I should clarify, also, that while Labor's policy on corporate tax evasion was stronger than the compromise negotiated by the Greens that in no way detracts from that fact Shorten's announced policies are very modest - perhaps even cosmetic - and do not go far at all in responding to the Budget deficit - and even in generating 'fiscal room to move'... That is so we can extend social insurance (NDIS, National Aged Care Insurance), extending Medicare (dental, physio, optical, mental health); implementing Gonski; paying for public infrastructure; reforming welfare etc....

Well I cant trust the Greens, they are bent in getting inner Sydney Seats. Their new leader is very different from Bob Brown. It is time Labor stands up and fights the people need protection from this very greedy NLP/Greens association. It has echoes of Italy before WW2.

first things the socialist left should learn that violence is unacceptable in Auustralia while free speach is.

Thanks Tristan. I think the issue is not what individuals can do but what the mass movement of workers, or refugee activists, or peace people etc can do. I think the problem then is that class struggle in Australia is at all time lows, and one reason for this is of course the Accord between a labor government and the trade union leadership and the class collaboration underpinning it.

In that sense it matters not to me if a person is in the Socialist Left or a socialist group like the one I am a member of, Solidarity. As ong as we can work together in building (or perhaps more correctly, trying to build) mas movements then all well and good.

However I think the idea that Labor is a party of progressive reform is flawed. Without real pressure from below - big, militant mass movements - and without a sufficient social surplus (think of Marx's ideas about the tendency of the rate of profit to fall) and the result is that Labor, a capitalist workers' party on the way to becoming a capitalist party whose role is to manage capitalism, will and is a party of neoliberalism and austerity.

Runner, The Left has never been violent, it did the last war defend the countries from Dictatorships and Nazism/fascism., in Australia we have a GVT bent on taking away basic rights in health, education ,the present PM has the same policies as the last PM.no more no less as they are all ultra right neoconservatives.The media is owned by the right, so the freedom of speech is not real as well!
The GVT has increased the deficit so that they can push their regressive policies on Australians. Australia is a rich country going the way of Argentina and others.Sad sad times!

A nice roundup of Labor's predicament, Tristan, but it's very difficult to see any positives from Labor's point of view. Shorten and his party oppose whatever the government puts forward for the sake of it. This is born out by the instances you cite where the Greens are compromising on what should be Labor policies.
Not only is Labor being contrarian "as policy", it lacks viable policies of its own to offer to the people instead, since as you say neither austerity nor taxation seem to be options. As you suggest, the obvious move is a higher tax threshold, which need not affect the vast majority of voters, but Labor needs to announce such a move immediately, and be prepared to dig in and fight for it (eminently winnable). I consider this Labor's only slim chance of winning the election, though time is very short, and should Labor announce such a scheme I believe the LNP would go early. Imo a reformed, progressive Labor party could become a political force again in the current global environment, but it needs time to sell the idea to the people, so it's unlikely to begin with the next pole.
Sadly there seems little evidence Labor has such a move in mind; like the LNP they seem besotted with neoliberalism, albeit with more radical social policies (as if that matters a damn!). Or else popular (centrist) politics is all they know anymore.
Labor seems bent on political destruction, announcing pie in the sky policies with no funding measures on the horizon. They're giving it to LNP on a platter. I doubt they'll need the Greens!

It's depressing to note that one of the only areas Labor hasn't been contrarian is offshore processing!

'Runner, The Left has never been violent'

Oh so the violent bigots opposing the so called ''racist are not from the socialist left. I wonder where they are from?

?Runner! You don't make sense.

Runner ; You are probably talking about the confrontations between the far right and the far Left over issues such as the construction of a mosque in Bendigo. Much of the thinking behind these far right movements is based on fear and ignorance. So many of the far-right participants wouldn't even know the difference between Shia and Sunni ; or the fact that the mujahedeen were considered Western Allies during the Cold War. Alliances shift ; religious, cultural and political movements are colonised. Yesterday's allies become today's enemies - and somehow it all has to be justified.

Very '1984-ish'.

I understand people don't want 'Sharia law'. But where is that coming from? Muslims make up barely over 2 per cent of the Australian population. And I understand people have a notion of 'the Australian way of life' - which used to be considered 'liberal, democratic AND egalitarian'. (The Conservatives have tried to erase the egalitarianism) But let's be clear: A liberal society is tolerant of difference ; tends towards pluralism.

Of course that liberalism and pluralism can come under threat if ultra-conservative or reactionary movements of ANY kind (religious, political) get too much of a hold. But Islam in this country is diverse - as Christianity is - even though I dare say Christianity has gone further down the path of 'liberalisation'. Yes we have a 'way of life' to defend - but pluralism, liberty, multiculturalism are part of that. And we need to balance the defence and promotion of liberty, egalitarianism, pluralism - with tolerance of difference.

