Discord and disunity are problems that beset the ruling class and its leadership as much as they do the labour movement, though of course in different ways and at different times. The struggles of the last decade in both the political and business wings have been unusually bitter, and are worth studying closely. Not only does the barrage of publicity surrounding them provide a unique chance to examine the modus operandi of the top leadership. A close analysis of the patterns of conflict can help rectify some of the characteristic weaknesses of class analysis as it has been practised in Australia.

In the first place, it is an empirical truth that conflict within the ruling class is chronic. It is the stuff of politics in Canberra, it is the stuff of business life. It is so widespread, so frequent, so ordinary, that it leads very many observers, including many journalists, economists, and political scientists, to regard it as the basic structure of politics; to adopt, that is to say, a pluralist interpretation of the structure of power. One of the reasons why pluralism, a profoundly unsatisfying intellectual position, keeps bobbing back (in tacit forms even if not as a theory), is that it points to truths that other interpretations persistently ignore or deny. It is really true that different businesses have different interests, which really are opposed.