potential strength of the left’s electoral base remains strong. To assume that the working classes have entirely abandoned the left is equally misleading.

They assert in their recent article in The Guardian that “not only is this working-class switch away from the left not the case, but it has never been the case.” What should the left do? Marx himself had theorized a time when capitalism will morph into its opposite. Is precariat the new proletariat? The proletariat today has become what sociologist Carlos Forment calls those who hold “plebian citizenship.”

Today the urban slum dwellers fall in the same category. French philosopher Alaine Badiou now talks of ‘nomadic proletariat.’ Today the ideological spectrum has become compressed. The far-right parties have forged salad bar alliances by reaching out to groups with ideological differences. The left groups also need to resort to salad bar ideologies to win votes. In last year’s elections, Brazil’s Luis Inacio Lula Da Silva did precisely that by reaching out to several centre-right groups including the Social Democratic Party. The left seems to lack its imagination for the future, or the same hasn’t been articulated eloquently. ‘Another world is possible’ or ‘other possible worlds’ are at best catchy slogans. These need to be theorised.

The left must realise that the welfare state is getting worn out under the weight of economic globalisation. As sociologist Manuel Castells argues, if new ideas are not developed, social democracy will lose its essence. If “welfare state and its relationship with trade unionism…is abandoned, [social democracy] will be liquidated.” Today, neither the proletariat nor the trade unions can claim to hold a powerful base, as they did in the 20th century.

The need of the hour is to build a new broader coalition that includes LGBTQ+, antiracist and feminist collectives, among others. Capitalism has triumphed, explains philosopher Laura Llevadot, because “it has understood how to appropriate narcissistic desire”, while “the moralistic left has limited itself to lecturing people.”

The left also needs to clarify its ideological positioning. It must re-examine its position towards inequality and social justice and formulate its stand on the future of work, basic income and economy for the many. Political scientist Adam Przeworski suggests that the left focus more on mobilising the middle classes to remain relevant in view of the rapid decline of the working class.

In his essay, “what should the left propose?”, Brazilian philosopher Roberto Unger says that “the question should not be ‘how much globalisation?’ but rather “what manner of globalisation?” Political scientist Wendy Brown believes the left “needs to set out its own vision…. That vision must be broadly compelling, and not iterate grievance but a better, more livable world.” Will the left re-invent itself remains a million-dollar question.