'You have to fight for a new society'

Green Left Weekly's PIP HINMAN spoke to MAX LANE, Democratic Socialist spokesperson on foreign affairs and candidate for the federal seat of Lowe, about his campaign and the differences between the Democratic Socialists and the Green parties. Question: Shouldn't the Democratic Socialists be throwing their weight behind the Greens at this election? Voting for the Greens is seen by many as a way to voice their protest. We will probably be urging people to vote Green in some seats. However, we stand for a different kind of politics. We are socialists. We think the decline in living standards, the attacks on the environment, and the Australian government's money-grubbing foreign policy can only be reversed if we replace the current government with one based on powerful organisations of working people. Question: But your 12 candidates aren't going to bring about a new government. That's true. But our approach points to what we regard as the most important tasks — revitalising the trade unions so that they become campaigning organisations to improve workers' welfare; building strong, independent movements for women's liberation; campaigning for a democratic and anti-imperialist foreign policy; and building a dynamic new workers' party. The chances of forcing immediate reforms from either a Liberal or Labor government depends on progress in these tasks. Question: But surely the Greens also agree with the need for strong movements? Many Greens would say so. But in some areas, like the trade unions, the Greens have done very little to develop a strong, campaigning movement. By contrast, the Democratic Socialists have been involved in campaigns in the ACT, WA and SA. In all these states workers have started electing Democratic Socialists to leadership positions. The underlying logic of the Greens' approach is that representation in parliament is the main measure of power. Our view is that power comes from the movements' ability to unite and mobilise people, on the streets and in work places. That is why all our resources, at election time and otherwise, are put into building a bigger national party with ever-increasing participation of workers and movement activists. We are also constantly seeking unity with other like-minded groups in order to broaden the party, and to help publish and distribute Green Left Weekly. This outlook, that there can be unity in action, is the reason why all our members are activists. Any of us elected to parliament have pledged to give all our salary, above the average award, to the struggle. Question: So the difference between you and the Greens mainly centres on strategy not policies? The Greens often limit their policy demands to what they think can be immediately achieved. Central to our demands in the economic sphere, for example, are the re-nationalisation of privatised public assets without compensation, and the nationalisation of the big bully boy corporations such as BHP. We also demand a shorter working week with no loss of pay, which would also end unemployment. The Greens do not regard these policies as central. Such demands can be seen as unrealistic. The current status quo won't accept them. But, equally, there will be no reversal in the direction of economic, social, environmental or foreign policy until the balance of political power in Australia is changed. If you want a new kind of society, you have to fight for it. This means more than simply raising issues and trying to win "the balance of power" in parliaments. To change society, from the grassroots up, we have to be able to wage nationally coordinated, united campaigns to force reforms out of Labor or the Coalition, as well as to eventually replace them. Question: But you will be giving preferences to Greens? I think that will be the case. We will also be giving preferences to Labor before Liberal. While Labor and Liberal both carry out pro-big business policies, Labor is a lesser evil. Labor-style Thatcherism is slightly slower in pace than Liberal-type Thatcherism. Question: So the Democratic Socialists go further than the Greens? Yes. Especially as far as Green's official policy is concerned. I know that there are many people who agree with us about the need for fundamental social and political change, but who are thinking about voting for the Greens because they have more chance of being elected. We don't agree with this thinking. We must persist in standing up for what we believe in, even if the first time round the odds aren't so good. If more people joined the Democratic Socialists' campaign now and stayed active after the elections, the next time round we would be that much more ahead. Of course, the next time round might not be an election; it might be a big industrial campaign against Howard government attacks, or a street campaign against another Keating government sell-out of East Timor. The point is that real political change can only come about if the majority of people are active in making those changes. Parliamentarians cannot do it for us.