Revitalising progressive politics

Sydney Greens forum

Thanks to the organisers for the invitation to speak. Revitalising progressive politics is an excellent topic for discussion. As we run helter skelter from one campaign to the next we don't give ourselves enough time to reflect, consider and discuss where our quest for political and social change and environmental protection is taking us. I am sure we will have a useful dialogue today.

Revitalising progressive politics is certainly in the air and I think there is much to feel very positive about. Events in recent weeks demonstrate a depth of awareness among the public on social and environment issues - the growing campaign against Howard's IR agenda and the planned desalination plant are two examples where very quickly people have grasped the essence of the campaign and taken a strong stand. And lets not forget the hundreds of thousands that took to the streets to stop the war in Iraq. Refugees

I am going to try and resist the temptation to talk in detail about these exciting campaigns and stay with the big picture.

First off some comments on the nature of political change - I believe this is relevant as how we view political change determines where we put our efforts to reinvigorate progressive politics.

History clearly shows us that progressive change comes from the struggle by people.

Today you would be hard pressed to find a country that does not have a minister for the environment. Schools and universities teach about environmental protection. This has come about because of the rise of the environmental movement in the 1970s. I certainly want to acknowledge that many courageous people with great foresight such as Milo Dunphy campaigned for environment protection and new national parks for decades but I would argue that what was critical to bringing environmental protection into the mainstream of society was the critical mass of people that became part of the environment movement from the early 1970s.

Women have the right to vote because our forebears protested long and hard. The second wave of feminism in the 1970s delivered another whole raft of changes - women moved into non-traditional areas of work, maternity leave was improved, issues of sexuality came out of the closet. Again mass numbers of women with support of some men that brought about this shift.

All the conditions we enjoy at work - long service leave, holiday leave loading, overtime, occupational health and safety are in place because workers and their unions stood up to the govt of the day, went on strike, mobilised, suffered and fought back.

The progressive change that characterises our society has been won through action. By people in struggle. Not by an MP having a good idea. And that is how it will always be even if the Greens increase their numbers in parliament, even if sometime in the future the Greens end up as part of a government.

The role of mass movements are critical in achieving political change. The role of a progressive political party is also significant but a party like the Greens ignores social and environment movements at its peril.

I give emphasis to this point - how we achieve change - at the outset as I believe it frames our discussion today on revitalising progressive politics.

Some key points for how we go about revitalising our political movements. We need: § to be well organised, § to draw more people into the campaigns we work on, § to be willing to embrace change in how we present our message, § to avoid being sectarian, § to develop a theoretical analysis of the political forces within our society, and § a progressive political party.

I don't propose to cover all these points in detail. A few comments and then I wanted to deal with the challenge populism poses for progressive politics.

I listed as one of my six points - avoid being sectarian. The word 'sectarian' might sound like jargon to some of you. But I have used it deliberately as we have to stop writing off some group forever because we have a difference with them at some point on some political issue. Left political parties, the environment movement, the women's movement, the peace movement - the whole progressive political movement in this country - have had some awful stoushes over the years. They are debilitating and drive people away.

Let's learn from our history - divisions are deadly. I am hearing the assertion around the place that the Greens and progressive groups are not doing enough on the environment considering the enormity of the challenges. Myself I think the balance is pretty good between social justice and environmental concerns, but for those of you who don't agree let's discuss it. I do believe pluralism in causes and tactics is a strength not a weakness. Being sectarian harms the wider cause.

If we could put sectarianism in the dustbin of history we would be better placed to determine who our allies are - and that is critical to building political cooperation as we develop our campaigns.

Another one of my six points for reinvigorating progressive politics is the need for a progressive political party. In Australia I believe that party is the Greens. A progressive political party is needed to challenge and displace the conservative power base.

However, as history shows progressive political parties can be effectively captured by the very system that they are trying to change. How we resist being just a parliamentarist party is a topic for another discussion. For now I want to give emphasis to the need to build the Greens as being critical to revitalising progressive politics. Building the Greens in numbers and activity is a key component to getting rid of the Howard government and most importantly building an equitable, ecological sustainable society.

Onto some of the challenges facing the development of progressive politics. The rise of right win populism is something we need to consider. It has the potential to divert and dilute progressive politics.

