ga('send', 'pageview');
John Passant

Site menu:

September 2013
« Aug   Oct »



RSS Oz House



Subscribe to us

Get new blog posts delivered to your inbox.


Site search


Keep socialist blog En Passant going - donate now
If you want to keep a blog that makes the arguments every day against the ravages of capitalism going and keeps alive the flame of democracy and community, make a donation to help cover my costs. And of course keep reading the blog. To donate click here. Keep socialist blog En Passant going. More... (4)

Sprouting sh*t for almost nothing
You can prove my 2 ex-comrades wrong by donating to my blog En Passant at BSB: 062914 Account: 1067 5257, the Commonwealth Bank in Tuggeranong, ACT. More... (12)

My interview Razor Sharp 18 February
Me interviewed by Sharon Firebrace on Razor Sharp on Tuesday 18 February. (0)

My interview Razor Sharp 11 February 2014
Me interviewed by Sharon Firebrace on Razor Sharp this morning. The Royal Commission, car industry and age of entitlement get a lot of the coverage. (0)

Razor Sharp 4 February 2014
Me on 4 February 2014 on Razor Sharp with Sharon Firebrace. (0)

Time for a House Un-Australian Activities Committee?
Tony Abbott thinks the Australian Broadcasting Corporation is Un-Australian. I am looking forward to his government setting up the House Un-Australian Activities Committee. (1)

Make Gina Rinehart work for her dole

Sick kids and paying upfront


Save Medicare

Demonstrate in defence of Medicare at Sydney Town Hall 1 pm Saturday 4 January (0)

Me on Razor Sharp this morning
Me interviewed by Sharon Firebrace this morning for Razor Sharp. It happens every Tuesday. (0)



Labor’s faction fiction

Prominent past and present Labor politicians, liberal literati and ALP well-wishers in the Murdoch press have been complaining for years about the influence of factions inside the party writes Rick Kuhn in Red Flag.

Whether this whingeing is accompanied by calls to curb connections with the unions or not, it is part of a campaign to liquidate Labor’s links with its working class base. That would turn the ALP into a pastel version of the deep blue Liberal Party, the equivalent of the US Democratic Party, another straightforward party of big business.

The factions have been fundamental to the way Labor operates in practice. The decline in their influence in the parliamentary caucuses over the past 20 years has been a major factor in the disunity and turmoil identified by many ALP apologists and superficial commentators as the main cause of the Rilludd government’s demise.

Labor is a capitalist workers’ party. On the one hand, it is committed to managing Australian capitalism and thus to perpetuating exploitation. On the other, its core constituency lies in the working class. The factions have been a crucial element in the party’s material constitution.

The historical connection between the party and the working class has multiple strands. All of them are fraying. Workers have tended to vote Labor. The party still does best in working class, city electorates. While in decline since the 1960s, working class identification with the ALP is still a fact of life.

In terms of active membership and especially active working class membership, Labor is now a shadow of its former self. Many branches are inactive shells. In branches, the role of parliamentarians and full time union officials (who are, by definition, not workers employed by a boss), the staffers, families and immediate hangers-on of the professional politicians is disproportionate. In order to recruit and hold members, the party has been reducing the already low requirements for participation in important ballots.

Trade union affiliation indirectly connects Labor with the working class, through the layer of senior full time union officials who control their organisations’ funding for the party and delegations to state and territory ALP conferences. Inside the party the main left and right factions and sub-factions are associated with unions. They are very important channels for union influence over the allocation of jobs and, to a smaller extent, over policy.

But the ability of union officials to exercise influence, inside and outside the Labor Party, has been declining. With the exception of relatively short episodes, the failure of union leaders to conduct militant and therefore effective campaigns to defend their members has weakened the movement since the 1980s.

The ratio of union members to potential members has trended downwards. Traditions of rank and file involvement, organisation, activism and militancy have decayed. Public funding of political parties and elections since the 1980s has also reduced the importance of unions for the Labor Party.

