Greens vs Respect in local elections
- Thread starter Fisher_Gate
- Start date
MatthewCuffe
New Member
If the Greens and Respect made a proper non-aggression pact that would help both of them.
Ah, such is the sorry state of socialism in our land these days!
Everyone has caught the bug of league tables and everyone wants to be Chelsea FC.
Would it not be wiser to co-operate and in so doing replace the blue meanies in the Conservative and New Labour parties with greens and reds?
Ah, such is the sorry state of socialism in our land these days!
Everyone has caught the bug of league tables and everyone wants to be Chelsea FC.
Would it not be wiser to co-operate and in so doing replace the blue meanies in the Conservative and New Labour parties with greens and reds?
rebel warrior
Soca Warrior
MatthewCuffe said:
You would have thought so, yes.
I don't think that RESPECT in Oxford would consider that standing only in Cowley was a bad decision, F_G. In iffley fields they could have a Labour lackey or an openly socialist, anti-war Green candidate. Not too much of a hard decision. Also, by focusing their efforts in Cowley they are likely to do much better than otherwise.
As for Greens standing in Preston against RESPECT, I consider that to be a generally bad idea. However, I don't think that you should consider it that surprising. We are standing over 1300 candidates in England + Wales - so there are likely to be a number of Green/RESPECT clashes across the country...we are different political parties, after all. I wouldn't join RESPECT, and you wouldn't join the Greens....
Matt
As for Greens standing in Preston against RESPECT, I consider that to be a generally bad idea. However, I don't think that you should consider it that surprising. We are standing over 1300 candidates in England + Wales - so there are likely to be a number of Green/RESPECT clashes across the country...we are different political parties, after all. I wouldn't join RESPECT, and you wouldn't join the Greens....
Matt
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Forgot to mention something ...
The Green Party are not standing against the two "white leftie" candidates Respect are putting up (one SWP, one ex-Labour). They are only standing against the two most prominent asian members of the local Stop the War Coalition ...
Funny that, isn't it?
The Green Party are not standing against the two "white leftie" candidates Respect are putting up (one SWP, one ex-Labour). They are only standing against the two most prominent asian members of the local Stop the War Coalition ...
Funny that, isn't it?
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Matt S said:Ah yes, I'd forgotten our identity as closet racists.Because obviously anyone who stands against an Asian candidate must be a racist. Stands to reason.
Matt
I'm not suggesting all Greens are racist - just that as a Party you are not very sensitive to such issues, and your "local autonomy principle" means you could not stop a local party if they were acting in a racist way (or voted for a coalition with racist tories for example). At least in Respect I could make a case that I as a member could influence Party policy.
Of course we could. No-one has ever claimed that there is no capacity for the national party to discipline or influence local branches. Just that said power is used extremely sparingly because of a belief in local autonomy. If (as I've explained before) there was evidence of something extreme - racism, for example, or homophobia - the national party would act on complaints received.
'Standing against Asian candidates' doesn't qualify as an extreme circumstance, believe it or not!
'Standing against Asian candidates' doesn't qualify as an extreme circumstance, believe it or not!
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Let's just consider what the Greens are about here.
You have a ward, Preston Town Centre, the only one in the country where "Socialist Alliance Against the War" won an election in 2003 at the height of concern about the Iraq war. A white anti-war socialist beat an asian pro-war muslim. That socialist councillor, who helped found Respect, has been very active on environmental issues and has done more through putting resolutions and issues on the environment before the council than most Green Party members would ever be able to do. The ward has three white councillors, yet has a more than 30% asian population. So Respect stand an asian anti-war candidate in 2004 who comes just over 100 votes short of defeating a leading sitting Labour councillor. Respect then decide to stand the same asian candidate again, against a sitting white Labour councillor. To cap it all, the same Respect candidate is a Unison steward and actually leads striking workers the week before nominations close and the Respect councillor leads a major public demonstration against the visit of Condalleezza Rice to a neighbouring town, with support of the asians living in the ward.
It is well known that all the other candidates are white. There are 14 other seats the Green Party could stand in where the three main parties face no challenge. The Greens have not contested a local election in the City for well over a decade.
So what do the Greens decide to do? ...
Stand a white candidate against the best hope that Respect has of winning a seat - spitting on both the anti-war movement, a striking worker, and the best hope we have of an anti-war and radical asian being elected.
