The far left and the general election
Posted on Wednesday 27 January, 2010
Filed Under The left
The following article was commissioned by the Alliance for Workers’ Liberty paper Solidarity. Normally I wait until such pieces appear in print before publishing them on this website, but I am seriously short of blogging time in Hong Kong, so I hope they forgive me just this once.
I’ve just had the first fitting for my first-ever fully bespoke whistle and flute. Beat that, Tommy Sheridan. Off the peg price, of course. Saville Row quality? I guess we’ll see. But Sam’s Tailors of Nathan Road has made garments for the Prince of Wales, Cliff Richard and, er, Carlos Santana. The walls are filled with photographs of the said celebs posing with the proprietor, just to prove the point.
Meanwhile, what you are about to read means that I am breaking my new year’s resolution no longer to write stuff on such topics and stick to matters of political consequence instead. Sorry, couldn’t help myself. And besides, it’s been ages since we’ve had a far left bunfight.
URBAN legend has it that George Best – by this point a rich but has-been alky rather than a footballer of genius – once ordered champagne to be delivered to the five-star hotel room in which he was gallivanting with a half-naked Miss World.
The bellboy arrived with the bubbly, only to find thousands of pounds of casino winnings strewn over the bed. The waiter calmly turned round to the the one-time Manchester United legend and pointedly asked him: ‘So, Mr Best. Where did it all go wrong?’
That’s a question the far left would do well to ponder as it gears up for the impending general election in a condition weaker than any in which it has found itself for perhaps a century.
In the 1990s and early 2000s, I was an enthusiastic advocate of initiatives like the Socialist Labour Party and the Socialist Alliance. But experience has taught me that a project of this type is impossible to realise in this country.
After 15 years of trying, we are actually further away from that target than we were to begin with. If you want to know why in six short words, the left is too bleeding stupid.
The period that opened up with the birth of New Labour offered it a real chance to build some kind of viable leftwing electoral formation, even if the AWL mistakenly clung to entrism.
Social democracy wilfully cast away the working class it once dominated ideologically, and launched into repeated wars that generated genuine mass opposition. Meanwhile, Stalinism appeared finished once and for all, and there was even a partial youth radicalisation.
It was utterly obvious what the situation demanded of us; unity in a single party and the hard slog of putting down meaningful roots in the labour movement and in working class communities. But we totally fluffed it.
The British left managed to shoot itself in the foot so many times that the ends of both its legs now terminate in bleeding stumps. I guess we got the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce and the third time as something that cannot be described in a family newspaper.
Much of the blame rests with the SWP, which has proven itself so entirely incapable of working with other forces inside a common democratic framework. That has to make the question of alliances with this group problematical.
Its central committee arrogantly assumes that the left cannot put together a meaningful electoral challenge without SWP participation. Much of the rest of the left – even if it diplomatically does not say it aloud – feels that it cannot put together a meaningful electoral challenge with the SWP on board.
Meanwhile, the very SWPers that preach ‘flair, determination and decisive leadership’ – qualities that Georgie Best amply displayed on the football pitch, I seem to remember – are reduced to provoking apolitical beauty contest faction fights by hyping up spurious non-differences. Hey guys, notice the fascists in Brussels?
Once, the Scottish Socialist Party demonstrated what could be achieved with a little nous. But all it took was one overblown male ego to squander that.
The Socialist Party in England and Wales deserves some credit for the years of patient local work legwork it has put in, at least in Coventry and a few other places. But the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition it is sponsoring this time round is clearly on the parliamentary road to lost deposits.
There is little point in putting together ad hoc coalitions just weeks before election campaigns begin, not even bothering to stand under the same name twice in succession.
At the time of writing, the SWP was in talks about joining up with TUSC. I’m frankly surprised that idea was not rejected as a non-starter. We’ll see what happens.
But even if it comes off, any shotgun marriage between Trots and the left of the trade union bureaucracy will prove a semi-tankie nightmare, with a rigid internal regime premised on the deterrence of microsect infiltration. That won’t stop the crackpots sneakily tabling transitional demands in the hope that no-one else will notice, of course.
There will be no prospect whatsoever of leadership accountability or control by the rank and file. That alone will prevent such a formation making headway in the working class.
The mosque bloc vote might see Respect fare slightly better than TUSC in percentage terms, but it has no realistic chance of securing any MPs either. It’s saddening to see activists desperately trying to kid themselves otherwise.
And I’m not telling you anything you don’t know already when I remind you that the solitary AWL candidacy may well struggle to poll a three-figure vote. Haven’t you lot got better things to do?
