See the thing about Labor is tha-… oh come on, let’s have one last go around before we drop the topic entirely for a while.
Once it was clear, last Saturday week, that we weren’t going to get to enjoy a few days/weeks/months of schadenfreude, the lesser pleasure of telling Labor what’s wrong with it takes over. A few final points:
1. Labor is no longer the ‘natural’ representative of progressivism
I mean, as we head into the 2020s, as huge numbers of non-European Australians, the children of our 20-year immigration wave, enter their late twenties and thirties, as women start to outnumber men in key professions and full-time work, Labor gives us middle-aged white guy leaders. White? They may as well be filmed in sepia.
It’s the great 1963 battle for leadership of the Wangaratta Slurryists and Frittlers all over again: sweaty men with fixed grins looking nervously at the camera. That and the factional argy-bargy around the final Senate position could only occur in a party that thought it didn’t have to win over whole sections of society — women, POC, Indigenous, LGBTQI — that they first got in the 1960s, with the rise of the Whitlamite compact.
The trouble is that this compact succeeded, at least for some of those groups, in terms of legal equality, and the journey to social equality. Increasingly for sub-groups of this progressive compact — professional-class women and POC for example — there’s no longer a clear social-material interest in “voting your values”, if the Coalition is offering a package better suited to individual accumulation. Indeed, for such groups — capital-poor until the last 30 years or so — there’s a progressive case to be made for such accumulation. It’s the completion of the bourgeois revolution, to a degree.
All the Coalition has to do is not be totally obnoxious, and close the “progressive gap” a little. As they’ve now done by having an Indigenous Indigenous Affairs Minister, and a few more women in cabinet.
The forcing-out of Tony Abbott in this regard has done them a favour too. Morrison’s Christianity may have a conservative view of the world, but it doesn’t publicly construct progressivism as the clash of God and Satan on Earth, and pine to restore the Hapsburgs. Labor is going to have to fight both the Greens and the Coalition for their hitherto rusted-on progressive voters, from now on.
2. Labor’s voters do not see Labor as their organic representatives
Labor is the party with the greatest disjuncture between its MPs and its voters, yet they remain in denial about this. Greens candidates are Greens members/voters through and through. Coalition members and voters may have a class gap, but it’s covered by notions of aspiration and legitimate privilege. Only Labor has a party of professional/knowledge class people leading a base who are precisely the opposite of that.
Worse, Labor is in denial about the lack of an organic relationship — as witnessed by member for Griffith MP Terri Butler’s Twitter spat with the Greens, and new leader Anthony Albanese’s relentless anti-Green rhetoric. Look, folks. You may see yourself as constitutionally different to the Greens — but a lot of your supporters don’t. They’ll vote Labor thick and thin, but they know that their members are not “one of them”.
Take something as minor but indicative as music choice. Yeah, I got a thrill when Albo quoted Billy Bragg. Australian left-wing Twitter had a tweetgasm. But that’s the problem, isn’t it? The heartland is still listening to The Eagles and Counting Crows. Labor’s leaders are still turned towards the inner city, in seeking their own affirmation. The more they deny the gap between base and representatives, the more mistakes they’ll make.
3. There are equal dangers in over- and understating this defeat
News Corp and related organs are going to town on the idea that the Coalition is the unmediated expression of the Australian people’s will, Labor a basically alien fifth column. It’s absurd, of course. A 400,000-vote gap in a two-party preferred system of 25 million people indicates that people voted largely on “client” grounds — i.e. they chose a party on the basis of its offer, less on its representation of values.
Morrison’s everyday-man imagery was less about setting him up as a Howard-type figure, and more about amplifying the widespread dislike of Bill Shorten as a person (Labor’s refusal to think in visual terms was another example of startling ineptitude). So the right could really fool themselves into complacency by constructing this defeat as a culture war one. Equally, however, it can lull Labor into thinking it has no serious work to do in re-grounding itself.
4. Labor has a huge amount of work to do
With the dominance of News Corp, the inherent right-shift of other commercial media, the increased individualism/familialism of Australian society, Labor has to always be aiming for a landslide in order to get a rockfall. Every piece of Labor’s progressive/suburban synthesis has to be rethought, in a manner more sophisticated than “move left”, “move centre/right”. Some sort of narrative, no matter how minimal, has to be found.
