tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5952277586613848648.post3595924212539108220..comments2024-03-02T11:36:17.816-08:00Comments on ALP Socialist Left Forum: Final Arguments for the Socialist ObjectiveVaughann722http://www.blogger.com/profile/11604027151490275320noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5952277586613848648.post-86311211387925112882015-07-21T03:46:57.250-07:002015-07-21T03:46:57.250-07:00This is an alternative 'Socialist Objective...This is an alternative 'Socialist Objective' as a compromise between the existing Objective and Luke Foley's proposal to drop all mention of democratic socialism altogether. Debate anyone?<br /><br />The Australian Labor Party is a Party in the traditions and practices of democratic socialism and social democracy. Our aim is to extend the principles of democracy, liberty and equality – in the political, the social and the economic sense – throughout Australian economy and society. And to work for those same principles globally in solidarity with like-minded parties and social movements.<br /> <br />We also believe in working for the empowerment of every individual to realise their full potential and contribute towards a just society .<br /><br />We believe in a society where citizens contribute according to their abilities, and where their needs are provided for comprehensively in areas as diverse as health and lifelong education, housing and aged care, transport and communication, authentic and meaningful civic/democratic activism, cultural participation and personal growth, and social inclusion. We recognise human suffering which arises in the context of alienating, repetitive and strenuous labour – as well as because of poverty; and we perceive in abundance and democratisation opportunities to overcome these debilitating trends. We are open to the likelihood of evolving human need with social and technological development.<br /><br />For the sake of justice and of human dignity we stand against exploitation and discrimination, and against domination and oppression. ‘Market failure’ persists through distributive injustice and power imbalance; through cyclical crises; and through the failure of existing capitalist economies to account for human and environmental needs where these are in conflict with the imperative of growth. We strive to extend and defend a democratic mixed economy that balances markets with strategic planning ; and which seeks to extend the democratic and public sectors strategically. Finally we are open to the future possibilities of human co-operation.<br />Vaughann722https://www.blogger.com/profile/11604027151490275320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5952277586613848648.post-24298972423015242072015-07-21T01:09:57.703-07:002015-07-21T01:09:57.703-07:00(Concluding from the last two posts - See the Full...(Concluding from the last two posts - See the Full Debate at Labor Herald - in response to Luke Foley - see: https://www.laborherald.com.au/politics/socialism-schmocialism-luke-foleys-new-objective/#comment-43 <br /><br />Without all of this we are ‘just another party of the neo-liberal right-wing consensus’. We demobilise and liquidate our own movement; our own values; our ideas and our very identity. Without this kind of outlook we turn away from the class interests of our constituents. Pretending that a threadbare minimalist welfare state and other bare-bones protections ala some ‘Third Way’ are enough.<br /><br />Instead we need a vision to extend democracy to the economy ; and provide for our constituents needs on the basis of political, social and finally economic citizenship. And have a vision which is about enhancing peoples’ lives in a multiplicity of ways – which cannot be measured by narrow economic conceptions. (eg: GDP alone)Vaughann722https://www.blogger.com/profile/11604027151490275320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5952277586613848648.post-29405646945440941192015-07-21T01:08:42.189-07:002015-07-21T01:08:42.189-07:00Finally there is a very legitimate role for the pu...Finally there is a very legitimate role for the public sector. There are natural public monopolies in infrastructure in transport, communications, welfare, energy and water. Privatisation, here, has added to cost-structures, confused consumers, seen the fleecing of the general public… Meanwhile at a different level – Local governments can provide cheap child care and libraries, parks and gardens and recreation facilities. Government Business Enterprises can actually enhance competition while at the same time providing cross-subsidised products and services for the poor and vulnerable. (eg: in insurance and banking) And some areas like communications and defence industries – are crucial to ‘national security’ – in terms of potential self-reliance, data security etc. <br /><br />Also, Government can play a core role not only in ensuring disability services, but also aged care social insurance – of the highest quality but without regressive user pays mechanisms inflicted on the working class and the poor. That is without mentioning the role of government in providing the highest quality public education – from pre-school to primary, and from Secondary through to Tertiary – and even ‘personal growth’ education which is about helping people develop their cultural aptitudes and adding depth to their lives – not just catering for ‘the demands of the labour market’.