The Green New Swindle

Written By: Louie Gibson

A recurring problem for the working class movement is the tendency one of giving up too early, setting their sights too low and investing resources into supporting more popular so “progressive” reformist leaders. This has occurred time and time again, most recently with the electoral hopes of social democratic leaders such as Bernie Sanders, Jeremy Corbyn and with the rise of democratic socialism on the political left. These movements offer proto-socialist reforms, in the hope of luring struggling people into endorsing their electoral campaigns, but more importantly, ensnaring working class people into the revolving door of seeking reforms within capitalism instead of challenging it completely.

A major issue, is the willingness of nominally revolutionary groups to drop their own independent politics to endorse social democratic charlatans. Downplaying their own revolutionary politics and using their own resources to promote social democrats is opportunism and demonstrates a lack of principles. The most recent example of this behaviour are the endorsements flowing from Australian groups such as Socialist Alliance, Socialist Alternative, the Greens and also Labor “left” to different extents for Bernie Sanders in the US Democratic Party primaries. With the rise in popularity and media coverage of personalities like Sanders and Alexandria Osasio-Cortez, these left forces have seemingly adopted the same policies of democratic socialism and a “Green New Deal”. To understand what is wrong with this move, it’s important to understand what democratic socialism and the Green New Deal are.

Democratic socialism and its proposed social contract of the Green New Deal is a modern iteration of an old technique for herding a working class that is growing more conscious of the contradictions of capitalism back into the electoral sphere and away from radical movements. Democratic socialism is the belief that socialism can be implemented through electoral means and would therefore be truly democratic. An example of a social contract is the Harvester Judgement of 1907 where Justice Higgins of the Arbitration Court ruled that a workers wage be based on the cost of living for a worker and his family, regardless of the company’s profits[1]. This set the basis of the minimum wage in Australia, where an agreement was made between the employer and employee on the minimum wage the employee would receive. Modern democratic socialists are trying to implement their Green New Deal as a new social contract which is less focused on the financial security of the worker and more on re-implementing the welfare state popularised by Roosevelt in the 30s & 40s in America, while also appeasing the environmental movement with green reforms.

So how have these political parties supposedly ended up with the same political program: Toxic, middle class opportunism, wrapped nicely with the gaslighting “harm reduction” label.

While the supposed left of the Australian Labour Party has tried to appeal to a left wing audience by proposing a Green New Deal, another riding on the reform bandwagon is the “tree tory” Greens Party. The proposed new “radical” deal that will supposedly revolutionise the Australian economy will be more capitalism, just “green”. It will feature the same old capitalists, with the same old exploitation except this time, you won’t be exploited in a coal mine, you’ll be exploited making wind turbines instead.

“We must never sway from our target and allow these opportunists to draw us in to their one step forward, two steps back dance”

So if the larger parties have taken on this opportunist approach, how have the “radical” left fallen victim to this new social contract? Because parties such as Socialist Alliance and Socialist Alternative, although claiming (quite loudly and obnoxiously) how “revolutionary” they are, are most likely embarrassed that these larger parties have taken and run off with their political program. Socialist Alliance was formerly known as the Democratic Socialist Party[2], while Socialist Alternative affiliated with the former in the Democratic Socialist Perspective[3]. Both parties still hold on to this political program regardless of their radical posturing and their inclination to ride every new bandwagon that arrives on the political scene has revealed their true colours. But don’t dare question this new political program however, or else you will be bombarded with gaslighting about “harm reduction” from all corners.

A snippet from Socialist Alliance’s “Climate Change Charter”

“These leaders guide the radicals among us into their bureaucratic circus of lobbying, of tokenistic marches and rallies and media campaigns”

Harm reduction, in the eyes of these careerist politicians and their naive supporters, means to tell workers and activists among them that they supposedly agree with our revolutionary demands, but for now, we need to allow reforms to increase the quality of life for this or that demographic. What they do to an individual is guilt and shame them with accusations that they do not actually care for those who are struggling and are apparently infatuated with their dream of revolutionary change. But as good as these reforms may sound they are always too good to be true. What has happened time and time again is these leaders guide the radicals among us into their bureaucratic circus of lobbying, of tokenistic marches and rallies and media campaigns. What results is a watered down version of a reform full of amendments to appease conservatives that successfully strips away any meaningful change that was to occur. This has a disastrous effect on the communist movement. It leads well-intentioned individuals through the revolving door of reforms, leaving them truly jaded and disillusioned by the time the performance is over. Although some end up with a clear class conscious analysis of the situation and come to join the communist movement, many end up giving up on politics and settle into a nihilistic rut. All the while the leaders of these reform movements find a new group of young and enthusiastic activists to keep the circus going. The show must go on!

What is needed, not what may seem trendy, is an independent working class movement that is not tied to any of these toxic tactics. The working class of Australia has become politically disillusioned, unimpressed and constantly let down by the political apparatus of this country. A revolutionary socialist program would be favourable to the working class. Opportunists know this and try to adapt those ideas for their own benefit, however they can never fully achieve what a communist movement has to offer. For all those who aspire to a society of true equality, both economic and social, we must never sway from our target and allow these opportunists to draw us in to their one step forward, two steps back dance.

Bibliography

1) https://worksite.actu.org.au/the-harvester-judgement-and-australias-minimum-wage/

2) https://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/rdv8n2/dsp.htm

3) https://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/rdv8n2/dsp.htm