BBC documentary: SWP has 7,000 members

[treelover]

You reckon they are going to get that many, what % of the vote would that be?

Contrast that with the "Upturn" of the 90's through to now - a truly awful time to be a radical or progressive of any sort with society rapidly moving to the extreme Right (proved by the 200,000 or so votes in London alone that the BNP are gonna get in two weeks time)

 

[Fisher_Gate]

You reckon they are going to get that many, what % of the vote would that be?

Around the 10% mark. They got 90,000 last time - 4.7%. I don't believe they'll get 200,000 for a minute, though there is a serious danger they could break the 5% level and get well over 100,000.

 

[Udo Erasmus]

SP candidates standing nationally inc GLA

Area Ward/Constituency Candidate
GLA elections Lewisham and Greenwich Cllr. Chris Flood
Manchester Baguley ward Lynn Worthington
Sefton Netherton and Orrell ward Peter Glover
City of Lincoln Carholme ward Nicholas Parker
Cardiff Adamsdown ward James Mapstone
Cardiff Canton ward Lianne Francis
Cardiff Pentwyn ward Stephen Williams
Swansea Castle ward Alec Thraves
Swansea Castle ward Sarah Mayo
Nuneaton / Bedworth Camp Hill ward Peter Bradley
Coventry St Michael's ward Cllr. Dave Nellist
Coventry Sherbourne ward Jason Toynbee
Coventry Whoberley ward Jim Donnolly
Stoke on Trent Burslem South ward Jane Mellalieu
Sheffield Graves Park ward Alan Munro
Wakefield Wakefield East ward Mick Griffiths
Huddersfield Crosland Moor and Netherton ward Ian Slattery (onbehalf of Huddersfield Save Our NHS)

That list is actually incorrect - Dave Bartlett is standing in Adamsdown, Cardiff not James Mapstone.and I don't think that Sarah Mayo is standing in Castle Ward, Swansea.

 

[Udo Erasmus]

Hey FisherGate, I was reading the website of Respect Renewal Councillor Hanif Abdul Muhit and it has a picture of him, Galloway and other worthies alongside the headline as the top story:

EAST LONDON BUSINESS LEADERS BACK RESPECT

See: http://www.abdulmuhit.co.uk/

Now I'm sure Hanif is a decent guy, and broadly left wing, but do you not think that what the SWP said about Galloway and your lot is . . . ermm . . . true?!

Do you not find this lack of political clarity a little problematic? Not the best way to build a new, mass workers party?

I mean imagine if Glasgow SSP had on their website: "GLASGOW BUSINESS LEADERS BACK SOCIALISTS" - would you not find that a little odd?

The problem was this: It's understandable that a new party will attract people who are fighting back but maybe a little politically naive on some things, but the trouble was that this kind of stuff had started to happen way too often. The problem was that this lack of political clarity is encouraged and pandered to by leading figures in Respect Renewal who place gaining power and votes above principles. The trouble is the lesson of Italy with Berlusconi back in power and Rifondazione all over the place shows that such politics cannot be the basis in the longterm for building an alternative.

 

[PaulOK]

You reckon they are going to get that many, what % of the vote would that be?

London has an electorate of 5.3 million - say half will vote on May 1st, 200,000 BNP votes would be 7.5%. The old NF got 100,000 in the 1977 GLA elections.

I reckon the fascists today could double that considering the hue and cry of immigration recently with the awful BBC's 'White' Season and Channel 4's Dispatches stirring things up.

 

[treelover]

bit late for that!

They don't accept people who fill in the online membership forms because they don't want weirdos to join it.

 

[Das Uberdog]

Pot, kettle, black...

 

[Groucho]

bit late for that!

I'll say! I wouldn't join any party (couldn't) that would discriminate against weirdos.

 

[Groucho]

If no candidate has 50% of first preferences, second preference and first preference votes are added together for the top two candidates.

So the SWP support Livingstone's reelection for Mayor.

It's very much, a secondary issue which order you put candidates in.

2nd pref is, as u say, to keep Boris out by getting Livingstone in back in.

I dare say there will be some SWP members who will vote green as 2nd pref though.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

Hey FisherGate, I was reading the website of Respect Renewal Councillor Hanif Abdul Muhit and it has a picture of him, Galloway and other worthies alongside the headline as the top story:

EAST LONDON BUSINESS LEADERS BACK RESPECT

See: http://www.abdulmuhit.co.uk/

Now I'm sure Hanif is a decent guy, and broadly left wing, but do you not think that what the SWP said about Galloway and your lot is . . . ermm . . . true?!

Do you not find this lack of political clarity a little problematic? Not the best way to build a new, mass workers party?

I mean imagine if Glasgow SSP had on their website: "GLASGOW BUSINESS LEADERS BACK SOCIALISTS" - would you not find that a little odd?

