chilango
Ha! Ha! Armageddon
As I said the GP is not, and should not be the vehicle for grassroots organising in the workplace. there are other more suitable vehicles for this. The GP merely has to encourage its members and supporters to jion these.
Another Green councillor
- Thread starter pingupete
- Start date
As I said the GP is not, and should not be the vehicle for grassroots organising in the workplace. there are other more suitable vehicles for this. The GP merely has to encourage its members and supporters to jion these.
chilango
Ha! Ha! Armageddon
What do you mean?
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
That is not true at all - they left because
a) after his democratic selection as the SA by-election candidate Terry had started (not unreasonably!) to campaign, whilst the SWP were "offering" the selection to Valerie Wise instead
b) because when they (again) not unreasonably considered standing for the same parliamentary seat at the next general election - ie. maintaining and building on the support they had built in the community - the SWP told them in no uncertain terms that the SWP would be encouraging everyone in Lancashire to be campaigning in Blackburn instead - because they deemed it more important to have a go at Jack Straw. Not only that, but they also insisted on having a veto on all SA material if Terry did stand, and that no money would be made available.
Terry told them to fuck off - and his agent was already by that stage supporting the SP and briefly joined. Terry was always old Labour, nothing more and never claimed to be - but the SP were arguing that they ought to be able to retain their identities as Labour Independents as part of a federal Socialist Aliliance - not be at the beck and call of the SWP the whole time. When the SWP insisted that a federal SA was not what they wanted, the Cartwrights decided they would keep their original tag instead, and were supported in this by the SP.
The SWP forced them out, monopolised control of the SA before closing the whole thing down since all but a few sects and independents had left anyway.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
I don't agree with your account, but it's not the central point.
The point is that they are independent councillors who are on the left. They were in the Socialist Alliance and they chose to leave, but that wasn't because they stopped being socialists or something. Had the SP and SWP been able to work together in the SA things might have been different, but for entirely different reasons they were not.
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
not sure what there is to disagree with - your "six of one, half a dozen of the other" gloss doesn't wash. The SWP made it impossible for any groups of ( however loosely or otherwise) organised lefts to be in the SA without subordinating all their work to themselves. Being slow learners, it took your ISG mates rather longer to discover this!
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
I think the history of Respect over the last twelve months, and the fact that some people in Respect stood up to the SWP when it mattered, indicates that it was perfectly possible not to be subordinated to the SWP while in alliance with them.
It was the SP's and other people's choice to leave the SA. No-one drove them out. Nor were the SWP driven out of Respect, they chose to withdraw.
Both the SP and the SWP suffer from the same control-freakery and both behave like babies throwing their rattles out of the pram when they don't get their own way. Real unity requires an element of compromise, but also recognising what issues are fundamental.
But I was more disagreeing with your chronology and detail of the events particularly around the selection of the candidate and campaign for the by-election, which I feel are urban myth rather than what actually happened. Certainly if a senior Labour figure in a by-election selection was seriously considering resigning from the party and fighting it as an independent on socialist policies, the Socialist Alliance would have had to have taken such an opportunity seriously. That the same issue also arose a few months later in St Helens North, where the SA sensibly responded to the opportunity also confirms this. On this issue the SWP were not in the wrong in my view, whereas the SP over-reacted and created an urban myth about alleged SWP monolithic control which was far from the case.
barney_pig
Po-cha-na-quar-hip
FG, that simply will not wash.
Firstly, I, and many others, never chose to walk away from the SA, the SWP packed out the meeting and closed it down, and never repaid a penny of the money owed.
The idea that you were in an unsubordinate alliance with the swp within REESpect is nonsense. As soon as Galloway was no longer willing to continue to maintain the balance of power with the swp inside respect, the swp flounced and left the rest of respect in a huff. You and your comrades in the ISG went from a supine position within the SWP dominated SA into a supine position in a SWP dominated respect and is now in a supine position inside a Galloway dominated Respact renewal.
the current rampant rush into the arms of Stalinism of the 'respect left' as represented by the SU blog leaves your orthodox trotskyists of the ISG looking increasingly isolated, how long can you yourselves hold out before galloway decides he no longer needs such inconvenient supporters of 'dead russians'
Firstly, I, and many others, never chose to walk away from the SA, the SWP packed out the meeting and closed it down, and never repaid a penny of the money owed.
