The Australian Labor Party is one of the oldest social democratic and labour parties in the world. Through its initial electoral and organisational success after Federation, over a hundred odd years ago, it consolidated a significant voter support base. This was complemented by the successful organising of Australian workers by its ally, the Australian trade union movement. Most unusually, it enjoyed its initial period of success in a period of prosperity in one of the richest societies in the world, at that time. Australia had both the world's first elected left-wing government and its first May Day march also. However, through the later 20th century and into the 21st, the Labor Party has strayed from its roots. Amid rising inequality and a cost-of-living crisis, the Australian Labor Party must faithfully apply its core philosophy to contemporary challenges.

At the end of the nineteenth century, Australia was considered one of the most socially advanced countries on earth, with the first elected left-wing government in the world and votes for women.[1] Foreign leftists visited Australia to see a unique form of social reform. And it all happened in a very prosperous country.

We were in some ways undermined by our early success. We never had to understand the significance of politically engaged working class trade unionists, when almost 50% of the workforce was unionised by the 1960s. (Both home ownership and union membership peaked in 1966 in Australia). We never needed to consider why we regularly received 40% plus of the vote, as a party with a mass membership in the working class, and many middle-class supporters. Nor the degree to which the great debates of the time filtered out into the general community through our network of community-based branches, because this was organic in a sense simply because of the party's size historically.

Things are not so easy (or maybe so lucky) today. A declining labour movement under constant conservative government attack, and an elite that has had a hundred years practise frustrating attempts at reform, make things harder now. 

One of the Australian Left’s mistakes in the twentieth century was to give up our natural high ground, our home ground, of democracy, despite being responsible for developing our first constitution, and compulsory voting. We undervalued participation and internal democracy, whether in our own organisations, governments or generally philosophically. We were happy to champion ‘the people’ but reluctant to let them get too involved. We were sure we could represent them without really involving them, or seeking their opinions.

Labor’s impersonal top-down welfare statism, and neo-liberal economic restructuring programs, that moved control to private hands, did not serve to build equity, equality or democracy, nor to deliver longstanding left-wing governments with popular support, at the end of the 20th century. For too long, corporations and right-wing politicians presented themselves as the protectors of democracy (“liberty”), not the working-class organisations and left-wing radicals who had played a key role in making Australia’s democratic parliamentary system, one of the first in the world, more than a hundred years ago. 

The best option for the Left in Australia is to underpin its struggles around the notion of democracy again – political democracy, economic and industrial democracy and social democracy. In this era of radical conservatism, one of the key challenges for the Left is actually to preserve existing democratic institutions. Our goal should be, through "democratic class struggle", to transform a capitalist democracy into an economic democracy, over time. Reformist, slow and gradualist, but changing power structures and democratically endorsed. The mainstream Left needs to find a workable alternative to capitalism and free market solutions, which only make a small minority richer. In the 21st century, using market forces for supply and demand to guide resource allocation and pricing is appropriate.

Our country now has the greatest gap between rich and poor it has ever had. The National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling in Canberra states that "the poorest half of the population will see their share of the wealth 'pie' reduced" and that it will "fall by one-third, from 7.0% in 2000 to 4.9% in 2030".[2] Australia is one of the most unequal countries in the developed world now.

And the global community has the same problems but magnified. As of 2025, the World Bank estimated that 700 million people were living in extreme poverty around the world, making up 9% of the world’s population, and a majority of the world’s population lived in poverty.[3] The majority of the world's population should be able to aspire to better living standards.

One of the things we need also to do clearly in the 21st century is associate our program with affluence for all, as opposed to the Right’s affluence for a few. If the poorest can be encouraged to participate in society, to work and become part of the community again, initially it doesn’t matter if there are billionaires (provided that they are required to exercise the huge social responsibility that comes with wealth), but in the meantime, it is somewhat perverse to have the two existing alongside one another. In a sense we are working towards a 'middle class socialism" where there should be no poor.

Practically, politically, because of the rapidly growing divide between rich and poor in our society, there is now a group that could be considered an ‘elite’. The middle class is also suffering from immiseration. Some of its members are facing poverty or personal difficulties simply because of the high cost of living in our society now. Others experience increased feelings of insecurity, despite reasonably comfortable personal situations for the moment. This has created an opportunity where the organised Left can now marshal middleclass people around what would have previously been working class political demands and campaigns – a great opportunity to mobilise a broader mass movement for social change, because there is a need to achieve "security" even though we live in a “prosperous” society.

