I'm amazed that anyone ever thought any of the above were a viable left alternative. Galloway was briefly credible but he was always aone-trick pony and, like Sheridan, an immensely vain megalomaniac. He wasn't even on the Labour left...so now they have all shafted one another. Well, who caresand who is surprised.....There is a job to be done within the trade unions and the Labour Party . A REALLY important job, not the schoolboy backstabbing which marks out the ultra-left.I would urge those pissed off with the shenanigans of RESPECT, SSP etc to at least come and observe the LRC conference on November 17 at the Conway hall, 10am.You don't have to be in the Labour Party. But you probably do have to be a socialist of the non-sectarian variety.... www.l-r-c.org.uk

RESPECT has made huge strides in the past four years – taking on and defeating New Labour across its heartlands, bringing millions on to the streets to oppose imperialism, forging deep and lasting links between class conscious workers and the massed ranks of Celebrity Big Brother viewers.

George, (I’m on first name terms with him since he stopped talking to the SWP), has been an inspiration to us all and has led RESPECT out of the trenches of sectariana and into battle with the mainstream political parties – now the SWP has stabbed him in the back.

We have been warning George of this danger for several months (see my pamphlet 'On the Cliffite Threat') but initially, probably due to his Labourite-Stalinist bureaucratic-collectivist background, George was unable to see the dagger being drawn. Now though, George has woken up to find the knife hanging out of his back with the bloodstained hands of German and Rees all over it.

Continues via clicking on Dave Dudley link below.

The intelligent critique will be along in another post, I take it. The only thing Scargill, German and Sheridan have in common is being in a left-of-Labour electoral party. To heap blame for the current state of RESPECT - which I guess is what triggered this post - on Rees, Galloway and Thornett equally isn't even-handedness, it's just sectarian myopia.

I second Susan, though - anyone who can should certainly get along to the LRC.

The LRC does however clash with respect conference.

But as that only involes a minority of people, let me also endorse the idea of attending the LRC, who have an importnat and significant role to play.

Blimey, you do sound bitter, Mr Osler.

No-one has mentioned the Greens, who whilst not representing the left per se have made significant inroads into gaining representation. The logic of environmental destruction has social implications that would appear to be leading increasing numbers towards an ecosocialism and anti-capitalism. Discuss.

Without wishing to paint the SWP as the force of all darkness - The Socialist Alliance, Scottish Socialist Party and (soon?) REspect appear to have all be brought down by their actions. While supporting none of the above, at least, assuming good faith, they contained andinspired genuine radicals and at times offered glimmers of a none Labour left - an open and honest left - (though, Respect only barely, it really was the third time as farce in that case).

OK, maybe none of my business, but... what is certainly dead is Leninism.

Why would any "political conscious worker" chose a political ideology that has led to mass murder everywhere - yes everywhere - it has been in power?

If the left is about offering hope to humanity about a better future, I'd start there.

I recommend "Lenin and the end of politics" if it is still in print.

Well said. The Left in this country couldn't run a piss-up in a brewery and are almost as much of an embarrassment as the deluded fools who think the Labour Party can be "rescued". It makes me want to bash my head against a wall.

I'd vote Green if they ever stood a candidate in my neck of the woods.

A few more thoughts:

Why does anybody think the Greens represent social progress? They are the party of the anti-enlightenment. If you hate globalisation then how can you be a progressive? After all the working man has no country.

There is no prospect of a left of Labour Party growing without PR. So campaign for it.

Any party to the left of Labour has to be Labour's left-wing ally, not its enemy. But of course 90% of leftists in another party follow the prescriptions of the "third period". Indeed it os pnly a few days ago that someone was on here comparing New Labour to the Nazis.

No, LotB, someone was not on here comparing New Labour to the Nazis. Somebody compared a specific piece of legislation to another specific piece of legislation. There's nothing 'Third Period' about drawing historical analogies, as far as I'm aware. Of course, you may want to challenge that comparison; feel free to do the necessary homework and get back to us.

Dave,
Why don't you just give up the pretence and shutup like a good little boy.

All this nonsense about joining Labour again but still remaining a lefty makes me want to puke.You have failed to gratify your obvious ego by trying a breakaway left movement so now you turn ofn the left and re-join the gangsters in the Labour party.
You can only be in for dissiluionment,and you next stop will probably be the BNP.

With childish tossers like you pretending to be lefties it is little wonder that the left are all but dead in the UK.
Grwo up.

"If you hate globalisation then how can you be a progressive? After all the working man has no country."

