Reader Tristan Ewins has sent in a guest post, regarding a proposal that the Australian Fabian society remove references to socialism as an objective. While, for a range of reasons, I prefer to describe my perspective as social democratic rather than socialist, I agree with Tristan that this is an unfortunate step, which severs the society from the intellectual tradition that gave it birth and that still represents the best hope for the future.

The Australian Fabians must remain an
organization for socialist reform

From early September this year members of the Australian Fabians will have received a mail-out from the National Executive announcing its intent to alter the Constitution, and in particular the Statement of Purposes, with the aim of removing all reference to socialism, classes, social and democratic ownership of any sort. In this veritable ‘coup d’etat’, the aim appears to be one of eliminating the traditional role of the Australian Fabians as a reformist socialist think tank of the Left, and of reducing it to a broad liberal forum devoid of traditional leftist aims or identity.

Rather than “by means of political democracy� working for a society in which “the economic power and privileges of individuals and classes [are] abolished through the collective ownership and democratic control of the economic resources of the community�, the National Executive aims to reduce the society’s statement of purposes to (amongst other things), “the [advocacy of] effective and just economic, social, environmental and cultural policies� and the upholding of “values of democracy, diversity, tolerance, truth, mutual respect and equality under the law.� Whereas there is nothing inherently wrong with these sometimes nebulous statements, the severance of all sense of continuity with socialist tradition is absolute, and it might even be said that there is not even any firm sense of commitment to social democracy as distinct from the liberalism the proposed ‘Statement of Purposes’ seems to promote.

There are a number of matters at stake here. Firstly, we need to confront the allegation made by the National Executive that the old ‘Statement of Purposes’ had “now been outgrown�, and their statement that they felt “uncomfortable� with the society’s prior ‘Statement of Purposes’.

Certainly, the fortunes of the world socialist movement have taken a battering over the past 25 years or so, with the imposition of neo-liberal values and economic structures on economies throughout the Anglosphere, and the adoption of neo-liberal principles of deregulation, small government and privatisation leading to a crisis of perceived relevance and of hope and faith amongst socialists in Australia, the United States, Britain and elsewhere. Furthermore, even though the evolutionary and reformist tendencies of the socialist movement were always distinct from Stalinism, the collapse of the Soviet Union also led to an onslaught of despair and defeatism, with the refusal of leading figures on the Left to remobilize their members around a socialist programme clearly distinct from the Soviet experience, and yet also clearly distinct from the neo-liberal orientation embraced by successive Labor leaderships, leading only to further demobilization and decay. Today, few leading Labor figures dare even mention the word ‘socialism’, and fewer still are inclined to promote any policy which would upset the whims of volatile finance markets, or in any way compromise leadership ambitions. Indeed, the idea of socialism is one with which they feel ‘uncomfortable’: instead desiring to cling opportunistically to the mainstream ideology of a liberalism which in no way challenges deeply ingrained structures of class privilege and power.

There are many strands of thought which run through the socialist tradition, but it has always been the role of Fabian societies in Australia and Britain to preserve and further its evolutionary and reformist elements. For some, retaining a reformist Marxist perspective which treasured Marx’s insistence on ‘winning the battle of democracy’, this meant gradual progress towards universal social ownership, and the elimination of exploitation in all its forms. For others, Fabianism was a vehicle for social democracy: for welfare state reform, progressive and redistributive taxation, a democratic mixed economy, and even co-operative ownership and mutualism. Here, social democracy need not be thought of as being distinct from the socialist tradition, but rather ought be constructed as a bold current in a broader movement.

Today, all these strands of the broader socialist tradition are in disarray, crisis and various states of dissolution. In Australia, the class struggle which once animated the socialist movement is at a low ebb: the consequence of deindustrialization, labour movement demobilization and a resulting loss of class consciousness. The Marxist dialectic between capital and labour, also, no longer seems to promise any process of inevitable transition. Labour movement bureaucracies are often afraid to lead struggles for fear of legal retaliation from government, the strength of the State to suppress struggle and dissent, and the prospective loss of assets and institutional strength. At the same time deindustrialization and so-called ‘labour market reform’ is narrowing the labour movement’s base while successful anti-union propaganda alienates unions from the working class, leading to further demobilization and marginalisation.

