What's up with the Labour Party

I went to the protest outside the Labour Party congress along with about 60 other people. The main focus was the operation 8 terror raids and on the whole I think the protest went pretty well. However I’m not going to talk about the protest, instead I am going to give a few of my observation about the congress.

Who was there?
Fucking Yuppies as far as the eye could see. Middle-class, well dressed (hip [in that middle class sort of way] and expensive) and university educated. I didn’t see a Labour hack much under 45 that didn’t fit this description (maybe not all well dressed). The young labour members (all recruited from university) are the biggest sycophants you will ever come across. They are all obsessed with MP’s and almost drunk on dreams of getting in to parliament themselves. This group is pretty ethnically diverse and has a pretty high queer make up, but being totally middle class it is hardly representative (I have never seen so many middle class Maori and Pacific Islanders in one place).

The next biggest faction is the leaders of groups connected to the Labour Party. This is where a large part of the Labour Party’s multicultural diversity comes from, with many Maori and migrant community leaders as members. I have no idea why this is, as the Labour government has done nothing for them while being more than happy to treat those groups as scapegoats. The reasons for their membership are probably varied, ranging from being opportunist scum to really believing in the myth that the Labour Party is better than National (a myth that these leaders have been important in propagating in their communities). You could put union leadership in this category as well. Leading members of the CTU and Labour Party affiliated unions were there, making up a very small percentage of the Labour membership. But and even smaller percentage (pretty close to zero) was rank and file members from those unions. This is an important point because if you are unlucky enough to be a member of a Labour Party affiliated union (like me) you would know how much they praise the Labour Party (mostly for not being the National Party, even the most sycophantic Labour hack union official has trouble pointing out the many good things that Labour has actually done) and workers are encouraged to be involved in the Labour Party, but nobody does. Even the union delegates, who have it drilled into them how great the Labour Party is and are trained to explain it to the rest of us, don’t even bother to show up.

There are two other smaller groups that go to the Labour Party Congress. Middle aged women who look a lot like these women. They would consider themselves to be some kind of Liberal feminist, but would have never been really involved in any feminist movement and honestly believe that all advancements of women are thanks to the Labour Party. The last group are the genuinely working class members; most of this very small group are so old many of them could be founding members of the Labour Party. I overheard some of them talking about how they were looking forward to hearing Michael Joseph Savage give his leaders speech.

What does the Labour Party have to say for is self?
Very little really. Most of the media reports about the congress were on Helen Clark’s speech, which contained nothing new, a workshop on how to get away with breaking the electoral law, and a song about how bad John Key is (which is mostly accurate but could also be sung about Labour). It is really blatant how empty, shallow and just idea-less the Labour Party is (to be fair this is true off all electoral politics, but Labour is at the extreme end of this inane trend).

That is the leadership, but what about that rank and file of Labour? If their response to the protest is anything to go by they are just as lacking in political depth. Most just stared bemused or laughed uncomfortable as they hurried by. Quite a few got really angry, which brought out the totally uniformed response of yelling, “Fuck you” while giving the finger. Of the few congress goers who did engage with the protesters (a practice that does not impress me), it was done to agree with a certain point and say in a painfully condescending tone, “that there are a lot of people in Labour who feel the same way. They are just trying to change things using the party.” Are they really so deluded that they believe this? Take the Terrorism Suppression Act, legislation several people in Labour claim that many party members disagree with (a claim I don’t believe). In the unlikely event that the party leadership would let a remit calling for the repeal of the Terrorism Suppression Act to be put up at a conference, there is no way the middle class majority, with their unfounded, media whipped up fear of Maori with guns, would ever vote for it. Even if it did get past all that, the leadership would just ignore it, as they have done with plenty of other remits.


Now if you want some statistics and facts to back up my main point of the middle class-a-fication and complete disconnection from the workers and poor of the Labour party, I would strongly recommend Liberation blog.

All the freedom you could want (as long as it doesn’t hurt the economy).

I love the contradictions given by the defenders of capitalism. They will go on and on about how capitalism is about giving us all freedom. However, when workers start expressing certain freedoms that don’t fit so well capitalism, like collective action, which impose on the freedoms of bosses to exploit (a freedom essential to capitalism), then talk of freedom is put to one side and it is replaced with how we must submit to economic determinism.

Here is an example from David “capitalism = freedom” Farrar talking about the campaign to get a pay rise for NZ Bunnings workers who are payed only NZ$12/hr while in Australia those same worker would be payed NZ$19/hr;

"The questions I would ask is what is the EBITDA for the NZ and Australian operations, and also what are the gross revenue and staff numbers for each side of the Tasman. And what is the cost of living in each country.
Without that info, I can’t really offer an informed view as to whether Bunnings pay rates are reasonable in NZ compared to Australia or not."