The unravelling of the long term ties between the working class, particularly through the unions, and the Labor Party has weakened the effectiveness of factions in the party and increased the autonomy of its parliamentary leaders, who have shifted the ALP to the right. The rightward shift has progressively evaporated distinctions between the left and right inside the party.

As former NSW Labor minister Rodney Cavalier put it in 2005, “the factions have become executive placement agencies”. That is still true, but the decline in their influence and discipline has meant that even this function is slipping away from them. The decline in factional discipline helps explain disunity in the federal party.

Individual Labor parliamentarians have increasingly consulted their individual consciences, generally a euphemism for calculating their chances of personal advancement, in deciding whom to back for the leadership. Since the early 1990s, the left has not delivered a coherent bloc of votes in ballots for the federal leadership. And it has just complained that the right is trying to do so in the contest between Albanese and Shorten.

So far, it is just a beauty contest over looks, style, loyalty and working class background rather than policies. But the federal leadership contests between Mark Latham and Kim Beazley, Rudd and Beazley and internecine warfare in the corruption-ridden Labor governments of Morris Iemma, Nathan Rees and Kristina Kenneally in NSW also indicate that the coherence of the right has been in decline.

Julia Gillard and Rudd have, in turn, led the party further to the right. While accommodating to factional realities, they sought to undermine them and increase the autonomy of the parliamentary leaders. In 2006, even before she became his deputy, Gillard proposed that the leader rather than caucus should decide who went into the (shadow) ministry. And this is exactly what Rudd did when he became the leader later that year.

[Rick Kuhn is co-author, with Tom Bramble, of Labor’s conflict: big business, workers and the politics of class, Cambridge University Press.]



Comment from Christine Hyde
Time October 1, 2013 at 6:53 am

Re connection to battlers, remember how the Convoy of No Confidence was rubbished? Were they wrong?

Comment from Phil F
Time October 1, 2013 at 5:03 pm

I’m not an expert on the ALP, but I do wonder about formulations like “capitalist workers party”. The problem I have is this. Lenin used the term *specifically* about the British Labour Party around 1920, calling it a bourgeois workers party. But how long could this contradiction hang around. My argument in the New Zealand case would be that once the NZLP took power in 1935 the contradiction was resolved. At the same time, I think *some* sort of case could be made that it wasn’t entirely resolved until the 1984 Labour government. But resolved it certainly has been. The NZLP is a liberal middle class party in terms of social composition and liberal-capitalist in terms of its politics.

I think the evolution of LPs has to be investigated in each specific national context as well as at a more general (global) level. Nevertheless, I do query the continued use of these kinds of formulations. Especially since they’re often followed by claims that LPs are financed by the trade unions. Actually, the vast bulk of their money comes from the capitalist state, through allocations made by parliamentary services. This *vastly* outweighs what funds they might still get from unions; union funds simply top up the incomes of LPs and are often, certainly in the NZ case, less than corporate donations.

The other thing is that Lenin identified a list of *preconditions* for communists supporting Labour like “a rope supports a hanged man”. These preconditions are often forgotten on the far left. I wonder how many of these preconditions still exist in the concrete conditions of Australia and the ALP in 2013.

Lastly, my abiding memory of ALP politics is that when it was founded its number one platform point wasn’t the standard “nationalisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange”, but support for the White Australia policy.

I make these points as someone who is generally very supportive of Socialist Alternative and what you are trying to do. and I wish you well. But I do wonder how much empirical work and theoretical reflection has taken place in relation to the ALP.

All the best,

Comment from John
Time October 1, 2013 at 7:36 pm

Yes, a few of Alan Jones’ reactionary supporters do not a mass movement of the poor and oppressed working class make.

Comment from Chris Warren
Time October 2, 2013 at 5:43 pm

The Australian Marxist movement has undertaken considerable empirical work and theoretical reflection on the ALP.

The better elements, in principle, base themselves on the Communist Manifesto.

Some do not.