What's more we shouldn't judge cultures when we do not understand them. I'm no expert on Islam. That said - so long as my rights and liberties are not threatened I have an attitude of "live and let live". Yes there's the threat of Terrorism - which has heightened with Middle East interventions. But the far-right only inflames the situation - confirming the very small minority who may be radicalised in their Ideology.

But getting back to the point I think Runner is making: He wants to defend the liberal right to demonstrate...

Liberal rights are very important... Sometimes it makes sense to consider them as 'absolutes'. Sometimes those very rights turn out to be just too fragile otherwise... But sometimes we need to be practical when a real threat - like Fascism - raises its head. Fascism is a threat to liberals, social democrats, socialists alike - and even genuine conservative democrats.

The extent to which we compromise on liberal rights needs to depend on the scale and the nature of the threat. And even then we need to be careful. Surely a lot of German people felt there was a 'threat' when the Reichstag was burned down for instance... Certainly 'the line that must never be crossed' is that of the formation of right-wing paramilitaries. Or the Right-wing politicisation of the police and/or military.

My instinct is to try and engage and convince rather than have a violent confrontation. But the far left's strategies are based on nipping the fascist threat in the bud. There is a difference between far left and far right also. The far left rejects racism for a start, and tends to accept a multicultural Australia. Though there are exceptions (Stalinists) they are also more sympathetic to our liberties. And their attitude to the far right is definitely the exception and not the rule. I would use different strategies. But I think I have an appreciation why they act as they do "to nip the threat of fascism in the bud".

Oh yeah Tristan so the Socialist Alliance (the real facist) can't allow the police to decide what is lawful and what isn't. Your intolerance and bigotry far surpasses the average person against Islamic immigration.

Runner, reality is that this GVT is cutting all services, and it is spending all in other areas, it does not care, all we get is platitudes lies and distortions of facts from a media supporting the far right.Aussies are not silly.

Tristan,
The bourgeois impostors calling themselves Trots and anarchists invented the Fascist threat out of thin air, the UPF are the only legitimate working class street movement in Australia, the "Far Left" work directly for the Bourgeois parties.

Aurora.
Are you saying the media support the "Far right", you're joking of course?
Every single journalist in this country condemns the workers movement as "Fascists", writes reams of lies about us and constantly tries to infiltrate and undermine our groups.

The Nazis referred to their Brown-shirts as a workers' movement too - and you know what they did to them and their leaders when it was expedient... (ie: they killed the leaders and demobilised the movement - in return for state power) That said I again I admit I'm torn on freedom of speech. ie: Once you set a precedent against the absolute nature of it - then it can potentially be violated again and again - with progressively less restraint. This affects the Left as well. On the other hand if there is a real and present threat of fascism perhaps hard decisions need to be made. Certainly the fascists themselves don't believe in free speech and would have us terrorised into silence or in camps as soon as it was in their power. Ironically the right-wing forces that demand 'free speech no matter what' for the fascists don't apply the same principle to the anti-capitalist movement such as 'we are the 99 per cent' - which have again and again been forcibly dispersed by the authorities - and endured slander in order to discredit them and justify that repression.

To me the point is to build a mass movement that can stop the fascists in the UPF and their useful idiots in Reclaim White Australia from demonstrating. Cable Street in 1936 is a great example of that. We on the left have not built such a strong anti-fascist movement and substituting ourselves as some groups do for such a mass movement (in useless confrontations with the fascists) is counter-productive.

The point is a more general one. Hope lies with the mass movements against racism, against fascism, against wage cuts, against sackings. The most important task right now to me is to build a fighting working class movement to beat back the attacks on unions from the Heydon-Turnbull ruling class alliance. Labor politicians are an impediment to doing that. Labor members, what is left of that dwindling membership, might not be. Ultimately the task as I see it is to split the membership of the ALP, well the good fighting sections or those who can be mobilised to fight anyway, from the leadership of the ALP.

Tristan I don't know where you get these ideas, a workers movement is made up of people who work for a living, fantasising about the SA, Dachau and the Night Of The Long Knives is not only perverse it's bordering on delusional.
Who do you accuse of Fascism? The UPF? On what basis?
At no point have we supporters or the leadership tried to shut down or impede the counter demonstrations, we don't stalk the bourgeois activists, we don't attack them or harass them.
Yeah, we mock, we laugh, we deride but it's in our interest to have the bourgeois activists there when we rally, it works in our favour.
When middle class brats beat up workers and elderly men and women, steal their flags, try to set fire to their clothing and so forth it draws people to us. We could just as easily hold spot rallies with no prior warning, assemble the core 50 activists and decamp before any opposition arrived but the point is to demonstrate to the working claees the complicity of the pseudo Left groups in the globalist- capitalist project and their support for the corrupt politicians, councillors and businessmen.