But it can’t be got off the shelf; it has to be derived from an actual social/sociological analysis of what Australian society is now, and how the goals of both equality and the opportunity for individual self-flourishing can be met. The long arc of the Whitlam coalition/compact is concluded. Labor has to build a new one from scratch, without preconceptions, arrogance or a belief that anyone owes it a vote. Somewhere over the rainbow is either victory — or the wilderness. And the abyss.
What’s the one thing you’d like Labor to take away from all this? Send your comments to boss@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name.
Most of the media is left biased, not right. Look at Fairfax and ABC, they are left, with ABC heavily left.
Labor released poor policies that were not media scrutinised when released last year and before the election, so when people started listening, they formed their own opinion. Being in a marginal seat, I was relentless possled by uComms which is owned by Unions and a few by YouGov, then over two dozen Union, GetUp and Labor calls. It pissed me off. I had 2 liberal robo calls and one live call with PM and local candidate and conference call where you could ask questioons .
*sigh*…. your anecdotes about MOST media and the ABC are sadly wrong – it actually just reflects your own bias. Sorry but when you start out with that – I can’t read the rest of what you say – it renders it meaningless. Real debate on policy has been neutered in this country. Please open the other eye and have another look.
Anyone who thinks the Nine publications and the ABC are left of centre says more about their own position than about the Nine publications and the ABC.
Of your view of Centre!!
The ABC are the only service annually audited for impartiality; maybe you disagree with the facts.
ABC and SBS are only ones wholly taxpayer funded. Rest live and die by advertising and circulation or ratings
Mostly die…
Fairfax regularly posted articles which were unfavourable to Labor’s proposed legislation, not many that were in favour.
Of course no media outlet scrutinised the government’s policies, since there were no policies to scrutinise.
Print media is dominated by Murdoch. Are you going to say that they are left wing biased?
And I doubt that Nine, Seven and Ten could be called left wing either.
Murdoch is right, Fairfax is left, ABC is way left.
There you go… step in the right direction!
1 out of 3 🙂
Fairfax is left of Murdoch. As is the ABC (but not as far as you think).
That doesn’t mean they are left wing.
I’ve read that Murdoch’s outlets comprises about 70% of the media in this country and it is predominantly right wing. Add to this, for arguments sake, a third of Fairfax and half of ABC outlets’ commentary as being ‘right’. How do you get to where you think that most of our media is left biased. It doesn’t make sense.
Yer Leigh Sales, Greg Jennet and the rest are lefties. Sure whatever you say.
You wouldn’t know real left if it bit you. Scrap private school funding, scrap private health insurance, publicly owned utilities and banks, real progressive taxation, etc ,etc. I didn’t here any of that on the ABC or channel 9.
Fairfax outright endorsed the LNP in the previous election, I didn’t buy enough of their product to determine if they did this time. Hardly the action of a left of centre media organisation.
Fairfax endorsed Labor on the last day before the election, based on the fact that Labor had policies and the LNP had none.
That is not to say that they didn’t carry coverage favourable to the LNP. They did.
Also, could a media organisation that employs Amanda Vanstone, for example, as a columnist be considered left wing?
Could a media organization the employs Vanstone as a columnist be considered a media organization? Vanstone is a politician, even if semi-retired.
And what about the hideous Tom Switzer. As for Vanstone she makes the lobsters look tame.
Oh yeah, the world according to Amanda Vanstone show. I try to listen sometimes but it gives me “cringe ache”
If you think Fairfax is left, ABC is way left I’d hate to see where you sit on the spectrum…
The “Jewel in the Crown” of Nine is AFR, run by an ex-Murdoch editor. The constantly misrepresent and under report important events that relate to Australia. The ABC (as pointed out by Bernard in this very edition) doesn’t even mention stories that are likely to upset the LNP, and in 7:30 either doesn’t cover stories that may embarrass the LNP, or goes very light on their reps, while holding every other politician of whatever stripe to a hot iron.
There is a reason the ABC has constantly come in as the most trusted news organisation, but on their current path I doubt they’ll hold it. I expect news sources like The Guardian or Crikey! to pick up that mantle up off them before too long.
Stop with he deliberate disinformation about the ABC being left biased. All investigations have found that not to be the case, so stop repeating the Murdock Coalition lies.
