Melanie Sjoberg
Kernot's economic nationalism
Australian Democrat leader Cheryl Kernot says that the alternative to "economic rationalism" is "economic nationalism". But what does this mean? We can agree that the economic rationalist policies of Labor and the Coalition place little value on social, environmental and community interests, and are creating a more selfish and uncaring society. But what the Democrats propose won't reverse this direction. In her January 20 speech to the Democrats' national conference in Hobart, Kernot said the Democrats' "genuine alternative" comprised proposals to:
- increase Australia's trade performance through sectoral industry planning (as in the vehicle and steel industries);
- oppose future privatisation;
- allow tax rebates on savings;
- limit overseas investment by superannuation funds;
- improve the labelling of goods to encourage buying Australian;
- campaign internationally for a 0.5% tax on foreign exchange transactions;
- tighten control over foreign investment.
Do all this, said Kernot, and we will reduce the $180 billion foreign debt and growing foreign ownership. Then, we will be able to
afford a more equitable and sustainable society. Kernot has missed the real problem. The reason we don't have an equitable and sustainable society is not that we can't afford it but that it would get in the way of corporate profitability. There's also a fatal flaw in her quaint nationalist vision: all Australians don't share common interests. Most larger Australian corporations want to lower wages and working conditions to more internationally "competitive" levels. They want the freedom to invest overseas
and to borrow or raise equity from overseas. They want to avoid environmental and social regulations in Australia and overseas (for example, BHP in Ok Tedi). They also want to pay slave wages to Indonesian and Thai workers in their overseas factories and mines. On the other hand, the great majority of Australians who work for wages are being forced to pay the price for their employer's greater competitiveness and profitability. Putting the competitiveness of the company first means taking pay cuts and losing jobs. Kernot's economic nationalism is not in the interest of the main class in society, and so is doomed to be a utopian dream. The Democratic Socialists agree that society should not allow important decisions about investment, production, imports and exports to be dictated by the corporate monopolies. But to challenge these powerful bodies requires more than passing a few bills in parliament. You have to bring together some other powerful political force that will act against these corporations. The only possible way to mobilise such a force is to build a real opposition to the major parties' profits-first agenda. This cannot be done from the comfort of the Senate. More importantly, the Democrats' economic nationalism cuts across this project by asserting a false common interest between Australian workers and their corporate bosses. Kernot conceded that the Democrats accepted the irreversibility of the global capitalist neo-liberal offensive under which "capital is flowing freely across national borders — and usually coming to rest where taxation is minimal, where labour is cheap and where environmental standards are poor". All the Democrats wanted "is for our leaders and policy makers to acknowledge the dangers inherent in this new era of globalisation, and to take action to safeguard Australia's interest". The global capitalist neo-liberal offensive is a reality. But we must reject and organise to defeat its logic of pitting worker against worker on a world scale. This can be done only by workers in Australia building greater solidarity among themselves and with workers overseas. Economic nationalism goes in the opposite direction.
[Melanie Sjoberg is the Democratic Socialist spokesperson on the economy and candidate for Hindmarsh in South Australia.]