The idea that you were in an unsubordinate alliance with the swp within REESpect is nonsense. As soon as Galloway was no longer willing to continue to maintain the balance of power with the swp inside respect, the swp flounced and left the rest of respect in a huff. You and your comrades in the ISG went from a supine position within the SWP dominated SA into a supine position in a SWP dominated respect and is now in a supine position inside a Galloway dominated Respact renewal.
the current rampant rush into the arms of Stalinism of the 'respect left' as represented by the SU blog leaves your orthodox trotskyists of the ISG looking increasingly isolated, how long can you yourselves hold out before galloway decides he no longer needs such inconvenient supporters of 'dead russians'
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
The majority of the SA wanted a new alliance - that's called democracy. When the ISG and others disagreed with the SWP (and Galloway) in Respect, they fought within the organistion, put resolutions to the NC (eg on Big Brother and on the support for the Racial Hatred bill), and set up a platform to campaign to change the line, some 2 years before the eventual split with the SWP occured.
On all occasions there was a balance between being prepared to fight for your positions and recognising the need for Left Unity.
I am more than happy to work with stalinists, trotskyists, and social democrats for that matter, even anarchists/libertarians, in a left organisation that takes the right line on all the major divisions in society, such as opposition to imperialist war and fighting privatisation of public services. In fact I go further and say it is a key task for the left at present to build such a movement. It is a shame that more people on the revolutionary left do not agree with that, but that is part of the seemingly perennial sectarianism of the british far left. The current Respect represents "work in progress" and is not the finished product, but is the best hope we have of building a left movement.
Udo Erasmus
Well-Known Member
I supported the launch of Respect at the time, because once the Socialist Party left the Socialist Alliance (and a year later the Welsh Socialist Alliance), the SA was pretty much dead in the water, there was also a problem in the rump SA that some elements were totally hostile to any attempt to relate to Muslims politicised over the Iraq War.
Unfortunately Respect was constructed in a very bad way and programmatically and democratically was a step back from the Socialist Alliance into populism and elements of a cross-class alliance. To be frank, the opportunism of the SWP blew up in their faces.
I would say that the death of the Socialist Alliance arose from an ego-clash between the two biggest organisations in it - SWP and SP.
It's ashame because if the two organisations had been able to genuinely work together rather than seeing each other as rivals, a very dynamic left wing organisation might have emerged.
It was the best hope of the Left.
Unfortunately Respect was constructed in a very bad way and programmatically and democratically was a step back from the Socialist Alliance into populism and elements of a cross-class alliance. To be frank, the opportunism of the SWP blew up in their faces.
I would say that the death of the Socialist Alliance arose from an ego-clash between the two biggest organisations in it - SWP and SP.
It's ashame because if the two organisations had been able to genuinely work together rather than seeing each other as rivals, a very dynamic left wing organisation might have emerged.
It was the best hope of the Left.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
No disagreement with you there Udo.
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
Urban myth? I can tell you where messrs Lavalette and Wise were at the time (a certain supermarket cafe on the docks!) - You seem to be supporting the idea that after agreeing to the democratic nomination of one candidate (a former Labour mayor and "senior figure") you would have happy for the self appointed chair of the local SA to unilaterally "offer" the same candidacy to someone else if they thought fit
. The only reason Terry wasn't screwed over was that Val wasn't persuaded to stand. Terry knew that, that's why he wanted nothing to do with the SWP - and since they 'ran' the SA that forced them out.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Urban myth? I can tell you where messrs Lavalette and Wise were at the time (a certain supermarket cafe on the docks!) - You seem to be supporting the idea that after agreeing to the democratic nomination of one candidate (a former Labour mayor and "senior figure") you would have happy for the self appointed chair of the local SA to unilaterally "offer" the same candidacy to someone else if they thought fit
The only reason Terry wasn't screwed over was that Val wasn't persuaded to stand. Terry knew that, that's why he wanted nothing to do with the SWP - and since they 'ran' the SA that forced them out.
You are a lying toerag. I know what was said at the time, and what you are saying is a crock of shit.
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
unbelievable - just shows that beneath the "reasonable" calls for unity lies the pure sectarian bile.
Anyway, what counts is not what I think or FG thinks but what the Labour Independents think. And the fact that their agent and former group colleague briefly joined the SP suggests they knew where they thought the problems lay
.
