Keith;

So - a democratic mixed economy,social wage,progressive tax system and regulated labour market now = 'communism' (!)

Then what do you think social democracy is?

Do you think people like me are to blame for the NSW electricy privatisation fiasco? (something the vast majority of the grassroots were against); But then Keating basically got up and said the other day that their opinions don't count; that the parliamentary party shouldn't be accountable in any meaningful sense to the organisation. Why then shouldn't the *parliamentary party* in NSW be blamed? That is: for prolonging the conflict to the point of disintegration when they KNEW the party grassroots, organisation, affiliated unions - were opposed to it? And now the people responsible are trying to rewrite history; and people wonder why the party organisation is dying!

And if we exclude social democracy (in any real and meaningful sense - which is what you seem to be doing) and democratic socialism as well - What 'principles' are left anyway?

Many party figures could not even claim to be social liberals anymore.

BTW - I'm not a communist. I don't think communism as envisaged by Marx can work for a number of reasons - including:

a) the impossibility of abolishing the division of labour - and the persistence of politics-ie: politics will not be reduced to 'the adminstration of things' as Marx thought it would

b) the imperfectibility of humanity, and hence the impossibility of developing beyond need for the state

c) That there will always be a role for markets as well as planning at different levels in the economy - even though markets fail; an important role for social democracy being to intervene to correct these failures

That said I consider myself a 'liberal democratic socialist'. I
identify with aspects of Marxist traditions. But I also identify with political and social liberalism, including pluralism. I'm not a pure materialist; I think Marx's dialectical materialism driven by class struggle is too simple a conception of history. I tend to be a voluntarist; and I believe socialism needs an ethical foundation.

Really Keith I'd like a response - what *are* these Labor principles you allude to; How are they at odds with what I'm arguing for?

Does high quality aged care have "no relevance whatsoever to today's working people"? Perhaps lack of care will become an issue for a growing 'underclass' - and that won't concern the 'mainstream'? And what of our failure to implement 'no disadvantage' with modernised Awards? Do declining wages & conditions have "no relevance"? Does a rising cost of living flowing from energy and water privatisation have 'no relevance'?

Even Gillard - from the Left - doesn't affirm the principle of equality in any sense other than some narrow 'equal opportunity'. And even that is hollow because of inequality of funding and resources between public and private schools. And furthermore betrays a lack of respect for the worth and dignity of all labour - where only a professional career is considered 'successful' and deserving of 'reward'.

That said - what's left? Multiculturalism and 'a republic' 'sometime' in the distant future? But no difference with the Libs on the economy?

To the extent that there IS hope for the future - it's the extent to which we HAVE been rediscovering our traditions of social democracy, democratic socialism, social liberalism. As evident in arguments for a public NBN, Keynesian demand management with infrastructure investment, Carbon Tax as an opportunity for redistribution etc.

But there are still those who want to disrupt this process. Perhaps with cynical intent. The natural disasters suffered this year if anything will have a deflationary effect on the economy. The need for mental health funding - which GetUp is focusing on - is real and dire. That is - it concerns *real people* NOW - not the economy in some abstract sense.

I've been considering this issue and what I wrote in the article attached to this thread. And on Company Tax for that reason I think Bob Brown may actually be right.

But I guess the mentally ill, the unemployed, the disabled more generally - are just 'irrelevant' for you as well?

I've got news for you Tristan, the whole Communist world was once full of "government businesses" and even the stupid commos finally woke up that they were the worst thing that could happen to an economy. It is amazing how somew people are uanble to learn from hiostory and just keep insisting that yesterdays dismal failures are today's bright idea.

For your information, I used to work as a private contractor to the Electricity Commision, and I saw with my own eyes the blatent featherbedding and overmanning of that particular "government business". No wonder that even the Labor party is now endorsing privatisation. Just like the Chinese and the Russians, even the Labor Party stalwards could not keep thinking up excuses for socialist stupidity and inefficientcy.

As for your precious "Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, the last I heard was that it was being looted by doctor shopping Asian "Australians" who were getting as many expensive drugs as they could carry and shipping them home to their relos to be sold on the black market.

Tristan,

Here is a link to a transcript of British historian, Tony Judt's landmark lecture on social democracy - a good read.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2009/dec/17/what-is-living-and-what-is-dead-in-social-democrac/

Tristan,

Lets see. How much in common have you with someone who lines up for a casual job with so many others and is picked on the whim of an employers agent, is given work without any security of tenure and can be dissmissed on a whim, who doesn't know how long the employment will last, whether the tasks they've been employed for are the only tasks they're expected to perform. Now let's assume they work only part of a week and are expected to survive on less than the basic wage. Someone who is faced with difficulty in providing sufficient nutricious food for family, who watchs their children go without a decent education, adequate clothing, an adequate health service, who sees the government introducing more and more taxes and charges, who sees the banks charging exhorbrant interest and fees, who faces unscrupulus landlords, who has little chance of home ownership, who watchs others who with great privilage indulge themselves, but most of all someone who watches their spouse succumbing to the trials inherent in such a deprived life all the time watching the self-indulgent selfish ignorant and suposedly well educated and liberal minded acting on their behalf in ways abhorent to their basic beliefs in family, egalitarianism and government.

Sounds familiar doesn't it?

One such was my fathers father? You'd not know anything of people such as he and they were the people who understood, formed and maintained the great traditions of labor and the labor party.

That you ask me 'what are these Labor principles you allude to; How are they at odds with what I'm arguing for?' shows you don't know labor nor labor people all you know is the mindless well-meaning views of middleclass dregs and an idealogy that doesn't put food on a plate ... nor creates a bright future for their descendants.

Keith and Tristan,

I don't think much is achieved by insults, especially when both of you have your hearts in the right place.

I do not think we can go back to a time when the answer was to tax or regulate as much as possible.

But we can work to achieve a better society, even if the answer may suit the liberal approach that seeks to reduce costs.

While i am still thinking about it, i think that a compassionate Liberal Party may hold the trump cards in coming years, assuming their leadership is up to it. however, I certainly do not believe in tactics to simply smash unions, or play the asylum seeker card to win support.

There is indeed a role for the left, if that means ensuring that social welfare assistance is fair and well-targeted, but the present demands (and coming turmoil) of the international economy will probably mean that cuts will have to be in terms of public expenditure.

I would forget about analysis that simply supports one party over another, as if one is the good guy and the other stupid. For too long, Aust's universities have been dominated by such rubbish, and I hope you will not simply become another one.