Hello, from Australia!

[Watermelon Man]

Hi all,

I am from Victoria in Australia. We have a vibrant leftist scene here, although it is often overshadowed in the international media by our ongoing struggles with racism and conservative politicians.

I am what you might call an eco-socialist.

Years ago, I might have joined the Communist Party of Australia or the Socialist Alliance, but I have come to recognise that both those organisations are currently incapable of actually achieving any goals that I would like to see achieved in Australian society and politics.

I have been left-leaning since my high school days. I am now an historian, and my work tends to reflect this. I hope RevLeft treats me well!

- WM

[NoOneIsIllegal]

A historian among our ranks! I hope you drop some great knowledge upon us in the History forums :D
That's a coincidence. For a few years, I described myself as an "eco-socialist" as well. A small group of us (friends of mine, socialists and social democrats) tried to infiltrate the local Green Party and have it become more radical. Bad idea; the Greens (in the United States) are just frustrated democrats without corporate funding...

Anyways, welcome to the board. I believe there are a few other Australians on the board.

[ellipsis]

welcome, you seem to have good politics, hope u enjoy the forum.

[Chambered Word]

A small group of us (friends of mine, socialists and social democrats) tried to infiltrate the local Green Party and have it become more radical. Bad idea; the Greens (in the United States) are just frustrated democrats without corporate funding...

I don't consider the Greens here radical at all either.

Nonetheless, it should be interesting to have you among us. Welcome to RL! :)

[dernier combat]

Welcome from a fellow Victorian.

[Watermelon Man]

...the Greens (in the United States) are just frustrated democrats without corporate funding...

I've heard as much. The Australian Greens aren't incredibly radical either. They are ideologically progressive, but the duopoly that is Australian politics requires small political parties to at least try to be pragmatic if they are to get anywhere useful. This seems to have worked for now.

Some hardline environmentalists feel alienated by the Greens, especially the Victorian division which is driven far more by social justice issues than ecological ones, but there are no major policy changes or decisions that I can point to and say 'that's where they sold out, right there', because I don't think they have. They might in the future, in which case I'm gone. Or, if the current trend in state politics continues - where conservative governments are forming majorities simply because the electorate gets bored after consecutive terms under the same government, no matter if its left or right - the Greens might find themselves reacting strongly to conservative governments and becoming more radicalised. Indeed, if the likes of Tony Abbott were to become PM, there would be protests from anyone with a brain. The guy is an effing nutcase racist.

[Niccolò Rossi]

The Greens aren't 'green on the outside, red on the inside'. They're liberal through and through. I have no idea what a 'progressive' is, but suffice it to say they're not radical, their not revolutionary, they're not socialist. Let's be honest about the matter.

None-the-less, welcome to the board and I look forward to your contributions.

Nic.

[Watermelon Man]

Situating Green parties and green politics is always contentious and complicated. There are Green parties across the globe - some of them are aligned with social liberalism, social progressivism, ecosocialism, ecoanarchism, ecofeminism and any other variation on the theme you can think of. The strand the usually connects them is environmentalism and ecological sustainability. Because of the ambiguity of green ideology, parties are very different in their policy platforms. You can arguably find policies within the Australian Greens platform that represent social liberalism and socialism and eco-socialism. And more. Unfortunately since the Victorian state election and the whole policy costing debacle, many state divisions have removed their full policy documents from the internet in place of very vague, warm-and-fluffy sounding statements of principle on things like healthcare, transport, climate change and what have you. This makes it hard for the discerning voter to work out what they're all about.

No - they're not revolutionary in the traditional violent-uprising-and-big-speeches way. They're a left political party working through the existing system for non-violent reform. Unfortunately, the organisations that might be considered properly radical and revolutionary in Australia, or even vaguely representing such a mode of political agitation - the Socialist Alliance for example - are plagued by university-style sectarianism and a complete inability to relate to the electorate.

[Niccolò Rossi]

Situating Green parties and green politics is always contentious and complicated. There are Green parties across the globe - some of them are aligned with social liberalism, social progressivism, ecosocialism, ecoanarchism, ecofeminism and any other variation on the theme you can think of. The strand the usually connects them is environmentalism and ecological sustainability. Because of the ambiguity of green ideology, parties are very different in their policy platforms. You can arguably find policies within the Australian Greens platform that represent social liberalism and socialism and eco-socialism. And more.

