GUEST BLOG: Anjum Rahman – shifting focus: towards building an effective opposition

11
0

102019000-455772188.530x298

It has now been three weeks since the election, and we on the left are still in the phase of trying to figure out what went wrong.  That can be a useful exercise depending on how it’s done, especially if it’s based on rigorous analysis including feedback from voters, activists and those who chose not to vote.  In that sense, the Labour Party’s independent review will be particularly useful.

Understandably, people have been pretty upset by the outcome of the election. Not one of the parties of the left has done well, and the loss of the Mana Party has been particularly devastating for many.  As a result, we’ve seen a lot of blame being passed around, without any evidence as to the impact of any particular aspect on the final result.

We’ve had the following reasons given for the poor result: Kim Dot-Com & his “moment of truth” which failed to deliver; the Dirty Politics book & related issues which put people off voting; the campaign by Kelvin Davis in Northland & other political parties stepping in to support him; the divisions within the Labour Party; various policy proposals such as the capital gains tax and the raising of the retirement age; media bias in reporting (who can forget the Herald front page demanding Cunliffe’s resignation, for a scandal that wasn’t).  I’m sure there have been plenty of others things thrown in the mix, and no doubt some or all of these things have had an effect.

While the analysis should happen, and self-retrospection is indeed in order for all parties of the left, it’s time to remember the bigger picture.  There is a right-wing government in place with enough of a majority to pass pretty much any legislation it wishes to.  We can expect to see, in the immediate future, a further erosion of workers’ rights.  In the longer term, we will see further sales of state-owned assets, more privatisation and contracting out of public services (I wouldn’t be surprised if this included welfare, but it will almost certainly include more private prisons and more privatisation of the public education system), more infringement on civil liberties and greater powers given to the GCSB & the SIS, significant changes to the Resource Management Act and less protection for the environment, and who knows what else.

The only way to stop these changes will be through strong public opposition.  We already know that this National-led government is much more likely to use urgency and much less likely to allow for adequate public consultation.  But they are poll-driven, and strong opposition from the public is likely to have some impact.  And we know that there is a significant amount of disquiet with many of the policies I’ve mentioned above.

Parties of the left are crucial to providing that opposition and supporting and enabling voices to be heard in the public arena.  So after three weeks of tearing each other apart, how about we now have some statements from our political leaders of the left about how they are going to work together to provide effective opposition.  What is the plan to oppose these harmful government policies rather than each other?

Because one thing we know for sure is that all the when divisions with the left movement and within particular parties are dominating the headlines, the government policies needing effective opposition are not getting the scrutiny they deserve.  We can complain about the media and a whole range of other things, or we can talk about the actions we are able to take based on each party’s strengths, which will have an impact in stopping this government from going ahead with its programme.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

Is this even possible?  Are the parties of the left too divided and too far apart from each other to work together?  I don’t believe we have a choice.  Our ability to remove this government and effectively oppose its policy programme is dependent on us all shifting our focus towards them and away from each other.

I accept that this is difficult to do while Labour is in the process of electing a new leader.  But it isn’t impossible.  It takes leadership and a willingness amongst parties to start talking to each other.  That can happen at various levels – caucus, party governing structures, activists and membership.  It wouldn’t be too difficult to organise joint meetings of the various party electorate committees in a particular location.  Parties of the left could meet regularly (say once every 3 months) to talk about main policy initiatives, on the ground campaigning, building up momentum for opposition movements against specific pieces of government policy.

Sure, there are some things that are confidential and that we wouldn’t discuss.  But I don’t believe those boundaries are too difficult to draw.  And I do believe that we have to be inclusive – that means including the Mana Party, on some issues we may wish to include NZ First, and also the Unions, affiliated and non-affiliated.

By working together on a few solid campaigns, we can build up a movement that is an effective opposition.  We can work on our own media narratives and ways to bypass mainstream media.  We can look for areas where we have common ground.  We can channel the disappointment and anger at the election results in a more positive way.

This is essential work, it’s not a nice-to-have.  There are too many people who are struggling with their day-to-day lives for any number of reasons, who are depending on parties of the left doing politics a lot better.  They need us to start doing that now.  So, can we make it happen?