In short, the only socialist MPs that will get to Westminster this year will be the handful that get elected as Labour candidates. I’ll be concentrating my political efforts on securing the return of John McDonnell in Hayes and Harlington, and then participating in the debate that will be had after Labour’s imminent crushing defeat.
<<Go back
Comments
60 Responses to “The far left and the general election”
-
- Yemen: an unfinished revolution
- Comment Is Free: An honours system for those who fight to make Britain a better place
- Democracy crushed; elected President arrested; World wrings its hands
- Fabians change policy on unpaid internships
- Kamal al-Fayoumi arrested as Egyptian regime retaliates to strikes
-
-
Meta
-
Why would anyone consider voting for a leftist candidate when its perceived to be tied to NuLabour and it various illegal wars. If the left means anything, its about taking action.
For anyone considering direct action, you could do worse that considering George Monbiot’s offer in The Guardian. He has set up a fund to reward the person who affects a citizen’s arrest on Tony Blair. A good idea, but he’s aiming at the wrong person.
Gordon Brown is still the Prime Minister and is equally culpable for what happened and is happening in Iraq. Affecting a citizen’s arrest on Gordon Brown would send a more powerful message.
The article gives clear instructions on how this can be done in a lawful manner.
Why would anyone consider voting for a leftist candidate when its perceived to be tied to NuLabour and it various illegal wars.
Possibly because they will actually win? And because getting elected on a Labour ticket is the only way that principled socialist opponents of illegal wars will get the hearing that a place in parliament secures?
> And because getting elected on a Labour ticket is the only way that principled socialist opponents of illegal wars will get
…told to sit down and shut up, which they will do immediately.
McDonnell seems like a nice enough bloke, but what can he possibly achieve as one backbench MP in today’s Labour Party?
Dave,
There is no point in replying to questions like “Why would anyone consider voting for a leftist candidate when its perceived to be tied to NuLabour and it various illegal wars?”
The point which ultra-left loons like Jon fail to grasp is that it makes not a jot of difference who he votes for. But tens of thousands of people do vote for leftist candidates standing under the Labour banner yet don’t do so when they stand under other banners.
If you want to waste your time arguing with the people of the constituencies that they’re wrong to vote for McDonnell, Corbyn, Clark and the rest of the Labour left MPs, or you accept the above observable fact and work out how to relate to it.
There is nothing more amusing and less important than tiny left wing sects “calling for a vote for X”, as if they can influence the outcome of an election.
Modernity,
What have you have you done with Dave? Release him now and give him back his blog.
“Much of the blame rests with the SWP, which has proven itself so entirely incapable of working with other forces inside a common democratic framework.”
Ye this was the view being expressed in the chip shop last night.
“Its central committee arrogantly assumes that the left cannot put together a meaningful electoral challenge without SWP participation.”
That’s what the women behind the Greggs counter said when I went to buy my Tuna sandwich.
In all seriousness the left have failed not because of the internal dynamics of the SWP (this is sectarianism gone mad), it is because they have failed to advance their views to match existing social relations and realities.
What do you mean the AWL clung to entryism?
We were in the Socialist Alliance from very near the start (certainly by 1998).
My third paragraph above should have read:
You can either waste your time arguing with the people of the constituencies that they’re wrong to vote for McDonnell, Corbyn, Clark and the rest of the Labour left MPs, or you accept the above observable fact and work out how to relate to it.
I hate to intrude on private grief but from the outside looking in it seems blindingly obvious to me that you are all, to some extent, utterly lost in a past romantic haze. ‘Y’all’ (as they say ‘over there’) never stop talking of “the working class” which no-one ever defines which is suprising given how many of you are forever analysing and defining everything else.
What is ‘the working class’? Is it people who work? In that case it includes almost everyone of working age from butchers to bankers. If you mean those who work for a salary below, say, the national average, you will still find that a considerable number of them own their own houses (or aspire to it) and recent economic events not withstanding look forward to leaving their increased value property to their children. In other words, damn them, they have turned middle class! If, on the other hand, you wish to represent the impoverished non-working class, that is, those who exist on benefits (a not dishonourable ambition) then you should change your language.
For Marxists the enemy is the property-owning class, and the enemy of Marxists are those self-same property-owning middle classes who today make up an enormous percentage of the population, so short of economic collapse followed by revolution you ain’t in with a chance! In the meantime, judging by this comments thread you give every appearance of being a collective of middle-aged, dare I say, ‘Dave Sparts’ unwilling or unable to relinquish the dreams of polytechnic student yesteryears.