To be honest, I'm not even sure what half of this means. While some people like yourself might be able to discern between 'social liberalism' and 'social progressivism' for me they don't mean anything.

What's fundamental is not whether the group is 'social liberal' or 'social progressive' or 'eco-whatever' - what's fundamental is what class interests the group defends.

Consider yourself as a Melbournian and myself as a Sydneysider, my question wasn't concerning the plethora of green parties internationally but the green party you are a member of.


Unfortunately, the organisations that might be considered properly radical and revolutionary in Australia, or even vaguely representing such a mode of political agitation - the Socialist Alliance for example - are plagued by university-style sectarianism and a complete inability to relate to the electorate.

However they like to dress it up, my opinion is that Socialist Alliance is not a communist (socialist) organisation. Nonetheless, if we take this as a criticism of all communists and communist groups in Australia, I think you're off base. The question is not whether communists are able to 'relate to the electorate'. We don't give a fuck about 'the electorate'. The working class is the only possible agent of social revolution. The interests of communists are always and exclusively the interests of working class.

Nic.

[Watermelon Man]

What's fundamental is not whether the group is 'social liberal' or 'social progressive' or 'eco-whatever' - what's fundamental is what class interests the group defends.

That's fine, and my point was that it is contentious to say the Greens are liberal, through and through, when their policies reflect a variety of ideological positions. The class interests of the Greens are fairly obvious when reading their employment and industrial relations policy - which, by the way, I have just found has been put back up on their website:

greens.org.au/policies/sustainable-economy/employment-and-industrial-relations

A bourgeoise party would not state that 'the right to be a member of a union, to collectively bargain, to collectively withhold labour and collectively organise in the workplace is essential to achieving a sustainable and democratic future', or that 'the objectives of profitability and efficiency should not override social and ecological objectives', or that 'free, independent and democratic unions are an essential pillar of a civil society.' While you can claim these are mere words, the Greens position on this and their voting history in parliament was enough to gain the support of the ETU in the federal election in their Melbourne campaign. Additionally, many of the currently elected Greens MPs began their career in politics through trades unions and not the environmental movement.





However they like to dress it up, my opinion is that Socialist Alliance is not a communist (socialist) organisation. Nonetheless, if we take this as a criticism of all communists and communist groups in Australia, I think you're off base.

This was not a criticism of all communist or socialist organisations in Australia, and I don't care if they are 'real' communists or socialists. I'm simply pointing out that there are barely any non-union political groups that have made an ounce of difference in our society, whether it be revolutionary or not.


The question is not whether communists are able to 'relate to the electorate'. We don't give a fuck about 'the electorate'. The working class is the only possible agent of social revolution. The interests of communists are always and exclusively the interests of working class.

Does it not occur to you that the working class belongs to the electorate? My meaning was this: when was the last time Barry and Steve at the mines in WA, or Rachel in the office, or Tony at the plumbers, gave a rats about communism? That's what I mean about not being able to relate.

[Niccolò Rossi]

The class interests of the Greens are fairly obvious when reading their employment and industrial relations policy

Funnily enough I agree!


A bourgeoise party would not state that 'the right to be a member of a union, to collectively bargain, to collectively withhold labour and collectively organise in the workplace is essential to achieving a sustainable and democratic future', or that 'the objectives of profitability and efficiency should not override social and ecological objectives', or that 'free, independent and democratic unions are an essential pillar of a civil society.'

Funnily enough I disagree! Disagree vehemently. These have nothing in common with a revolutionary proletarian perspective.


Does it not occur to you that the working class belongs to the electorate?

No doubt. But workers qua electorate has nothing in common with workers qua class.

Nic.

[Watermelon Man]

Funnily enough I disagree! Disagree vehemently. These have nothing in common with a revolutionary proletarian perspective.

I sense a degree of disdain for the Greens on your behalf, yes? The Greens are unapologetically a postindustrial left party - the industrial Old Left tends to not play well with them. Neither does the Australian Sex Party... but that's what happens when you go for the hipster vote. But anyway...