The problem was this: It's understandable that a new party will attract people who are fighting back but maybe a little politically naive on some things, but the trouble was that this kind of stuff had started to happen way too often. The problem was that this lack of political clarity is encouraged and pandered to by leading figures in Respect Renewal who place gaining power and votes above principles. The trouble is the lesson of Italy with Berlusconi back in power and Rifondazione all over the place shows that such politics cannot be the basis in the longterm for building an alternative.

Have you actually noticed that Left List are actually standing candidates who are themselves "Business men"?

One, Kumar Murshid, in particular, who owns and runs a rather posh restaurant in up-market Covent Garden, is on the Left List slate for the GLA.

I haven't seen you complain about that, so your double standards are becoming breathtaking.

I don't have a problem with asian business people, particularly those from small businesses, supporting left campaigns - and neither does the SWP, whose coat pocket you are moving ever-rapidly into.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

For SWP? Lindsey German

Similarly, the Socialist Party advocate a first preference vote for German.

 

[Geoff Collier]

Have you actually noticed that Left List are actually standing candidates who are themselves "Business men"?

One, Kumar Murshid, in particular, who owns and runs a rather posh restaurant in up-market Covent Garden, is on the Left List slate for the GLA.

I haven't seen you complain about that, so your double standards are becoming breathtaking.

I don't have a problem with asian business people, particularly those from small businesses, supporting left campaigns - and neither does the SWP, whose coat pocket you are moving ever-rapidly into.

Surely the point is that Respect (LL) and this candidate don't promote a campaign as being by and for businessmen. Nor, I'd guess does Steve Hall, the Respect Renewal candidate in Wigan for that matter. Despite being a small businessman he's also a trot of some sort (lambertist?). So he probably doesn't campaign in the same way as they appear to do in East London.

 

[chilango]

The Green Party voted down a resolution to their 2001 conference linking British foreign policy to the 9.11 attacks, and this is the crap they were coming out with about pulling the troops out of Iraq:

"Respect's position is that troops should immediately be withdrawn and Iraq left to its fate. Fitz-Gibbon comments: "This is a disgraceful, callous attitude because we know Iraq would dissolve into civil war."

From press release: http://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/1457

Here are some recent quotes from a leading Green:

"Chris Rose, the party’s national election agent, who points out that ‘many Green Party members wouldn’t like to describe themselves as left. If we positioned ourselves as explicitly left it would be dangerous, with no guarantee of success. We need to keep our reputation on the environment.’"

"London Assembly member Darren Johnson, who is not on the left of the party, takes a different view: ‘I’m not a socialist but I feel comfortable about being on the progressive left. Not the far left – we never will be. But we’re the serious party of the left and a potential power broker working with centre left parties, like the SNP in Scotland and Labour in some areas.’" Does this not remind you of the kind of stuff New Labour was coming out with in '97?

Chris Rose again on the Green Party/Tory Coalition in Leeds:

" ‘We say none of the mainstream parties are worth anything. So, if the situation demands it, it doesn’t really matter which one we work with, just what the outcome is. We can’t sit on the sidelines forever.’ "

http://www.redpepper.org.uk/article1168.html

I mean why join the Green Party? They give the environmental movement a bad name by associating it with middle class lifestyle politics, and in power they act no different to the mainstream parties, they are more akin to the LibDems than New Labour

I'm not sure what your point here is...that the Greens are not a far-left party?

Of course we're not. Nor do we want to be.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

I'm not sure what your point here is...that the Greens are not a far-left party?

His point was fairly clearly expressed. It can be broken down into a few subsections:

1) The Greens are not a far left party.
2) The Greens are not a particularly left wing party at all.
3) The Greens associate environmentalism with middle class lifestyle politics.
4) The Greens have already proven willing to prop up Tory administrations.
5) The Greens have been notably unprincipled on the issue of the war.

You can agree or disagree with these points, and if you agree with them you can regard that as a good or a bad thing. But it wasn't particularly complex.

 

[chilango]

His point was fairly clearly expressed. It can be broken down into a few subsections:

1) The Greens are not a far left party.
2) The Greens are not a particularly left wing party at all.
3) The Greens associate environmentalism with middle class lifestyle politics.
4) The Greens have already proven willing to prop up Tory administrations.
5) The Greens have been notably unprincipled on the issue of the war.

You can agree or disagree with these points, and if you agree with them you can regard that as a good or a bad thing. But it wasn't particularly complex.

Well...why is he making these points? Anyway, I'll reply to these now.

1) No we are not.

2) Well, that depends upon how you define "left-wing", but tbh I'm happy to say no we are not.

So nothing to argue about there then.

3) The Green Party as such has not, sections of the green movement including some elements in the GP have. But plenty haven't so its a misleading generalisation to say the least.

