|
Is it really a new democratic left?
Lebanese University professor Saud Mawla joins debate on HYD
BEIRUT - Saud Mawla
March 2005
BEIRUT – The announcement of the birth of the
Democratic Left Movement (more known for its Arabic acronym
HYD) has been a new qualitative and bold step in the history
of Lebanese and Arab political activity especially that it
presented a unique political and intellectual critique when
reviewing the past experience of the Arab national liberation
movement including its successes and failures, and most
importantly it presented the youth with new hope. This youth
has always been the heart of every true “leftist” activity.
The new movement has in fact inherited and is
the continuation of previous democratic, national and
revolutionary experiences that have characterized groups of
leftists activists who have been opposed to party stereotypes
(that are called Stalinist while in fact these are Leninist
and Trotskyist par excellence) and to canned ideological
frames (which some secular leftists share with national
fascists and neo-Islamist). The groups of leftist activists
have launched several initiatives and have organized
themselves over the past decade in more than one style, the
most famous of them (even though not the only one) was the
Democratic Forum.
I recall among these transparent and audacious
self-criticisms that of the Organization of Communist Labor in
the early nineties and the brave experience of the democratic
opposition inside the Lebanese Communist Party and that of the
Congregation for Lebanese Dialogue and finally the personal
experience of a number of leftist intellectuals in the fields
of journalistic and cultural writing and their contribution in
defending civil society, democracy, individual liberties,
human rights, and humanitarian causes such as the Palestinian
cause.
I allow myself here to include another branch,
which is also leftist, embodied in the development of the
rational and enlightened Islamic line in expressing itself
within the framework of Arabic, international, as well as
Lebanese dialogue.
These branches came to represent a unique case
in the past few years as they were characterized by a kind of
solid revolutionary enthusiasm against campaigns aimed to
bring back the civil war and against Arab impotence and
ultra-Islamic and ultra-nationalistic movements and all
aspects of corruption and tyranny.
All this was not to be realized easily, it
required awareness, maturity, commitment and cooperation but
first and most essentially a vision and a dream. This made me
one of the most excited supporters of this new movement and
among the ones calling for its backing and improving its
theoretical tools and organizational structures so that it
becomes capable of touching the thoughts and initiatives of
all youth, leftist and democratic moves that are likely to
expand and develop in the next decade. And the only greeting I
could offer my comrades in the new Democratic Left (from one
of the founders of the New Left in the seventies and the New
Islamic Movement in the eighties and the Democratic Islamic
Left today) is observing what I consider a renewal and a
differential approach in the founding statement and practice:
1. Avoiding the logic of ideological
classifications or the bragging about belonging to the
‘nationalist’ rank and other forms of ideological blindness
and political short-sightedness. The new Democratic Left has
taken a daring step here in view of the nature of enthusiastic
youth who are constantly looking for slogans and leftist
revolutionary principles that serve more their personal
aspirations than the actual needs of the country. Having made
this observation, I expect that the new movement will suffer
from schisms (even if small or marginal) as it advances in
practicing this leftist responsibility in formulating a
national political democratic thought that is rational,
open-minded and diversified and adopting a proper
organizational structure for this attempt.
2. The revolutionary ability to try and capture
reality as it is and describe it without deforming it or
expressing nostalgia about the past or belittling the
achievements made possible by the sacrifices of average people
in Lebanon and the Arab world (i.e. putting people first -
something that old leftist movements failed to recognize).
Accordingly, the movement was able to tackle the sensitive
issue of Lebanese confessionalism by realizing that abandoning
sectarianism and tribalism and adopting institutions and the
rule of law is achieved first by coexistence and second by
sorting out differences through dialogue and third by
civilized settlements and by adopting a culture of openness
and mediation and moderation as well as democratic values
(justice, human rights) and achieving harmony between state
and religion and between justice and freedom and between
individual rights and groups’ rights and between Lebanon’s
independence as an entity and its Arab belonging.
3. The serious attempt at looking for common
factors that permit the formulation of a dynamic program,
allowing everybody to put history behind them once and for all
and build for a true national reconciliation based on healthy
democratic development. This constitutes a departure from
previous leftist movements with their decisive and radical
standpoints where settlements and reconciliations used to
signal concessions that bring its people to the ‘right’ of the
political spectrum.
4. A simple, honest and clear rhetoric that is
not too pretentious yet one that does not avoid raising
realistic questions, all in a transparent and modest language
that does not take people for granted. Rather, it acknowledges
their rights and roles and aims at involving them in seeking
answers and solutions. In raising the issue of liberties,
sovereignty and independence and principles of Arab
cooperation and the proper Lebanese-Syrian partnership, the
new Democratic Left has entered history and found good
response from Syrian and Arab leftists who value justice. It
is the historical return to the real meaning of leftism and
Arabism in forging a leftist Arab democratic path towards
liberation and change.
5. Bringing back what’s good and valuable in
the local and international leftist tradition especially in
striving for the best and the most just, in line with local
Islamic, Christian, and humanitarian values and the
abandonment of single party mentality and inherited leadership
similar to Russian and Bolshevik traditions.
6. The movement does not intend to become a new
party to be added to the list of aging and static Lebanese and
Arab parties. As such, it did not claim to be the party of all
people and did not give unrealistic promises and avoided empty
slogans.
7. The movement did not claim to be the
exclusive voice of all prominent intellectuals who would
release statements of condemnations or support and hold
infinite seminars. It rather aimed to launch a new form of
intellectual dynamism through debate, interaction, honesty and
accountability in order to formulate a clear, humane, just,
and open democratic leftist rhetoric that tackles vital issues
of nation, society, identity, sovereignty, freedom, democracy,
and equality. The movement incorporates all these issues
within the framework of the national democratic struggle for a
new
Lebanon
and a new Arab world and a better world.
For all these reasons, and despite few
disparities, I find myself, as an Islamist, not only
sympathizing with the new movement but an active supporter
willing to contribute in activating its role and prospects
especially among the youth.
Saud Mawla is a professor of philosophy at the
Lebanese University. This article is a translation of the
original which appeared in Arabic in the Beirut-based daily,
Assafir newspaper. Alternative publishes it courtsey of both
the author and the mentioned newspaper.
|