FIGHTING CORONAVIRUS CAPITALISM

As the economic crisis deepens, the Labour Government is intent on retrenching the status quo. So what are we prepared to do to bring about the kind of economic transformation now permanently off the Labour Government's agenda? What are we prepared to do to make the politically impossible become politically inevitable?

IN FARAWAY New York Stephen Colbert has been singing the praises of New Zealand again. The host of The Late Show  praised the country's management of the coronavirus pandemic and singled out his new best friend, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, for special mention. Of course Colbert lives in a country where there has been no coherent nationwide attempt to fight the virus and which has resulted in tens of thousands of preventable deaths. Living in a country where over 300,000 Americans have died as a consequence of the deadly virus, its little wonder that Colbert should regard New Zealand as something of a paradise. Colbert is something of a Tolkien devotee and New Zealand is indeed his 'Middle Earth'.

But while Colbert might wax lyrical about New Zealand, there was no mention in Colbert's commentary about the high economic and social price that has been paid for suppressing the virus and how the economic burden has been squarely dumped on the shoulders of the very people who can least afford it.

In August a leaked cabinet document revealed that the Labour-led Government had been told  that some half a million New Zealanders could struggle to put food on the table each day as the economic impact of the virus began to grip. As we approach Christmas its reported that Work and Income are issuing  over 4,000 emergency food grants a day. And frontline community groups  continue to struggle to meet the increasing demand on their services. These are bleak times for many.

During the lockdown Finance Minister Grant Robertson talked airily of using the opportunity provided by the pandemic to 'reset the economy' and 'build back better'. But instead the Labour Government has been intent of shoring up the status quo. And while the Government has had plenty of cash to throw at the business sector, little of that money has  been directed to those doing it hard. While the lines at the food banks have lengthened the response of Jacinda Ardern has been to flatly reject the widespread community call for a substantial increase in core benefits in order to alleviate the increasing level of economic distress.

The ranks of the poor have considerably swelled this year, the direct result  of the Labour Government's failure to protect the community from the economic consequences of the coronavirus.  In the words of Auckland Action Against  Poverty's coordinator Brooke Stanley Pao, the Government has chosen 'to keep people and families in poverty'.

The World Bank has had to revise its figures on the economic fallout from the coronavirus on several occasions this year. In April it estimated that the virus would result in approximately 40-60 million new poor. By November it had scaled that figure upwards to between 90-115 million new poor.

Even the World Bank, hardly a left wing or even liberal institution when it comes to economic prescriptions, has been advising that expecting market mechanisms to solve the crisis will only result in further inequality. As business commentator Bernard Hickey has noted:

'..economists as conservative as those of the OECD, the IMF and the World Bank are now begging Governments to do things differently by spending money on the poor and on infrastructure, rather than just pumping up  asset prices  to make the rich even richer.'

Borrowing from the monetarist economist Milton Friedman, activist and author Naomi Klein says that the future 'will be determined by whoever is willing to fight harder for the ideas they have lying around.' The exact quote of Friedman's is this:

'Only a crisis — actual or perceived — produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on ideas that are lying around. That, I believe, is our basic function: to develop alternatives to existing policies, to keep them alive and available until the politically impossible becomes politically inevitable.'

The question that opponents of the Labour's Government's austere economic policies need to answer is what economic and political alternative are they fighting for and how far they are prepared to take the fight. 

Commentator Chris Trotter has suggested that its time for some good old traditional struggle, including mass demonstrations. All very fine, but we also need to be certain about what we are demonstrating for. Agitating for some minor concessions from this Labour Government would be sorely inadequate and I'm reminded of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's recent exasperated comments about how she's sick of the lack of vision and ambition expressed by campaigns for 'incremental reforms'. 

Given the urgency of our times we need the kind of economic transformation that would be resisted by this Labour Government. If we are to make 'the politically impossible become politically inevitable' we need to stop pandering to the political interests of Labour and stop letting it off the hook every election year. The last thirty years of neoliberal rule should have taught us that we can't fight with one hand tied behind our backs.