And you so-called radical Greens try to defend this kind of behaviour? Words fail me!
You have a ward, Preston Town Centre, the only one in the country where "Socialist Alliance Against the War" won an election in 2003 at the height of concern about the Iraq war. A white anti-war socialist beat an asian pro-war muslim. That socialist councillor, who helped found Respect, has been very active on environmental issues and has done more through putting resolutions and issues on the environment before the council than most Green Party members would ever be able to do. The ward has three white councillors, yet has a more than 30% asian population. So Respect stand an asian anti-war candidate in 2004 who comes just over 100 votes short of defeating a leading sitting Labour councillor. Respect then decide to stand the same asian candidate again, against a sitting white Labour councillor. To cap it all, the same Respect candidate is a Unison steward and actually leads striking workers the week before nominations close and the Respect councillor leads a major public demonstration against the visit of Condalleezza Rice to a neighbouring town, with support of the asians living in the ward.
It is well known that all the other candidates are white. There are 14 other seats the Green Party could stand in where the three main parties face no challenge. The Greens have not contested a local election in the City for well over a decade.
So what do the Greens decide to do? ...
Stand a white candidate against the best hope that Respect has of winning a seat - spitting on both the anti-war movement, a striking worker, and the best hope we have of an anti-war and radical asian being elected.
And you so-called radical Greens try to defend this kind of behaviour? Words fail me!
MatthewCuffe
New Member
Matt S is absolutely right that standing a white candidate against an (Asian) British candidate is not racist in any sense whatsoever.
However, Fisher Gate et al are right to bring up ethnic issues in relation to the current splits in the British Left (a split exemplified by that between the Green Party and Respect). I do not have facts or figures at my fingertips, but I do have a intuitive sense that were I of an urban Asian background (particularly if young, male and unemployed) I would find it easier to be drawn into the Respect sphere rather than the Green sphere as they stand at the moment.
The messages of the two parties are in many aspects similar - particularly on the big one of the immorality and illegality of the Iraq war, the importance of avoiding war with Iran, and the importance of ending New Labour.
Where they differ is not so much in message but in the socio-economic and ethnic background of their support and their personnel. There is also something of an urban-rural split between the two. If we want left-wing policies applied at grass-roots level in May, these differences are important and must not be brushed over or avoided through simplistic accusations of racism on the one hand and the pretence that ethnicity and socio-economic fortunes are unconnected on the other.
It is no accident, for example, that Respect might do better in Cowley in Oxford - traditionally working-class with the motor works etc - than in the leafy lanes of Jericho, where the Greens might do better.
Why on earth these two groups (and all the rest) are not uniting in clearly defined alliances, I do not know. What that lack of unity allows is for a privatising, corporate, anti-environmental agenda to dominate our politics.
Green Labour Green Labour Green Labour.
However, Fisher Gate et al are right to bring up ethnic issues in relation to the current splits in the British Left (a split exemplified by that between the Green Party and Respect). I do not have facts or figures at my fingertips, but I do have a intuitive sense that were I of an urban Asian background (particularly if young, male and unemployed) I would find it easier to be drawn into the Respect sphere rather than the Green sphere as they stand at the moment.
The messages of the two parties are in many aspects similar - particularly on the big one of the immorality and illegality of the Iraq war, the importance of avoiding war with Iran, and the importance of ending New Labour.
Where they differ is not so much in message but in the socio-economic and ethnic background of their support and their personnel. There is also something of an urban-rural split between the two. If we want left-wing policies applied at grass-roots level in May, these differences are important and must not be brushed over or avoided through simplistic accusations of racism on the one hand and the pretence that ethnicity and socio-economic fortunes are unconnected on the other.
It is no accident, for example, that Respect might do better in Cowley in Oxford - traditionally working-class with the motor works etc - than in the leafy lanes of Jericho, where the Greens might do better.
Why on earth these two groups (and all the rest) are not uniting in clearly defined alliances, I do not know. What that lack of unity allows is for a privatising, corporate, anti-environmental agenda to dominate our politics.
Green Labour Green Labour Green Labour.