Passy.
Delusional, elitist, bourgeois wittering. The UPF threaten only your privilege and your livelihood, when you're thrown down out of the middle class and have to subsist on mimimum wage like my wife and I do, when your combined income drops from 110 to 35 thousand and you find yourself competing with foreign students and asylum seekers working illegally for $4 an hour then you might see things differently.
In the real world your unions are over run with gangsters and bikies who extort and stand over workers, your Labor party is in bed with property developers and your street movement is dependant on free public transport and Police escorts just to get to rallies and would fall apart if not for the handouts from those same corrupt unions an bourgeois political parties.

Tooth and nail. The greens and labor left have little if any common ground.

Labor should preference anybody else! If only to stop the anti development anti well paid jobs greens, winning traditional labor seats with labor preferences!

But for the greens and their mindless intransigence, we could have had a flourishing oil industry to our immediate north, which according to some analysts, may hold more hydrocarbons than the entire middle east!?

And nowhere have they demonstrated that the reef was actually more threatened by drilling, than from the tanker traffic that brings in the dirtier costlier oil, we must therefore import.

In fact, given the nature of our, almost ready to use as is, traditional sweet light crude, and producing less than half the carbon production in common use; and given it's carbon destroying the reef, the lesser of two evils.

A day will dawn in around fifteen or so years when electric cars, with better low cost batteries will replace the conventional motor vehicle.

Till then we pragmatists, should mine the reef for its probable bonanza of much lower carbon oil and gas.

Gas being prefered, given methane will run ceramic fuel cells, with their 80% energy coefficient, Produce endless free hot water and the world's least costly electricity( cheap coal fired power having just 20%) and produce mostly water vapor s the exhaust product.

Yes they may look similar, but these two parties are not even alike in any sense of the word. We would create the jobs needed for true social justice, the greens on the other hand think they can manage with a few tourists and the very low paid servile seasonal jobs they produce; and the printing presses? Insanity versus pragmatism. Hopefully, occasionally.
Rhrosty.

Jay expresses the fear of the middle class and the despair of the working class that Hitler played upon so well in his rise to power and his smashing of trade unions and political organisations of the left that were the defensive organs of the working class. It was this criminalisation of organisations and imprisonment of communists, socialists, ALP types and trade unionists in the first concentration camps in Germany that enabled Hitler to cut wages by up to 50% and restore German profit rates. No point in debating an out and out fascist driven by the failures of capitalism and the tragedy of loss of economic wellbeing. His situation just highlights the failure of the left to have built an alternative that is big enough to attract those workers subject to the crimes capitalism is and will commit against them. That failure in part is because of the ongoing attraction to some of Labor as a party of progressive change and their illusions in its ability to deliver real change for workers.

Rhosty,
"Labor should preference anybody else! If only to stop the anti development anti well paid jobs greens, winning traditional labor seats with labor preferences"
Do you even know how the preferential voting system works? In traditional Labor seats (as well as everywhere else) Labor preferences aren't activated unless and until the Labor candidate has already been eliminated.

The stereotype of Greens as "anti development anti well paid jobs" doesn't have much basis in reality. If you think the Greens policies are worse than everyone else's than by all means put them last, but please do so according to actual policies rather than your prejudice.

"But for the greens and their mindless intransigence, we could have had a flourishing oil industry to our immediate north, which according to some analysts, may hold more hydrocarbons than the entire middle east!?"
We do, in the Timor Sea. Though an enormous oil spill a few years ago shows that having much much tougher environmental standards from the start would have made our oil industry more lucrative as well as less environmentally destructive.

"And nowhere have they demonstrated that the reef was actually more threatened by drilling, than from the tanker traffic that brings in the dirtier costlier oil, we must therefore import. In fact, given the nature of our, almost ready to use as is, traditional sweet light crude, and producing less than half the carbon production in common use; and given it's carbon destroying the reef, the lesser of two evils."

All that "sweet light crude" under the Great Barrier Reef is a figment of your overactive imagination indulging in some very wishful thinking! No oil of any sort has ever been discovered under the Great Barrier Reef, though there has previously been oil exploration there. According to most analysts, it's too young to have oil under it.

What analysts Aidan? Where did you find these dills. Most thinking people today realise oil is part of our geology, & nothing to do with dead dinosaurs, or buried vegetable matter.

The reef is merely a 10,000 years old bit of stuff, growing on billions of year old hills, drowned at the end of the last ice age.

