In the November 10 federal election the Socialist Alliance averaged 1% in the 15 House of Representatives seats in which it stood candidates. How good is this result? What does it mean when the Greens nearly doubled their vote from 2.4% to 4.7%? What does it mean in the context of a third defeat in a row for the ALP?
These are some of the questions Green Left Weekly's ALISON DELLIT put to Dick Nichols, a member of the national executive of the Democratic Socialist Party and one of the alliance's three national conveners. Here he puts the DSP view on the achievements and tasks of the alliance.
@QUOTE = Was 1% for the Socialist Alliance really a good result in the context of a shift to the left that largely went to the Greens?
Yes, it was. This was an election where the bureaucratic electoral cards were stacked against the alliance because its application for registration as a party for electoral purposes was frozen as soon as John Howard called the election. The alliance's candidates therefore appeared on the ballot paper without any party identification. We can therefore be confident that practically all the votes that went to the alliance were conscious votes for our socialist alternative.
@QUOTE = But if you assess 1% as a good result, what would have been a poor result?
We would have been worried if the alliance vote had fallen behind the traditional left vote. But despite not being registered, our vote generally rose — especially in the most working class and migrant electorates. And in the Senate, where lack of registration is really crippling for a party that can't be present on every polling booth, tickets led by our indigenous candidates Sam Watson and June Mills did well in Queensland and the Northern Territory.
This result is undeniably due to the consistent work that the Socialist Alliance has been doing both in the movement against the "war on terrorism" and in support of the rights of asylum seekers and refugees.
How was the Socialist Alliance vote achieved?
Through the quality of our candidates — committed activists and fighters for working people's rights — and through the very hard work of more than 1000 members and supporters who helped build the alliance's election campaign up to and on polling day. That's another feature of the alliance's first election campaign — it involved many more members and supporters than belong to the founding affiliates. It confirmed that the Socialist Alliance is winning the loyalty and commitment of hundreds of socialists who weren't convinced to join any of the founding parties.
What were the main features of polling day?
Two aspects stood out. The first was the utter shame of so many ALP members and supporters at Kim Beazley's "me too" approach on the war and refugees. For many older ALPers who remember the 1975 Kerr coup, the thought that Malcolm Fraser now has a more decent position on the refugee issue than Beazley was simply humiliating. Many ALP booth workers told us they were going to give their first vote to the Greens or the Socialist Alliance, which is actually forbidden by ALP rules.
The second was the determination of many people to vote for the Greens as the most obvious way of opposing the two-party consensus for war and racist scapegoating. Many voters insisted on only taking the Greens how-to-vote.
How do you view the doubling of the Greens vote?
The rise in the Greens vote is a big step forward for progressive politics. Hundreds of thousands voted for the Greens as a way of saying no to the war, racism and, more broadly, neo-liberal globalisation. The surge in the Greens vote means that opposition to the neo-liberal agenda can speak out louder. The fact that Bob Brown will probably be joined in the Senate by two or three other Greens. This could take us back to the days when WA Green senators Christobel Chamarette and Dee Margetts caused scandals simply by refusing to compromise on questions of principle.
The Socialist Alliance should aim for closer collaboration with the Greens both "on the ground" and in suggesting initiatives for parliament. Collaboration already began in the election campaign itself, where the Socialist Alliance and Greens candidates put out joint statements against the war in a number of lower house seats and in the Senate for the Northern Territory. The alliance needs to further develop such "red-green" dialogue and collaboration.
What should that dialogue be about?
In general terms, it should be about how best to consolidate the shift to the left represented by the strong reaction against the Coalition-ALP consensus for neo-liberalism, racism and war. It should involve collaboration to build the movements of resistance as well as discussion of policy.
This dialogue is needed because there's a certain gap between the protest movements and the Greens, whose main centre of attention remains parliament. It's also necessary because the movement against the war and the general movement against neo-liberal globalisation still has to get a clearer view of where the Greens stand in practice on many issues. That requires ongoing dialogue.
On a more fundamental plane, "red-green" dialogue is essential to clarify whether the Greens broad principles of social justice, sustainability and peace really can be won under some form of capitalism. We, of course, don't think so. Many Greens members agree with us on this, but while they may identify themselves as anti-capitalist, they do not have a clearly formulated conception of what the alternative is to capitalism.
What relations should the Socialist Alliance now look to develop with the ALP left?
During the election campaign the Socialist Alliance candidates put out an "open letter" to ALP members urging them to remember the best traditions of their party and oppose the "war on terrorism" the way Jim Cairns and thousands of other ALPers opposed the Vietnam War. That letter certainly struck a chord, because it rapidly went around ALP networks.
The Socialist Alliance should look to deepen collaboration with everyone in the ALP who wants to fight against the war, for a humane refugee policy and against the terrible impact the coming recession is going to have on working people. But it should do that in the clear understanding that any improvement in ALP policy on these issues will only result from strengthening mass movements of resistance to Howard's policies.
At the same time the alliance, and alliance unionists in particular, should be promoting the discussion of what steps now need to be taken along the road to forming a mass working-class party in this country. It's clear than there will be no miraculous left shift by the ALP under Simon Crean's leadership, and that the millions of dollars given by unions to the Labor Party for this election was just money poured down the drain.
With the economy sliding into recession, the question of an independent political voice for workers is becoming increasingly urgent and the Socialist Alliance has to be at the forefront of arguing for it.
What should the Socialist Alliance do next?
In our view, the Socialist Alliance's work is basically one of consolidation. It will now get federal electoral registration, and registration should immediately be pursued in the states and territories. It should continue its work in the anti-war and refugee rights movements. It should be at the forefront of defending the militant unions, as in the case of the "Skilled Six", and against the attacks being prepared by Howard and Abbott. It should now relaunch its phase of policy elaboration, which was decided on at its founding conference but was suspended by the election campaign.
The alliance should also redouble its efforts to attract the left organisations that remain outside its ranks. The very process of having nine organisations form the alliance and then collaborate on a common project has been enormously valuable for the Australian left. It has been the precondition for drawing into radical political activity hundreds of socialists who would otherwise probably have remained inactive. It has enabled stronger collaboration with migrant left and socialist organisations. Most importantly of all, it has given the socialist message a higher profile.
So we should all redouble our efforts to strengthen the Socialist Alliance. We can be certain of one thing — the more influential it is in the unions and other social movements, the greater will be the chance of converting the leftward shift shown at this election into a more lasting opposition to neo-liberalism and capitalism.
From Green Left Weekly, November 21, 2001.
Visit the Green Left Weekly home page.