No one is claiming that the Greens are revolutionary. If they are socialists, they are democratic socialists. Whether you count that as 'real' socialism is an entirely different matter - something tells me you're comments about the Socialist Alliance indicate something of a dislike for democratic socialists. In any case, these policy positions are related to industrial relations and workplace rights - not revolutions. The Greens support workers and the working class. The fact they do not advocate revolution as the path to a better society is irrelevant; one does not need to harbour a desire to overthrow the existing societal and economic system in order to advocate for the rights of workers. As I implied before, today's working man is more likely to vote for the Liberal Party and call you a wanker for talking about revolutions.

Once again, the Greens aren't revolutionary. I, for one, don't give a shit. They are in parliament, and in the public sphere, advocating for causes I believe in. They're pissing off Rupert Murdoch more than anyone - that, at least, is something worth boasting about. One day we might have legalised same-sex marriage, made progress on mitigating Australia's contribution to climate change, given workers a fair go for once, dismantled this absurd private school funding scheme, enacted humane immigration laws, and so on and so forth. Seeing these changes occur through the existing parliamentary system is better and more likely, in my opinion, than waiting around for the revolution. I'm not an anti-revolutionary; revolution has its place in our world and has and will continue to bring about amazing changes. But I've grown into thinking about the here and now in Australia and what we can do today to make our own country a little bit less shit using the channels already available to us.

So if you're going to attempt to discredit me and the Greens for not being revolutionaries, you're flogging a dead horse. I'm here on the RevLeft forums because I believe in social progress. If anyone suggests that their social progress is better than my social progress because of an ideological tendency, then there is clearly something wrong.

[Niccolò Rossi]

I sense a degree of disdain for the Greens on your behalf, yes?

You can call it what you like. I don't think the Greens have anything to offer the working class.


The Greens are unapologetically a postindustrial left party - the industrial Old Left tends to not play well with them. Again, I'm not interested in these name games. I wouldn't call myself 'industrial old left'.


If they are socialists, they are democratic socialists. Whether you count that as 'real' socialism is an entirely different matter - something tells me you're comments about the Socialist Alliance indicate something of a dislike for democratic socialists. More of this name game stuff. I don't think the Greens are 'democratic socialists'. I don't even think the Socialist Alliance think of themselves as 'democratic socialists'. It's not about liking or disliking 'democratic socialists', it's about what is and isn't communist politics.


In any case, these policy positions are related to industrial relations and workplace rights - not revolutions. The Greens support workers and the working class. The fact they do not advocate revolution as the path to a better society is irrelevant; one does not need to harbour a desire to overthrow the existing societal and economic system in order to advocate for the rights of workers.There is no mistake. I don't think the Greens industrial relations policies have anything to do with a proletarian perspective.


So if you're going to attempt to discredit me and the Greens for not being revolutionaries, you're flogging a dead horse. I'm here on the RevLeft forums because I believe in social progress.No one is attempting to discredit you here. Infact I wouldn't be surprised if other people end up wanting you restricted because you're a reformist or whatever. I would oppose it tooth and nail. As I've said before, welcome to the forum and I hope you find it a good opportunity to discuss and clarify.

Nic.

[Chambered Word]

As I implied before, today's working man is more likely to vote for the Liberal Party and call you a wanker for talking about revolutions.

This sounds to me like a ridiculous anti-workerist myth that supports stereotypes about workers being stupid and uneducated.

[Watermelon Man]

This sounds to me like a ridiculous anti-workerist myth that supports stereotypes about workers being stupid and uneducated.

It was not intended to be a slur of any kind, trust me.

Australia's economy is dominated by it's service sector, like most Western economies. About 21% of the labour force is in the industrial/manufacturing/secondary sector, while 75% is working in the service sector. I wish I could cite some hard evidence and show it to you, but I have heard from people like Antony Green that the typical voter demographic in Australia works something like this: low wage and blue-collar workers still mostly vote Labor; the typical Greens voter is tertiary educated and wealthier than the typical Labor voter; the typical Liberal voter is a 'middle class' Australian and I believe there is a range of income levels. Also, middle Australians are just as likely to vote Labor - depending on the electoral climate. Oh, and the Nationals still have a strong hold in rural electorates. And this is from electorate demographics, not a sample voter survey or anything like that. So no, it's not perfect.

