Calling a General Strike

Each day we wake up to the reality of the past feeding off the future. As each day is ushered into the present, corporate vultures repeatedly feast on the organs of the future. We rip off shreds of our national wealth and feed them to the vultures. Their hunger remains. We push more and more student and housing debt onto the next generation struggling to make its stand in the world. Still the vultures want more. We push the costs of ecological clean up to a future we imagine will never arrive. Still the vultures hunger. They will never be satisfied. The seemingly perpetual present of the Prometheus cannot continue. It is a cycle that dooms us to oblivion.

To save the future, we cannot wait for it to arrive. As Octavio Paz wrote, “the future is a deceitful time that always says to us, ‘Not yet’, and thus denies us.” It is not, however, the future’s fault. When it is being continually consumed it will never arrive of its own accord. It is up to us to act in the present to save the future. The current federal budget does not incite rage because it goes to new levels of violence against the Australian people and our future. People are incredibly strong and adaptable – we can adjust to live with previously unimagined levels of suffering and be thankful for it. The federal budget incites rage because its violence is so blatant. The gap between the treatment of a transnational mining corporation and a chronically ill pensioner is laid bare for all to see, uncovered by even the most modest pretence of a narrative of national interest. Aside from the briefest of budgie smuggglers, the Emperor has no clothes. It is this inability to project a narrative which highlights the weakness of the Abbott government. It is a government which either acts in an irrelevant or cruel manner.

If the rage maintians, the Abbott government will fall sooner rather than later. The question is whether it will occur in an educative manner for the people. Will it be an opportunity for people to realise their own power to remake the world around them or will it pass in the dead of the night with yet another party room coup? Will the violence at the heart of the budget pass with this government or will we see yet more attempts to cover that very same violence with move convincing attempts at narrative?

That is why the time for action is now. That is why the action needs to be universal – people need a taste of the power they can truly exercise. That is why the action needs to be at the point of production – people need to experience how much the system is dependent on their ongoing consent and obedience. It is time for a general strike. For it is this which will not only bust the budget but bust the violence at the heart of the budget.

There are many who would oppose the calling of a general strike for ideological reasons. We will never see eye to eye on this. There are, however, others who would oppose the calling of a general strike for a more practical consideration – does the union movement have enough power to pull it off? We have to recognise no matter how militant or moderate a union, there is a structural contradiction at the heart of a union organisation. On the one hand, a union must make the truly radical claim that its members are agents who must be treated with dignity and respect within the economic process. On the other hand, a union must adopt a defensive posture to maintain its organisation and assets in a hostile environment. Union leaders will structurally have to consider the risk that the failure of a general strike poses an existential threat to their unions. The consideration of this risk, though, comes back to the root question – does the union movement have the power to pull it off? Probably not today but I want to put forward an idea of what we can do today so that we have that power tomorrow.

As Hannah Arendt wrote in On Violence, power comes from people cooperating together. To put it the other way round, people acting together creates power. This is why those who imagine themselves to have the hardest heads when it comes to politics usually have the least understanding when it comes to power. It does not come directly from the control of the State or the ability to control the use of force. Having power and being in government are not the same thing. Building for and taking action leads to power.

I would propose a decentralised and networked exercise in direct democracy. You would need a union peak body, or an alliance of a few unions and other known groups/organisations hosting a website which contains a resolution on a general strike. The data that goes into the site would need to be kept absolutely secure, the site would need to be clean, simple to use and easy to share, and it would need to be able to keep running even under the adversity of potential hacks. It would need to be done in alliance with the internet activist community – otherwise it wouldn’t work.

A key part of the website is that it would work like Kickstarter – the resolution on the general strike would not be initiated unless it hit a set critical mass within a discrete geographical location. For the sake of example only, 200,000 people within the greater Melbourne area. What this means is that failure is built into the organising process. If the resolution does not get initiated in an area or at all we have still:

  1. Undertook a large scale process in deliberative democracy that cuts through the bottle neck of existing hierarchies
  2. Got many people to take part in an educative process to imagine their own power as a group of workers
  3. Built a community people who are willing and prepared to take such action and campaign for it next time

The key with this process is that it allows the participation of those who are outside of the traditional employment relationships. Someone who is a freelancer or runs a small business which is substantially dependent on their own labour has a way to voice their support for such action and organise for it within their communities. Someone who is a student can take their resolution around to their class mates. Anyone who is a member of a community group or organisation can go around to their fellow members and volunteers to start a discussion.