+100
Everyone’s entitled to their opinion of course, but the constant refrain of the left-wing bias of the ABC has never been proven true by any independent review – and there’s been lots of them. In addition to which, if anything, the ABC has become increasingly captive to a hostile government. Can we talk instead Suzanne of the rank bias that the Murdoch Press demonstrated in this election campaign – as 75% of our media landscape, many Australians rely on them for their news, and yet this election campaign they were little more than a propaganda arm for the LNP, running a blatant and bias campaign to get the government re-elected. Can we talk about how that damages our country? Can we talk about how that disenfranchises millions of Australian voters who vote for progressive parties? The right’s constant bleating about bias in the ABC, is little more than a cover for the fact that the real bias in our media landscape lies with News Corp.
Seriously, that is weapons grade delusion you are dealing with there!
Suzzane Blake ..anyone who refers to the Fairfax Ch9 corporate free pre$$ ponzi property promoting entertainment centre as left is dreamin’…as for the ABC..well r.i.p …ol’ girl ..you once was a contender…
Long time no hear Blakey – wear ya bin?
Ironing her flag collection ?
Working hard to stay ahead. Not on welfare, so have to work
Still claiming to be a foresnic accountant?
They were an elite brigade in the Yugoslav army. Did all the book keeping and logistics.
‘working hard’- same here,’not on welfare’ -me too but I’m barely staying ahead. To be honest, I can’t really afford my Crikey subs but MSM (Fairfax & ABC included) is so full of right wing rants and rubbish that I’m prepared to pay for a different perspective, that’s why I’m here…what’s your excuse SB ???
Missed you too. Pity you are still in the whirlpool
I call the MSM the Corporate Media – that tells you all you need to know. With company profits and executive wages the only growth areas in the economy the’re quite happy with the libs in power. And I’ll be interested to hear what the ABCs election bias review comes up with – the 2016 said it was more biased to the Libs as I remember, and I’d be surprised if that has changed, certainly in the other direction. Those who think the ABC is left-biased should watch more News 24.
There have been numerous reviews of ABC bias in the past 2 decades. These have used varying methodology such as counting the number of complaints of left bias vs right bias, analysing the political leaning of guest speakers, and comparing the time devoted to supporters of left vs right. EVERY review has determined that the ABC is dead centre in its reporting, speaker selection and time devoted to topics. Any bias is the listeners, as professional analysis, with a variety of methods indicates No bias.
Aha, gotcha! The ABC employs a declared old lefty like Phillip Adams. Any organisation that employs Phillip Adams must be left wing, like the ABC and…The Australian…oh.
What, the Rudd government is the most currupt and anti transparent government Australia has ever seen? Seriously? I would argue it pales into insignificance when compared to this government. Giving hundreds of millions of taxpayers dollars to a small, unknown group of their industry mates to protect the GBR without a proper tender process? Even their mates were shocked by the audacity of that one. Introducing legislation to silence and jail anyone who discloses how the Australian government treats (read tortures) refugees on Manus and Nauru? Installing an environment minister with links to the coal industry just to bully the CSIRO into releasing a report clearing Adani’s dirty coalmine just hours before calling an election? They then turned around and mislead the Australian people on the real interpretation of the expert advice they had received. And thats just the tip of the ice berg.
Where is your evidence? Where is your balanced and unbiased analysis? And where is your integrity? Please spare us from such drivel.
suzanne while I understand why race horses wear blinkers I`m a bit baffled why you do, must make life very difficult, blinkers stop horses from being frightened of anything on their right or left so then can only see straight ahead ,but your blinkers seem focused only to the left, so whats happening on the right goes completely unseen, comforting ,but very dangerous as what is looming up on your right side may cause much pain, especially around the hip pocket nerve which is the most sensetive part of a voters body
At least this time Labor and Greens seemed to recognise they were both on the same side. In previous times Labor has preferenced Greens last, presumably out of spite, as if they had an inalienable claim to anything left of centre.
And how about the times the Greens preferences PUP and the Climate Skeptics before Labor!
It’s time voters took responsibility for their preferences, and stopped blaming the parties for their own actions
Easily said than done, did you read this?
The Australian electoral commissioner himself couldn’t clearly explain how it works. And he’s not alone
While lots of Australians were already a bit confused about how Senate voting worked, the new system has confused people quite a bit more. So much so that even the man responsible for overseeing our elections, the Australian electoral commissioner, Tom Rogers, either misspoke or misled the public when trying to explain the new system on the ABC this week.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/01/preferences-matter-for-senate-voting-heres-how-to-make-your-election-vote-count
Whaaa..? Citation required.
