Below is a post that reflects a passionate partisan arising from the
existence of a (once?) mass Australian Labour Party. He refers to the
post below.
Bob Gould Says:
May 8, 2008 at 11:14 pm
In their increasingly frenzied dismissal of the whole of the Labor
Party ranks, the anti-socialist so-called World Socialist Web Site
peddles the same line as Imre Salusinszky and others in the bourgeois
media that the post-conference Labor caucus meeting on Tuesday
endorsed the Iemma-Costa position on privatisation.
These pur****tedly left-wing journalists are not at all interested in
examining, or even noting, the struggle that=92s continuing in the
labour movement, including in the Labor caucus.
On Tuesday the joint pressure of the left and right unions and the
Labor conference decision got the number of anti-privatisation MPs in
the caucus up to about 28, which was short of a majority and despite
the almost universal discontent of the Labor Party branches, the left
ministers declined to vote in caucus against the premier, arguing that
they=92d cross over when a majority was achieved.
A number of people, including some in quite senior positions, strongly
pointed out to the left ministers that if they ****fted, those who were
wavering might follow their lead, creating a majority, but the
ministers still declined to take the risk and their position is being
shored up by some left figures in the federal government.
In the face of that situation, the 28 who were committed to sup****t
the conference decision, and their sup****ters at different levels in
the Labor Party, considered it politic not to press the vote in the
caucus at that point. The failure to insist on a vote is a reasonable
subject for tactical discussion among comrades, but it=92s absolutely
clear the 28 did not endorse the pro-privatisation position of the
government leaders.
Reactionary cranks such as the WSWS take up the story of the bourgeois
press and Iemma wholesale, because it suits their rather psychotic
view of the world. By definition, from their point of view, no
struggles can take place in the Labor Party.
The WSWS can be well assured that there are plenty of struggles going
on all over the place, in union executives and offices, in Labor Party
branches around the state, in the Labor Party head office and among
Labor politicians of the better sort, and their staff.
The anti-socialist WSWS is acting as a publicity agent for the ruling
class, using its little pea-shooter to peddle the story that the
struggle is already lost, which has been their story since the
struggle began.
This latest article spells out even more clearly the WSWS=92s basic view
that the Labor Party and the unions, including the rank and file, are
completely bankrupt. Once again, this coincides with the current
tactical position of the ruling class. It=92s the same story advanced by
Keating and Carr in The Australian and the Sydney Morning Herald, with
the addition of a threadbare attempt at some left cover: =93The movement
against the power privatisation plan can only go forward to the extent
that it makes a conscious political break with these bureaucracies and
begins to advance an internationalist and socialist program.=94 That=92s
so threadbare it=92s completely transparent.
The WSWS even brazenly peddles the same story of the ruling class,
Carr and Keating, that =93defence of the status quo in the NSW power
industry is untenable=94.
The thing that=92s wrong with that claim, which is the core argument of
the ruling class in this battle, is that the trade unions, the
overwhelming majority of Labor branches and the better Labor
politicians, both left and right, don=92t think it=92s untenable at all,
as Bernie Riordan points out very effectively in this morning=92s Sydney
Morning Herald. They=92re conducting a vigorous campaign to retain the
existing arrangements.
The WSWS bunch, insofar as they can influence anyone from their
website, in their position totally outside the labour movement, are
doing a job for the ruling class, which is really their only practical
political role these days. All their guff about the whole program of
the socialist revolution is just window dressing.
When the WSWS rejects the Labor Party and the unions, however
imperfect they may be as vehicles for struggle, and counterposes to
them a pile of political abstractions to which they say the workers
should turn, that=92s so obviously impossible that ordinary people can=92t
comprehend it. It=92s a total appeal to spontaneity among the m*****,
which in the end doesn=92t exist.
With this particular small bunch of anti-socialist renegades, it=92s
necessary to look at their tactical approach. They give half the votes
they can influence (happily a very small number) to the Liberals, and
they call for the sma****ng of the unions and the Labor Party, which
are the only physical obstacles to the rule of capital with no
constraints.
If there hadn=92t been a union revolt and a revolt in the Labor branches
against electricity privatisation there would be no public expression
of the massive popular discontent with the privatisation.
Michael Berrell=92s WSWS mates are outright tools of the ruling class.
|