Who is trying to defend "this kind of behaviour"? All most of us have said is we can't comment because we aren't on the ground and do not have all the facts, have explained why this kind of thing can happen within the Green Party's decentralised way of doing things, and object to the argument that isolated examples of what Respect supporters perceive as sectarian, or unprincipled, or right wing behaviour condemn all Greens everywhere and mean that (as suggested above) Respect should try and sabotage Green strongholds (yeah a lot of good that would do the left )
You are either serious about broad left co-operation (which means recognising that all parts of the left have their sectarian and unprincipled elements that will be obstructive of this) and seek to work with socialists whatever their Party affiliation to achieve the best electoral result for the left as a whole, OR you are not serious and spout weasel words about co-operation and unity, whilst using any excuse whatever to launch vitriolic attacks on anyone who does not subscribe to the tenets of your sect or meet this week's criteria of political acceptability. Carrying the argument forward from attacking all Greens because of the actions of some on the right of the party would see Respect standing against all the Campaign group of Labour MPs and trying to lose the last remaining tiny group of parliamentary socialists their seats on the grounds that they belong to the right dominated Labour party - or perhaps all Greens should stand against all Respectites because we don't like the right wing authoritarian Galloway?
Lets have less of the Dave Spart rhetoric and more left unity......but I'm not hopeful on the evidence above.
)You are either serious about broad left co-operation (which means recognising that all parts of the left have their sectarian and unprincipled elements that will be obstructive of this) and seek to work with socialists whatever their Party affiliation to achieve the best electoral result for the left as a whole, OR you are not serious and spout weasel words about co-operation and unity, whilst using any excuse whatever to launch vitriolic attacks on anyone who does not subscribe to the tenets of your sect or meet this week's criteria of political acceptability. Carrying the argument forward from attacking all Greens because of the actions of some on the right of the party would see Respect standing against all the Campaign group of Labour MPs and trying to lose the last remaining tiny group of parliamentary socialists their seats on the grounds that they belong to the right dominated Labour party - or perhaps all Greens should stand against all Respectites because we don't like the right wing authoritarian Galloway?
Lets have less of the Dave Spart rhetoric and more left unity......but I'm not hopeful on the evidence above.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
MatthewCuffe said:
For the record, I never said it was.
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Stepping back for a moment this all looks like the Respect drones have been ordered to go on the offensive.The local elections campaigns begin this week and already the rampant electioneering is getting to them!
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
greenman said:...
Lets have less of the Dave Spart rhetoric and more left unity......but I'm not hopeful on the evidence above.
I did vote Green you know ...
I would have happily signed a nomination paper for a Green candidate in my ward and displayed posters in my window, by the way.
I try to base my analysis on what people do, not just what they say.
Rather than criticise Respect for not having dialogue with a party that does not exist locally (and has not organised a single activity for over 5 years), you could at least admit that this does not sound very good from the point of view of a Green. Otherwise you are saying implicitly it's okay.
I have my suspicions that this situation has been orchestrated by those in the Green Party that want nothing to do with Respect. Given the actions of the Greens - and they cannot use the party label without national approval - it might be better for the debate if you came up with some positive concrete examples of your own on how we can achieve left unity in practice.
The former Green Party candidate I voted for in the 2001 General Election signed the nomination paper of the Respect candidate in his ward by the way. I do not know yet what his position on this is, but will try to find out.
MatthewCuffe
New Member
At least Respect's members (not drones) DO go on the offensive!
Having campaigned with the Greens in the 2005 GE I got very frustrated with the way they play on the backfoot. Too much Geoffrey Boycott-style batting for my liking. The environmental crisis we are in is of such a great magnitude that being polite and genteel about it is simply wrong.
Of course Respect go on the offensive. If you want to win an election in an urban, alienated, ethnically mixed and socio-economically unequal area like Bethnal Green and Bow you have to organise your campaign like a military operation. You have to play yang style. In Gotham City, you play like Ian Botham.
If you want to win in a rural town with lots of crystals and nice delicatessens like Totnes, you can take a more relaxed approach and play yin style.
Nationally, if you want a left-wing government in the UK you must do both. And if you do both you will win elections all across the board without having to 'fight for the centre ground', or adopt some dumb 'Middle Way' or sell out or privatise everything or hang out at fat cat corporate lunches or launch a nuclear war with Iran.
Green socialism Green socialism Green socialism
Having campaigned with the Greens in the 2005 GE I got very frustrated with the way they play on the backfoot. Too much Geoffrey Boycott-style batting for my liking. The environmental crisis we are in is of such a great magnitude that being polite and genteel about it is simply wrong.