It is clear, now, that the Marxist view of history: as a dialectical unfolding of class struggles where the mobilization and emiseration of the labouring masses led to socialist transition – can provide no comfort to a movement facing a crisis of dimensions unforeseen by Marxism’s original 19th Century thinkers. Classes ‘in of themselves’ continue to stand in bold relief, with spiraling levels of inequality confronting a society which, despite unprecedented levels of wealth, remains unable or unwilling to distribute that wealth fairly. The working class, however, is only at the fringes capable of seeing itself as a ‘class for itself’: the consequence of atomization, labour casualisation and an ideology of consumerism and alleged ‘classlessness’: this despite a concentration of power and wealth previously unimaginable. Amidst all this, can we fight back and, what is more, is there any more any alternative to liberalism as the hegemonic ideology of a broad Left which no longer identifies with class politics?

The key to this question rests in the embracing of a voluntarist liberal socialism as the ‘animating idea’ behind the broad movement. No longer can we talk about the ‘inevitable’ dawn of the new socialist society: the necessary consequence of the play of productive forces. A change of fortunes will occur through force of will, if at all, and here the role of the Fabian Society in providing a forum not only for internal discussion, but also a vehicle for proactive agitation, is key for the Australian labour movement. If anything, the experience of France, where a more militant, yet significantly less representative labour movement, was able to force the retraction of regressive ‘labour market reforms’ for youth through protest and general strikes, shows the capacity of a strong and organized minority, with the support of a broader social base, to force change. As an organized minority within the broader labour movement, the Fabian Society still holds out the hope of leading policy debate, and bringing about a ‘sea-change’ of opinion in the Labor Party. In Britain recently, where there is little of inspirational value amongst the nebulous ‘Third Way’ orientation of the UK Labour Party, the Fabians succeeded in leading policy debate so as to bring about the tax reform necessary for progressive social expenditure and welfare state expansion.

Of course, the Fabian Society cannot, in of itself, bring about a socialist transition: not without the firm base of a mass party committed to the same principles and objectives. A key objective of the Fabian Society, therefore, ought also be the promotion of organizational reform in the ALP, with the intent of opening structures to accommodate mass membership and participation.

Socialism remains relevant for the ALP and for the Fabian Society for many reasons. Exploitation remains a fact of life. As ‘labour market reform’ deepens, the ranks of the working poor will swell, and many more millions already work in insecure environments with little opportunity to effectively organize. Governments are hostage to the whims of finance markets, and never before has the wealth of the world been concentrated in the hands of such a self-conscious minority: a minority which through the World Trade Organisation, World Bank and other bodies seeks to export the neo-liberal template to the entire world. The legacy of neo-liberalism and privatization can be seen in the growing marginalization of public health and education, and the crisis of an aging population seems to promise further indignities for the poor and aged in the near future as access to quality care is dependant upon wealth. Social ownership remains one possible response to this crisis, with the participation of government business enterprises promising to upset oligopolies, enhance competititon, create an additional stream of revenue for government, and provide progressive cross subsidization to the poor and needy. Furthermore, social ownership in communications, banking and other fields holds the promise of accelerated and universal service and infrastructure provision. Co-operative ownership in other economic fields holds the promise of economic democracy, and grassroots participation in economic decision-making. The welfare state, meanwhile: that great achievement of social democracy – is under siege from all sides, with the Howard conservative government eager to dismantle the remnants of the Whitlam legacy. Expanding progressive taxation and policies of redistribution through social provision of health, education, infrastructure including public transport and roads, aged care, public housing and other services, also remain core socialist objectives. Finally, as the role of pension funds increases in a world desperate for capital, the democratization of pension funds, the introduction of Meidner-style redistributional policies, and the harnessing of funds for social purposes: all these remain matters for serious debate and collective action amongst democratic socialists/social democrats.