Perhaps what I’m trying to say, nicely, is grow up!
Boilermaker,
The sole reason New Labour have McDonnell, Corbyn in the party is to attract the votes of some of its ‘traditional’ constituency. By falling for this you reinforce the project that is New Labour. Blair was able to move the party to the right on the assumption that the left had nowhere else to go and he would pick up votes from the middle classes.
The call the left have to make is will election defeat and a stint in opposition move New Labour to the left and provide the likes of McDonnell with more clout within the party.
DD- yawn. The enemy for Marxists is not the property owning middle-classes, but the capital owning, business running, labour employing upper-middle classes, who are not anything like “an enormous percentage of the population.” Owning a house does not stop you from being working-class, despite a lot of (highly effective) right-wing propaganda from the Tory press and the likes of yourself stating otherwise.
Perhaps what I’m trying to say, nicely, is fuck off!
I don’t particularly disagree with most of the original piece, but I do feel TUSC is getting a bit of a raw deal.
There is an element of ‘how do I we get to such and such a place? Well I wouldn’t start from here if I were you’ going on.
In Brighton we are putting together a TUSC campaign as a real coalition between lots of groups from No2EU and beyond. Will it at this election make up for 15 years without a push from the whole left and major unions towards a new party? No. Can it grow and develop in that direction, potentially, yes, but it will take time work and vitally consistancy.
Analysing the socialist alliance again may be valuable in terms of learning lessons, but don’t let it mean we give up on working with what we have got now to build what we need. Which is a situation where socialist politics can be put forward not just by a few principled MPs buried in a neo-liberal jungle but by the program of a healthy successful working class party.
and no we are not standing against Lucas.
Dave Osler – your analysis of the failure of the far left is all fair enough, and I’d agree with most of it, but it would be more constructive to give an example of what conceivable use voting Labour would be in building a left alternative.
The sole reason New Labour have McDonnell, Corbyn in the party is to attract the votes of some of its ‘traditional’ constituency.
Laughable. Do you really think that NL are scared that if they ditch the few remaining left MPs, they’ll lose power? That the media-invisible Campaign Group and LRC MPs are keeping a large number of ‘traditional’ Labour supporters on side?
I think you’re rather overestimating the importance of the small number of people who read far left newspapers.
Oh and another vote for the ‘David Duff hasn’t the faintest idea what he’s on about’ party.
I don’t much care for the cut of DD’s jib – he’s caricaturing wildly in order to denigrate, a traditional left-baiting tactic – but there’s a kernel of truth in what he’s saying about the way the ‘working class’ is defined. I’ve been to a fair few meetings about ‘the crisis of working class political representation’, which do tend to have a cart-before-horse approach that assumes that all we need to do is ‘build a party’ and a unified-in-interest ‘working class’ will swing behind it. But what we might call the working class itself needs to be identified and built-up.
So while what went on at Visteon and the oil refineries and Vestas was all very inspiring and justifiably militant, it didn’t really reflect a broader mood of class militancy or class consciousness. When bank call centre staff and the likes start walking out en masse, then we’ll be going somewhere.
I’m not sure the left fully knows what its audience, its constituency, is or should be. You can’t “build up the class” if you don’t know where it is.
Boilermaker,
I agree it is laughable but it is still a fact. Prescott was made deputy leader because he symbolised old labour and its ‘traditional’ constituents. Blair’s calculation was that by moving to the right he would still keep Labour’s core supporters but at the same time attract the middle classes. He kept some superficial token elements of old labour just as insurance. That is what McDonnell and Corbyn have been reduced to, window dressing. They have as much influence on the Tory party as they do on New Labour.
And your solution is “accept the observable fact and work out how to relate to it.”, which means nothing.
And you need to respond to my other point, “The call the left have to make is will election defeat and a stint in opposition move New Labour to the left and provide the likes of McDonnell with more clout within the party.”, which means the observable fact could be Labour losing the next election may help McDonnell and Corbyn gain some influence within the party.
I agree it is laughable but it is still a fact. Prescott was made deputy leader because he symbolised old labour and its ‘traditional’ constituents. Blair’s calculation was that by moving to the right he would still keep Labour’s core supporters but at the same time attract the middle classes. He kept some superficial token elements of old labour just as insurance. That is what McDonnell and Corbyn have been reduced to, window dressing. They have as much influence on the Tory party as they do on New Labour.
