Tristan,

Your sentiments are well meaning, but this is all just idealistic intellectualism. Someone earlier made the comment that what the Left needs to do is engage with the Right to get outcomes one issue at a time. This is realistic and the way things actually work. The more people waffle on, whether it be lefty idealism or anything else, all that actually happens is that they drift further away from getting an outcome. And there is no substitute for getting an outcome.

I'll give you an example. You've talked before about the Kennett Government and some of its privatisation failures. However, you never talked about what preceded Kennett - Joan Kirner. What did she do for the economy? What did she do at all except to compile Emily's List? Big deal. The reason Victoria needed Kennett was as a correction for the economic drift of the previous Labor Government. Sure Kennett made some mistakes, but anyone else would in his position. The real problem is the imbalance, the way the pendulum swings from one extreme to the other, and the need for a correction at all.

So, to solve this problem, the Left, with its conscience and values switched on, needs to engage with the Right to achieve balanced outcomes issue by issue. This means people getting off their ideological butts and actively being prepared to make the necessary compromises. Then we'll all be better off right from the start. The first step is the hardest. Once that's been done, it will get progressively get easier to maintain.

To begin with, it's a bit unfair to attack Joan. She really was handed a 'poison chalice', and had little scope or time to implement much reform.

On 'dealing with the Right'. Yes, they make up around half the Conference, and obviously they have support in many branches. So it goes without saying you'd have to deal with them. But I think the Right is divided into social democrat and pure opportunist camps - and the 'pure opportunist' camp seems to hold sway.

I'd like to see a portion of the Right split away and join with the Centre-Left to form a Centre or united Centre-Left faction. Perhaps then we'd have someone we could deal with to get some real reform: tax reform, support student unionism, expand expenditure by 1%-2% of GDP in health, education, welfare, infrastructure, restore cross media ownership laws... And even if the Right didn't split (it's unlikely I guess), the Left should still be demanding a greater say in policy for 'consensus' in the Party, and thus stability. Rudd should not be allowed to take a unilateralist path on issues like IR.

Rob; you call my call for reform "idealistic intellectualism" - but if the ALP can't even expand progressive tax and expenditure by 1%-2% of GDP, who CAN we do? Is it "idealistic intellectualism" to say SOMEONE should get serious about the hospital waiting lists crisis - which can be remedied by redirecting less than 1% of GDP? $3 billion of reprioritised expenditure in an economy of $1 trillion (that's what we're proposing) - really, it's nowhere...

I agree with the principle of solidarity... But while many people would spurn the term 'class struggle' because of its Marxist origins, the reality is that ordinary working people still struggle to maintain wages, rights and conditions, and the most conscious struggle for more hospital beds, teacher etc. The union militancy of the 70s is gone, but in a sense class struggle is still with us. And that's not a bad thing.

more to come...

Chris C - re: communism, I see myself working in a tradition that goes back through the long history of the socialist movement, and I identify with Swedish social democracy, Eurocommunism... But even the ex-communists are no longer proposing communism... Some today are social democrats, other are post-materialists, some want a new philosophy that blends liberalism, socialism, conservatism. (consider David McKnight's 'Beyond Right and Left') The Left today is broad and comprises liberals, social democrats, democratic socialists, post-materialists... A new party would have to be broad and inclusive also, even if not so accomodating to neo-liberalism as the ALP is today.

But I'm not committed to support a new party yet. I think there's still room for the ALP Left to maximise its influence in the party. There's the prospect of reaffiliating Left unions to increase our influence at Conference and in National Exec; there's the prospect of using our leverage to secure a more progressive consensus that incorporates tax reform and meaningful social wage expansion; and there's the prospect of waging a strategic cultural struggle regardless, campaigning for progressive politics and participating in progressive campaigns regardless of who 'has the numbers' in the party. There's still the choice of whether we allow the Right to 'contain' and 'neutralise' us, or whether we choose to maintain an independent voice and profile.

But should all this fail, we need to keep out options open. I believe a new party, in tandem with the Greens, could secure meaningful representation if it secured the support of unions, prominent intellectuals, the welfare sector etc. If Rudd Labor took a hard turn to the Right, and refused to comrpomise for the sake of cohesion, then we'd have to keep our options open.

Tristan

It is time for the Left to remember Marxism is dead. That the Labor Party is a Socialist Party, which has been hijacked by the Conservatives.

For the Union Movement, which is in its darkest hours, it is time to change their approach to Industrial Relations. To ensure that when negotating any wage agreement that they produce a win, win result for all parties. When workers conditions are underminded we must learn to use the media. That means presenting evidence, which is accurate, and to name the offenders using the Television Media.

Remember we can no longer been seen as a group made up of a thousand parts. We must unite as one and be prepared to take the lead on all issues.

Above all, when selecting candidates for positions in government, we must look towards those who have a sound knowledge of a particular portfolio. People who can fill the role of a Leader and/or Cabinet Minister. Lets not be like the Right who only look inwards for party hacks to reward or outward for Celebrity Candidates. Who in some cases no bloody nothing about nothing.

We are not William Morris Hughes, like some rats who have jump ship for the sake of power. Remember that my brothers and sisters in arms.

Tristan, your text book politics 101 definition of Leftism has long been redundant. Unfortunately no one remembered to tell the political science boffins or they were too busy with trying to extract their own heads from being stuck tight up you know where = to take notice.

If you don't understand this its because its a Lefty thang.

re: the status of Marxism - I don't think Marxism is 'dead' in the sense that, taken electically, I think there's still many good ideas and perspectives in the broad Marxist tradition: the idea of there being a role for class struggle in driving historical change; one of the first accounts of globalisation; the critique of 'commodity fetishism'; and the idea that people should provide what they are able, and take what they need...

But the Marxist metanarrative, of class struggle lead inevitably to communism - that is no longer sustainable. Class struggle is one of many forces driving history, and it is not always decisive. And the Marxist dream of communism neglects that human nature is not so perfectible for a stateless society to be sustainable.

The closest we've got to a real modern communism was the experience of the Kibbutz in Israel; and for a while it was successful. But on a grander scale, states do not 'wither away', and markets continue to drive innovation and competition. There's no reason, though, why GBEs cannot play a role in the market, to provide goods and services on the basis of need, and provide a counter to collusive market practices. On the other hand, Marx's critique of capitalism's tendency to monopoly is as relevant as ever.

And if I have my 'head up my arse' because I don't want people being forced to wait 2-3 years for 'elective' surgery like hip replacements, and I want kids to have real equal opportunity through a quality public education system, and an accessible higher education system, then I'd hate to know where the *&^% Howard and Costello have their heads.