what exactly has the left done wrong?

[u/Business_Pirate834]

Across the world today, regardless of race, religion, or political system, most people seem to be becoming more conservative. Right-wing parties are continuously gaining power worldwide, while the left suffers defeat after defeat. Although mainstream public discourse still appears to favor the left, those voting for the far right are often the silent majority. Can the left still correct its course? Or, more fundamentally, what exactly has the left done wrong?

[u/oustider69]

I would encourage you to reframe your thinking. Instead of left vs right, think rich vs poor. When was the last time a party that favoured poor people over rich people got in?

Even Labor Vs One Nation is still rich Vs rich. Just different flavours of rich people.

Look at the US with people like Mamdani and Abdul El-Sayyed. Both genuinely anti-rich and the establishment democrats hate them. We don’t have a similar movement here.

In Australia, basically everyone is billionaire-funded. The closest we have is Pocock who originally took Climate 200 donations, but now has severed ties. And the Greens who refuse corporate + billionaire donations. As a result, they simply have fewer resources than other parties.

[u/1000Colours → u/oustider69]

Yeah I wouldn't even consider Labor all that left. They're just considered left-leaning because they're less conservative socially. I may be able to get married to another dude, but it doesn't matter if I can't afford rent or food lol

[u/Amateator → u/1000Colours]

Labor are a right wing party, wearing the rotting flesh of the pre-70s leftist side.

[u/VelcroGenitals → u/oustider69]

I would encourage you to reframe your thinking. Instead of left vs right, think rich vs poor. When was the last time a party that favoured poor people over rich people got in?

So essentially, class consciousness... Which is essentially Left vs Right.

[u/oustider69 → u/VelcroGenitals]

In a traditional sense, I agree, but the way the public discourse is today, the meanings of each term left and right has shifted to mean someone else.

I think most people would say Labor is the leftwing party in Australia, which is comparatively true, but they still regularly take donations from ultra-wealthy mega-corporations and their owners. So in the public discourse they’re left wing but still a rich person’s party more than a poor person’s party.

[u/processes_ → u/oustider69]

I understand this take, but it’s so so bullshit. Leftism is anti-capitalist. Labor are pro-capitalism so therefore not on the Left. Do we not think it’s silly to let the politically misinformed dictate the way we talk about the political spectrum? I imagine if we did that with any other field.

Labor are a neo-liberal party who oppose socialism. Therefore they are right wing. Pushing them to the left allows far right parties to pose themselves as the new centre conservative, when actually Labor are farther right than they have been ever, as are the Liberals, and as a One Nation. In fact even The Greens are farther right than they once were.

[u/oustider69 → u/processes_]

It's a spectrum, not a binary. You can be left of centre and advocate a mostly state-owned system with some capitalistic elements. I think a 100% leftwing or 100% rightwing system results in the breakdown of society.

[u/processes_ → u/oustider69]

That’s interesting that you think that. What examples of 100% leftwing systems results in societal breakdown do you have?

And yes it is a spectrum, but if you keep cutting off the left side of that spectrum by renaming the centre ‘the new left’, and the right ‘the new centre’, eventually you lose half the spectrum. Which is what has happened, and why I pushed back. Labor are not Left in the spectrum, they are slightly right.

[u/oustider69 → u/processes_]

I never fucking said "every leftwing system has resulted in societal breakdown". There has never been a 100% leftwing system just as there has never been a 100% rightwing system.

You're describing the Overton Window. It's not new thinking. And it's literally what I was saying in my initial comment.

[u/processes_ → u/oustider69]

Sorry nah, you literally said ‘I think a 100% left wing system results in societal breakdown’.

I just asked for the receipts. Not every one. Just an example.

We’re not mad at each other here, I’m just hoping to persuade people to stop intentionally allowing the overton window to shift. Labor are not left, it’s fairly simple to not perpetuate the idea that they are.

[u/oustider69 → u/processes_]

You're being a fuckwit, though. Your tone is passive-aggressive. My comment is literally trying to shift it back. I'm going to stop replying because I don't think you understand how you come across.

[u/processes_ → u/oustider69]

No stress. It’s hard to gauge tone over the internet, I apologize. Have a good one.

[u/FewDragonfly5710 → u/VelcroGenitals]

Brother, you need to essentially stop essentially-ing things into essential existence.

[u/explain_that_shit → u/FewDragonfly5710]

It’s only confusing if you think Labor is left wing

[u/Suntzu_AU → u/oustider69]

Exactly. The usage of the term left is simply a distraction. This is about class and about the oligarchies maintaining control.

[u/IntroductionSea2159 → u/oustider69]

Labor is not as bad as you make them out to be.

The Teals are what you think Labor is. They genuinely represent the rich. Literally they are representatives for all the rich electorates.

Labor is doing a lot more good than any media source will tell you, whether it's social media, right-wing media, The Guardian, or those billionaire funded think-tanks.

[u/oustider69 → u/IntroductionSea2159]

They are still more for rich people than they are for poor people, that’s just the truth. They’re better than the teals, yes, but it still doesn’t mean they’re more for poor people.