Does having no country mean that you rule the world?

Was Harry Secombe a Scotsman?

"They are the party of the anti-enlightenment." - Last of the Blairites

Yep, those Greens do hate to see people arguing for freedom of conscience and vulgarising 17th century scientific theories...

I don't mind the Greens, though I do have a habit of saying unfortunate things to them like, "Did you know there's very little scientific evidence of any health benefits from organic food or of health risks from GM food, that there's considerable evidence that the overwhelming majority of complementary therapies operate on the placebo effect, that medical research would grind to a halt if vivisection were banned...hey, wait, where are you going?"

I'd still rather vote for the Greens than Wespeckt though.

"Did you know there's very little scientific evidence of any health benefits from organic food or of health risks from GM food"

Aren't the Greens pro-organic and anti-GM because of their relative effects on the wider ecosystem, rather than the relative nutrition value of the food produced? There was a study published years ago that showed battery eggs were slightly better for you (lower fat, I think) than free range ones, but I wouldn't consider that much of an argument for battery farming of hens.

All of the 'left of Labour' initiatives listed by Dave were foredoomed to failure for the good reason that unless they can be launched on the basis of an upsurge, either political or economic, of working class they lack social roots other than in marginal sectors of society.

This explains why the SLP, based on declining sectors of the working class, failed. It also explains why the CNWP, creature of the SP that it is, will inevitably fail to develop into a party of the class.

Respect too, based on some fractions of British Muslims, and The Greens, based on the dafter sections of the NMC, can maintain themselves as minor parties but can never play an important role.

Despite which a new Mass Workers party is needed but denial of the reality of the present low level of class struggle and volutarist attempts to create such a party only make the sponsors of such attempts look like clowns. better to build what can be built at present and forego sectarian adventurism.

I agree and endorse wholeheartedly with you Dave.

As said earlier, all attempts to form a new workers party left of Labour are doomed to fail unless their is an upsurge in the class struggle.

You then have to question the capability of the existing organisations such as the CNWP or Respect in actually taking advantage of any upsurge.On current record, while there have been limited successes, they are failing.

The idea promoted by the LRC and John McDonnell seems now the only idea in town. The left can and should work on this basis, uniting where we have common interests, in promoting the ideas of socialism and solidarity.
Political representation of the working class is something that is patiently built and not sucked out of the thumb of whatever left group appears to want to dominate the agenda.

Red Deathy I agree - and that's on top of them ruining any viable left caucus in unions to the ground.

In order to do what the LRC want and have an effect in the LP we need to first seize control of our unions.

in fact you could argue that in order for the left to do almost anything we need to have support from the unions who are becoming increasingly more hostile.

But the ultra left (mainly swp I but also SP) with their inability to do anything democratic (what relinquish control?!) and sensible ruin any chance we have of lefty thinking people working together to force unions to be effective

Indeed they seem content to sabotage any true chance of having an effect within unions just so long as they're seen to be 1 in control and 2 the candidates of the left - even though they have no chance of winning.

Sorry 4 rant!

The only way it can be done is by getting PR. I also think the Greens and a Left party would have to form an alliance to have good electoral prospects.

Still this is all hypothetical and as I am no longer a Labour Party member or active politically I won't hold my breath or stop living my life until it does.

Comrade Osler, you just need some pathetic justification for still being in the New Labour Party. Your mini-rant then gives your Labour Party chums the chance to indulge in their pathetic 'criticisms' of other socialists. Incredible really, since the utter absurdity of being in the shrinking mass party of big business should be pretty clear by now.

Yes, the chances to build a genuine socialist organisation are most likely to succeed when there is an upsurge in class struggle. Since there hasn't been an upsurge how can the CNWP be accused of failing to take advantage of one?

Thought 'Dave Dudley' was an invention of Sectarian Worker (aka Harry Hatchet, forerunner of Harry's Place). Or was pleasuring her Majesty in Rampton.

Stand corrected.

There's some stuff in comments on Harry's Place about the SWP considering cancelling the venue for the Respect conference if they think their vote won't carry. I don't want to waste my time travelling down to London for the conference if that's a serious plan!

Regarding comments about the Green Party here. Whilst it is true that the Greens are not an explicitly socialist party, they are way to left of New Labour. Take Green Party policies like those on public services, which are unambiguous in stating that they should be publicly owned. Or that the Tory anti union laws should be abolished. There is also an anti capitalist current within the England and Wales Green Party called Green Left, of which I am a member. GL seeks to outreach to socialists and leftists and to inspire the wider party to reach its radical policies through green socialism. The party has just re elected Derek Wall, a Marxist, as its principal speaker (increasing his majority). Don’t be put off the Greens by outdated assertions about our policies, take a look yourself. If you are ex Labour supporter, you will be pleasantly surprised.