Of course Respect go on the offensive. If you want to win an election in an urban, alienated, ethnically mixed and socio-economically unequal area like Bethnal Green and Bow you have to organise your campaign like a military operation. You have to play yang style. In Gotham City, you play like Ian Botham.
If you want to win in a rural town with lots of crystals and nice delicatessens like Totnes, you can take a more relaxed approach and play yin style.
Nationally, if you want a left-wing government in the UK you must do both. And if you do both you will win elections all across the board without having to 'fight for the centre ground', or adopt some dumb 'Middle Way' or sell out or privatise everything or hang out at fat cat corporate lunches or launch a nuclear war with Iran.
Green socialism Green socialism Green socialism
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
JTG said:Respect stood a white male candidate against a mixed race female in Bethnal Green & Bow in last year's general election.
What a bunch of filthy racists they are
Nobody mention the war will you ...
I refer you to the comments I have already given. I never said there was anything wrong with standing white candidates against black candidates - it's always a question of politics.
However the fact that Respect are standing a highly credible asian radical trade unionist and anti-war candidate in a winnable ward with only white councillors and a high proportion of asians is not an irrelevant issue though.
In this circumstance, it seems that the politics are that it is more important for the Green Party to run a 'spoiler', than allow a Respect candidate to be elected.
MatthewCuffe
New Member
We need to unite. We have to stop a nuclear war with Iran. The plans are there. We must stop them from enacting them.
That means electoral alliances, vote-swapping, and a million other techniques to ensure that in each locality the best left-wing candidate is elected.
I lived in Japan for a year, studying Japanese. I have visited Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I went to a festival of the dead in Nagasaki, where those who died in the city in that year are put on ships on wheels and paraded through the city streets to the accompaniment of firecrackers.
It taught me that nuclear wounds do not heal quickly.
The nuclear bombs in this world are of a potency which makes those of 1945 look like water pistols.
We must lead the world in multilateral nuclear disarmament.
Squabbling amongst ourselves is no good. Not squabbling means deferring to those better qualified in a particular area to win a seat and enact proper left-wing policies.
In one area that might be an Asian British trade-unionist. In another it might be a white academic.
Tribal differences shall be the death of us.
That means electoral alliances, vote-swapping, and a million other techniques to ensure that in each locality the best left-wing candidate is elected.
I lived in Japan for a year, studying Japanese. I have visited Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I went to a festival of the dead in Nagasaki, where those who died in the city in that year are put on ships on wheels and paraded through the city streets to the accompaniment of firecrackers.
It taught me that nuclear wounds do not heal quickly.
The nuclear bombs in this world are of a potency which makes those of 1945 look like water pistols.
We must lead the world in multilateral nuclear disarmament.
Squabbling amongst ourselves is no good. Not squabbling means deferring to those better qualified in a particular area to win a seat and enact proper left-wing policies.
In one area that might be an Asian British trade-unionist. In another it might be a white academic.
Tribal differences shall be the death of us.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Kid_Eternity said:
No-one orders me to do anything!!
(apart from my partner when it comes to leaving the toilet seat up of course!).
Fisher_Gate said:I did vote Green you know ...
I would have happily signed a nomination paper for a Green candidate in my ward and displayed posters in my window, by the way.
I try to base my analysis on what people do, not just what they say.
Glad to hear all of that.
Rather than criticise Respect for not having dialogue with a party that does not exist locally (and has not organised a single activity for over 5 years), you could at least admit that this does not sound very good from the point of view of a Green. Otherwise you are saying implicitly it's okay.
OK, it does not sound good. But I re-iterate, I do not know the situation, I am not there.
I have my suspicions that this situation has been orchestrated by those in the Green Party that want nothing to do with Respect. Given the actions of the Greens - and they cannot use the party label without national approval - it might be better for the debate if you came up with some positive concrete examples of your own on how we can achieve left unity in practice.
National approval?
The former Green Party candidate I voted for in the 2001 General Election signed the nomination paper of the Respect candidate in his ward by the way. I do not know yet what his position on this is, but will try to find out.
If you wanted to know which local Labour candidates were on the left you would use your union, campaign group and ex-labour contacts to find out. So for left unity you need to establish contact with your nearest group of left wing Greens, or individual Greens that are sound. Person to person contacts begins to break down the appearance of monolithic organisations conspiring against the left and begins to build the kind of informal networks that the left needs to progress. It will not be easy - as I now to my cost, having been severely attacked on occasion for seeking maximum left electoral strength rather than narrow partyism - but it is better than flaying around in the dark at unknown enemies. Often these enemies, once seen in the light of inside information, are not the nasty conspiratorial beasts imagined, but our old enemies ignorance, laziness, lack of imagination and paranoia.