As for no oil. it is percolating out of the ground for 500 kilometres of the Queensland coast. Even your make believe experts should be able to interoperate this as an oil source below.

Perhaps they think Captain Cook's Endeavour has leaky engines, & left it when passing.

Hasbeen, of course oil is part of our geology. And like many other parts of our geology, it formed in specific conditions. It's the result of buried vegetable matter (algae) from the time of the dinosaurs (when the hot conditions favoured algae at the expense of other marine organisms).

Searches for oil based on that theory of its origin often find oil. Searches based on alternative hypotheses, looking in places the accepted theory says oil would not be, never find oil.

As for oil percolating out of the seabed, I understand that happens off the coast of WA but not Queensland. Queensland's oil slicks originate from 20th and 21st century boats.

Tristan,

The marxists and fascists are both far left/right sides of the same coin and must be avoided.

Similarly the Greens' policies are really only wildly impractical and uncosted wish lists.

As for the greens' compromise on removing Labor costly gesture politics that gets companies to publish information that is already available from their end of year reports will not generate one red cent of additional revenue, but is simply to make Labor look like it is "doing something", the only reason Dinner Tally did this is to screw Labor, who is the greens natural competition.

Marxism undeservedly has a bad name. Sure there were the Stalinists at the worst extreme ; and the Leninists and Trotskyists also defended the indefensible at times. But Marxist social democrats were also amongst the first to fight for full, equal and universal suffrage. Marxists also opposed the First World War ; fought for women's and indigenous rights far before it became 'mainstream'; fought for the welfare state and workplace rights; fought against fascism from the outset and so on. (though there was the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact - which might have been avoided had the West been more decisive in prioritising the anti-fascist struggle) Marxism will probably never regain the relatively hegemonic place it once had on the Left. But its a very diverse tradition with a lot of theorists (including Marx himself) who are very useful to think with. The theorists from the Marxist tradition have a legitimate place in the 'theoretical toolbox' of progressives today. That's probably better than it having 'hegemonic' status anyway. Though the global Left still needs a cohesive practical and theoretical framework for global co-operation as well. That doesn't exist right now.

Kind of diverting from the point of debating ALP Policy and relations with the Greens mind you...

Shadow Minister, you seem to favour only what maintains the status quo?

Doesn't matter. Tanya will be "Dear Leader" next year and will change the colour of Labor livery to dark green.

Tristan,
That comes off as disingenuous, you know very well the steps required of the ALP to take the impetus away from nationalist groups and the Greens. A shift back to the ideals and policies of pre 1949 Labor would captivate the White working class, it's absurd that UPF speakers are quoting Lang and Calwell while the opposition are still entranced by Marcuse and Alinsky.

Jay its not only the 'white working class' we need to concern ourselves with. Its the working class and its potential allies generally. Calwell was also a product of his time. Sure earlier Labor leaders were stronger on economic justice in many ways. But we have a very deeply embedded multicultural society now. And so long as we succeed in integration (NOT assimilation) that can work in our favour. (ie: Australia's favour)

As for Marcuse - yes he's interesting. But personally I still have hope for the working class - and not ONLY for a 'Great Refusal' on the part of the students and the most marginal. Indeed over the past few decades students have been progressively de-radicalised. Though he does have a point re: the 'affirmative mentality' which holds that capitalism 'delivers the goods' and hence should only be affirmed and not negated...

The proverbial will quite possibly hit the fan in the coming years: attacks on welfare and workers. I worry that we're not at all prepared to deal with it in the ALP, including on the ALP Left.

Jay, the working class needs more than economic justice. It needs its liberties; its dignity... It needs inclusion in a participatory democracy. And this holds the hope of overcoming some of the worst features of capitalism. (eg: extreme stratification; raising profit as 'the highest principle' in every instance - placing it ahead of human life and human need; inefficiencies that lead to unnecessary and painful austerity...)

Far-Right Ideology does not deal with any of this. It splinters and divides the working class. Rather than building solidarity it creates divisions that make that impossible - and ensure the defeat of the (organised and conscious) working class and its allies. Even if you 'get the trains running on time' that is little consolation for a working class that dares not dissent and lives in fear.

