Talk:Communist Party of Australia

Proposal to move to "Communist Party of Australia (historical)"

I'd like to suggest that this party gets moved to the "Communist Party of Australia (historical)" and the "Communist Party of Australia" page becomes a disambiguation page. There's a surprising amount of mixups where people think the current party is the same as the old party. The naming scheme used is (very ironically now that I look at it) inspired by Democratic Labor Party (historical). Catiline52 (talk) 08:11, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

I support this. It is inherently confusing as it is. There is also a disambiguation page for the Socialist Party of Australia.--Jack Upland (talk) 08:56, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Support -- makes sense. Rjensen (talk) 09:13, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose. The current party is a microparty that doesn't even field candidates and draws zero media attention. The historical party had a significant influence on Australian politics over several decades and has had multiple books written about it. The DLP is a bad example to follow as Wikipedia is the only source that treats the "historical" and "current" parties as separate entities. A better comparison would be the historically significant United Australia Party and the flash-in-the-pan United Australia Party (2013). Ivar the Boneful (talk) 10:03, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose for the same reasons as Ivar the Boneful, especially given the recent further splintering of the new "CPA" to form the "ACP". It's ridiculous to treat the real CPA and the post-1991 microparty CPA on the same level.Locochoko (talk) 10:57, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

The current CPA is actually a continuation of the Socialist Party of Australia, which was founded in 1971. It is not "post-1991" or "new". While small, the SPA attracted historically significant figures such as Pat Clancy, Freda Brown, and Judah Waten. And of course The Australian was obsessed with it because Lee Rhiannon was once a member. The existing article about the current CPA is woefully inadequate and misrepresents it. We are not proposing to treat the parties on the same level. We are proposing that Wikipedia helps people tell the difference between the two. Making snide remarks about electoral performance is unhelpful to the task of building an encyclopedia.--Jack Upland (talk) 10:03, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose. Jack Upland's point above is worth considering - the current CPA was not always the utter nonentity it is today - but also actually underlines a strong reason for not making this move: the current CPA, when it was most prominent, was most prominent under a different name (SPA), when it was operating as a split from the original CPA. "Communist Party of Australia", in the literature, overwhelmingly refers to the original CPA. There probably is an argument for moving the current CPA to "Socialist Party of Australia", given that I don't believe it has ever been registered under its current name. (Incidentally I have long felt the two DLP articles should be merged.) Frickeg (talk) 22:06, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

I think changing this article to "SPA" would be even more confusing. However, I would support redirecting "SPA" to here. This party is the one known as the "SPA". The Socialist Party (Militant) have never been called the "SPA", and the third party mentioned on the disambiguation page is a real, real non-entity.--Jack Upland (talk) 23:24, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Fair enough. The redirect does seem to be a no-brainer. Frickeg (talk) 01:37, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

• Note: the "Communist Party (current)" has now been moved to Communist Party of Australia (1971). I'm not sure that helps.--Jack Upland (talk) 23:54, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

I support this change over changing the more notable Communist Party page. I also agree that the current page for the SPA-CPA is lacking. However, what date should be used for the splinter party? The SPA was founded around 1971, but they weren't the CPA until 1996. Would Communist Party of Australia (1996) be more appropriate, as it differentiates it from the party which dissolved in 1991? Catiline52 (talk) 00:03, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

I don't think so. The SPA is more notable than the current CPA. I would prefer something like Communist Party of Australia (formerly Socialist Party).--Jack Upland (talk) 01:38, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Socialist wings of ALP and Greens?

I have removed this from the "Legacy" section:

The Australian Labor Party and the Australian Greens continue to have socialist wings as part of their parties in the 21st century.

There are factions of the ALP which call themselves socialist, but there always have been. I know there have been socialists in the Greens, but I'm not sure that there is a "socialist wing". In any case, how is this a legacy of the CPA?--Jack Upland (talk) 08:38, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Australian Communist Party (2019) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:19, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation page

Sorry my talk ended up on the wrong talk page, oops. Anyway I was changing the disambiguation box for clarification, otherwise it looks like there were two concurrent CPAs. Cheers. Locochoko (talk) 00:09, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

CPA still exists

Despite WPs position in the article, the CPA still exists and this is their website: https://cpa.org.au/cpa-introduction/ 182.239.144.69 (talk) 09:23, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

That party's article is Communist Party of Australia (current).--Jack Upland (talk) 09:55, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks Jack. 14.2.202.183 (talk) 07:14, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Some second and third party historical works on the Communist Party of Australia...may be use

1. Lance Sharkey, The trade unions, communist theory and practice of trade unionism, Australian Communist Party, Sydney, September 1942.
2. Lance Sharkey, An Outline History of the Australian Communist Party, Australian Communist Party, December 1944.
3. E.W. Campbell, History of the Australian Labour Movement, Current Books Distributors, Sydney, 1945.
4. Gibson, My years in the Communist Party, International Bookshop, Melbourne, 1966.
5. D. B. Young, What's happening in the C.P.A.? Will the Communist party split?, Sydney, 1970.
6. Sendy, John, The Communist Party: History, Thoughts and Questions, CPA History Group, Melbourne, 1978.
7. Clancy, Pat, "The formation of the Socialist Party of Australia", in Communists and the Labour Movement National Conference, Melbourne, 22, 23, 24 August, 1980.
8. Australian Marxist Review Special Issue Sixty Years of Struggle for Scientific Socialism, No.4, Socialist Party of Australia, Sydney, October 1980.
9. O'Lincoln, Into the mainstream: the decline of Australian Communism, Stained Wattle Press, Sydney, 1985.
10. Stuart Macintyre, The Reds: The Communist Party of Australia from origins to illegality, St. Leonards, N.S.W., 1998.
11. Warren Smith, A brief history of Australian Unionism and the role of the Communist Party, 2000edition.
12. Lang, John.T, Communism in Australia: A Complete Exposure, W. Brown, Sydney, 1944.

Sheminghui.WU (talk) 07:03, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Macintyre has a second volume called The Party.--Jack Upland (talk) 02:02, 2 June 2025 (UTC)