By Anthony Benbow and Virginia Brown
PERTH — The scarlet-coloured leaflet advertised the Fremantle branch of the Australian Labor Party meeting as "Re-visioning Labor". It was to assess the federal election result and discuss where to go to next.
Neither of us were sure of exactly what to expect, having just come from the inspiring and innovative two-day Democratic Socialism conference, organised by the Democratic Socialist Party and Resistance. Hawking our Green Lefts to participants as they arrived, we wondered how the ALP conference would deal with the broader social justice and economic issues that Labor has ignored for so long.
The agenda for the night turned out to be a lecture by Melbourne academic Peter Beilharz, followed by discussion kicked off by Carmen Lawrence. Beilharz dealt exhaustively (and exhaustingly) with Labor's "need to define the status of its collective consciousness" and pondered on the transformations in the global system and in western political culture.
Insisting on the "cultural evacuation" of the ALP, Beilharz reminded us that Labor was "both the subject and object of this process, both author and victim". It was obvious why he was such a successful academic. It appeared that a main objective of the lecture was to avoid mentioning any word beginning in "p" and ending in "olicy".
Likewise, the words "East" and "Timor", and "uranium" and "mining", were mentioned neither separately nor together. The word "socialism" was, however, used quite affectionately, with Beilharz and later Lawrence and WA parliamentarian Geoff Gallop all assuring us fervently that they were indeed happy to be described by the "s" word.
Beilharz maintained that the ALP "now lacks the kind of language necessary to mobilise popular support" and that "language and representation" remain central to ensuring that parliamentary parties retain their power. This concern seemed rather hollow given the failure of the conference organisers to set up a PA or provide enough time for anything but a cursory discussion on strategy.
So, with a similar number of participants, how did the ALP evening compare to the DSP conference?
Democratic Socialism '96 analysed the current position of the feminist, green and trade union movements, nationally and internationally. It brought together WA and interstate activists from these movements, as well as newly radicalising people looking to become involved in politics. The discussions throughout were dynamic and open to allow everyone to participate as fully as possible.
Back with Beilharz, when the floor was finally opened to discussion (1½ hours later) the audience appeared overwhelmed. "When I vote Labor, how exactly do I know what I'm voting for?", was one question.
We asked what could force Labor to change its policies away from economic rationalism, and suggested working outside the ALP to build new democratic left forces. Geoff Gallop responded by talking up the need to keep winning elections and how cunning the Coalition could be.
The questions that followed were equally as ineffective in diverting the discussion from its by now obvious course. "Re-visioning" Labor obviously meant a new paint job rather than a complete renovation and remodelling of the ALP machine.
The last question from the floor summed it up: "Does it matter if we don't re-vision the ALP?"