You will be payed what the EBITDA (Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, I had to google it) says you will be payed. David puts a lot stock in this EBITDA thing (after all it should determine what poor people, who David have never meet, should be payed). I think he is in love with EBITDA. I think he should marry EBITDA and have babies with EBITDA. Oh wait, EBITDA is not a human being, its an abstract accounting principle. So why is it determining wages? Because capitalism isn’t about freedom for humans, it’s about freedom for capital. Workers relationship to the economy is not all that different from that of the Hebrew’s to the Pharaoh’s. The Pharaoh wants a pyramid, the slaves build a pyramid, the economy needs lower wages, workers get lower wages. Now you might say the Hebrew were slaves and had to work for the Pharaoh and modern workers can choose their boss. Firstly, there is not that many options when it comes to looking for work right now. Secondly, and most importantly, its not about individual bosses its about how no matter where you work its always in the same economy and it will be the same abstract accounting principles. If there is no other option than working for the capitalist economy then that is a form of slavery.

Under capitalism the economy is king or Pharaoh. It’s needs, which are more often than not are different (if not the complete opposite) to the needs of the majority of the human race, always come first. Because of this you will hear a pro capitalist say out one side of their mouths that the system give us freedom, then out the other side of their mouths comes the stuff about how you can’t buck the system. You can’t get a wage rise because of the economy, you lose your job because of the economy, and you have to work longer hours because of the economy. So not so much with the freedom talk out that side of the mouth.

No matter what the economy is doing or what the EBITDA is, there is only one way the working class will ever get higher wages. Getting organized and taking collective action, and anybody who does that will get a small taste of the freedom that is waiting beyond capitalism.

Five years in Iraq

Its a little bit late but here is something for the fifth anniversary of the War on Iraq.

No Compromise

“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man”

George Bernard Shaw’s “Maxims for Revolutionists”

Despite Shaw’s blatant sexism (he was so sexist and racist), he is right. Being reasonable and compromising is just endorsing the status quo. So it sucks that today compromise has been put forward as such an important virtue in politics, and most of all on the left. Where did this culture of celebrating selling out, giving up ideals and capitulating with out a fight develop? I’m sure it has something to do with the rise of neo-liberalism, the defeats of the working class and the general retreat of the left, but I’m no sociologist so I have no evidence to back that up. However there is no shortage of evidence of how compromise is now lorded.

The most blatant glorification of compromise come went the untimely death of Green Party co-leader Rod Donald in late 2005 (I’m about to speak ill of the dead, but it will be all political and not personal, so please forgive me). Every obituary and commentator brought up and venerated his willingness to compromise. Also they praised how he led the Green Party from a small party of ideals (none that I have anytime for, but ideals none the less) to a mainstream party that would compromise what few principles it pretends to have left. Compromise was held up as the greatest of all human traits and a prerequisite for social change and political legitimacy. However, when it comes down to it, for all their compromise, what has Green Party got to show for it? Nothing of any real consequence, that’s what.

It is easy to write off the Greens (and I do) as middle class, white liberals, pretty bourgeoisie, eco capitalists who sold their soul to get into parliament, but the “proper” left seem to be doing no better. The Trade Unions are in a perpetual state of compromise to the bosses and the Labour party. The Supermarket lockout was the biggest most militant union victory in a long time, but objectively the final deal was still a compromise (union democracy was also compromised to get the workers to accept the deal).

So where do New Zealand revolutionaries stand in this world of compromise? In the last elections most anarchist’s voted for the greens. Socialist Worker is more interested in working on projects like RAM than being revolutionaries. The Workers Party has made no effort (at least publicly) to push for increased democracy in Unite union. Also, any pretense the Worker’s Party have of building a revolutionary student movement at Victoria University is laughable. Just read the VUWSA President's columns for the two worker party members here and here.

What do today’s revolutionaries think is going to happen in the future when the workers are sick of compromises with the bosses and the system that exploits them? They will not be inspired by RAM; they won’t be looking for an organization that put union democracy on the back burner. When the students rebel they won’t look toward student association presidents that spent more time working with uni management than organizing students.

Now I’m sure the revolutionaries that I’ve bad mouthed here will justify their compromises by claming something along the lines that they are just engaging in mass workers or student or community or grassroot organizations, and if they acted like I want, all uncompromising and ultra left revolutionary like, then they would seem crazy and nobody would listen. I do think they do have a point. I have seen plenty of people who come across as nutters when they try to talk about revolution to ordinary folk. However there must be away for revolutionaries to articulate themselves in a coherent way without compromising. It’s been done before and I’m confident that it can be done again. It should be noted that, particularly in times of low struggle, you will often look crazy when you are fighting against the commonsense of the status quo, no matter how articulate you are. If you don’t want to ever look crazy well then like Joe Hill sings; If you like sluggers to beat off your head, then don't organize, all unions despise, If you want nothing before you are dead, shake hands with your boss and look wise.

There maybe times when revolutionaries do have to make tactical retreats and make temporary compromises. In these rare cases, revolutionaries should regretfully acknowledge them as compromises (there is nothing more ridiculous than revolutionaries trying to making their compromise out to be victories) and they should be part of an overall (uncompromising) strategy of moving forward.


In conclusion, what is the point in me, or you, or any other revolutionaries compromising when there is a huge number or reformists, social democrats and liberals who will not hesitate to compromise? All the compromise options are already well covered with plenty of people in reserve to take up the compromise banner. There is just no shortage of people who are willing compromise, but there is a desperate shortage of people who will not compromise.