 

Anjum Rahman. – I fit into a lot of boxes – I’m an ethnic minority (born in india), a religious minority (muslim), and a woman. I’m a mother, an accountant, a political activist and a feminist. All of these form part of my identity to a greater or lesser degree. most of all though, I’m a rebel who refuses to fit neatly into boxes or to conform to the patterns that people expect of me. 

 

11 COMMENTS

  1. Hi,

    Well said. I agree completely. And while Labour goes through its personal bloodletting, the media feed off it, making a bigger mess. At least the greens have the discipline not to simply start chopping the heads off their leaders before the analysis of what happened has actually been done.

    Cheers, Greg.

    • lol, in a post where i talk about parties of the left attacking the right rather than each other, you post a comment attacking another party of the left…

  2. One distasteful attribute of the partys on the Left was the horrific scapegoating of each other…it truly was…. pathetic to behold. And…played right into the hands of neo liberal strategy. It was painful to watch.

    One of the overiding long term strategies of a neo liberal govt is to break up and destroy ANY collective movements, be they political or social.

    Repeatedly , you will find the analysis of top economists reports for social democracy all have the ‘remedy’ of collectivisation . A classic case in point is the destruction of the power of unions. This was achieved throught the Employment Contracts Act,….the deregulation of imports- ie : removal of import tarriffs…which displaced our industrys and thusly our workforce with cheap overseas commodities by which we could not compete. It is done with such things as ‘self appraisal’ reports ….bonus driven goals…and many other tools to divide and separate individuals….

    The point of this is…and a real answer to the percieved division of the Left is to hold cross-party summits / forums. These would include commonality of policy , strategice placement of candidates , a total media ban in place while this is in session…with only a few issues being raised by a spokesperson ….to whet the MSM ‘s appetite…and to encourage the neo liberal Right to ‘sweat’.

    Now..regards strategic placement..it is obvious the Greens , IMP , and Labour often worked at cross purposes…..this must stop. Another area is where there is commonality among partys…perhaps in this….the most acheivable policy should be centered to that particular party….while others….are awarded the iniative for thier good policy….this way spreading the attractiveness across the Left.

    The advantage of National is basically a single guiding principle – neo liberalism . With the Left …it is social democracy…and it is all too easy to entrench division caused through the VARIANCE AND INTERPRETATION of social democracy- this is where there needs to be a forum of concensus, a summit if you will….to avoid the pitfalls inherent in differing interpretations.

    SOLIDARNOS’C’ in all things for without it : the Left will continue to fail.

    • Well done Anjum, W K & I would fit into the same box of not wanting to fit the “normal” pattern of being lead.

      “how about we now have some statements from our political leaders of the left about how they are going to work together to provide effective opposition. What is the plan to oppose these harmful government policies rather than each other?

      These opposition Parties are harming us all and must wake up and play ball to provide a strong opposition voice before we are all finished, at least they owe this to us many who voted for them right?

      To spend their entire time disagreeing with each other over petty things and take their eyes off the major issues facing us all, well they are being thoughtless with our future so please opposition wake up now before it is to late for goodness sake.

      I have said it till I am blue in the face unite and from a series of policies firstly to combat the wicked use by National of our public media, TVNZ/RNZ for their war games campaign and attacking the Opposition at every turn.

      This while using our taxpayers funding is criminal, so take them to court and have half those assets given to a joint opposition to use as their media to get an effective opposition voice out there to the public to combat the key mob propaganda.

    • i really like to idea of a cross-party summit. in fact, we could do something like holding party conferences in the same city in the same weekend, and spend a day of the conference on a cross-party summit. but definitely smaller, local cross-party organisation would be pretty useful as well.

    • Well put but in my opinion the Labour Relations Act, State Sector Act and State-Owned Enterprises Act, all enacted by the fourth Labour Government had a major role in weakening the power of unions.

  3. Think about it, how was National ever going to lose this election when they had such solid backing from the corporate mainstream media? Remember the eve of the election with the National Party bordered front pages of Stuff and the Heralds internet editions? It said it all!

    No one else on the left stood a chance and I’m thinking without Hagers book National would have comfortably exceeded 50% on their own without the need for the 3 stooges of Dunne & ACT who are affiliate members of the same National Party anyway and the Maori Party.

    And KDC may well have planted a seed that although it appeared to have backfired may well bear fruit sometime in the future.