Tristan,
You've got to get past this idea that we're "Far right", it's untenable and it's hurting your cause, the media only report the information fed to them by Jeff and Rob Sparrow and their ANTIFA network and they have their own agenda.
Go to a UPF rally and see for yourself, we're all about uniting the working classes, integration is a key talking point as is respecting the diginity of ethnic minorities as long as it's a two way street.
Like it or not spreading Islam is a part of the globalist-capitalist program, as long as the Muslim "community" leaders continue to rent seek and co-operate with the Liberals and capitalists they're a target.
(On a side note maybe the election of Sheik Abdul Salam Zoud to the post of Grand Mufti of Australia would be a good thing as he'd be less likely to tolerate the opportunistic lickspittles and rent seekers)
We're anti war, pro worker, pro union, anti globalist and the core group have said straight up, if another party comes along and satisfies the requirements of the working and marginalised people they'll subordinate themseleves to that cause.
Labor isn't doing enough, it has no activist base willing to engae with un-educated people and worst of all it co-operates with people who actively espouse class and racial hatred toward the majority White working class (and especially the marginalised "Bogans")
If you had your finger on the pulse you'd be aware of the origins of the "neo Nazis" and various "Far Right" wreckers, they're creations of the Liberal party, names have been named, all you have to do is go looking for the information.

Ok Jay a few questions.

Why oppose the construction of a mosque in Bendigo when Muslims make up a small minority and it is a matter of their liberal rights?

Why fight for 'the right to bear arms' when we see where that's lead in the US? And when the formation of paramilitary formations has threatened civil wars in the past? (including in Australia during the Great Depression)

Why harass Jewish people when you claim you have nothing to do with Nazism?

see: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/farright-group-upf-plans-to-run-for-senate-and-campaign-on-right-to-bare-arms-20150911-gjk73n.html

BTW: I don't like the term 'bogan' either ; Its a loaded, class-based term of contempt ; There are 'lumpens' who have reactionary politics, yes. But there are double standards when it comes to class-based putdowns as well.

Tristan,

Atrocities on a grand scale were committed not just by Stalin, but by Lenin, Brezhnev, Mao, Castro, in North Korea, Vietnam, and pretty much every Marxist state. This runs with endemic corruption, nepotism etc.

Noticeably workers are abandoning corrupt unions in Aus and most developed countries.

Tristan,
The issue of the Bendigo Mosque has a broader context, it goes to the issue of deeply entrenched regional "aristocracies",the virtual ALP hegemony in the Bendigo electorate, perceptions of a conflict of interest on the part of councillors and new resident vs old tensions.
Bendigo is a deeply divided community, it has been as long as I can remember and I grew up in the district, the Mosque is just a lightning rod for dissent and old enmities at this point in time.
The UPF being politically motivated are wisely using the controversy to anchor their movement in a physical space and a particular time period, Bendigo is their Red Ribbon Rebellion, so to speak.

The "right to bear arms" is as far as I can tell just another talking point, an attack strategy to upset Liberals and Leftists and to attract more of the Sporting Shooters type voters, the UPF intend to absorb all those smaller parties so it makes sense.

I don't know what you mean by harassment of Jews, the UPF won't allow people to fly the Israeli flag at their rallies but they don't demand that it be removed from Reclaim Australia events.
Are you referring to the Anti Semitic leaflet drops in Bondi in 2013 and 2014? If so the UPF was not even formed until May 2015 and in any case the culprits in those incidents in NSW "Squadron 88" were exposed as Liberal party operators run from the Penrith branch.

Bianca Hall, Ruby Hamad and the person writing under the pseudonym "Luke McMahon" source all their information from the Sparrows and their ANTIFA network who are known pranksters and mischief makers. As I said, as self styled "Anarchists" they have their own agenda and there's always been considerable crossover between that milieu and the state security services, as revealed by Alex Gollan during his child pornography and pedophile grooming trial.

Tristan Ewins, "Why fight for 'the right to bear arms' when we see where that's lead in the US?"

A politician such as yourself would cynically ignore the facts: that gun crime and serious crime with weapons is black on black and gang and drug related.

It is a social problem made worse by ill-conceived social policies driven by ideology.

Australian federal government should be very careful not to create similar conditions here.

If you move on to 'mass homicides' in the US, outside of terrorism (where ill-conceived social policies such as diversity through immigration are also implicated), mass homicides are very few in number and while horrendous to us are statistically insignificant in a population of 320 million.

Jay - it sounds pretty cynical re: your pitch to shooters ; And the old tensions you refer to - I don't know what they are - But how is a mosque relevant to them? But anyway the size of the rallies in Bendigo - and the fact that so many were brought in from outside - tends to suggest you've not been successful.

Shadow Minister: Yes terrible things have been done in the name of Marxism. But my position has developed from a 'democratic marxist' perspective ; and today perhaps even 'post marxist' positions ; Whatever Stalin and Mao did that should not be taken to discredit Kautsky, Luxemburg, Bernstein, the Austro-Marxists etc. And Mouffe and Laclau have had important insights into the failings of prior Marxisms.