Anyway, what counts is not what I think or FG thinks but what the Labour Independents think. And the fact that their agent and former group colleague briefly joined the SP suggests they knew where they thought the problems lay
.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Nothing sectarian about it - it was an entirely personal attack for telling out and out lies, something I don't like.
And actually far from being sectarian here, I am entirely defending the role of the SWP and its members on this issue; I think they behaved honourably and correctly, and one of the reason I am so angry with them is that mistakes they made later - in their relationship with the rest of Respect last year - were entirely out of line with their behaviour at that time and have sullied their name and reputation irretrievably.
But also if the SP were so correct, what has happened to the one-time SP trophy councillor, since his brief period of flirtation? By the way, which trade union was he in when he was a member of the SP?
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
I'm happy if you want to set the record straight - Wise and Lavalette didn't meet? Lavelette didn't discuss the possibility of 'standing down' the SA candidate in place of Wise, or ideally having Wise stand on an SA ticket?
On the SP councillor - you presumably know that their seat allocation was gerrymandered down from 3 to 2, leading him to stand in another ward at quite short notice. He did respectably, getting 20% of the vote. Then felt he needed to prioritise his family and role as Chair?of school governors. As for the Union - I'm not sure. Maybe he was in the POA.
On the SP councillor - you presumably know that their seat allocation was gerrymandered down from 3 to 2, leading him to stand in another ward at quite short notice. He did respectably, getting 20% of the vote. Then felt he needed to prioritise his family and role as Chair?of school governors. As for the Union - I'm not sure. Maybe he was in the POA.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Lol! I'm not prepared to go into personal details about people on a website, who met who, when, where and what was said etc, just take it from me that I know what happened, but you really are clueless and your version is based on half-truths and some lies that have been spread maliciously.
And as for thinking socialism is incompatible with having families, jobs and voluntary work .... words fail me!
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
so you can't or won't substantiate your claim I'm a liar. I'm prepared to be corrected but otherwise see no reason to withdraw. The whole point is that the discussions weren't held openly, so everything was done behind the back not just of SA activists but also the candidate!
And who said PM has given up socialism? He has taken time out of far left organising and electoral politics (a rather different thing - not that I expect a sad left anorak to undesrand). Frankly if it involves having to deal with poisonous little cretins like yourself who can blame him?
And who said PM has given up socialism? He has taken time out of far left organising and electoral politics (a rather different thing - not that I expect a sad left anorak to undesrand). Frankly if it involves having to deal with poisonous little cretins like yourself who can blame him?
Hmm, so hostile towards trade unions that the woman who was Chair of the Oxford Trades Council joined the IWCA?
Most of the IWCA people I know are involved in their trade union, as workplace reps/shop stewards etc. Just because the IWCA does not believe unions are the be-all and end-all of political organisation, does not mean IWCA members are not also union members and involved in their workplaces.
BTW, I also just noticed some stuff you posted a while ago about the IWCA backing the Oxford Academy. Complete bollocks.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Because of the IWCA's hostility to unions?
Smear job bollocks again.
Smear job bollocks again.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Most of the discussions were with paid-up members of the Labour Party so it could not be "open" in the sense you suggested. Lavalette made clear to Labour Party members that only the members of the Socialist Alliance could decide their approach to elections, and in that he was absolutely right to do so.
As for the other matter, you obviously have no idea of the skeletons some people have in their closets, for example as activists in David Owen's SDP, as officers of the Labour Party, as smearers in the local press of socialists, in refusing to joining unions at work, and in their personal life and relationship with members of their families.
She stood down as President of the Trades Council for various reasons. I do think she was shocked by the outright hostility of trade union activists towards the IWCA though, especially after Stuart Craft's speech which they really didn't seem to understand at all. You'll also know that various members of the Trades Council were desperate to have her back as she was the most active person who'd been involved in the Trades Council for years. It should also be noted that said person is currently involved in trying to get union recognition in her workplace.
Nothing further to say on the Academy bollocks then?
Nothing further to say on the Academy bollocks then?
Nigel
For A Degenerates' Workers State
I'm not smearing anyone.
They themselves point out their position in their FAQ that they consider Trade Union and Labour Movement to be basically irrelevent except for minor economic gains for individual members, socialism and the left out dated and out moded.
Similar threads