Green Left can be contacted here:

http://www.greenleft.org.uk/

That's just it - they're policies put on the national web-site and election leaflets. They aren't used as the basis of actual activity or involvement in campaigns. What gets most Green Party members juices flowing is the old environmental concerns. What is pathetic and disgraceful is Green councillors in various places joining with Tories and others in voting in cuts, the price of which is just a few more recycling facilities. I'm afraid, in a recent interview on the Socialist Unity blog, the so-called Marxist Derek Wall, excused this.

As of last night, the LRC now has a new regional group in West Yorkshire with contacts in Labour Party CLPs in Keighley, Leeds Central, Wakefield, Colne Valley, Halifax, Calder valley, Batley and Spen, Skipton. And we're going to get more. We will be working with unions, Trades Councils, and single-issue groups. Frankly, anyone who's interested in socialism and doesn't indulge in pathetic fantasies about new workers parties......Just because Gordon brown on the right and the SWP/RESPECT on the ultra-left are losing the plot doesn't mean we have to.We're getting real and we are organising.

Actually this is what was said:

I have pointed out before that if accept the limitations of the comparison (Labour are not fascist) that the nazi government also described themselves as communitarian "Volksgemeinschaftishe", and there are some very close policy analogies; in particlar ASBOs are remarably close to Himmlers proposed legislation in 1944, but his law feel foul of the nazi judiciiary who regardded it as outsdie the framework of the rule of law, and the police beleived it was unenforceable.

Which apart from the "Labour are not fascist" then goes on to say that the policies of the Labour government are analogious to those of the Nazis.

Pretty much sectarian central.

As for the greens - anti-immigration, anti-trade (live in the developing world - then you'd better get on with your susbsistence living) - I quote from their webiste:

British pig, fruit, veg and poultry farmers are being completely undercut by cheap foreign imports that the Government is powerless - or lacks the political will - to stem.

In other words, British workers should pay higher food prices to subsidise landowners. Well f**k that.

LotB,

in fairness, that "Volksgemeinschaftishe" statement was from Andy Newman, and whilst he has been known occasionally to make some intelligent points, that was NOT one of them, see http://www.davidosler.com/2007/10/gordon_brown_and_the_ideologic.html

Sadly, Andy comes out with these statements every now and again, more recently his comment on "Muslim lands", see http://hurryupharry.bloghouse.net/archives/2007/10/25/muslim_lands.php

I really wouldn't take them too seriously

There's a few irritating anti-science statements on the greens' website too. Just browsing through the bit about animal experimentation...

There is an overwhelming body of evidence to suggest that animal research is at best unreliable, and at worst potentially dangerous to humans. Indeed, an estimated 70,000 people are injured or killed by adverse reactions from their animal tested medications every year in England alone. The British Medical Journal have recently released a report stating that at least 10,000 people are actually killed by prescription medicines in the UK each year.

Oh dear, not that old chestnut again. Yes, it's true that there are a lot of adverse drug reactions each year. However, one thing the anti-vivisection lobby fail to mention is that the overwhelming majority of those figures are things like overdoses, prescribing errors, interactions with another drug or with a complementary therapy (traditional Chinese medicines are particularly notorious for interacting with conventional meds) - all of which is no fault of the use of animal testing.

Also they fail to mention that animal testing is only one step along the way of getting a drug from lab to market. They don't just stick in a rabbit one week and on the pharmacist's shelf the next. They start off with things like cell cultures and computer models, then move on to animal tests, then on to human volunteers. If there's a problem with the safety of medicines, then that whole process must be at fault, not just the animal component.

And don't even get me started about the stuff on the Green Party website about mobile phone masts...