But anyway... The Liberal party has had, in the last two decades, more electoral success than Labor has. Hence my logic that your typical Australian worker - and I include middle Australia and the service industry - is more likely to vote Liberal at the moment. And, somebody must have voted for John Howard for all those years, right? Given recent and predicted state government results, the conservatives are set to rise again.

Once again, I was not taking a swipe at 'dumb conservative tradies', or anything like that.

[Chambered Word]

It was not intended to be a slur of any kind, trust me.

Australia's economy is dominated by it's service sector, like most Western economies. About 21% of the labour force is in the industrial/manufacturing/secondary sector, while 75% is working in the service sector. I wish I could cite some hard evidence and show it to you, but I have heard from people like Antony Green that the typical voter demographic in Australia works something like this: low wage and blue-collar workers still mostly vote Labor; the typical Greens voter is tertiary educated and wealthier than the typical Labor voter; the typical Liberal voter is a 'middle class' Australian and I believe there is a range of income levels. Also, middle Australians are just as likely to vote Labor - depending on the electoral climate. Oh, and the Nationals still have a strong hold in rural electorates. And this is from electorate demographics, not a sample voter survey or anything like that. So no, it's not perfect.

Fair enough, that's different to painting the majority of workers as conservative Liberal voters though. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by 'middle class' though - I'm sure small business owners by and large do conscientiously vote Liberal.


But anyway... The Liberal party has had, in the last two decades, more electoral success than Labor has. Hence my logic that your typical Australian worker - and I include middle Australia and the service industry - is more likely to vote Liberal at the moment. And, somebody must have voted for John Howard for all those years, right? Given recent and predicted state government results, the conservatives are set to rise again.

Yes they have, except when Labor actually made an effort to appeal to workers (only to leave WorkChoices intact once they were elected, unsurprisingly). When the only opposition* is utterly spineless, it's less of a surprise when people are convinced to vote for the Liberals.

*If you can call it an opposition. While I don't think their support bases are identical, there's little difference between Labor and the Liberals at all.

[Lunatic Concept]

Well, welcome anyway :lol:

[Rousedruminations]

WM i am from melbourne victoria, i consider myself to be pretty radical and left wing. I joined the socialist party of Australia and they were no good. There are others at trades hall in melbourne as far as i am concerned they were no good also. I'm not much of a greens fan except for the fact that i advocate gay marriages across the country and i am pro-choice as well. When it comes to environmental impacts i am aware of the damage capitalism is doing to our trees, forest and greeneries, but i'm more concerned about workers rights- people power.

[chebol]

Watermelon Man wrote:

the Socialist Alliance for example - are plagued by university-style sectarianism and a complete inability to relate to the electorate.

"University-style sectarianism" how exactly? Or have you confused the Socialist Alliance with Socialist Alternative.


a complete inability to relate to the electorate

"Complete inability"? That's not entirely true. While our results at federal and state elections are rather poor, our council results, particularly in Victoria and WA, have been quite good, and we have a councillor in Fremantle.

More importantly, we don't run in elections just to get votes, but to talk politics to people, convince them to get active and think politics beyond electoral politics, and to (hopefully) join the socialist movement. (Ie it's not about "relating to the electorate" per se, so much as interacting with and relating to as much of the working class as possible - in this case through the medium of elections").


Years ago, I might have joined the Communist Party of Australia or the Socialist Alliance, but I have come to recognise that both those organisations are currently incapable of actually achieving any goals that I would like to see achieved in Australian society and politics.

We agree. The Socialist Alliance doesn't see itself as the vehicle for achieving socialism in Australia. Rather, we see ourselves as playing a part in uniting the movement that is necessary to do so. That's why we work with other socialists and activists wherever possible, including those on the left of the Greens (and Labor).

Niccolo wrote:

However they like to dress it up, my opinion is that Socialist Alliance is not a communist (socialist) organisation.

Fortunately for the rest of the world, your opinion on this matter is absurdly laughable and counts for diddly-squat.

