Kevin: the morning after

Culturally there may be some more possibilities. A retreat from the overt racism of the Howard regime and a resurgence in the teaching of Asian languages (which began in the 1960s, but died under Howard) are likely. Nevertheless, we must remember it was Labor (under Keating) that introduced mandatory detention of asylum seekers, and Labor (in Western Australia) that introduced the mandatory jailing of Aboriginal child offenders. The first test for Labor in race relations will be to apply the Anti-Discrimination Act to the Northern Territory and reverse the privatisation of indigenous land rights that Howard began this year, with Labor support.

Low expectations of Labor (perhaps a bitter pill for those young people who do not recall a Labor government) can prove useful. There is a great need to rebuild progressive politics after Howard and this, in my view, can only happen outside Labor, but perhaps including a split in Labor.

Student activists will have to watch the role of Labor students with a Labor government. With most of its leadership angling for jobs in the Labor machine, Labor student groups will be actively working to defuse criticism of a Rudd government.

The socialist groups, some of which have been important in anti- war and solidarity movements, will have to rethink their approach to Labor in office, as well as to the unions that bind themselves to a Labor government. A ‘left realism’ has crippled the imagination of many, through narrow labourism and despondence, just as the ‘correct line’ obsession of others has made them irrelevant. Yet socialist groups are well placed to unmask neoliberal doublespeak, and offer practical alternatives.

The Greens, who seemed to be the hope of some conscience in Australian politics, are likely to go backwards electorally: first because of the corporate media stage management of a highly polarised election, and second because the Greens have developed illusions about electoral success through ‘playing it safe’. They will have to reconsider their relationship with a Labor administration, and to distinguish themselves very clearly on the major issues. To mimic the Democrat-Liberal relationship would be fatal.

So what are the big issues? What might ‘politics’ in Australia be after the Rudd-Howard show? Well what about work security, social security versus private superannuation, shared institutions versus privatisation, public education with a conscience (not just vocational training), citizens’ initiatives versus consumerism, internationalism versus imperial war and regional domination, public health without the ‘parasites’, environmental protection without bogus ‘market solutions’, and a new constitution with a bill of rights? These could be a good start.