Future Directions for the Left Julia Gillard

With Labor in government, the key question for the Left in determining its future direction is its relationship to government. To date the Left has responded in a variety of ways to Labor in government, most of which have been profoundly inadequate. One factor conditioning such responses has been a deep sense of disillusionment with the actions of Labor governments by many committed to the Left. Having worked for the election of Labor Governments the tendency of the left is to scream ‘sell-out’ when they fail to deliver the goods. The political constraints arising from the current nature of Australian society restricting the actions of Labor Governments are ignored. This cycle of expectation and disappointment is fuelled by the Labor Party often promising the world when in opposition, whether or not the promises can be upheld in government, and the lack of political experience with and education about the realities of government.

CURRENT RANGE OF RESPONSES BY THE LEFT TO LABOR IN GOVERNMENT
1) Total Opposition : The revolutionary Left continues, as expected, to oppose Labor Governments as hindering the prospects for revolutionary change. This perspective will not be discussed in detail here but clearly offers no strategy of advance for the Left.
2) New Left Party/Coalitions : The sense of disillusionment with Labor in government has provided old Left interests with fertile ground for ideas about new political parties or coalitions outside of the ALP. It is argued that when the Left in trade unions, social movements and inside and outside the ALP is united it wins through. Consequently what is needed is a structural formation to ensure this unity is the norm.
The implied relationship to Labor in government is one of opposition. By advocating a unification of the fragments of the Left this perspective ignores the reality that even if unity could be achieved the Left would be weak and marginalised. This very emphasis on a structural solution ensures the political constraints within Australian society that have resulted in a weak left and in Labor Governments ‘selling out’ are not recognised.
3) Trade Union Domination : Both within and outside the ALP many hold the view that the Labor Party is solely the mouthpiece of the trade union movement and Labor Governments should only be strived for on the basis that under their administration the climate for achieving industrial victories is better. This view in identifying industrial militancy as the sole force for social change ignores the role of social movements. Indeed in advocating an industrial free for all it is not even an effective strategy for maximising trade union gains. Obviously those holding this view are opposed to the Accord and in effect Labor Governments.
4) Food Preservers Union View : A commonly held perspective on Labor in government particularly within the ALP Left and one articulated by FPU officials is while the Left should in general support the election of Labor Governments it should reserve the right to analyse each decision of those governments and decide whether to support or oppose it. Persuasive at first sight, this perspective in fact ensures the Left would be locked into a separate and oppositionalist position from Labor Governments. By advocating the Left should stand aloof from Labor governments and judge their actions any possibility for the Left effecting [sic] government policies and programmes is implicitly rejected. No advances could be made as presumably the Left’s role would simply be to articulate ideal policies and oppose any Labor Government action which fell short of these policy goals. Once again the underlying political realities of Australian society are ignored in preference to blaming the ‘opportunists’ in government.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS
For the Left to make any real advance all the perspectives on the relationship to Labor in government need to be rejected in favour of a concept of strategic support for Labor governments. We need to recognise the only possibility for major social change is under long period of Labor administration. Within that administration the Left needs to be willing to participate to shape political outcomes, recognizing the need to except [sic] often unpalatable compromises in the short term to bolster the prospect of future advance. The task of pushing back the current political constraints by changing public opinion would need to be tackled by the Left through government, social movements and trade unions.

While this option of strategic support for Labor in government is easily stated, providing it with real meaning by discussing the details of what is meant is a task that has not yet been undertaken, either within the Forum or outside it. Any discussion of this kind is only associated in many people’s minds with the divisions and suggestions of structural change within the Socialist Left. The tendency of this debate to collapse down to solely a question of splits and structure must be resisted. To have the debate only conducted at that level is to make the same error as those advocating a new Left political party or coalition of trying to impose a structural solution on what are essentially political problems.

Whilst over time there will be realignments within the Left generally it is the ideological basis of those changes which is important. The Forum can and should play a role particularly through its publications of stimulating discussion of the political issues surrounding the question of the Left’s relationship to Labor Governments. In particular the details of what constitutes strategic support for Labor Governments and its implications for Left political practice needs to be defined.

Charles of macleod (Reply)
Sun 01 Aug 10 (09:01am)