Any significant challenge to capitalism, in a modern advanced society, will only be viable when the Left is a mass, inclusive movement, made up of different movements, parties and social groups. Presently, the ALP’s main focus is the electoral cycle, which alone will not improve or change Australian society in a lasting way. As a result, the focus of the party’s activities has moved from class to the attitudes, preferences and circumstances of ‘swing voters’ who are unrepresentative of the rest of our society. Labor has a good strategy to win elections, but not to hold and exercise power.

The labour movement also needs to rebrand itself as a broader political movement instead of a uniquely worker-centric one. There is a deep cynicism about politics today. This is manifested in low voter enrolment rates, and the recent failed Voice referendum. At present about 30% of Australian voters believe voting will make no actual difference to their everyday lives.[4] 

The formal union movement has declined considerably in membership since even 1990. Rebuilding is underway though. The good news is that this is not the first time the Australian labour movement has been in such a situation. It went through the same experience in the 1890s. And it is still the largest and oldest left wing social movement in the country.

There is also a plethora of social movements which are not fundamentally at odds with the values of the traditional Left, but are not always fully in tune with them either. These range from the online activism of GetUp to the direct action of the Occupy movement, to the environmental movement.

To achieve our aims, we need to recognise that any significant change of the power relationships within Australian society and economy requires a disciplined organisation of activists, that emphasises political education and development, grass-roots organising and a collective sense of purpose. The internet has increased the opportunities for political education exponentially. This should play a leading role amongst the social, community and labour movements. This sort of approach can sustain and rejuvenate Labor over a long period in office. Australia’s problems of inequality and injustice and conservative attitudes will take decades to transform. To achieve this, we need to think strategically, not just tactically over the next election cycle.

While it would be difficult, looking back over Labor’s entire history, to say it was a radical party, it would equally be difficult to characterise it as a moderate or centrist party - the truth lies somewhere between.

The Labor Party of the 20th century was better able than today’s to recognise capitalism’s faults, pursue positions on principle and try to build a better society, rather than tinker at the edges. While it promoted electorally popular left-wing policies, such as the introduction of Medicare, the ALP also assumed more principled and less popular stances such as its opposition to the Vietnam War. This arguably contributed to its disastrous 1966 election defeat, but ultimately built momentum for Whitlam's 1972 election victory, on the back of widespread antiwar sympathies which spurred people, particularly young and middle-class people, into political activity. In the case of this principled position, the passage of time showed that Labor was simply a little ahead of community attitudes.

The ALP is a mass party containing a wide variety of points of view, and there has always been a radical element, both within the Party and the wider labour movement. This is arguably evidenced by the fact that Australia is the only Commonwealth country where the Crown has used its prerogative to dismiss elected heads of government, both of them Labor, and both of them appearing to offer too much of a challenge to the status quo: Whitlam and Lang.

The current fascination with "small target" election strategies will not have the same long-term effect on the direction of political debate in this country. It is founded on a historically incorrect view that left wing policies have been and will be "electorally unpopular”. After all, the thoroughgoing reformist agenda of Gough Whitlam in 1972 received just as much support electorally as Kevin Rudd’s more cautious program in 2007.

Labor federal leader Scullin, in the 1920s, publicly supported the socialist objective for our economy. This didn’t stop him from winning the landslide 1929 federal election.  In 1932, in NSW, Lang wanted 'socialisation' of industry to be the campaign theme. Again, this didn’t stop Lang from being elected Premier of New South Wales twice.

Australia had no great ‘home-grown’ philosophers nor have there been any revolutionary situations. All the social gains in our history – social welfare, shorter working hours, public education and the right to vote - are ultimately the products of working class and left-wing political activism, and achieved through parliament.

Working class politics and trade union activities came early to Australia. Victorian Stonemasons lobbied politicians on the 8-hour day in 1856. The Miners Reform League was set up post Eureka to pursue political goals. And Queensland Labor MPs led the 1912 Brisbane general strike. Australian Labor had the first elected left-wing government anywhere in the world, with the election in 1899 of Labor in Queensland. And the first May Day march in the world was in Barcaldine, in 1891. 