Yes about Prescott. Absolutely no comparison with the few left Labour MPs. His position was a high profile one both within the party and outside. The existence of left Labour MPs at the fringes of the PLP may persuade a few hundred far left political activists across the country to grudgingly vote Labour but the effect on New Labour’s electoral success is less than tiny.
And your solution is “accept the observable fact and work out how to relate to it.”, which means nothing.
It means something in relation to the nonsense above it, which you didn’t quote.
And you need to respond to my other point, “The call the left have to make is will election defeat and a stint in opposition move New Labour to the left and provide the likes of McDonnell with more clout within the party.”, which means the observable fact could be Labour losing the next election may help McDonnell and Corbyn gain some influence within the party.
I don’t really understand the point in inverted comments. Is it a question?
Boilermaker,
the bit in inverted commas was in my original response and you did not respond to it.
The fact is that New Labour losing may be better than them winning in the long run, it may give the likes of McDonnell more influence in the party. Your idea is to keep voting New Labour in the hope that somehow we will relate to its tiny left wing. You do not offer any idea how this relation will show itself and how that relation will change New Labour. Your position is no less laughable than those of the ‘Ultra left’.
We should tell the traditional voters that New Labour have achieved nothing in power, Thatcher devastated entire communities for her class, all New Labour have done is pave the way for Cameron’s assault on the Public sector. They have changed nothing that the Tories can’t undo. Their changes have been superficial.
Forget the Tories, the defeat of New Labour is the challenge facing the left.
Christ, I’m depressed…
Interesting article from Liam Mac Uaid:
http://liammacuaid.wordpress.com/2010/01/27/the-withering-of-labourism/
Dave, on more pressing matters, how much does a bespoke suit set you back at Sam’s? His photo aray does look rather impressive but not too many left wingers so I would suggest it would cost a few thousand HK$.
Nothing new perhaps for many here, but we need to look at the theories advanced by those such as Crouch – that we are now in a post-democratic environment, rapidly regressing back to the mid- and early- 19th century in terms of political realities, if not social realities.
Parties and movements will increasingly be funded by individual patrons, those without benefactors will resemble cults of some kind. For the Left, the reformist traditions will be less of an option, its almost unavoidable that these are set to fade; radical self-organisation as the only viable and yet difficult future, increasingly driven to militancy and even light degrees of subterfuge. Not to say that Parliament will be useless, but real depth to any renewal will be provided from outside of Parliament, as was always the case.
Big question is how hopeless things have to get, before egos are set aside, and people abandon grandeur and grandeur’s pretensions. Such mobilisation usually requires a catalyst, perhaps a Tory government would be enough, but I am not entirely sure of it, given a smooth makeover.
Yes your right we are and were too bloody stupid, to believe in the crap New labour put forward, to a Leader who was looking forward to filling his pocket with millions.
But I have for one learned a lesson after forty years of listening and believing labour new and old, your a lot of cheap skates who came to power changed the party and left the most needy without anyone.
I for one have decided after learning about Sharia court to see if I can join the BNP at least I know what that bunch is.
15 or so comments followed my question which I would have thought central to any Left-winger and yet no-one even attempts to answer it.
‘E10rifle’ shows exemplary taste and discernment in not liking the “cut of my jib” (such a deliciously retired Commodore/sec of the golf club expression) and if I stood where he stands politically I wouldn’t either. However, alone amongst you Lefties he shows his intelligence in understanding that the electorate has moved on and any political party needs to define who it means to represent. Empty and redundent expressions like “the working class” makes you all sound positively antideluvian. Apart from anything else, many of those whose parents and/or grandparents might have been legitimately ‘working class’ would not wish to be associated with it themselves today, they have moved on. Have you?
Let me leave you with one more question: how many of you here go home with blisters on your hands from your daily work?
Personally, if the stories are to be believed, in Hong Kong I would spend my time getting made a couple of well cut suits.
McDonnell?
Is this the same McDonnell who has waxed so eloquently in the past about the selfless courage of the bloodstained psychopaths of the “wrap-the-green-flag-round-me” IRA?
The same IRA that planted the Birmingham bombs?
The IRA that is to this day behind the kneecapping-’n-Semtex party led by Brownie the Barman and the Butcher Boy of Derry?
Or someone else entirely?
I have industrial white finger will that do, I only have blister now from my wheelchair, but yes I had blisters often from a pickaxe’s, or jackhammers, or moving wheel barrows.
I use to piss on my hands to stop the blisters busting, still does not help me understand new labour.