The union of liberal and socialist objectives, here, is also key for the transformation and survival of the socialist tradition. Although liberalism alone does not provide the answer to the ‘social question’ of poverty, crisis and social inequality which called socialism into existence, the liberal democratic framework provides the means by which, as Marx once put it, socialists can ‘win the battle of democracy’.
The liberal democratic framework provides the means for free and open exchange of ideas, freedom of association, freedom to struggle, freedom to secure democratic change. Insofar as our society does not enable such freedoms and liberties: for instance, there is no right to withdraw labour – then it is not truly liberal democratic. Furthermore, liberal democracy provides stability through an almost universally-acknowledged pluralism, and prevents the kind of desperation seen where vacuums of power have led to a ‘winner takes all’ ‘life or death’ struggle for survival. While historically some on the Left were contemptuous of what they saw as ‘bourgeois’ democratic institutions, today we on the Left must defend to the end those entrenched liberties that enable us to struggle for a better world without fear of repression or political violence. Finally, however, we ought remember that so long as the state retains its role as guarantor of private property, it retains a class character – albeit one of contradiction as the field of the state is imprinted by the logic of class struggle. The contradiction between a state which guarantees the privileges of private property on the one hand, while promoting policies of redistribution on the other, is terrain we must negotiate carefully, seeking to extend social democracy at all times, while never acting in a manner which compromises the stability of the political system which ensures all our liberties.

What, then, is the answer? What kind of statement of purposes ought the Fabian Society embrace if it is to remain true to its traditions, while remaining relevant and forward looking? To begin with, we need to be careful of words such as ‘relevant’ which all too easily can be reduced to the question of how compatible our values are with the dominant ideology. A retained commitment to socialist and liberal principles could possibly be secured by changing the Fabian Society’s ‘Statement of Principles’ to the following:

“a) To establish, by means of political and liberal democracy, including the struggles of diverse social movements, a society in which equality of opportunity, democracy in the workplace and in the workings of economic markets, and equal access to necessary services in fields as diverse as health, housing, aged care, education, welfare, and infrastructure including communications, banking, provision of public space, public transport and roads, will be assured through the collective ownership and democratic control of the economic resources of the community, and the regulation of labour markets, including the creation of works councils, bodies for collective consumption of services, democratic pension funds, mutual societies, co-operatives, socially-owned infrastructure and government business enterprises (GBEs).�

b) to be slightly re-worded to read:

“To further the principles of democratic socialism, liberal democracy and social democracy, and the education of the public in these principles by the holding of meetings, lectures, discussion groups, conferences and summer schools, the promotion of research into political, economic and social problems, the publication of books, pamphlets and periodicals, and by any other appropriate means.

c) To agitate and struggle for the realization of liberal rights and principles such as: equality before the law, pluralism, freedom of speech and association, and the right to collectively bargain and withdraw labour

d) To agitate and struggle for policies favouring co-existence with and preservation of the natural environment

For those pressing hard to change the constitution of the Australian Fabians, this will hardly be satisfying. The movement for change appears largely to be one aimed at broadening the base at the expense of ideological content. Keeping the ‘Statement of Principles’ ‘as is’ would be preferable to the mooted process of liquidating social democracy into a nebulous liberalism. While there is nothing wrong with liberal politics per se, and there ought be a combined liberal and social democratic framework within which political discourse takes place, pure liberalism, not complemented by socialist principles, is not the tradition of Fabianism, and does not provide a way forward in terms of redressing the numerous modern manifestations of the social problem of poverty, inequality and economic crisis. The membership of the Australian Fabians has exploded over the past few years, and it seems incongruous that now: so soon after this rapid expansion in the society’s membership base, and with little or no discussion, there is a move to radically alter the movement’s ‘Statement of Purposes’ in a fashion with is tantamount to liquidating the Australian Fabian tradition: a tradition which is one of reformist and evolutionary socialism.

It is, then, with these closing statements that I recommend to readers who happen to be members of the Australian Fabians that they attend the coming Annual General Meeting, and either vote for the changes I have proposed, or otherwise vote to simply keep that section of the society’s constitution ‘as is’. Finally: should the moves to liquidate the Australian Fabians as a society of socialist reform succeed, those concerned should not simply quietly melt away into silence. Rather, any such change should mark the beginning of a new struggle to reclaim the Fabian socialist tradition.

Tristan Ewins

September, 2006

Comments not working on this for some reason. I’ll create another thread