Globalisation has divided our society. There are those who feel comfortable with technological advance, enjoy the interchange of cultures, and have the qualifications and income to enjoy these changes. But there are many disadvantaged by these changes - their skills are limited or outdated, work is casual or non-existent, they feel insecure economically and personally. Certainly people from both groupings can be xenophobic and strongly oppose those of us who embrace progressive change. But we do need to acknowledge that disadvantaged, disaffected communities in particular are fertile territory for right wing populism.

Right wing populism can divert people who are our natural allies. Those of us with a tertiary education, members of the Greens, who live in the inner city are portrayed by the voice of ring wing populism - the shock jocks and right wing columnists - as the problem. It is a challenge how we counter this.

At times we will need to be pragmatic in dealing with populism - sometimes there is come ground. But we need to be wary. Pragmatism without passion and principle is quickly detected by the public. If we dilute our principles in the name of short-term gains opportunism has won and our movement will suffer - we will not be able to build enduring political support. The challenge is to respond to populism without succumbing to it.

There are many reasons why right-wing parties dominate in western democracies - control of the media, mistakes and divisions by parties of the left. But the reason I would put out in front is that for the public it is the right wing of politics that is addressing their concerns about terrorism.

We need to see the right's misuse of the threat of terrorism to frighten and disempower people as an opportunity to build our progressive movements. We need to promote our values of justice, environmental protection, equity. But I do think in this current climate we do need to consistently address people's fear and insecurity.

We need to say we are committed to people being secure in their homes and their communities. There is nothing wrong with using the language of the right if we have a progressive analysis. If we do not address people's fears about terrorism we reduce the reach of our other messages. People will find it virtually impossible to relate to our analysis of why there is an upsurge in terrorism, and will be opposed rather than united with the progressive movement.

Promoting our voice on terrorism will allow us to differentiate ourselves from those committed to misusing terrorist attacks for political gain.

It is one thing to be well organised, not be sectarian, and develop creative ways of promoting our message but what are the crucial issues for our society and therefore for the progressive movement.

Two critical struggles of the 21st century that are very much entwined is addressing climate change and economic inequality. I say they are connected because when people live below the international poverty level that they eke out a living on less than $1 a day as 1.2 billion people do environmental protection has no meaning; the environment is one more thing that is trashed in the name of survival.

The corporate world is divided on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. On one side is the fossil fuel industry willing to sink planet earth as it exploits its reserves and on the other side is the insurance industry and many businesses that have not been hoodwinked by the greenhouse sceptics.

That's a big plus for a progressive movement working to build attitudinal change among the public on energy sources and political will among the major parties.

Renewed egalitarianism is see if the progressive side of politics is to remain true to itself.

We need to acknowledge that progressive politics has been pushed onto the back foot; at times intimidated in speaking up for wealth redistribution; from challenging the privileges of the few; from critiquing the underlying philosophy and motivation of the conservative forces.

A revitalisation needs to address these shortcomings and that means recognising that the Coalition is the party of wealth, privilege and big business. Yes the problems with Labor at times come close to those we encounter with the Coalition but I still argue that there are differences.

Revitalising progressive politics does need to address relations with the ALP. Please don't think I am soft on Labor as some have attempted to portray me - I spend my day job criticising the damage Labor is doing to this state.

But we have to work out our relationship with Labor. I think by distinguishing leadership from membership we don't fall into that sectarian trap of pushing away potential allies. On many issues we will be critical of what Labor leaders dish up but many Labor members are as committed to progressive change as we are.

We need to consider how people learn about world events; how young people interact with their peers; what motivates people to speak out publicly about their concerns and join with others in protest.

We in the Greens and in the broad social and environment moves need to remember that we don't have a monopoly on how we organise, how we revitalise, how we challenge the anti- environment, anti-humanist, undemocratic governments. Struggle is going on all around us - the progressive movement comes in many forms. We have much to learn from what each generation throws up. At this point I am not going to have a rave about the internet although I obviously agree that it is a powerful tool with considerable untapped potential.

What I wanted to pick up on is one particular music phenomenon - hip-hop. Now I am not suggesting that we turn our leaflets into hip-hop lyrics. But hip-hop is politicising a generation, and not just about issues. Hip hop lyrics deal with much more than the troubles of the day from bush to Blair from racism to poverty. They explore how we change society - what we are grappling with today.

Eg Cuban rapper. The upside of globalisation.

New styles can be embraced but I would warn against slavishly following the new trends. Old style campaigning - what our forebears in the women's, peace, environment and union movement used so effectively - is still critical.