Lenin and Trotsky at least need to be considered in the light of what they were trying to do ; and the objective circumstances they faced. Their policies developed in the context of war, civil war, starvation, fuel shortages, millions freezing to death... That said Kautsky, Luxemburg, Abramovitch , Martov etc were all democratic Marxists who had telling points against the strategies of Lenin and Trotsky... But when judging Lenin be sure to judge the Great Powers and their leaders that sent the world into the Hell of WWI - without which Lenin's revolution never would have happened.

North Korea is like a hereditary despotic monarchy... Certainly it has very little at all to do with what Marx envisaged....

Tristan,
Again you're basing your assumptions on faulty information, the corporate media lie about crowd numbers and the people participating. Mate I was at the last outing at the Victorian Parliament, we had 35 men and women there, tops, the Age reported it as 150, CARF and NRFR outnumbered us by about three to one but the media said the numbers were equal.
At the first Bendigo rally in August we had about 600 with maybe 50 from out of town and interstate, at the second which I couldn't attend a petition was circulated which amounted to 1500 signatures, the media on both occasions reported crowds of 300. The core of UPF is less than 20, there are a few dozen supporters like me in each of the cities and a large Facebook following.
Your information comes from ANTIFA and a very small group of reporters working for Fairfax and the ABC who all know each other and all share hard Left sympathies, I mean honestly, are you expecting Ruby Hamad, John Safran and Jeff Sparrow to be objective?
I don't expect those people to betray their principles and jeopardise their standing in the community by being objective, I mean, be realistic Tristan.
As for cynical approaches and entryism, we want to win, by any means necessary under the law, we didn't set the scene, we're just using the rules created by the present status quo to manipulate the mood of workers and the marginalised and demonised White minority.
If you want those people come and get them but you won't get far with progressive rhetoric, Anti Fascism and reliance on Anarchists and outright lunatics like Ruby Hamad,Ezekiel Ox and Mel Gregson.

Tristan,

My experience is that democratic Marxism is a oxymoron, such as the democratic republic of Germany.

Is democratic Marxism where the people are represented by people the "party" chooses, or where only people that the "party" approves can run for election?

If democratic Marxism relies on free and fair elections it will go extinct.

Shadow Minister ; Democratic Marxism is such as the pre-WWI German Social Democrats and the pre-1934 Austrian Social Democrats - who were amongst the first to fight for full, universal and equal suffrage. As for the Austro-Marxists specifically, they won a majority in 1934 - only to be destroyed in a fascist coup. The democratic Marxists were very different from the Leninists, and especially the Stalinists. Karl Kautsky made the point that the Bolsheviks severed the nexus between socialism and democracy. That they discredited socialism in the process. And hence over the long term perhaps did more harm than good to the socialist cause. If socialism fails to succeed it is party because we lift in a society where as Chomsky said 'consent is manufactured'. Genuinely progressive viewpoints are weeded out of the public sphere. The range of debate is very narrow. But again as Chomsky argues debate within that range is very strong - in the process kidding people that we have real pluralism - when we don't.

Tristan,

Considering that pre 1934 Austrian politics consisted of parties with their own paramilitaries shooting at each other, I can't see this being a great example of marxism.

The single biggest problem for marxism is its dismal history, while theoretically it has a lot of merit, its major problem is that it clashes with the mass of humanity who are not morally "pure" enough to accept the yoke of marxism.

As for manufactured consent, while I understand what Chomsky is saying, I believe that he goes too far. My brief interaction with Marketing in my MBA showed me that marketing is primarily finding out what people want and providing it. Advertising can influence desire and make things more desirable, but people can be made to buy what they don't want.

Shadow Minister - You need to look deeper into Austrian social-democratic history. For the Social Democrats in Austria the 'Schutzbund' (socialist paramilitaries) was "an insurance policy for democracy". It was not to be used offensively to conquer state power without the corresponding democratic majority. Right after WWI the social democrats dominated the military and steered the democratic revolution. In that period (1917-1934) a lot happened. There was a massacre of workers/demonstrators in the 1920s and even then the social democratic leadership held their fire. The social democrats overwhelmingly controlled Vienna which post-WWI had a status as a province in its own right - with taxation powers. They built public housing with laundry facilities, pools, communal child care, hot running war ; also they provided for workers' education, sport, libraries, radio stations etc. Vienna was seen as "a showcase for social democracy - even with the advent of the Depression.

Unfortunately the Social Democrats made many strategic and tactical errors. They did not consolidate their hold over the state apparatus after WWI - and that provided scope for the rise of a fascist threat later on. Arguably they should have taken strike action in 1927 to demand action over the massacre of workers and demonstrators. In 1934 they kept holding back on taking any kind of action - even after the parliament in which they had a majority was forcibly dispersed. When the civil war actually occurred most of their leaders had been arrested ; and many of their arms caches confiscated. Austro-Fascism won - but maybe earlier action might have given the Social Democrats a fighting chance.