All the best, and good night,
Greenman
MatthewCuffe
New Member
I must confess to having never really heeded complaints of the SWP. What would you say are the major problems you have encountered with their methods over the years?
red gone green
sandal wearing socialist
Prove that Respect and Greens take votes from each other....
This entire argument from Fisher gate and others is based on the idea that that a Green candidate will take more votes from a Respect candidate than other candidates. I tried to get a thread going on this a while ago, because i see no evidence up here in Scotland that in terms of votes the Greens and the SSP show a stronger overlap than the Greens and Labour (not to mention the SSP taking more votes off the SNP than anyone else).
So Fisher Gate argues that Greens and Respect both standing in Preston will split the anti-war vote and let labour in. It is just as plausible to argue that the Greens standing will split the anti-Respect vote and stop Labour getting in.
While Greens and reds overlap in terms of activists, I would like to see any proof that they overlap significantly in terms of votes.
The time for Red -Green unity is after the election, not before....
This entire argument from Fisher gate and others is based on the idea that that a Green candidate will take more votes from a Respect candidate than other candidates. I tried to get a thread going on this a while ago, because i see no evidence up here in Scotland that in terms of votes the Greens and the SSP show a stronger overlap than the Greens and Labour (not to mention the SSP taking more votes off the SNP than anyone else).
So Fisher Gate argues that Greens and Respect both standing in Preston will split the anti-war vote and let labour in. It is just as plausible to argue that the Greens standing will split the anti-Respect vote and stop Labour getting in.
While Greens and reds overlap in terms of activists, I would like to see any proof that they overlap significantly in terms of votes.
The time for Red -Green unity is after the election, not before....
Fisher_Gate said:
Do you really have to resort to these insinuations? Whatever is motivating the Greens to stand in the "town (sic) centre" ward, racism is about the least likely...
Tbh Respect will have it all on to win the seat even without the presence of the Greens - I think the decision is unfortunate on balance - but you can see less malign reasons than racism/outright sectarianism behind it
The city centre is facing an increasing congestion problem at precisely the same time as the Bus Station (also in the ward) is up for demolition. Whilst Respect has made the odd noise in this direction, they haven't really campaigned with any urgency about the dire state of transport infrastructure. If the Greens were going to take this up in a serious way, that ward would be critical. Still, making Labour's job easier for them won't help anyone much
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
greenman said:
Absolutely, categorically 100% FALSE and UNTRUE. You should stop hiding behind this rubbish. I'll return to your other points later but in the meantime please retract this nonsense.
Extract from the nomination paper for Preston City Council election candidates (it's the same everywhere else):
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Calum McD said:Do you really have to resort to these insinuations? Whatever is motivating the Greens to stand in the "town (sic) centre" ward, racism is about the least likely...
Tbh Respect will have it all on to win the seat even without the presence of the Greens - I think the decision is unfortunate on balance - but you can see less malign reasons than racism/outright sectarianism behind it
The city centre is facing an increasing congestion problem at precisely the same time as the Bus Station (also in the ward) is up for demolition. Whilst Respect has made the odd noise in this direction, they haven't really campaigned with any urgency about the dire state of transport infrastructure. If the Greens were going to take this up in a serious way, that ward would be critical. Still, making Labour's job easier for them won't help anyone much
I never mentioned racism, though as you readily admit the decision is "unfortunate on balance" - perhaps you could explain why you think that is?
I presume the SP will be voting Green or abstaining in this one? Come on, declare your allegiance! And what are the "less malign reasons" behind the Greens ignoring say University ward (also covering much of the City Centre not to mention the odd student) but contesting a known Respect stronghold?
As for the transport issues you might like to take a look at the minutes of the Council meeting of February 2005 where Lavalette won a motion on this and the numerous articles in the pages of the Lancashire Evening Post about his campaigning on this and other environmental issues. It would make a change from your foolish attempts to object to a protest against a pornographic photo shoot
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Sue said:Oh FFS. How low can you go...? Trying to smear people as racist evidently.
No, not racist - merely insensitive and uncaring about race issues. Carry on reading ...
Similar threads