[Mr. Natural]

Watermelon Man,
I just found this site and am struggling with its rules and mores and the computer I just obtained. I'm an old fart learning new tricks.
I don't know why your Feb statement found its way to the top of Introductions today, but I found your opening remarks and the tempest they stirred up to be interesting.
I was an original Green in here in California, and found US greens to be political hacks yearning for a progressive Democratic Party. Australia can only be better. I agree with you that the socialists and Communists are useless at best.
So we really have nowhere to go; we have no valid political party and will have to form one. So let's get going.
I'm hoping you as an eco-socialist have read Joel Kovel's Enemy of Nature (2002). If not, you gotta do this. I consider it the best of all the few recent books on Marxism and our current situation. In it, Kovel (now the head of American eco-socialists) conclusively indicts capitalism as an unredeemable horror, and he then presents an ecosystemic revolutionary organizing schema in response.
I hope you are interested in discussing Enemy further; I believe I can bring Kovel to life and praxis. Eco-socialists, like all other Marxist groups, have been unable to get going.
I thought you got a rude reception from some revlefters. I'm sure I'll get the same.
If interested in continuing this conversation, I assume we can do it via the regular revleft means (as a computer and site rookie, I'm having problems figuring out just what they are). My red-green best, Joe B

[Watermelon Man]

Mr Natural – thank you for your kind words! I have not actually gone through that that book, but it does sound like a good read.

This can be a difficult forum to understand at times. It's hard to know when someone wants to have genuine discussion and when they are just stamping out their ideological territory. The biggest tensions, I find, are between pragmatists and idealists – we mostly all want the same thing in the end, but there are conflicts over how we get there.

There also seems to be a culture of categorising one's philosophical and political views with a high degree of rigidity. I've called myself an eco-socialist, but maybe I'm just a left-leaning person who is worried about both the environment and worker's rights (among other things), and thinks that capitalism is probably to blame for the problems of both. As an Australian, I'm just happy to mingle with other progressive thinking people.

My best advice is to write with clarity: the biggest problems come when people do not take your words to mean what you intended them to mean.

[Blackburn]

Hi watermelon Man!

I've very much like you! Voted Greens/Sex Party last election because of teh Internet Filter. More as a left protest against labor.

Anyways, Nice to meet you!

[Watermelon Man]

Sorry for the zombie thread, but I have been inactive for some time and wanted to re-engage.

Reading through my initial introduction, I'd like to mention some of the things that have changed. I am no longer a member of the Greens, and have not been for a while. Recently, they have been promoting Labor's National Disability Insurance Scheme (as it stands, a pro-market voucher system for disability services). The NDIS is a wolf in sheep's clothing. I am also disappointed with their non-critical support of Labor's version if the Gonski education reforms, which will simply entrench public/private disparity and leave the door open for a voucher system under a Coalition government. But these are local issues that probably mean little to the majority of RevLeft readers. It should be enough to say that these reforms are putting social policy into private hands - not good.

I also made some some inaccurate statements about Socialist Alliance. It was, indeed, the Socialist Alternative I meant to criticise in regard to sectarianism. Nevertheless, a movement for left unity in Australia has been underway in recent times. Hopefully the Alliance and Alternative can move beyond their differences and combine resources to offer a genuinely powerful political organisation for the socialist left in Australia. Maybe even one I can vote for in September ;)

But anyway, I just thought I would pop my head up to say 'hi', again. I'm currently teaching history at uni, and researching immigrant contributions to Australia's labour movements in the past.

[Fourth Internationalist]

Welcome (again)! :D

[Bardo]

Greetings!

I've been wondering about the Australian presence here on the boards lately, having just moved to VIC from the US a few months ago. To be honest, I've also been wondering about the Australian left in general. The only organization I've been able to come into contact with here is the Socialist Alternative, who also has a presence in my city in America. I've been a little disappointed as I was hoping the radical left would have a stronger presence in Aus than it does in America, but it seems to be almost fully absorbed by Labour and the Greens.

Maybe I'm not looking hard enough? :confused:

[Hiero]

Fair enough, that's different to painting the majority of workers as conservative Liberal voters though.What do you call it when Australia votes in a Liberal government? I know plenty of workers who vote liberal.


(only to leave WorkChoices intact once they were elected, unsurprisingly).How did they do that?

edit: Shit, that was 2 years. I doubt he even posts anymore.