All too true. Until the sectarian left sheds it’s authoritarian pretensions it will get nowhere.
The Marxist dynamic of opportunistic Party building, respectable protest, and calling on the ‘trade union’ leadership is like a a bad joke – and it gets worse with repetition. British workers have never fallen for it, and never will. Equally fatuous is the notion of Labour as some kind of ‘deformed workers’ Party,’ and calls to support it, along while building a ‘fighting socialist alternative.’
The truth is that the Leninist left ran out of steam decades ago. What’s left are a series of squabbling, quasi-religous cults, with virtually no influence on anybody who actually works for a living, though I’m sure they’re all well represented at the SOAS student’s union.
Still, at least the abject failure of Respect’s confessional project gives us something to look forward to!
For what it’s worth, I tend to agree wit ‘whoever’. I remember that the very first comment I posted here, all those moons ago when I was still young, was that we appeared to be rerunning the Industrial Revolution. On a purely impressionistic take, the types of crimes appearing in the newspapers (where there are any papers left!)reminded me very much of the breakdown in social disorder of the early nineteenth century. We all know that it was the building of the British Empire that got us out of that particular hole, but there is no space for imperialist expansion of that ilk in today’s world. I have remarked before that my hope is pinned on China, not because I am a Maoist but because they appear to have taken over as ‘workshop of the world’, although I don’t know how true that really is. At the time of the fall of the Berlin Wall, a pundit on the radio said that it signified the death of socialism, as socialism is a European aberration. I think that one can’t ignore the contribution that Europe’s intellectual history has made to concepts of political democracy, but unfortunately, many people want to do so.
As for Jeremy Corbyn, I would be surprised if many traditional working class people are left in Islington. His vote relies very heavily on the Irish and probably immigrant groups as well nowadays.
The problem for Labour is that people gave their allegience to it for concrete reasons such as housing and jobs and trade unionism. As they can no longer deliver upon such goods and are virtually indistinguishable to the Tories or Lib Dems, their vote has evaporated. It’s all become like a big votegrabbing supermarket. You have to decide who to vote for based upon economic calculations.
Duff,
The reason that no one has responded is:
a)We have heard it all before and responded to you in the past.
b)You are clearly ignorant of the subject you are criticising, i.e. Marxism.
c)You attempt to fill this ignorance by inventing categories and views onto Marxism, which are so cretinous as to be insulting.
d)You have a habit of building up straw men which forces us to waste time knocking these straw men back down. This is very tiresome and time consuming.
e)Anyone who is to the left of Kelvin Mackenzie needs to grow up or is a student in your warped universe. (Are you related to modernity?).
f)In light of D we already know your response to any points we make.
As a tip try reading some actual Marxists who have written volumes on the very questions you raise. Then come back with some points we can bother replying to.
We actually had a debate about this very subject on this site not so very long ago (maybe your age is affecting your memory).
Also as an aside the working class do still exist it may pain you to know and are still the overwhelming majority. Take a look around your room, how do you think all the objects came into being, the commodity fairy?
SueR,
“a pundit on the radio said that it signified the death of socialism, as socialism is a European aberration.”
Yes but he was a fuckwit very much in the David Duff mould. It is like saying Mathematics was an Asian abberation, i.e. an idea formed on one continet cannot possibly ever move beyond those borders. Do me a favour.
The fact is that New Labour losing may be better than them winning in the long run, it may give the likes of McDonnell more influence in the party. Your idea is to keep voting New Labour in the hope that somehow we will relate to its tiny left wing. You do not offer any idea how this relation will show itself and how that relation will change New Labour. Your position is no less laughable than those of the ‘Ultra left’.
But you and other members of parties to the left of Labour have absolutely no effect on whether New Labour wins or loses the election. My idea is that millions of people will vote Labour in May, whether or not I or you or anyone else tells them to.
If you do have any illusions that there may be more opportunities for the Labour left after an election defeat then surely it therefore follows that socialists should exploit those opportunities by being in the party? Or do you just cheer on McDonnell from the sidelines?
We should tell the traditional voters that New Labour have achieved nothing in power, Thatcher devastated entire communities for her class, all New Labour have done is pave the way for Cameron’s assault on the Public sector. They have changed nothing that the Tories can’t undo. Their changes have been superficial.
Tell ‘the traditional voters’ whatever you like. They aren’t listening to you.
David Duff – I answered your question, rather well I thought. No-one else wanted to waste time on your shit. At no point are blisters on hands mentioned in the Communist manifesto, last time I read.