<br /><br />ALSO re: the capitalist system’s role in ensuring the distribution and production of goods… Its not so much capitalism as it is MARKETS. But It is very-well conceivable that markets themselves could be democratised via the strategies discussed already, but also through other social regulation. (eg: of the labour market) <br /><br />Central Planning did some things well. Producing steel and coal; pumping out cars which admittedly all looked the same; producing tanks en masse in the USSR in WWII. There are some things government planning can still do best. (eg: in areas of natural public monopoly re: services and infrastructure) What a Command Economy does NOT do will is respond to the INTRICACIES of DIVERSE and EVER-DEVELOPING consumer need. Whether through modern entertainment – music, information technology, gaming, films and television, Smartphone Apps, a diverse array of choices for dining at home or dining out… <br /><br />Where markets produce innovation responding to the intricacies of consumer demand – then markets provide for this best. That is – At least under conditions of relative abundance as the developed economy can now provide. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn't try and democratise those markets where they work well. <br /><br />However, realism means we see there’s no road currently open to democratise all the big transnationals – eg: Samsung, Sony, Apple, Microsoft. We operate in a global capitalist economy. Consuming these companies innovations improves our lives ; as do the associated jobs which are created. We cannot and should not cut ourselves off from the global economy of course. <br /><br />Though there are things we can do – things we should have done in the past. Like socialising mining as much as practicable – capturing ‘super profits’ like was done with oil in Norway. This could have provided a ‘long term war-chest’ of many tens of billions. No we can’t just expropriate Gina. smile emoticon But we can impose stronger and fairer taxes. And we could even establish a public sector exploration company.<br /><br />Finally of course distributive justice is also a part of the Socialist Objective. We need fair welfare. We need appropriate regulations and rights in the labour market. We need to redistribute to counter the severity of unfair outcomes. Again: through welfare and labour market regulation, but also though public-owned infrastructure and services, and ‘social wage’ provisions in health, education, aged care etc.<br />Vaughann722https://www.blogger.com/profile/11604027151490275320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5952277586613848648.post-16254222115616215882015-07-21T01:05:47.775-07:002015-07-21T01:05:47.775-07:00RESPONSE TO TONY WOOD at Labor Herald: The proble...RESPONSE TO TONY WOOD at Labor Herald: The problems with share ownership are manyfold. Firstly, economic power and wealth depends on HOW MANY shares you have. So token share ownership by small investors does not change the situation under capitalism as we know it. Most wealth is held by the top 10%, and almost no wealth is held by the bottom 20%. And even those in the middle cannot realistically aspire to the wealth and power of the super-rich. Democracy is based on ‘one person one vote’ – free, universal and equal suffrage. Capitalism on the other hand is like the old ‘weighted suffrage’ where individuals had vastly increased voting power (much more than one vote each) according to wealth and/or nobility. Free, universal and equal suffrage itself was promoted by democratic socialists in the 19th Century when democracy was practically unheard of. A small investor has no hope of having comparable influence to a genuine large-scale capitalist. But government investments, services, enterprise etc – is accountable to all of us equally as voters and citizens – and where markets operate they are accountable to us as consumers like any other enterprise of course…..<br /><br />Meaningful economic democracy could take many forms. Co-operatives are an ideal form to democratise the economy – to give the workers themselves creative and managerial control over their work; at the same time countering mechanisms of exploitation. This can work on a large or small scale. Or can potentially take a ‘hybrid’ form – when workers’ stake-holding existing alongside State Aid and a public share – intended to provide the capital necessary to expand and remain competitive in large and often global markets. Some co-ops could even involve a stake-holding from specific regions which could stand to suffer with the loss of investment and jobs that may otherwise occur. For instance – Geelong and Broadmeadows could have co-invested in a ‘bailout’ for the automotive industry in Victoria. Or Shepparton could have taken a stake in the bailout for SPC-Ardmona.<br /><br />But a “democratic mixed economy” is more complex than this. It can also include collective capital mobilisation – for instance superannuation – though democratically administered public pension funds may be preferable by better spreading risk and providing more equal outcomes. There’s also the option of wage earner funds as tried in Sweden – or perhaps reconceived as ‘citizens funds’ given the shortcomings of that model originally.