AGAIN it has to be recognised that for the Social Democrats the Schutzbund was only to be used defensively to protect democratic institutions and rights.

Tristan Ewins, "Genuinely progressive viewpoints.."

'Progressive'?

There is that over-used code word again for the policies (and secret hand shake) of International Socialism.

Marxist appropriation of words to use them for sedition. There is nothing progressive about that.

I'd disagree with the notion that Marxism has been discredited, Marcuse is the cancer rotting the Left, people still respond to Marxist Leninism if it's presented in the right way.
The pseudo Left, Socialist Alliance, Socialist Alternative, Socialist Equality Party etc are bourgeois opportunists who've hijacked working class institutions, Trades Hall for example. It's these "progressives" who have given the Left a bad name among the White working class and marginalised minority, not Marx,Lenin or Stalin.
I mean think about it for a second, we're expected to believe that the workers in an advanced multicultural society are automatically responsive to Hitler if his very narrow, ethnocentric ideals are presented in the right way but not to Lenin's?
So called "educated" people are an extreme minority in this country, sorry to say but the vast majority are dumb and unwilling to embrace progressive ideals, the ALP has nothing to offer in that regard and their alliance with the Greens only antagonises the lower classes.
As I said, if the ALP want the workers then adopting Nationalism, immigration restriction and trade protection will hand them victory on a platter.
Occupy the centre and expand outward and upward, if those conditions are met then the so called "Fascists" you so fear won't have a chance.

sorry for typos ; last post should have read "running water" ;

on the beach : what's 'sedition' for you? The Marxist social democrats were among the first to fight for free universal and equal suffrage. If fighting for democracy and the sovereignty of the people is 'sedition' then you can count me in. lol.

I also believe the far Left is finding it very hard to set down roots in the working class in this country. The ALP is losing its grip there as well. As far as the ALP is concerned its decades of spurning class politics and distributive justice in favour of a 'reconciliation' that in practice means surrender.

But its also the post-Fordist workplaces we're living in which makes it so hard to organise and develop class or social democratic consciousness. Some (not all) union leaderships that put their careers and political influence ahead of the immediate needs of their members are problematic as well. The Liberals want to take advantage of this to destroy organised labour in this country. And in the process to destroy what possible is democracy's last line of defence.

I'd also suggest the far right has a base amongst the lumpenproletariat in this country. Nothing unusual there. Except the Left is partly to blame for its own failure to connect with these people. There's a book "Dear Hunting with Jesus" by Joe Bageant which explains how the US Left speaks down to these people, and constantly uses class-based-putdowns. (eg: 'white trash') And therefore gets these people to vote against their class interest and the basis of opposing 'political correctness', 'gun control' and the like.

We could do better I think. But not on the basis of Stalinism or Leninism. Though the far left continues to be Leninist - and in such a way narrows its potential base.

typos again: "and the basis" should read "on the basis" ;

Also I think the 'political correctness" arguments are over-used. A lot of it is manufactured and exaggerated in order to control people and alienate them from the Left.

Though some of the Left's cultural politics are distant from the consciousness of the working class.

Tristan,
Obviously imitating the Bolsheviks is just Larping, standing in the street bearing a hammer and sickle flag with your fist raised in the air, as they do reinforces the idea that the Left are a dated joke.
From what point could those ideas be adapted to fit the present society?
We live in a world where even the unemployed people mostly live in air conditioned homes and battle obesity as opposed to hunger, the average unemployable White slob consumes more calories in a day than Russian peasants were getting in a week.
The Lumpen Whites are fed up with being ridiculed and spoken down to, they want a fight, relative to the Left the UPF are succeeding in mobilising them and from what I know of their Fortitude party platform for the upcoming federal election it's going to be very middle of the road and very attractive to working class people.
The characterisation of these Lumpen people as "reactionary" is totally wrong, among genuine reactionaries and Nationalists they're called "Bangkok Bogans", colour blind, largely unconscious on racial, class and political issues, tolerant to a fault and dissolute in their personal habits.
However that's the majority born of 50 years of Liberal multiculturalism, the UPF are embracing these people warts and all and promising to fortify them against the elites and their minions, the ALP and the hard left are stalking, bashing and deriding them at every opportunity.
Go and have a look at Clementine Ford's latest stunt, it's up on her Facebook, how is that going to generate anything but rage among working and marginalised Whites? If that guy loses his job I'm going to suggest that we picket his employer and have him reinstated, would you be prepared to join me?

