"When people talk about identity politics it’s often assumed they’re referring to the politics of marginalized groups like African Americans, LGBTQ people, or any group that is organizing on the basis of a shared experience of injustice — and that’s a perfectly reasonable assumption."
Eh, call it a draw? I'm not wedded to the list of terms people use.
If you mean to restrict things to the developed West, then “Socialism" is fairly accurate if somewhat broad, but then Western Cold War era leftism was itself pretty broad.
Yes, I suppose I could have explicitly stated I was writing from a European/American political context. That's usually the default assumption here on HN though.
Corbyn and Sanders are barely left-wing.
According to them they are very much left wing, more left than anyone else in modern politics! Using a strict dictionary definition that would count the Soviet dictatorship as a left wing political party, yes you're right, but people (in the west) use the word communism to describe that, not left-wing or leftism. And my post is about how language is used today, and how it's changing.
Blair, like Clinton, was no kind of left-wing politician, and certainly not typical of the post-1950s left wing in his country.
He was left wing of a sort. For example he pretty massively expanded the state, but in obfuscated ways that even today are causing problems and haven't really been tackled, e.g. the growth of "quangos", the level of state funding of the charity sector, the large increase in student and academic funding.
To me the acid test is this: if a politician calls themselves left wing, and hardly anyone disagrees, not their opponents and nor their allies, then that's what the word means. Blair is the most ambiguous case because the hard left of his party did sometimes claim he was in reality not left wing at all, but that was never true of Corbyn or Sanders. Not even the rump communist movement would have been so bold as to claim that Corbyn wasn't genuinely left wing.
However, Corbyn and Sanders did not (to my knowledge) ever advocate for suppression of their political opposition. Thus I wouldn't describe them as engaging in "leftism".
This whole discussion is a giant rabbit hole though. Perhaps the terms "left wing" and "woke" are sufficient to distinguish between what I'm calling "classical post 1950 left wing politics" and "the ideology of leftism".