Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

11761Re: SA-VIC: SA election results smash records!

Expand Messages
  • bobgould987
    Dec 15, 2004
      By Bob Gould

      Further to Nigel Irritable's measured and careful discussion of the
      local government election results in Victoria, it might be useful to
      add some elements.

      Firstly, whether socialists decide to run independently in elections
      is a tactical question to be decided by the socialists concerned. In
      my view it's lunacy to counterpose such electoral exercises to the
      work of socialists who decide that their tactical orientation is to
      work in the Labor Party or the Greens.

      It's even worse to delude yourself that engaging in a fairly
      straightforward electoral exercise solves the central strategic
      problems facing socialists -- whether you're relatively successful as
      the Socialist Party and the ISO have been in Victoria, or relatively
      unsuccessful as the DSP/Socialist Alliance has been everywhere in
      recent times.

      The particular strategic problem facing socialists is clearly the
      hegemony of the Labor Party over the organised working class and the
      demonstrated viability of the Greens as a small mass electoral
      formation to the left of Labor, based largely in the new social layers.

      It's pretty clear that when they engage in their independent electoral
      activity the Socialist Party and the ISO do so quite seriously, in the
      way that Nigel Irritable describes.

      The DSP tends not to do it in that way because of its preoccupation
      with the internal life of its own apparatus, which absorbs the
      energies of that organisation almost totally.

      Several conjunctural factors obviously have a bearing on the Victorian
      local elections. Firstly, the Labor Party in Victoria has a more
      limited tradition of participation in local elections than it does in
      NSW and Queensland, for instance.

      Secondly, and this is an area where people who know more than me might
      enlighten me. It's my impression that when the reactionary Liberal
      government of Jeff Kennett enforced wholesale amalgamations of local
      councils in Victoria a few years ago, it introduced
      first-past-the-post voting everywhere. It appears that a number of
      mainly Labor and Green municipalities have reintroduced proportional
      representation, which is a progressive step. I'd be interested to know
      when that happened.

      An even more progressive step would be to increase the number of
      councillors from three to four per ward, thus lowering the quota to 20
      per cent. Maybe Steve Jolly could consider such a proposal for the
      Yarra council.

      In the federal elections, the Socialist Party chose not to run,
      implicitly recognising the great polarisation in Australian society
      between the Labor-Green and the Tory sides of politics in those elections.

      The ISO, which did run in the federal elections as part of the
      Socialist Alliance, avoided to a large extent the extravagant
      anti-Labor rhetoric of the DSP, but the DSP rhetoric tended to
      dominate the Socialist Alliance campaign, for which the SA paid the
      inevitable penalty of a vote so small as to be off the electoral radar.

      It seems to me that better electoral result for the Socialist Party
      and the ISO candidates of the Socialist Alliance in the Victorian
      local elections is directly due to the less sectarian and more
      sensible tone of the ISO and the Socialist Party, both to the broader
      Labor movement and to the Greens.

      On the face of it, Steve Jolly's statements before and after his
      election seem quite reasonable. He counterposed himself as a socialist
      both to the Labor Party and the Greens, but he also made an appeal to
      the better traditions of the Labor Party and to the ranks of the
      Greens for better collaboration around progressive policies. All of
      that seems to me entirely reasonable.

      He delivered his vote for mayor to the Labor candidate and explained
      why. As he only had half a quota, it's quite clear that Steve Jolly
      was elected on the Labor Party surplus, which carried over to him as
      preferences. Half the votes that elected him came from Socialist Party
      voters, and half from Labor voters.

      I base this interpretation on local newspapers in Yarra, which have
      been sent to me by a friend. Was it the case that Steve Jolly and the
      Socialist Party actually exchanged preferences with the Labor Party?
      That's a genuine question, because it's not entirely clear from the
      local paper reports.

      Anyway, it seems clear that Jolly's election is the product of a good
      deal more sensible strategic orientation than that of the DSP, both in
      the terms described by Nigel Irritable about concentrating seriously
      in one area, and also adopting a more realistic overall approach to
      the continuing grip of Labor and the Greens on the masses.

      PS. One shouldn't underestimate, in this kind of political exercise,
      Steve Jolly's individual personal role. He's a colourful immigrant to
      Australia with a strong Irish accent and in a modest way a charismatic
      figure with a long history of socialist political agitation behind
      him. The human element should never be overlooked as a factor in
      electoral politics.
    • Show all 24 messages in this topic