There is an urgent need for left unity

BY
LALITHA CHELLIAH

I have followed the Socialist Alliance unity debate. As a member
of the Socialist Alliance — but not a member of either the Democratic Socialist
Party (DSP) or the International Socialist Organisation (ISO) — it has
been interesting to observe the reflections made in the presentations so
far.

One of the key elements of this debate is, without it being stated explicitly,
the urgent need for the left to react to the international and national
onslaught by the right wing. This onslaught ranges from the threat of war
against Iraq to refugee issues in Australia.

This urgency seems to be reflected in the DSP's desire to dissolve into
the Socialist Alliance. This view may be truly justified when viewed from
international and national political perspectives. At the same time, the
ISO has tried to justify its views and concerns.

As an independent, this debate raises a number of questions for me.
Firstly, the unity process for me was a dream come true. As a person who
believes that the majority of people do oppose the actions of international
and national politicians who act against basic human values, I wanted a
force that can and will act against such actions. Hence, I joined the Socialist
Alliance.

I still observe elements of the numbers game in the debate. Is the thinking
then aligned with the same parliamentary games played out in the capitalist
arena by the ALP and the Liberals? Is this necessary? Maybe it is idealistic
to expect two groups, who wish to unite, to do so without suspicion of
each other.

Is this suspicion about what has not been expressed thus far in the
debate? So far, the differences have been outlined clearly, yet the similarities
have not been spelt out. Maybe it's time to take stock of the points of
agreement and compare them against the list of disagreements.

It's my view, having read the ISO's views, that they may feel that the
list of agreed points are not sufficient to go ahead with the fusion.

Timing

The international and national political situation demands urgent action
from the left to present itself as a credible force. The political gains
of the Greens are not an accident. These gains at the expense of ALP demonstrate
that people are tired of the tweedledum, tweedledee syndrome and wish to
move ahead. The Greens are buoyant from their gains while the left is still
struggling to work out its differences.

There is international political unrest, reflected by the mobilisations
against the World Trade Organisation and the war against Iraq. The left
has the opportunity to place its agenda in the political arena. This means
that addressing the needs of the political situation must come before its
internal squabbling.

It is true that, as David Glanz states (GLW #516), that the Socialist
Alliance can mobilise and act as a force in the form that it has done so
far. Where does that leave the independents who wish to be active? While
organisations within Socialist Alliance caucus, form their views and present
them at alliance meetings, the independents can only present theirs as
individuals.

This is a formula for alienation. The feeling that organisations continue
to function in this way is a threat to the functioning and the ongoing
building of Socialist Alliance. The independents obviously have not joined
the ISO or the DSP for their own particular reasons, but are willing to
join the alliance. This is the issue that needs to be explored.

If the strategy of the two organisations is to form a mass party on
the basis of socialist principles, then the timing is more than perfect.
Should this be delayed or hindered by their differences, instead of going
ahead on the basis of their common ground?

It is always easy to find differences. But a principled political person
moves ahead in times like these to forge unity and keeps their eyes on
the common enemy. This view is demonstrated by the attraction of the alliance
to broader forces, including in the trade unions. While the DSP and ISO
have the ability to discuss as groups and present their views to the trade
unions, other independents are waiting to be able to discuss their views
in the Socialist Alliance.

Bolsheviks

The common agreement amongst the two main organisations, and the smaller
groups and independents, within the Socialist Alliance is that it is anti-capitalist.
Tactics and strategies have to flow from this agreement. The alliance's
views have to be discussed and decided upon by the whole membership, not
just by small caucuses that wish to exert their views on others. The point
here is that the Socialist Alliance has to debate as a whole all its views
in its meetings, otherwise the independents become disenfranchised. The
alliance must be inclusive not exclusive.

Views on issues have to be based on the historical gains of the left
and applied to the current situation. No view should be a blanket one or
inflexible, as long as the flexibility remains within the principled position
that the Socialist Alliance is anti-capitalist. It is difficult to go wrong
on this basis.

It also does not mean that a transitional strategy should be ignored.
This was demonstrated by the Cunningham by-election in Wollongong, where
many voters were happy with the Greens but not quite ready to vote for
the SA. This means that there are issues on which we can form a united
front with the Greens, and this has happened in the past.

What do Bolsheviks do in the current situation? The Socialist Alliance
is the arena to discuss this. Further clarifications will occur as we act
as an united force. Political unity comes from acting and discussing,
not just discussing. This does not mean that the Socialist Alliance is
not acting, but I think we are hampered by the different organisations
struggling to build their own groups as well as the alliance.

Among the alliance's constituent parties, there are, no doubt, fears
about dissolving the organisations which their members have strived to
build over many years. It is a difficult ask, but a necessary one given
the political situation.

The ISO and the DSP have survived for several decades as small groups
that tend to be dominated by young people. The working class is changing.
In the near future, a larger proportion of workers will be older and have
family responsibilities. Strategies have to be designed to orient to this.

Unfortunately, the Socialist Alliance is not yet ready to worry about
such issues as long as the internal debate continues. How long are we to
wait before the alliance is allowed to operate as a legitimate, fully functioning
party? Should there be a time limit set, and the two organisations work
towards it, or should the discussion continue without limit?

As an independent, I have reservations about such an open-ended approach
as it belittles the political urgency of the situation we face.

I look forward to working within a Socialist Alliance that is an anti-capitalist
political party made up of many groups and individuals.

[Lalitha Chelliah is a Socialist Alliance member in Victoria.]

From Green Left Weekly, December 4, 2002.

Visit the Green Left Weekly
home page.