Even though I'm not sure I agree 100 per cent with how Ford handled the situation I do think the abuse she was subjected to was appalling. I don't like some of the things Ford has said - though I'm informed it was parody. I guess I just feel some things you don't joke about. Anyway we're diverting from discussion of the topic.

Triatan,
It's not really a deviation, you're discussing the Left, at the moment the Left is infested with people like Clementine Ford, who is clearly mentally ill and unfortunately for real activists like you they're it's public face.
The ALP will be obliterated if they continue their dalliance with the Greens and the Social Justice Warriors who for all their bluster have no political program and no theories which could be presented to the working and marginalised Whites as practical measures.
Progressivism, Social Justice, Feminism and Internationalism all work against the interests of working and marginalised people because those groups are by nature conservative, patriarchal and parochial, egalitarian ideals undermine our society, hence the growing hostility toward anyone associated with the Left.
Your think tanks can come up with all the theories in the world but if they're not practical they're of no use to anyone, impractical theories are rightly just seen by those classes as antagonistic.

Tristan,

While I admire your optimism, the efforts of yourself and other intelligentsia, but from where I stand, they have as much chance of saving Marxism's credibility as rearranging the deck chairs could have saved the Titanic.

The unions are deserted for various reasons, the most obvious is the rampant corruption, the inflexible and undemocratic structures of the unions. The damage this is doing to them and the ALP cannot be underestimated, however, what is far more damaging is the change in the nature of employment.

Most people are employed by small businesses or are self employed, and businesses are competing for skilled workers who can pick and choose employers and move at short notice. For this sector unions are largely irrelevant. Large industries are moving to having a small core work force with the majority of work being performed by contractors and subcontractors and potential union members are disappearing.

Labour is now skilled, flexible, and in demand and can largely can look after itself far better than the unions, which is why the youth eschew membership and as the older generation retires the numbers continue to drop. Unless the unions embrace reform, they too will go the way of the dinosaurs.

SM,
The means of production in the "knowledge economy" are available to anyone at next to no cost, for a few hundred dollars you can get a second hand laptop and a mobile phone and you're in business.
Trade secrets are available to all complete with instructional videos on Youtube and the relative cost of vehicles and hand tools has dropped drastically over the last 20 years.
My own work life and that of my tradesman peers could best be described as Anarcho-Syndicalist, I set the price of my labour and enter into temporary syndicates with other trades to complete jobs.

Jay ; How can women's liberation not be in the interests of women? ; And how can Internationalist solidarity not be in the interest of workers? Women workers still face disadvantage in the labour market because of an interrupted working life. Though you could forgive some working class women thinking other (bourgeois) women 'making it' in the corporate world is beside the point compared with their experiences and problems. Working class women need to be empowered through recognition of 'feminised' professions - and hence appropriate compensation.

Re: internationalism - a rebalance in the world economic order may disadvantage us (Australians) to a degree. But the bigger struggle is reaffirming global solidarity of labour, and of citizens. Overcome disadvantage from the mobility of capital with global solidarity of labour. That isn't against the interests of workers - white or otherwise. Its an old idea - but a very important idea. And it also requires a reaffirmation of labour organisation locally. Reclaiming industrial liberties would help. As would union leaderships who always put the members first.

As for 'social justice' 'not being in the interests of workers' ; Well we all might face obstacles in life. Social solidarity through universal social insurance and welfare is in all workers' interests assuming we get past the 'bourgeois programming' and realise it. A 'safety net' means workers can bargain without fear of utter destitution. And without fear for contingencies they have no control over

Shadow Minister; you're right that the 'new forms of investment' a Marxist by the name of Immanuel Wallerstein was talking about a couple of decades ago is disempowering organised labour and workers generally. At an industrial level anyway ; with the decline of mass production; Fordist work practices etc.

Though workers still hold leverage at several crucial economic conjunctures. (transport, education, communications, the docks) So if we overcame secondary boycott provisions and won industrial liberties back - a relative minority of organised workers could win gains for all of all. (assuming that had the consciousness and were organised) That's what I think we have to fight for. The danger is a US-style labour market where the working poor and the destitute at once provide for middle class living standards ; but also serve as a threat in order the discipline that middle class.

The political power of unions is a double edged sword. To begin, some strong Left unions provide the ALP with an interest in not moving so far too the Right as to end us with a US style labour market and health system. On the other hand - some union leaderships just see their members as a power base from which to secure careers, or influence policy. Now influencing policy I can understand - so long as the industrial interests of workers are not sold out. But the right-wing unions who would vote for further labour market deregulation - what the hell are they there for?

Without strong progressive movements, though, a US style scenario will just gain further traction. Which is against the interests of much of this country's population. If only the ALP could articulate that clearly and unequivocally.