In one election (2013), in one state (SA), the Greens put the Labor right candidates (including Don Farrell) behind the PUP ones, but the Labor left (Penny Wong) before them.
That’s it unless you can come up with anything else.
The climate skeptic part seems to be entirely made up as far as I can tell.
A week or so ago, Bowen was saying Labor needed to return to its roots. It occurred to me at the time that the roots of the Labor Party (or, at least, the labour movement in Australia) are, in fact, rural – even though we tend to think of Labor as a city party.
The grand social justice successes of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries involved the organisation of largely rural workers: shearers, miners, common labourers. As a primary-producing nation, these workers were the bedrock of our prosperity and organising them gave the union movement a huge degree of political power. Conversely, as their numbers dwindled, so too did the power of the labour movement. I find it difficult to see how this power can be resurrected and – even if it could be – the question is (as Guy suggests) to what end? While many feminists, gay-rights activists and representatives of minority groups may disagree, I think that from the perspective of the early twentieth century, most social justice battles have been considerably advanced, even if not won outright.
It seems to me that the two main progressive issues that remain to challenge us are entwined and, possibly, also have implications for many of older issues that need to be closed off. These are, first, growing social and economic inequality and, second, the threat of climate change. It also seems to me that the likely solution to both of these will call for the development of an alternative to the capitalist/laissez-faire economic model that currently dominates the world.
I have serious doubts about the traditional ‘Labor’ mindset being able to do this, because the older views of both ‘capitalist’ and ‘worker’ are so tightly bound to the old economic order. I also doubt the ability of the Greens to succeed: as recent electoral performance would suggest, the Greens can capture the inner city vote but they do not seem able to capture the remnants of Labor’s old rural support base, who are now much more likely to vote One Nation or some other right-wing crazies. We need another alternative, but I’m not sure what.
Or maybe we just need more hipsters to go bush.
Well put Graeski. The mental picture of more hipsters going bush
made me laugh out loud but your point about some kind of reboot being needed is solid. The making of new classes in societies around the world is underway. Political ideologies are struggling to keep up which imho is going to cause greater polarisation and extremism as people try to find something that represents and enables them. Dunno where it’ll all end, maybe earth will run out of clean water and air first.
Fair comments Vasco and Graeski. I suspect the old political divides are as current as Guy’s sepia pictures.
The World has moved on, we are left to create a new story.
Good points Graeski.
I think one of the biggest problems for Labor is they are leaving their traditional supporters behind (workers usually in unions) thinking they are locked in.
They also forgot their roots in where the party was born (the bush). They also need to start looking at being the party that stands up for the “knowledge” class (people trying to make it on their own) and small business (who are usually workers starting to branch out from “the bosses” anyway).
I’ve always though of Labor as being the party of the “little guy”, but they have lost their way in the last few elections (which is why I shifted my primary to the greens).
Spare us the rubbish Rundle. Don’t try and tell us that the Greens are the progressives.
They are. For example, their positions on industrial relations are more favourable for workers and unions when compared to the “party of workers and unions” ALP.
More specifically, the Greens supported all demands od Change The Rules campaign. The ALP didn’t. Greens support right to strike, ALP doesn’t.
Also, the Queensland Greens ran a far more left campaign than Labor in this recent election. They proposed universal dental care, free childcare, bringing electricity back into public hands and proper taxation of corporations. Labor can rage all they like against the greens, but the queensland greens ran the progressive campaign that labor should have run, connecting Australians’ increasing alienation and hardship with late neoliberalism, and offering real solutions.
Labor spends too much effort and policy positioning on pandering to the Liberal bigot party. Stand up for what progressives believe in- one foot each side of the barbed wire fence, as old Joh used to say, is useless. Our local Labor candidate signed the pledge offered by the cfmmeu and it did him no good at all!
The Greens can support whatever they like. They won’t ever be burdened with governing
It’s trending that way though. Look at Germany. (Not a Godwin ref)
https://theconversation.com/how-germanys-green-party-took-on-the-far-right-to-become-a-major-political-force-117927
True, but the excuse of governing is exactly what labor has used to justify pursuing economically conservative policies that have ultimately alienated their base. And it goes without saying that the greens as a whole aren’t necessarily great e.g. the Victorian greens seem to be more concerned about bike lanes in Brunswick than things like free childcare.
Stop with he deliberate disinformation about the ABC being left biased. All investigations have found that not to be the case, so stop repeating the Murdoch Coalition lies.