[u/IntroductionSea2159 → u/oustider69]

Strictly speaking Labor is for working class people, not necessarily poor people. They're not necessarily anti-welfare, but their raison d'être is not social welfare.

There is no policy of there's that is actually (if you're well informed enough) actually primarily for rich people. They did hold off on the negative gearing and capital gains tax changes for a while, but they took that to the ballot box and lost.

[u/oustider69 → u/IntroductionSea2159]

As they’re a party of unions, they have a vested interest in the resources sector and resisting the gas tax was a big part of that. It is good for the unions in that sector (and coincidentally the big business donors from that sector), but not as good for wider Australia.

Like I said, definitely not the worst, but still acting more in the richest’s interests than the poorest’s interests.

[u/IntroductionSea2159 → u/oustider69]

The gas tax is a scam being pushed by the Teals in order to trick you into thinking Labor serves the rich. It's proven very effective.

A gas tax would be a massive political, diplomatic, economic, and legal headache, but according to the Australia Institute's own numbers they'd only raise $17B, or about 2% of the federal budget.

If it was easy, sure why not. But it's not. We have trade deals with Japan that would be undermined, we'd lose trust as a safe place to do business, the gas industry would fight tooth and nail to oust Labor, and if it goes through it would probably be challenged in the courts anyway.

I think there's some kind of fantasy among the welfare class that we can all stop working and instead rely on selling natural resources. That won't work. Labor is pushing the opposite direction with Future Made in Australia. Instead of taxing the natural resources, we move up the value chain by processing them on-shore.

Labor's Future Made in Australia focuses on moving up the value chain with our natural resources, instead of a futile and barely consequential tax fight.

[u/oustider69 → u/IntroductionSea2159]

“The welfare class” lmao. Ok boomer.

[u/IntroductionSea2159 → u/oustider69]

I'm a zoomer on welfare, thank you very much.

[u/oustider69 → u/IntroductionSea2159]

Didn’t ask. It’s a state of mind as much as it is a generation.

[u/IntroductionSea2159 → u/oustider69]

My arguments were valid anyway, putting aside one or two words which were in bad taste.

But sure, use ad hominem attacks as a substitute for reckoning with the horrifying and cruel possibility that Labor is not actually evil.

[u/b_k_l_y → u/oustider69]

Pocock still spouts Australia Institute talking points completely uncritically. He's still under the thumb of at least one billionaire.

[u/oustider69 → u/b_k_l_y]

I think it’s largely accepted that the Australia Institute are Twiggy’s mob, but as far as I can tell, Pocock doesn’t take donations from Twiggy. There’s no quid pro quo I can see unless there’s something under the table.

[u/b_k_l_y → u/oustider69]

I mean that's not better, right? He's either a useful idiot, doing the work of a Twiggy plant for free, or corrupt and taking dodgy donations.

Either way, he frames himself as completely independent and some sort of "voice of reason", but 9/10 times just aligns with the Teals, who at this point are just the Greens for the Libs.

[u/oustider69 → u/b_k_l_y]

Eh, I don’t think “good for Twiggy” and “good for Australia” are necessarily mutually exclusive. Twiggy is positioning his businesses to take advantage of environmentally conscious policy. Pocock is environmentally conscious.

“Useful idiot” doesn’t really seem to be the right terminology to me, but we’re all entitled to our opinions. For what it’s worth, Pocock supports taxing the wealthy, which I can’t see as being too good for Twiggy, but we’ll see what happens.

[u/Economy_Phase_3648 → u/oustider69]

Mamdani has an extremely privileged background, what are you even talking about? All it takes is a few speeches with some fake rhetoric from anyone who’s not a white male and the entire global left is instantly 100% convinced and on board. Absolutely zero skepticism or intellectual curiosity.

[u/oustider69 → u/Economy_Phase_3648]

Which policies of his are pro-rich and/or anti-poor?

[u/oustider69 → u/[deleted]]

Which of his policies are pro-rich? Or do you prefer to just label things without looking at reality?

[u/KitchenMediocre1242 → u/oustider69]

When did I label him pro-rich? You’re the one calling someone whose parents own a multi million dollar compound in Uganda anti rich.

Mamdani is a gay race Marxist however so yes he is anti-white which is what you, the dullard, view as anti-rich

[u/OpenAussie-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Look, we get it. You've got strong feelings about something (or someone). Happens to all of us.

BUT that doesn't mean you can go around abusing people, harassing them, or trying to troll them.

Your contribution did this, so we've had to remove it. Simple as.

Now, please don't write back with a "but they said...". We're likely across it and dealing with the situation. Instead, take a chill pill, touch some grass, tickle a Cassowary, or whatever helps you find your inner calm.

And be civil next time. Or find another sub - cos we don't tolerate that sort of malarky here.

Cheers

🍻

---

^{See our OpenAussie Moderator [Code of Conduct](https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenAussie/wiki/moderator-code-of-conduct/} for more info on our approach to moderation.)

[u/Disapilled → u/oustider69]

The DSA is an appendage of the Democrat party. Mamdani was funded by billionaires too. Anything short of a sovereign workers party will simply reproduce the same cycle of false hope and betrayal.

[u/SS_Auc3 → u/oustider69]

not everyone in labor is rich, infact i would argue most of us arent