I’m not going to pre-empt what a resolution would look like other than to make two comments. Firstly, it needs to be simple, short and displayed prominently across the top of the website. Secondly, it needs to contain a pledge to take further action should any individual person be subject to retribution for taking part in the general strike.

I’ve set out below a first draft attempt at some of the data fields that would need to go under the resolution to further illustrate what I mean.

The time for action is now. If you think I’ve outlined at least the starting point for a realistic process whereby we can organise a general strike then share this so we can start the discussion, and leave your comments so we can make this better. We can only do this together.

 

8 Comments

Filed under The road map to another world

6 Reasons why Social Funding can effectively end political corruption

Shit is about to get real...ugly

Shit is about to get real…ugly for the political class.

While ICAC has temporarily suspended its inquiry into the soliciting and concealment of political payments, we have a chance to reflect on the systemic implications of what we we’ve found out. The roll call of resignations, suspensions and those broadly implicated in the last few weeks runs deep – former NSW resources Minister Chris Hartcher, former Federal Assistant Treasurer Arthur Sinodinos, Federal Treasurer Joe Hockey, former NSW Police Minister Mike Gallacher, Central Coast MPs Darren Webber and Chris Spence, and former NSW Premier Barry O’Farrell. It feels like a George RR Martin novel where the body count is extensive, the web of intrigue intricate and there are thousands of pages of plot still to come where the axe will continue to swing. O’Farrell’s unexpected beheading certainly signals the unfolding of chaos for the political class in the capital and the rest of the seven kingdoms.

This runs deeper than a few errant pollies and political operators. Rather, the corrupt behaviour of individuals reveals the ongoing corruption of the system. The structural driver of this corruption is that politicians, in both major parties, depend on the support of a small class of rich donors looking to expand their wealth. It means that parliamentarians are more representative for some than the rest of us, and it cuts the political class off from the rest of the population.

Most of the resultant suggestions concerning the reform of political donations have centred on either banning any entity other than individuals from making donations or replacing all private donations with State funding. Neither suggestion would substantially change the behaviour of the political class. This is because neither suggestion alters the structural driver of corrupt behaviour. Banning all corporate, union and membership-based organisation donations has a certain liberal appeal. All it would do, however, is provide for an empty formal equality where the single parent office cleaner is just as free to donate $10,000 to a political camapign as the private hospital entrepeneur. Marc Newman has written further on the futility of restricting political donations to individual persons. Restricting political campaigning to state funding, on the other hand, is just as problematic. What it does is leave the State inherently unchanged but entreches power within the existing political class. If I was a parliamentarian this would be my preferred option because it removes the effective ability of candidates outside a narrow range of power cliques within existing parties from challenging me before I decide to retire to a life of corporate boards and making money off of my relationships.

What we need is a system of political funding that effectively ends corruption by putting power directly in the hands of the people. We need the social funding of elections. The idea is that each year every Australian voter has the ability to donate a set figure, for example $20, to a registered political party or candidate. Political funding is thus equally in the hands of each member of our society, and it is your decision about who to donate to or whether to donate at all. To make this system constituional, anyone would still be free to make political donations (although any donation should be immediately reportable and available for the public to check) but if a candidate or a political party decides to accept a private donation they are no longer eligible to receive social funding for a significant period of time. Further, the decision to rely on private funding or social funding would itself become an issue in any political campaign. Erik Olin Wright outlined this system which he calls a “Democracy Card”  in his book Envisioning Real Utiopias including some of the safe guards and accountability mechanisms that would be required for such a system to work.

There are 6 reasons why I think social funding can effectively end systemic political corruption:

  1. It rebalances power away from a small network of mining and property magnates towards the rest of the population.
  2. In a very tangible way it means that every voter counts and not just a few thousand people in key marginal seats. Voters in safe seats will matter to political parties because they will be necessary to the ongoing ability to fund effective political campaigns – ignore your voting base and your funding runs dry.
  3. It builds civil society and associational democracy – the endorsements of organisational leaders will matter for building up a funding base. However, they will be more effective for active organisations with an engaged membership and the structures to incorporate an ongoing discussion amongst the membership. Endorsements from an organisation with a large paper membership where the leadership is cut off from the membership base would be next to useless.
  4. Social funding would drive conversations with real people – political parties and candidates would have to spend more time having proper conversations with real people, listening to their issues and meaningfully responding to them in order to be able to function.
  5. It provides a pathway to mass participation and mass membership in political parties again – building the infrastructure necessary to get donations also involves building the infrastructure necessary to ask people to join. In addition, once you’ve made the decision to donate, why not help out to ensure your favoured candidate gets up? Why not join to attempt to make the party even better?
  6. Social funding builds in the prospect for democratic renewal – it provides a funding mechanism whereby groups such as Voices for Indi can organise a credible campaign within their own communities. A few dissatisfied community members can gather around a kitchen table to register a political candidate and with their networks get together the seed funding to start a campaign. This works as social funding does not lock in funding based on past political preferences but based on our active and current preferences.