So, like I said, fuck off.
Boilermaker,
I am assuming we are both socialists who wish to see the demise of New labour. If we are not then this discussion has been a waste of time.
“My idea is that millions of people will vote Labour in May, whether or not I or you or anyone else tells them to.”
That is not an idea just a fact and here is another fact, millions will vote for the Tories.
“If you do have any illusions that there may be more opportunities for the Labour left after an election defeat then surely it therefore follows that socialists should exploit those opportunities by being in the party? Or do you just cheer on McDonnell from the sidelines?”
But you have said there are too few on the left to make any difference, so what would be the point?
Better that socialism has a distinct voice and doesn’t get drowned in New Labourism, I say. I would agree that more McDonnells and Corbyns would be welcome but New Labour seem to be killing them off gradually.
Frankly I don’t know whether the best tactic to kill New Labour would be to ditch all socialist parties and work within it or promote our ideas outside it. The point is neither do you.
All I do know is New Labour have shifted the political centre ground way to the right.
“Tell ‘the traditional voters’ whatever you like. They aren’t listening to you.”
Maybe, maybe not but they are disaffected and looking for answers outside New Labour. Things change you know.
One of the problems here is that you are using New Labour and Labour interchangeably. If you think they are now totally indivisible and inseparable then fair enough, but be consistent.
That is not an idea just a fact and here is another fact, millions will vote for the Tories.
Yes, I used the wrong word, was typing in a hurry. Of course it’s a fact. Millions will also vote for the Tories – if you think there are Tory MPs, councillors, affiliates and activists who “are socialists who wish to see the demise of New labour” then you might as well join the Tory Party and support them. But there aren’t, so the comparison fails. There are in Labour.
But you have said there are too few on the left to make any difference, so what would be the point?
Better that socialism has a distinct voice and doesn’t get drowned in New Labourism, I say. I would agree that more McDonnells and Corbyns would be welcome but New Labour seem to be killing them off gradually.
I said there are too few on the left to alter the outcome of a general election by calling for votes for Labour, Respect, TUSC or whoever. I did definitely NOT say that there are too few on the left to make any difference within the Labour Party. Anyone who is still active within the Party could tell you that with about a dozen left or leftish activists in a constituency you could select yourself a left candidate for a general election. And if, as you say, the Tory general election victory will make the landscape better for McDonnell et al, then surely round about now is the right time to get involved in that.
Frankly I don’t know whether the best tactic to kill New Labour would be to ditch all socialist parties and work within it or promote our ideas outside it. The point is neither do you.
All I do know is New Labour have shifted the political centre ground way to the right.
On your last point there can be little argument. On the previous point, nobody on here knows for sure either way, but I reckon even a 1% chance of winning power nationally for socialist or even social democratic policies through the Labour Party is better than the 0% chance of ever achieving it outside the Labour Party.
Maybe, maybe not but they are disaffected and looking for answers outside New Labour. Things change you know.
Indeed they do. And, as Dave alluded in the O/P, the past thirteen years have been the most fertile ground imaginable for creating a left alternative to Labour: hated Tories, rightward shifting and disconnected Labour Party, increasingly unpopular leaders and finally a capitalist crisis. I doubt there will ever in my lifetime be a better opportunity for the non-Labour left to build an alternative.
And what has happened at the end? Sod all.
Your arguments are becoming more persuasive but how the hell would I sleep at night lending support to that lot of war mongering bastards.
I find whiskey helps.
Johnno: Where has there been a successful socialist revolution outside of Europe? You could answer China, but I would point out that there is a lack of political democracy in that society. (We had this discussion the other day.). Of-course, the human race is the human race, and solutions to life’s problems are the same all over the world, but unfortunaely, the ‘subjective’ factor is not the same all over the world. Yes, leaderships talk socialist when then want to kick out the colonialists or get money off the Soviet Union, but once they come to power, and once the SU collapsed, suddenly, no-one is a socialist (except for Cuba).
I am left-wing but find left-wing blogs like this very depressing. First we have our host celebrating his recent success despite a past supporting the Provisional IRA and no doubt all the other rag-bag of causes that stuck limpet like to socialism and had nothing to do with ordinary people’s economic interests, such that you dreaded going to meetings.And eventually stopped.
Then there is no concept of who or what the enemy is ,as for instance keeps the Tories going.
I should say high house prices are the greatest enemy for young working people,leaving them de facto homeless or depriving them of the spending power that should employ their fellow workers.But although the Labour Party started out as a land tax party fully aware of the problems caused by property,the desirability of high house prices is viewed as positively on the left as it is on the right. And the centre.