Thanks to the organisers for the invitation to speak. Revitalising progressive politics is an excellent topic for discussion. As we run helter skelter from one campaign to the next we don't give ourselves enough time to reflect, consider and discuss where our quest for political and social change and environmental protection is taking us. I am sure we will have a useful dialogue today.

Revitalising progressive politics is certainly in the air and I think there is much to feel very positive about. Events in recent weeks demonstrate a depth of awareness among the public on social and environment issues - the growing campaign against Howard's IR agenda and the planned desalination plant are two examples where very quickly people have grasped the essence of the campaign and taken a strong stand. And lets not forget the hundreds of thousands that took to the streets to stop the war in Iraq. Refugees

I am going to try and resist the temptation to talk in detail about these exciting campaigns and stay with the big picture.

First off some comments on the nature of political change - I believe this is relevant as how we view political change determines where we put our efforts to reinvigorate progressive politics.

History clearly shows us that progressive change comes from the struggle by people.

Today you would be hard pressed to find a country that does not have a minister for the environment. Schools and universities teach about environmental protection. This has come about because of the rise of the environmental movement in the 1970s. I certainly want to acknowledge that many courageous people with great foresight such as Milo Dunphy campaigned for environment protection and new national parks for decades but I would argue that what was critical to bringing environmental protection into the mainstream of society was the critical mass of people that became part of the environment movement from the early 1970s.

Women have the right to vote because our forebears protested long and hard. The second wave of feminism in the 1970s delivered another whole raft of changes - women moved into non-traditional areas of work, maternity leave was improved, issues of sexuality came out of the closet. Again mass numbers of women with support of some men that brought about this shift.

All the conditions we enjoy at work - long service leave, holiday leave loading, overtime, occupational health and safety are in place because workers and their unions stood up to the govt of the day, went on strike, mobilised, suffered and fought back.

The progressive change that characterises our society has been won through action. By people in struggle. Not by an MP having a good idea. And that is how it will always be even if the Greens increase their numbers in parliament, even if sometime in the future the Greens end up as part of a government.

The role of mass movements are critical in achieving political change. The role of a progressive political party is also significant but a party like the Greens ignores social and environment movements at its peril.

I give emphasis to this point - how we achieve change - at the outset as I believe it frames our discussion today on revitalising progressive politics.

Some key points for how we go about revitalising our political movements. We need: § to be well organised, § to draw more people into the campaigns we work on, § to be willing to embrace change in how we present our message, § to avoid being sectarian, § to develop a theoretical analysis of the political forces within our society, and § a progressive political party.

I don't propose to cover all these points in detail. A few comments and then I wanted to deal with the challenge populism poses for progressive politics.

I listed as one of my six points - avoid being sectarian. The word 'sectarian' might sound like jargon to some of you. But I have used it deliberately as we have to stop writing off some group forever because we have a difference with them at some point on some political issue. Left political parties, the environment movement, the women's movement, the peace movement - the whole progressive political movement in this country - have had some awful stoushes over the years. They are debilitating and drive people away.

Let's learn from our history - divisions are deadly. I am hearing the assertion around the place that the Greens and progressive groups are not doing enough on the environment considering the enormity of the challenges. Myself I think the balance is pretty good between social justice and environmental concerns, but for those of you who don't agree let's discuss it. I do believe pluralism in causes and tactics is a strength not a weakness. Being sectarian harms the wider cause.

If we could put sectarianism in the dustbin of history we would be better placed to determine who our allies are - and that is critical to building political cooperation as we develop our campaigns.

Another one of my six points for reinvigorating progressive politics is the need for a progressive political party. In Australia I believe that party is the Greens. A progressive political party is needed to challenge and displace the conservative power base.

However, as history shows progressive political parties can be effectively captured by the very system that they are trying to change. How we resist being just a parliamentarist party is a topic for another discussion. For now I want to give emphasis to the need to build the Greens as being critical to revitalising progressive politics. Building the Greens in numbers and activity is a key component to getting rid of the Howard government and most importantly building an equitable, ecological sustainable society.

Onto some of the challenges facing the development of progressive politics. The rise of right win populism is something we need to consider. It has the potential to divert and dilute progressive politics.