<br /><br />Other options include mutualism in banking, insurance and so on. Or co-determination agreements between workers and bosses – which deliver managerial influence and consultation to the workers. Or even self-employment – which also bypasses exploitation.Vaughann722https://www.blogger.com/profile/11604027151490275320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5952277586613848648.post-66823336482071333052015-07-20T18:02:34.852-07:002015-07-20T18:02:34.852-07:00Comrades might wish to make a comment at the "...Comrades might wish to make a comment at the "Labor Herald" here: <br /><br />https://www.laborherald.com.au/politics/socialism-schmocialism-luke-foleys-new-objective/#comment-43Mike Ballardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05410520975856239745noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5952277586613848648.post-56352608120211357852015-07-20T01:52:13.860-07:002015-07-20T01:52:13.860-07:00NBN is the National Broadband Network. It was sup...NBN is the National Broadband Network. It was supposed to be a publicly-constructed optic fibre network - fibre-to-the-home. But Abbott has changed the focus to cheaper, relatively inferior technology. (Fibre-to-the-node)Vaughann722https://www.blogger.com/profile/11604027151490275320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5952277586613848648.post-39963643826067146952015-07-20T00:30:19.811-07:002015-07-20T00:30:19.811-07:00WHAT IS THE NBN?WHAT IS THE NBN?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5952277586613848648.post-53880372103016708782015-07-19T22:51:10.225-07:002015-07-19T22:51:10.225-07:00Another issue is that we need a 'fall back pos...Another issue is that we need a 'fall back position' in case we're going to lose an Objective which proclaims the ALP as a democratic socialist party. If we can secure a compromise which proclaims us a Party incorporating democratic socialist and social democratic tendencies and traditions - then that's better than 'losing the lot' and openly embracing some 'Third Way' ala Giddens, Blair, Clinton. Vaughann722https://www.blogger.com/profile/11604027151490275320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5952277586613848648.post-996602536258056522015-07-19T22:22:43.018-07:002015-07-19T22:22:43.018-07:00Shayn - Though arguably the ALP is already a '...Shayn - Though arguably the ALP is already a 'big tent' in a sense. We include everyone from the AMWU and CFMEU to the AWU and even the SDA. Democratic socialism is also coming under attack from within the Left itself. At the same time we need enough cohesion to have a chance against Abbott - who leads a government so reactionary it makes the Howard government look good... What do we do about it? For me step one is to consolidate democratic socialist ideology within the Left, and get the Left itself involved in promoting counter-culture. Then from a position of strength - that is, clarity about what we stand for in the Left itself - take the debate to the Right and even into the Right. I think a US-style 'big tent' is pushing things way too far. I oppose ideological Convergence on some kind of insipid 'Third Way' relative Centre. But the fact is that we already have people of that mindset working within the Right - while others move to liquidate socialism within the Left. Again: what do we do about it?Vaughann722https://www.blogger.com/profile/11604027151490275320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5952277586613848648.post-6926110381275141572015-07-19T21:53:39.120-07:002015-07-19T21:53:39.120-07:00I would also have to consider seriously whether to...I would also have to consider seriously whether to continue in my (largely symbolic) membership of the ALP if the socialist objective was totally dropped. It is true that the ALP has not acted as any kind of socialist- or even social-democratic- party in years but there is an important qualitative difference between ignoring a commitment you nonetheless pay lip-service too and dropping that commitment altogether.<br /> I would be prepared to tolerate a re-wording of the socialist objective to embrace a notional social-democracy and might be persuaded to hold on to my party card despite my lukewarm enthusiasm but a total rightward shift towards a US Democrats-type "big tent" so shapeless as to embrace every clown in the baggy-pants circus......no, sorry. Count me out. That's a bridge too far.<br /> If you're not prepared to give the odd glance at the dimming embers of the light on the hill at least have the respect not to take a whiz on it to put it out entirely.Shayn McCallumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16271879521616740320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5952277586613848648.post-91630909700109867122015-07-18T20:43:07.236-07:002015-07-18T20:43:07.236-07:00Social ownership and democratic control of the col...Social ownership and democratic control of the collective product of labour is what socialism means to me. To the right, socialism means undemocratic Marxist-Leninist regimes. To a lot of the left, it means what you say it means, Tristan, a more democratic form of the wage system. My kind of socialism has never yet been established. My kind of socialism can only be established in Australia by the immense majority voting for it and organising unions to back up their ballot. <br /><br />I will have to carefully consider my membership in the ALP, if the 'socialist objective' is dropped. I do support left-wing measures to increase the amount of the Gross Domestic Product of labour going back to its producers via progressive taxation. That's not socialism, but it is a step towards greater well being for the immense majority, the people in my class, the working class, those dependent on wages for making a living.<br /><br />In the meantime, I suspect the right will get its way and promote the outdated system of wage labour by pushing the ALP more and more in the direction of becoming LNP-lite for the post-modern generation in the revolving door of corporate State capitalism. Mike Ballardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05410520975856239745noreply@blogger.com