The rallying cry should be high wages: low rents and mortgage repayments.But the old lefties happy in their own homes smoking dope ,another daft New Left obsession, will stay by their hearthsides hoping that house prices go up.Just like their Conservative neighbours “Much misunderstood really.All they want is a tax-free capital gain in an inflating asset.Just like we do.”
the desirability of high house prices is viewed as positively on the left as it is on the right
What the fuck are you on about?
I missed have missed the UNITE THE WORKING CLASS TO DRIVE HOUSE PRICES UP headlines in Socialist Worker, the Morning Star and Tribune.
This is seriously baffling shit. Are you basing it on some old hippy you know and extrapolating that to the rest of us?
SueR
“Where has there been a successful socialist revolution outside of Europe?”
Show me the one within Europe and I’ll go and live there. But the idea that socialism was some sort of European aberration that no one else would accept is absurd.
DBC Reed,
“the desirability of high house prices is viewed as positively on the left as it is on the right.”
I think many left wing economists (and some centre and right ones) have pointed out that lower house prices are in fact an advantage to those wanting to move house.
The calculation (simplified as is the want in economics) goes something like this:
Imagine your house was worth £50k and the house you want to move to was worth £80k. Then imagine if house prices rose by 100%, so your house is now worth £100k and the house you want to live in is worth £160k.
This means you have to fork out £60k to move to your desired house.
Then imagine if house prices rose by 10%, so your house is worth £55k and the house you want to move to is worth £88k.
This means you have to fork out £33k.
This means you save £27k with the lower house price rise.
Those owning many properties are most advantaged by this situation, which is why rising house prices are a god send for them and they have a vested interest in keeping prices rising. This also explains why a great deal of surplus value has been invested in property in recent times but the recent crisis shows the danger of this ‘investment’ pattern.
Our attempts to form a new left party or pull together a left wing alliance has been piss poor over the past 14 or so years. Perhaps it will take the complete destruction of the Labour party at the general election to encourage the left TU’s to jump and fund a new party of Labour. We also face real problems with FPTP elections in most of Britain unlike in Germany for example. Scotland where they have elements of PR have made the best progress with the SSP before its implosion!.The left outside the Labour, at present just does not have the social weight, leadership, unity etc to pull it off.
The SLP gaining around 2,000 members at its height and perhaps slighly more in the SA. Over 4000 have signed the CNWP open letter. However many of us are still trying and have not given up. I hope the TUSC is able keep campaigning after the election and put down some roots in local communities and grow into a new left party.
There are however some interesting local developments which people may not have picked up on. Across the country, a number of progressive anti cuts, anti privatisation campaigns have registered as local political parties and intend to stand candidates in the local elections -some may well also consider putting up parl. candidates. We had over 30 people turn up to our Lewisham People before Profit meeting tonight, on a cold wet evening to launch our borough campaign. I think these developments may hold the seeds for some progress in the coming years.
@ boilermaker (why the pseudonym and all the abuse? More working class? You have to laugh)
More to the point where are the left headlines saying “Unite the working class to drive down house prices?” They are very high and going up already had n’t you noticed? Leftie politicians are shit scared of being associated with anything that brings down house prices,I know because I had to lobby MP’s to join an APPG on Land Value Tax.The Labour woman was really violent in her refusal even to attend a meeting:she said she did n’t want her mother’s property going down in value and to lose votes.
Unite the working class to keep house prices steady and not to go up anymore ever by freezing residential land values might work and is not far off the original proposal by John Stuart Mill.As a proponent of LVT (which was in all the Labour Party manifestos before WW2), I have always encontered more mindless hostility,like yours, from the Left than the Right.
Those on the far left know they do not have a hope of being elected. They have a choice support labour or campaign for the tories. They have not learned anything from British history. The British people do not want dictatorships.
my brother said to me the other day why would he vote for people who might split after the election. I think that spew would be best to stick to the name socialist alternative at least people in coventry will know who they are voting for. SWP should have kept left alternative going but just not stood against against respect or soc alternative. Im not a respect activist but thought salma yaquob was in with a am i mistaken. james?
‘Arthur Seaton’ (or should that be Anthony Shenton of Media Lens, and if so, is it shyness or deception or autism that makes you sign your comments in different names in different places?) tells me that he has answered the question I asked: “What is the working class?” He goes further and claims that he answered it “rather well“. Here is his answer:
“Owning a house does not stop you from being working-class”
Oh, I forgot, he also told me to “fuck off“.