I think a section of the Stalinists is moving in to the Labour Party anyway, very secretive, except one picks up the signs. Their job will be to defend the LP on its Left to protect the ambitions of careerists and union bureaucrats.
I don't see how anyone could have taken Galloway seriously except through wishful thinking. Part of the Left's problem in this country is it keeps looking for "charismatic leaders". Is it some kind of unconscious hangover from forelock-touching to the gentry?
To the guy who goes on about "Leninism" in power killing millions, perhaps he should take a look at what happens in the rest of the world, where millions are dying from hunger and diosease anyway. No need to lock them up in a camp (though there are those too), you can just lock them out with immigration controls. But that's only lesser breeds - except for the millions killed in Europe because the Left in Germany had failed to take power. But it can't happen again, can it?
We live in Britain, a relatively privileged country, where manufacturing (except armaments) has given way to shuffling IOUs about in the City, and though the gap between rich and poor has grown, we're supposed to be all middle class now, so all we need is a few reforms - in fact I can't see why Labour is not delivering them. I expect it is all the fault of us old gits who are living too long, and I shouldn't moan. By the time your pensions and benefits are gone I'll have enjoyed mine.
But you are right that the "Left" we have left is donald ducked, and not up to the job. You'll have to start again. And start from where you are. By all means learn from our mistakes. But don't pay too much attention to those who pretend there's nothing to be done, or can never offer anything but dire warnings of the dangers if you do. Think of the dangers if you don't. And before some literary detective points to it, yes I did read What is to be Done, several times, and would stand by it, though not by those who brandished it.

Doug says

'Yes, the chances to build a genuine socialist organisation are most likely to succeed when there is an upsurge in class struggle. Since there hasn't been an upsurge how can the CNWP be accused of failing to take advantage of one?'

Well as you say that , an upsurge in the class struggle would just as much affect the Labour Left, arguably more so than the CNWP.

The CNWP arent being accused of failing to take advantage. The question is , because of their present orientation, and that of Respect/SWP/SSP etc,etc, are they capable of taking advantage?

I think not.

I'm not sure what you mean by affect the Lbour Left - if you mean more people will join it's pointless quest to 're-capture' the Labour Party, then I doubt it, particularly young workers whose only experience of Labour is it shitting on them.

LOTB

Well clearly the Labour government are not facsists.

My point however is that the communitarian agenda of the labour right over anti-social behaviour is uncannily similar to the communitarian agenda of Himmler.

Both value social conformity from a statist perspective.

I see modernityblog has turned up, purely to attack Andy Newman and defend his Blairite Neocon mates at Harry's Place, while adding nothing to the debate. Although, why would he? He's not interested in left politics at all - only in attacking the anti-war left, and criticising people who don't compare Muslims to Nazis often enough for his liking.

The latest Sauce at HP:

"Word from 'sources close to Serwotka' is that George is going to jump ship publicly today, denounce the SWP, and announce the formation of an almost brand new 'Keep George In The Headlines' party."

http://hurryupharry.bloghouse.net/cgi-bin/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=7436

"anti-trade (live in the developing world - then you'd better get on with your susbsistence living)"

Arguably it's the current system of "trade" that keeps the developing world in poverty. It's not as simple as a straightforward choice between market fundamentalism or autarky. What's the Green position on foreign aid? I'll bet it's better than the current Government's.

"In other words, British workers should pay higher food prices to subsidise landowners. Well f**k that."

In other words, we should continue to contribute to the exploitation of the Global South, because it allows Tesco to sell us cheaper veg (and puts a few Kulaks out of business).

McGazz, who said anything about "market fundamentalism"? I quoted a real live Green party press release saying people should pay more for food (and if I had quoted the whole thing you would have to agree it was because the Greens think workers should pay more to keep the petit bourgeois landowners known as farmers going).

But as for the argument that trade maintains the "Global South" in poverty - would you care to tell us more. You could be about to win a Nobel Prize with that one.

What certainly keeps the Global South in poverty is the restrictions on their trade (coupled with, at the margins, the idiocy of 'fair trade' - both are preserving the patterns of colonial trade for the benefit of the rich).

"What certainly keeps the Global South in poverty is the restrictions on their trade (coupled with, at the margins, the idiocy of 'fair trade' - both are preserving the patterns of colonial trade for the benefit of the rich)." - LOTB

Socialism 101: It's not how you trade that matters, it's ownership. Those left-wingers who forget that attack socialism as surely as the people who re-wrote Clause 4 (changing the implications, if not the actual meaning).

Dave, What's this talk of a lash-up between RMT, the CPB and Bob Wareing? I've not heard it myself.

LOTB, Charlie Baldwin,

It's not trade restrictions per se - fair trade coffee is bunkum (and potentially harmful) as any Marxist knows, capitalism isn't a trading system its a capital system, and what it rewards is the ownership of capital - the global south has, generally, not capitalised, leading to massive surplus value transfers to the owners of capital in the industrialised core (and of course, leading, due to free movement of capital, to the capitalists of the global south investing their capital in the core for quick returns, rather than build up the infrastructure necessary to endogenise capital to their own polities).