The Labor Party's origins in the failed mass strike movement of the 1890s are noteworthy. The decision by the labour movement to establish a political party to represent its interests was the sign of a development of class consciousness beyond trade union consciousness and a sign of the strength of the labour movement relative to other countries at the same time. Indeed, the Australian egalitarian value of mateship was shaped last century by socialists like Henry Lawson who played a role in moulding Australian identity. It’s also interesting that support for the establishment of a Labor Party came from across the Left, supported by trade union leaders and Australia’s early socialist groupings, like the Australian Socialist League.

The growth of unionism in Australia in the 1890s was important for spreading notions of collectivism at the most basic level. Union membership dipped to single figures in the 1890s, in the wake of a national wave of failed industrial action. But it rebounded. Both of these historical events, are important for modern Labor. 

The Russian revolution of 1917 also had a significant impact on Australian Labor, with the adoption of the "socialist objective" nationally (both the Queensland and Victorian branch had one since 1912.) Support for the Russian Revolution should not be underestimated too amongst key Labor figures. But a curious thing took place on the Left. Given Australian Labor's electoral predominance then, many on the Left welcomed events in Russia in 1917 but believed that Labor in its current form could be the catalyst for social change. A Leninist party was not needed, as it was not necessary in the Australian context. Wise advice that still applies today. 

History is important to remind younger Australians that many of the great social achievements of our society are actually Labor achievements. History reminds us of Labor’s achievements in the past, and hence legitimises it as a practical choice for a government of the future.

Geoff Drechsler, June 2026

Geoff Drechsler was a white-collar union organiser for ten years in Melbourne, Canberra and Wellington. He has been a member of both the Labor Party and the Fabian Society since he was a teenager, as well as being a regular contributor to Fabian publications previously. He was formerly Editor of the ALP newspaper Labor Star. His primary area of interest is economic policy.

REFERENCES

[1] National Museum of Australia, “Defining Moments Australian Natives Association” www.nma.gov.au/defining-moments/resources/australian-natives-association#:~:text=Advancing%20Australia,enfranchisement%20and%20free%20secular%20education.

[2] https://apo.org.au/search-apo/National%20Centre%20for%20Social%20and%20Economic%20Modelling

[3]www.worldbank.org/en/news/factsheet/2025/06/05/june-2025-update-to-global-poverty-lines

[4] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-10/the-survey-that-should-worry-politicians/105027738

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

- Argy, F, Where to From Here? Australian egalitarianism under threat, Allen & Unwin, 2003

- Battin, T "The Vain Hope of Chasing the Middle Ground" in A Century of Social Change, Pluto Press, 1992

- Callinicos, A, Trotskyism, Open University Press, Buckingham, 1990

- Conrick, P, A History of the Australian Labor Party 1890-1967, 1972

- Despain, H, "It's the System Stupid - Structural Crises and the Need for Alternatives to Capitalism" in Monthly Review Vol. 65 No. 6, Nov 2013

- Gollan, Radical and Working Class Politics, Melbourne University Press, 1960

- Hansen, J, "Transitional and Democratic Slogans as Bridges to Socialist Revolution" in The Transitional Program for Socialist Revolution, 1977

- Korpi, W, Democratic Class Struggle, Routledge, 1983

- Maddox, The Hawke Government and Labor Tradition, Penguin Melbourne, 1989

- Maddox,  Australian Democracy in Theory and Practise, Longman, 1995

- McGregor, C Class in Australia, Penguin Books, 2001

- McMullin, R, The Light on the Hill – The Australian Labor Party, Oxford University Press, 1991

- Nairn, B, The 'Big Fella': Jack Lang and the Australian Labor Party 1891 - 1949, Melbourne University Press

- Rundle, G, "Break-out from the giggle palace: social democracy, the postmodern economy and the prospects for political renewal" in Patmore, G & Glover D (eds) New Voices for Social Democracy - Labor essays 1999 - 2000

- Trotsky, L, The Death Agony of Capitalism and the Tasks of the Fourth International - The Transitional Program, 1938

- Wright, E, "Compass Points - Towards a Socialist Alternative" New Left Review 41 Sept 2006

- "After Caterpillar's Turnaround - A Chance to Reinvent Globalisation", Washington Post 19.4.06

- "Getting By: Postcards from the edge" International Herald Tribune 11 & 12.6.05

- "Oedipus wrecks" The Age 28.8.04

-  "The Moral Midget in the World" The Age 19.4.06

- "Why Europe should reject US market capitalism" International Herald Tribune 29 - 30.4.06