Globalisation has divided our society. There are those who feel comfortable with technological advance, enjoy the interchange of cultures, and have the qualifications and income to enjoy these changes. But there are many disadvantaged by these changes - their skills are limited or outdated, work is casual or non-existent, they feel insecure economically and personally. Certainly people from both groupings can be xenophobic and strongly oppose those of us who embrace progressive change. But we do need to acknowledge that disadvantaged, disaffected communities in particular are fertile territory for right wing populism.

Right wing populism can divert people who are our natural allies. Those of us with a tertiary education, members of the Greens, who live in the inner city are portrayed by the voice of ring wing populism - the shock jocks and right wing columnists - as the problem. It is a challenge how we counter this.

At times we will need to be pragmatic in dealing with populism - sometimes there is come ground. But we need to be wary. Pragmatism without passion and principle is quickly detected by the public. If we dilute our principles in the name of short-term gains opportunism has won and our movement will suffer - we will not be able to build enduring political support. The challenge is to respond to populism without succumbing to it.

There are many reasons why right-wing parties dominate in western democracies - control of the media, mistakes and divisions by parties of the left. But the reason I would put out in front is that for the public it is the right wing of politics that is addressing their concerns about terrorism.

We need to see the right's misuse of the threat of terrorism to frighten and disempower people as an opportunity to build our progressive movements. We need to promote our values of justice, environmental protection, equity. But I do think in this current climate we do need to consistently address people's fear and insecurity.

We need to say we are committed to people being secure in their homes and their communities. There is nothing wrong with using the language of the right if we have a progressive analysis. If we do not address people's fears about terrorism we reduce the reach of our other messages. People will find it virtually impossible to relate to our analysis of why there is an upsurge in terrorism, and will be opposed rather than united with the progressive movement.

Promoting our voice on terrorism will allow us to differentiate ourselves from those committed to misusing terrorist attacks for political gain.

It is one thing to be well organised, not be sectarian, and develop creative ways of promoting our message but what are the crucial issues for our society and therefore for the progressive movement.

Two critical struggles of the 21st century that are very much entwined is addressing climate change and economic inequality. I say they are connected because when people live below the international poverty level that they eke out a living on less than $1 a day as 1.2 billion people do environmental protection has no meaning; the environment is one more thing that is trashed in the name of survival.

The corporate world is divided on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. On one side is the fossil fuel industry willing to sink planet earth as it exploits its reserves and on the other side is the insurance industry and many businesses that have not been hoodwinked by the greenhouse sceptics.

That's a big plus for a progressive movement working to build attitudinal change among the public on energy sources and political will among the major parties.

Renewed egalitarianism is see if the progressive side of politics is to remain true to itself.

We need to acknowledge that progressive politics has been pushed onto the back foot; at times intimidated in speaking up for wealth redistribution; from challenging the privileges of the few; from critiquing the underlying philosophy and motivation of the conservative forces.

A revitalisation needs to address these shortcomings and that means recognising that the Coalition is the party of wealth, privilege and big business. Yes the problems with Labor at times come close to those we encounter with the Coalition but I still argue that there are differences.

Revitalising progressive politics does need to address relations with the ALP. Please don't think I am soft on Labor as some have attempted to portray me - I spend my day job criticising the damage Labor is doing to this state.

But we have to work out our relationship with Labor. I think by distinguishing leadership from membership we don't fall into that sectarian trap of pushing away potential allies. On many issues we will be critical of what Labor leaders dish up but many Labor members are as committed to progressive change as we are.

We need to consider how people learn about world events; how young people interact with their peers; what motivates people to speak out publicly about their concerns and join with others in protest.

We in the Greens and in the broad social and environment moves need to remember that we don't have a monopoly on how we organise, how we revitalise, how we challenge the anti- environment, anti-humanist, undemocratic governments. Struggle is going on all around us - the progressive movement comes in many forms. We have much to learn from what each generation throws up. At this point I am not going to have a rave about the internet although I obviously agree that it is a powerful tool with considerable untapped potential.

What I wanted to pick up on is one particular music phenomenon - hip-hop. Now I am not suggesting that we turn our leaflets into hip-hop lyrics. But hip-hop is politicising a generation, and not just about issues. Hip hop lyrics deal with much more than the troubles of the day from bush to Blair from racism to poverty. They explore how we change society - what we are grappling with today.

Eg Cuban rapper. The upside of globalisation.

New styles can be embraced but I would warn against slavishly following the new trends. Old style campaigning - what our forebears in the women's, peace, environment and union movement used so effectively - is still critical.