4) Unlike Respect councillors in Tower Hamlets actually joining the Tories eh? Tbh the Leeds example (which I assume you're refferring to) is not representative of the GPEW and is afaik regarded as an aberration. The affair with the CDU in Hamburg too is something harshly criticised by many in the GPEW and in GPs elsewhere. I don't think we've heard the last of this one.

5) Unprincipled? No.

Wrong, maybe.

But again why the judging of the GPEW by far left standards? Few within the GPEW would describe ourselves as part of the far-left, so its a bit of an errroneous comparison, no?

 

[lewislewis]

At least the Greens can actually hold their party together without squabbling and fragmenting every five minutes, and at least they aren't based on egos and personalities such as George Galloway or John Rees.

 

[treelover]

i think the GP is different in different places, in my home town, the GP is most certainly left wing and was totally opposed to the Iraq war, though it draws the line at shouting , we are all Hezbollah'!. It has also unlike what's left of the left actively opposed the new welfare reforms. Oh, and nationally there is a large faction in the GP, the Green Left , which is certainly anti-capitalist,

Which wing on you on Chilango.?

 

[chilango]

i think the GP is different in different places, in my home town, the GP is most certainly left wing and was totally opposed to the Iraq war, though it draws the line at shouting , we are all Hezbollah'!. It has also unlike what's left of the left actively opposed the new welfare reforms. Oh, and nationally there is a large faction in the GP, the Green Left , which is certainly anti-capitalist,

Which wing on you on Chilango.?

Green Left.

Though I'm not at all interested in pandering to the foibles of the Left as it (largely) exists in the UK. I think the Greens (even those on the "right") have a lot more to offer than the likes of the SWP.

I'm personally not bothered about justifying myself as "left". I guess thats my time as anarchist for you...

 

[cockneyrebel]

But it would be terrible if you actually believed, as the SWP purports to believe, that the present period is the best time ever to be a socialist or that we are in a period akin to the 1930s in slow motion (but speeding up), wouldn't it?

I agree with this, you get quotes like:

…the whole world is now in the embrace of a world economic crisis.

The present world situation is characterised by the worst economic scenario for capitalism since the Great Depression of the 1930s.

Together with the fall-out from the Iraq war, this has laid the basis for political convulsions and a fundamental change in geo-politics in the next period.

the looming crisis will be deeper and would last longer than anything experienced in the previous period since 1945.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

I agree with this, you get quotes like:

You may agree with that, but the quotes you posted have nothing to do with the phenomenon I was describing. I was talking about a view of the current period, and the period just past, as being excellent times for socialists to organise and build. The evidence is that they were not. You posted quotes arguing that capitalism is going to run into serious economic difficulties in the near future, which may or may not be true but doesn't have any bearing on whether or not the 90s were like the 30s in slow motion.

I realise that PR are quite monomaniacal about this sort of stuff, but perhaps next time you would consider reading the thread before adding your single transferable opinion?

I note by the way that PR have gone in a fairly brief period from arguing that the rest of the left was wrong that there would be an economic crisis, to arguing that the rest of the left is wrong to think that this economic crisis would be serious, without breaking stride or acknowledging that they were wrong in the first place.

 

[cockneyrebel]

I realise that PR are quite monomaniacal about this sort of stuff, but perhaps next time you would consider reading the thread before adding your single transferable opinion?

I note by the way that PR have gone in a fairly brief period from arguing that the rest of the left was wrong that there would be an economic crisis, to arguing that the rest of the left is wrong to think that this economic crisis would be serious, without breaking stride or acknowledging that they were wrong in the first place.

As you are probably aware Nige, these quotes are from the SP and I was just having a light ribbing. Have you had a sense of humour bypass?

As for PRs line you obviously misunderstand what we've been saying. The long wave theory doesn't say in any way that there won't be recessions or financial crisis during the long wave, it just says they will be relatively short lived and shallow. We will see. Hopefully this is the big one and we got it wrong.

But I would say that:

The present world situation is characterised by the worst economic scenario for capitalism since the Great Depression of the 1930s.

Is totally ridiculous as there have been far worse recessions and crisis for capitalism since the 1940s. Also would you not say that saying:

Together with the fall-out from the Iraq war, this has laid the basis for political convulsions and a fundamental change in geo-politics in the next period.

and

However, this crisis is not likely to be of short duration but, on the contrary, will last longer, will be deeper and is likely to have a more severe effect than any of the previous recessions since the Second World War. Even if the economic contraction is only half what Roubini is estimating, it will still be severe enough to produce huge social and political convulsions.

and

But the whole world is now in the embrace of a world economic crisis.

is, to put it mildly, a tad over the top?

And is not saying there will be

a considerable radicalisation of the working class

not saying that the upcoming period will present excellent opportunites for socialists to organise and build?