Social funding won’t solve all our problems but it should expand the horizons of public discourse so we can at least start talking about how to solve our real problems.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The Blog is Back

Need before Greed

The Blog of Claims is back people. I’ll resume posting on topics designed to get us to a world which is based on fulfilling the needs of the many as opposed to meeting the greed of the few. I’ve been on extended hiatus between getting married, going on honeymoon and getting in the swing of a new role at work. However, I’m now in a position to begin regular posting again so here’s the rules:

  1. The usual posting cycle will be once per fortnight – every second Sunday.
  2. Topics will generally be a mix of unionism with a hack effort at politics and economics thrown in.
  3. Individual posts will be between 700-1000 words (give or take 10 per cent).
  4. I’ll attempt to throw in a dash of humour where possible.
  5. All of the above may be broken where I judge necessary (for instance it would be pretty boring if I turned this post into 1000 words).

For for some extended reading here’s a dialogue I engaged in with ACTU economists Matt Cowgill on housing policy. Enjoy.

I’m also open to taking suggestions re updating my blog roll, so please let me know what you think I should add or delete.

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

We’re no longer beholden to Detroit

To lament the death of the Australian car industry is to grieve for something which never existed. Australia has never been anything more than a branch office for the global players of Detroit and Tokyo. An industrial reflection, perhaps, of Australia’s subservient foreign policy. Our political class has never really had the courage or strength to take matters into their own hands. And so it continues with General Motors (GM) announcing the cessation of Australian manufacturing from 2017. The mainstream political debate is stuck between lamenting that this was an inevitable but natural result of market dynamics and that further public subsidies could have kept GM manufacturing in Australia. Continue reading

1 Comment

Filed under The road map to another world

Australia’s Kleenex workers – used for dirty jobs then thrown away

My union, the National Union of Workers, held a demonstration this morning at Southern Cross Station called the Fluro Fightback. Here’s the corresponding article in The Guardian about it, “Australia’s Kleenex workers – used for dirty jobs then thrown away”.

2 Comments

Filed under Just how stuffed the world is today, The road map to another world

Coalition’s job security campaign contradictions

Just what are the Coalition promising to do to increase job security? The answer is very little and there is an important reason why, writes Charlie Donnelly.

“If you want to hang on to your job and have job security you will not be guaranteed that job security under Labor because everything they say and do is pointing the economy in the wrong direction. It is only the Coalition that is going to make the decisions that get the economy back on track.” – Joe Hockey Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Just how stuffed the world is today, Uncategorized

PRISM and Hannah Arendt

My latest article is up at Overland. It’s a piece on the wider implications of PRISM against a reading of Hannah Arendt’s essay, Lying in Politics.

Leave a comment

Filed under Just how stuffed the world is today

The Dangers of Abbott & Abetz

1003141_488718587882165_1771278282_n

After Rudd’s announcement of his PNG option, you may be thinking with Labor governments like these, who needs Tories right? This is, however, a discussion we still need to have to form the basis of coherent Left strategy for the next Coalition government. If you’re in Melbourne, I hope to see you down at Trades Hall on Thursday 25 July at 7pm.

 

1 Comment

Filed under Just how stuffed the world is today

file000884219889-600x250

For a universal income

My latest post is over at Overland – check it out.

2 Comments

June 19, 2013 · 4:36 am

A Direct Response to the Coalition’s Policy to Stuff Workers

On Wednesday, the LNP announced their IR policy to Improve your employer’s ability to exploit you. Well that wasn’t exactly the name but it is the strategy, and that’s what I’ll expand on in this post. If you want to feel the cold hand of Voldemort on your soul then you can read the original policy document here and make up your own mind. Continue reading

7 Comments

Filed under Just how stuffed the world is today