    The left have to stop beating itself up and it has to figure how to go it alone and its a tough ask. Otherwise the alternative as many have said here before is they will need to sell their souls if they are to meet the high $$$ expectations of the corporates who own the MSM and who rub shoulders with the millionaires of National.

    And whoever is the next leader of Labour will meet the same dirty opposition Cunliffe did so he is going to have to think deeply how to negotiate that and the minefield that is our sad, barren but dangerous media.

    But if the left get elected they must pass laws to subsidise an independent media and strongly regulate the corporate media in NZ, otherwise our farce of a “democracy” will continue its downward spiral.

    I just don’t know how they will get elected in the interim given the current arrangement, no matter how badly National cock things up!

  4. This is a very good article. Where does NZ First fit into all of this? Although nationalistic, of late some of their policies have been to the “left” of Labour. Also, at present, with his statements about the privatisation of State housing, Winston Peters is effectively acting as Leader of the Oppostiion.

  5. I agree with the sentiments expressed in this article. There needs to be solidarity brothers and sisters. The Left needs to stand together regardless of Party affiliation to combat the reckless assaults on democracy and freedom being undertaken by National. Together we stand, divided we fall.

    I’d suggest that as each party of the Left does have a different emphasis on contentious policy issues, that they continue to stand for those. In addition to this though, that they sign up to an agreement, a memorandum of understanding, that they are all on the same team. To indicate this solidarity to the public a coalition name, logo, brand and slogan should be created and added to all public communications. 30 or more years of neoliberal practices in New Zealand have made these methods the easiest for the general populace to comprehend and so would be most effective in getting the message across.

    The intention and outcome of this would be that come election 2017 New Zealanders know that even if they vote for Labour, the Greens, Mana, or any other Left party, they are showing solidarity by making it clear they are *not* voting for National. Remember the Natz got 48% of the Party Vote, that means they didn’t get 52%!

  6. When the selfie becomes the self…..

    The trends that could be observed during the last elections in NZ can be detected in an international context, too, and by taking up such perspective, one may realize that similar developments are shaping politics across the globe, especially in industrialized or industrializing counties with representational parliamentary systems (exceptionally, South America still being a bit out of pace with the rest of the world).

    Enforced by the overpowering influence of public media, coupled with diversions trough event staging and organized distractions, and through false or misleading advertisements by political promoters in the political economy, the basic parameter of the representational voting system “one person – one vote” no longer stands to accommodate the balancing of factual socio-economic needs, and diverging or conflicting interests in the society.

    In a one-sided communication process dumped upon the ordinary individual he or she escapes extracted as the final consumer only. As such remaining market corpse (‘the living dead’ might be a suitable analogy), the ultimately reduced participant in the process of capitalist accumulation can hardly afford capacity for making strategic decisions in the best interest of the society as a whole, or even for the individual’s own medium- or long-term benefit.

    Lessons Learnt from NZ 2014 are:

    1. Most important questions for the future of NZ’s socio-economic independence and the country’s natural environment are not resonating with the majority of the voting population despite verifiable evidence – accessible to nearly everyone – that would require urgent remedial action.
    2. The present selection of parliamentary parties (and some of their representatives) is insufficiently capable to deliver the genuine and material political issues and challenges into the intellectual rationalization process of the voting individuals, both in urban and rural areas.
    3. Extra-parliamentary resistance and resilience by NGOs in NZ is facing deterioration up to the point of insignificance or triviality.
    4. Additionally, a proper analytical discourse of NZ politics is often blurred and disguised through a mockery of right wing vs left wing antagonisms.

    A strategic response to the outcome of the NZ 2014 election would have to find answers to the two most important questions:
    • How can the intellectual debate over the Political Economy of NZ be fostered, developed and further organized with a focus on a society embracing “Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité” for all?, and
    • Which organizational platforms should the civil society in NZ encourage and cultivate to involve the segregated, disadvantaged and marginalized as equivalent stakeholders, eventually becoming a political mass movement?

    From this viewpoint the Internet Mana Party was the strategically most advanced and yet inconclusively radical opportunity offered to the NZ electorate, as it did touch essential intellectual, socio-economic and cultural challenges not taken up by any other organization in the country.
    It is hoped that this far-reaching transformation does not fade away because of the disappointing election result in 2014. Knowingly (or perhaps unknowingly) the NZ public is looking forward to continued strategic discussion and tangible action, within IMP and others, especially the Greens.

Comments are closed.