Now I have another question: is this what passes for rigorous thinking in Marxist circles? If it is, and if Mr. Shenton/Seaton (delete as necessary) represents the very highest intelligence that the Left can offer I can only paraphrase that great political philosopher Pte. Fraser, ‘you’re all doomed!‘
The failure of the Left comes down to one main handicap: money. New Labour didn’t just ditch Clause 4 and embrace capitalism, it got itself expensive PR which brushed up its appearance and how it sounded. The working class were then, in effect, promised celebs, plasma screens and XBoxes as a bribe for Labour abandoning its ideological base.
C21 multi-platform media disseminate information far better than brow-beating conferences and seminars at Conway Hall on ‘where now for the working class’; and the message is ‘buy, buy, buy’. Like it or not, the cult of personality and smooth (often kneejerk) responses to soundbite news have rendered politics the slave to presentation; while, as ever, the left is mired in ideological warring, dry-as-dust politicising and hackneyed sloganeering.
Ideologically unsound it may be, but we can’t beat the machine until we know how it works; we have to USE the machine to do that. And that may mean having a poster boy/girl or two who can put the message across more, er, attractively than we’ve managed heretofore.
@ boilermaker (why the pseudonym and all the abuse? More working class? You have to laugh)
More to the point where are the left headlines saying “Unite the working class to drive down house prices?” They are very high and going up already had n’t you noticed? Leftie politicians are shit scared of being associated with anything that brings down house prices,I know because I had to lobby MP’s to join an APPG on Land Value Tax.The Labour woman was really violent in her refusal even to attend a meeting:she said she did n’t want her mother’s property going down in value and to lose votes.
Unite the working class to keep house prices steady and not to go up anymore ever by freezing residential land values might work and is not far off the original proposal by John Stuart Mill.As a proponent of LVT (which was in all the Labour Party manifestos before WW2), I have always encontered more mindless hostility,like yours, from the Left than the Right.
Pseudonym? Because I’m on here in work time, and some of my opinions are not necessarily held by organisations I’m involved in, so I’d rather not give anyone extra reasons for firing or expelling me from anything.
I don’t notice any abuse in my last posting. There was some swearing, due to exasperation, but not abuse.
So in summary: you base your nonsensical “the desirability of high house prices is viewed as positively on the left as it is on the right” on one conversation with one unnamed Labour MP?
Is that all you’ve got?
@boilermaker (not really a boiler maker/works at a computer)
Why don’t you discuss the issues rather than losing it at the drop of a hat?
One way the left can re-engage with ordinary people on everday economic issues is by calling for a house price freeze ,enforced by a stiff land value tax which would force developers to build on the 250,000 building sites with planning permission that they have in land banks.
This is a class and equality issue,the political parties having built up a huge class of homeowners they can rely on to vote for them as long as they keep house prices rising.That includes Labour .All the media see house price rises as positive.It is engrained in our culture (not just one MP) and entirely wrong.The Co-op
party has come out in favour of LVT as has the Green Party for some time now.Why is the Left so averse to a policy that when its leaders really were boilermakers was their highest priority?
Yes well done, you worked out that I’m not actually typing this while bashing rivets.
I don’t really disagree with any of those policies you’ve outlined. Not sure where you got that idea, other than perhaps some sort of weird paranoia.
And I still don’t understand where you got the idea that “the desirability of high house prices is viewed as positively on the left as it is on the right”, other than by talking to one Labour MP. You haven’t provided any examples of lefties being in favour of high house prices. None at all.
David D, I hope you didn’t take my comment to mean that I don’t think class matters, or exists, anymore – because that’s the opposite of what I think. Merely that the working-class constituency the left needs to engage with – and, ultimately, come from – is in different places from where it once was. And the Left needs to acknowledge that.
David Duff.
I have no idea, or interest, who Anthony Shenton is.
I feel you should understand that under the rules of debate you are only allowed to effect a haughty, condescending tone AFTER you have first said something vaguely interesting, or intelligent, or non teeth-achingly thick, obtuse and gittish. This is something which you have singularly failed to do in anything you have ever written old boy.
Just as there’s no point in “engaging” with someone who has just biroed “Twat” over your front door, there is no point “debating” the socialist definitions of class with a streak of dank piss like yourself.
That’s why its only me who’ll talk to you here, and the only response you will get, or deserve, will be “Fuck off”. And indeed you won’t even get that any more.