Comments on: Latham revisionism http://www.tallyroom.com.au/1028 Elections and politics in Australia and around the world. Wed, 08 Feb 2012 07:46:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Tad http://www.tallyroom.com.au/1028/comment-page-1#comment-974 Tad Mon, 06 Apr 2009 13:28:24 +0000 http://www.tallyroom.com.au/?p=1028#comment-974 "However I still think a Latham government would be more progressive than a Rudd government, simply because of his personality style" Hmmm.... are you sure you mean that? “However I still think a Latham government would be more progressive than a Rudd government, simply because of his personality style”

Hmmm…. are you sure you mean that?

]]> By: Ben Raue http://www.tallyroom.com.au/1028/comment-page-1#comment-954 Ben Raue Sun, 05 Apr 2009 23:36:38 +0000 http://www.tallyroom.com.au/?p=1028#comment-954 I agree about Latham's politics. I saw a lot of him before he became Opposition Leader because he was my local member, and it's certainly true that he was very right-wing. However I still think a Latham government would be more progressive than a Rudd government, simply because of his personality style. I agree about Latham’s politics. I saw a lot of him before he became Opposition Leader because he was my local member, and it’s certainly true that he was very right-wing. However I still think a Latham government would be more progressive than a Rudd government, simply because of his personality style.

]]> By: Tad http://www.tallyroom.com.au/1028/comment-page-1#comment-939 Tad Sun, 05 Apr 2009 14:04:37 +0000 http://www.tallyroom.com.au/?p=1028#comment-939 Ben, I think you overplay the significance of Latham's way of doing politics. Yes he was quirky, vaguely populist and unpredictable, but I think his value within the ALP was greater than his impact publicly. Despite being a hard, ideological free marketeer he was able to speak to Labor's core support base with a superficial, class-based "us and them" language (tied together with some crude anti-US nationalism). This made him appear more radical than he actually was, and it was enough to rally the demoralised ALP troops who had been so distressed by Beazley's capitulation over Tampa and 9/11. Latham's initial high rating in the polls can be better understood as voters desperate for a real opposition to Howard seeing possibilities in him. However, don't forget that he stopped cutting through for a period of months in mid-2004, leading to a big decline in ALP support in the polls. This was partly reversed when he wrong footed Howard on the Free Trade Agreement, but he was unable to sustain momentum thereafter. I agree that subsequent attempts to pin the loss solely on him are disingenuous, but he was no more the solution than any other Labor leader... wedded to neoliberalism and quite happy to send right-wing messages on social issues (his position on refugees was the worst of any post-Keating ALP leader). That the ALP caucus took a chance on him only proves how confused and directionless they were after the 2001 election and their inability to take a clear position against the invasion of Iraq. In the end they won in 2007 on the back of widespread rejection of Howard's agenda and a mass activist campaign against WorkChoices that they piggybacked on, not because they found the right "solution". Although having a leader a bit less unstable than Latham certainly didn't hurt. Ben, I think you overplay the significance of Latham’s way of doing politics. Yes he was quirky, vaguely populist and unpredictable, but I think his value within the ALP was greater than his impact publicly.

Despite being a hard, ideological free marketeer he was able to speak to Labor’s core support base with a superficial, class-based “us and them” language (tied together with some crude anti-US nationalism). This made him appear more radical than he actually was, and it was enough to rally the demoralised ALP troops who had been so distressed by Beazley’s capitulation over Tampa and 9/11.

Latham’s initial high rating in the polls can be better understood as voters desperate for a real opposition to Howard seeing possibilities in him. However, don’t forget that he stopped cutting through for a period of months in mid-2004, leading to a big decline in ALP support in the polls. This was partly reversed when he wrong footed Howard on the Free Trade Agreement, but he was unable to sustain momentum thereafter.

I agree that subsequent attempts to pin the loss solely on him are disingenuous, but he was no more the solution than any other Labor leader… wedded to neoliberalism and quite happy to send right-wing messages on social issues (his position on refugees was the worst of any post-Keating ALP leader). That the ALP caucus took a chance on him only proves how confused and directionless they were after the 2001 election and their inability to take a clear position against the invasion of Iraq.

In the end they won in 2007 on the back of widespread rejection of Howard’s agenda and a mass activist campaign against WorkChoices that they piggybacked on, not because they found the right “solution”. Although having a leader a bit less unstable than Latham certainly didn’t hurt.

]]>