[Watermelon Man]

Greetings!

I've been wondering about the Australian presence here on the boards lately, having just moved to VIC from the US a few months ago. To be honest, I've also been wondering about the Australian left in general. The only organization I've been able to come into contact with here is the Socialist Alternative, who also has a presence in my city in America. I've been a little disappointed as I was hoping the radical left would have a stronger presence in Aus than it does in America, but it seems to be almost fully absorbed by Labour and the Greens.

Maybe I'm not looking hard enough? :confused:

The Greens and the Labor left represent the 'mainstream' Left in Australia. They are broadly progressive on many social issues but often can be very pro-market, too.

My sense is that the biggest problem with the socialist left in Australia is disunity; there are so, so many different socialist groups here. Socialist Alternative is probably the biggest, though they are a revolutionary Marxist party and do not participate in elections - they've also found themselves stuck with the image of a predominantly campus-based group of activists. The Socialist Alliance, Socialist Party, and Socialist Equality Party run in elections - there are probably more. There's the Communist Party of Australia, and then there are parties that come together as electoral fronts (e.g. Communist Alliance). But you get the picture - the socialist left is fragmented along various lines of difference (e.g. revolutionary v reformist), and its weakening our voice, IMO.

Trade unions on the left have a long and proud history, though, and are still strong. Hell, it was the unions that got Howard out of office in 2007, and the Coalition is still licking its wounds (look at Abbott's recent IR policy) - so they must be doing something right.

[Watermelon Man]

On that note, if anyone here is from Australia and wants to chime in re socialist parties, go ahead. I'm an outsider, to be honest, and probably don't know what I'm on about :grin:

[Lev Bronsteinovich]

Welcome comrade Watermelon. Looking over this thread, it seems to me that you initially were confused about class content of the politics of the Greens. Whatever their paper program, they are a pro-capitalist party -- in the US and everywhere else. Wanting to protect the environment does not place one on the proletarian side of the fence. I would argue that the only road to environmental sanity is through socialist revolution around the world. Capitalism cannot be trusted to make even vaguely reasonable environmental decisions. Treating it as an independent issue will always bring you into the camp of the bourgeoisie.

[Goblin]

You call that a knife?

[MarxSchmarx]

g'day mate.

university teacher - wow. I am told that getting an academic post is incredibly competitive and also quite tricky because one doesn't have permanent professor positions in Australia the way the rest of the industrialized world does.

By the way, what do you think of Michael Flood's writings/approach?

[Watermelon Man]

g'day mate.

university teacher - wow. I am told that getting an academic post is incredibly competitive and also quite tricky because one doesn't have permanent professor positions in Australia the way the rest of the industrialized world does.

By the way, what do you think of Michael Flood's writings/approach?

It's very competitive and ongoing/permanent/full time positions are rare due to the casualisation of the academic workforce - over half of university teaching in Australia is done by casuals on 13-week contracts (90 days!).

We do have permanent positions, but they are few and far between, and there are many people clambering for them at the same time. Once in, however, it is like any other ongoing position in which you move up the pay scale depending on your performance. There isn't really a tenure track here - permanent positions are open to anyone.

re Michael Flood, I presume it's the University of Wollongong feminist sociologist Michael Flood? To be honest I haven't engaged much with his area of research or writings. This is not to be dismissive, of course... I'm just not in the position to comment.

[nopasaran]

On that note, if anyone here is from Australia and wants to chime in re socialist parties, go ahead. I'm an outsider, to be honest, and probably don't know what I'm on about :grin:

I'm from Sydney, Parramatta to be more precise, I joined the Socialist Alt for a while.. Was not impressed, they struck me as fairly naive upper-middle-class champagne-socialists . For example we went to a protest in Liverpool (the Geert Wilders meeting) and some of the members actually started joking that we were going to get stabbed because it is such a 'dodgy area'- in the heartland of working class sydney!!! So yes, was very disillusioned by that one protest in particular, was turned off politics for a while but I'm looking for another group if anyone has any suggestions?

I'm tempted by the wobblies and the ASF-IWA, although I've left my factory job to study so don't know whether I'm even eligible to join. would love to hear from anyone else with experience in other groups?