File spoon-archives/marxism-international.archive/marxism-international_1996/96-11-22.061, message 56


Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 16:05:34 +1000 (EST)
From: Gary MacLennan <g.maclennan-AT-qut.edu.au>
Subject: Re: M-I: Re: Staying focussed


>And to Gary - your smugness is well earned.  Two little questions:
>
>(1) is Howard's reticence a sign that domestic election considerations
>outweigh the economic rationalism of a life-time - or just evidence that
>Howard's racialist filth circa 1987 was sincere, and that, like the
>coalition he leads, he is half reactionary conservative, half radical
>ecorat (a balancing act that can't be comfortable to negotiate for man or
>government)?


Rob this is actually a very deep question.  Howard is two people.  He is
your classic little petty bourgeois motivated above all by the need to stamp
on the working-class and to grovel to the powerful.  But sometimes he
actually forgets his positon in life.  It is as if he genuinely believes
that Australia is a dmocracy and that as the elected leader he should lead.
But he has had a lot of this knocked out of him lately.

 I like Poulantzas' distinction here between the hegemonic bloc - capital -
and those who reign - i.e. Howard and his petty bourgeois mates.  I thought
it was very significant that Howard of all the people in his government has
actually made the least out of  his political position.  He owns the fewest
shares apparently. So to repeat he is a genuine petty bourgeois who is
anxious to rule in the national interest.  This is code of course for the
interests of the capitalist class.

His 87 speech calling for "one Australia" i.e. a white Australia was from
the heart.  Similarly his recent call to integrate the battlers i.e. the
working-class into the Coalition is also sincerely meant in that he seeks to
replace the traditional leaders of the working class with his own party.

He is also pushing a whig view of Australian history i.e. history as
progress.  It is these ideological gestures ( e.g. his attack on political
correctness)  that make him such an interesting politician. Well mildly
interesting.

But as always when his non-sunchronous inclinations are opposed to ecorat or
the interests of the powerful he will choose the latter.

>
>(2) Can Hanson's pre-eminence survive an economic rationalist adviser? 
>Beyond the racialism in her speech, and even informing it, there was much
>anti-ecorat, public interventionist, nationalist, protectionist stuff. 
>Surely, that too is a significant constituent of her popularity?


I agree here Bob.  Her racism was popular but  so also was her economic
nationalist program.   Her popularity will collapse if she starts pushing
economic rationalism.  It seems to me that shw may well turn out to be the
flash in the pan.  Australia has yet to produce its Le Pen, ti would seem.

take care

Gary



     --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---


   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005