STICKING TO DIFFERENT PLAYBOOKS
The ideological chasm separating the traditional world order and advocates of globalisation means that problems such as the energy crisis will not be resolved
POLITICS today is marred by deep-seated ideological divisions which make essential reforms virtually impossible to implement. Energy policy reform is the latest example.
The disputes arise from the conflict between the advance of the globalised economy and the older nation-state based world order, which it is gradually replacing.
Globalisation advocates believe in climate change, open borders, political correctness and identity politics.
Supporters of the old order generally reject these notions, and believe in traditional political solutions.
These ideological divisions cut across political parties, and have caused much of the instability which has plagued politics in recent years.
In France, Emmanuel Macron’s election win was a victory for globalisation. Macron is now trying to reform the highly regulated French economy, but he faces strong opposition from labor unions and continuing instability seems certain.
Donald Trump’s election as US President was a victory for the old order, but he is now bogged down in a bitter fight with supporters of globalisation. Trump has achieved little, and US politics is in a state of disarray.
Similar trends can be seen in Australia. Unlike in France, the traditional conservative and social democratic parties continue to dominate here but they are riddled with division.
The Labor Party has adopted most of the ideologies of globalisation – especially climate change.
The Coalition is deeply divided on the issue, with Tony Abbott and the Nationals rejecting a clean energy target as well as subsidies for renewables.
The Greens are the most rabid champions of globalisation, while Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party embodies a Trump-like opposition to its advance.
In this context, is a rational solution to the energy crisis possible – even one as modest as Malcolm Turnbull’s proposal to keep some coal fired power stations operating into the future? Probably not, for various reasons.
First, climate change ideology, makes change near impossible.
Labor and the Greens rejected Turnbull’s reform proposal this week because of their commitment to climate change. Both parties also oppose nuclear energy and increased use of natural gas – two other possible solutions.
Second, any radical policy change would need the cooperation of major energy corporations. But, as this week’s fruitless negotiations between Turnbull and AGL showed, these corporations are committed to climate change ideology.
AGL is determined to close coal-fired power stations as soon as possible, for ideological reasons and because their closure will result in increased profits.
Nor can Turnbull expect assistance from most media organisations or universities, which support globalisation, and have for years shut down debate on climate change.
Reform can only occur if Labor agrees to support Turnbull’s proposal for change (the Greens will never do so).
Former Labor politicians Graham Richardson and Michael Costa advocate this, but they are traditional Laborites – who believe the party should assist workers and ordinary consumers.
Bill Shorten’s Labor, however, is in the globalisation camp, where ideological commitment matters more than ordinary Australians.
This explains the strange realignment which took place this week – the Coalition supporting workers and consumers (Labor’s traditional constituency) while Labor sided with large energy suppliers who are profiting from the energy crisis.
These are strange days politically and there appears to be little prospect of averting a full-scale energy crisis.
In fact, Australia, despite its abundance of coal, natural gas and uranium, is in a worse position than France, the US and many other countries.
Most of France’s energy is supplied by emission-free nuclear power stations and prices are a 10th of those here.
In the US, use of its natural gas reserves has solved its energy problems.
China, Japan and Germany continue to build coal-fired power stations. Australia, meanwhile, finds itself in the worst of all possible worlds.