Hierarchy of Oppression

[belboid]

This is what bothers me, to. The left seems unable to champion a workers' cause unless they can find some way of hitching it to a racial issue. Why they insist on doing this, I really can't understand.

wow, three points, three loads of total tosh.

What 'racial issue' is connected to the PCS dispute? Or the postal workers strikes?

Any chance of you actually replying this time, btw, as you have ignored the two previous occasions when your points were refuted.

 

[Fruitloop]

I'm gonna write a proxy server that replaces all urban75 posts involving the phrase 'the left is x' with 'blahblahblahblah'.

 

[Blagsta]

Nope. To the point. Funny how you always seem to get your knickers in a twist when middle class subject matter comes up yet always fail to make any contribution christ you make nino look like some sort of divine intelligence

*snigger*

 

[treelover]

but with the welfare reform bill, aside from some input from John Mcdonnell and some greens in the early stages, aside for some directly affected, nothing was done....

I don't think the term "hierarchy of oppression" is appropriate either - every person who cares about others can't put the same amount of energy into every cause available, or very little would ever get done about anything. People have to prioritise depending on what touches their lives - and different people have different priorities. This doesn't mean they don't care about other causes - but there is only so much that each person can do.

 

[kyser_soze]

OK, aside from willy waving we're not getting anywhere with this discsussion, so maybe approach from a different angle.

How is the modern left contructing a narrative of global solidarity when all it seems to do is focus on single issue or identity politics; how is it approaching making the 'abstract' arguments surrounding class palatable and relevant to a global working class that covers everyone from Chinese kids in a trainer factory to Sharon Ridsdale from Manchester who's a call centre supervisor and goes to the Med twice a year? More importantly how can it relate the whole lot together into a globally relevant, class based analysis that doesn't sound either ironic or cheesy?

Maybe addressing the issue from a positive (how to get something done) rather than negative angle will improve the discussion...maybe it won't, but hey...

 

[treelover]

Kyser, instead of the often abstract and in some some cases corrupted internationalism of todays left, i've just joined the world development movement which has actually had some real concrete victories such as stopping Severn Trent water from taking over and privatising Nepals water supply. I am also encouraging others to join.

 

[belboid]

OK, aside from willy waving we're not getting anywhere with this discsussion, so maybe approach from a different angle.

How is the modern left contructing a narrative of global solidarity when all it seems to do is focus on single issue or identity politics; how is it approaching making the 'abstract' arguments surrounding class palatable and relevant to a global working class that covers everyone from Chinese kids in a trainer factory to Sharon Ridsdale from Manchester who's a call centre supervisor and goes to the Med twice a year? More importantly how can it relate the whole lot together into a globally relevant, class based analysis that doesn't sound either ironic or cheesy?

Maybe addressing the issue from a positive (how to get something done) rather than negative angle will improve the discussion...maybe it won't, but hey...

I don't have any problems with those questions kyser, but they are a totally different topic. The changing nature of the world working-class, who benefits and how it can be united into a movement that can change the world are obviously important questions, but they do not negate the fact that different kinds of oppression (as opposed to exploitation) do still exist in the world, and that they need to be opposed as well. Just because some (including plausibly the SWP in practise) seem to see 'the oppressed' as the new proletariat, it doesn't mean that everyone, or even the majority follow that line.

Perhaps the apparent fact that the discussion isn't really getting anywhere is partly due to the fact that 'hierarchy of the oppressed' doesn't really mean anything concrete, no one (who is sympathetic to the concept) has explained really why they think it does operate even, who is where in the hierarchy etc (okay treelover has very vaguely, but it is all very vague).

 

[belboid]

Kyser, instead of the often abstract and in some some cases corrupted internationalism of todays left, i've just joined the world development movement which has actually had some real concrete victories such as stopping Severn Trent water from taking over and privatising Nepals water supply. I am also encouraging others to join.

WDM have always seemed to take up very reasonable causes to me, tho I don't know a vast amount about how they are run, or who is 'behind them' etc, but I do wonder if 'their' success is more to do with the role of the Nepalese maoists who have just joined the government

 

[bluestreak]

One reason is that the left as it is has little or no organisational links or presence within working class communities, they have no influence or pull so there's nothing to be gained organisationally from that sort of approach. A broader approach in which they can recruit hopeless naive well-wishers is far more likely to provide them with what they as party organisations need. In the case of many of the most influential of the party leaders, they are unable to even see many class needs due to their relatively comfortable backgrounds and consequent insulation within the coccon of full-time party activism from many of those pressues that the wider working class has to face daily. This isn't true for all of them, not by a long shot but it certainly is a real trend - people can often only see that which appears common-sensical to them as a result of their background (see rich people denying that class exists or middle manangers denying that they're tools). Bit of broad brush i used there, i know.

good post IMO.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Is there one amongst the left? What is it?

Why do the left focus more on Israel/Palestine than Darfur, for example?

any hierarchy is imposed On Socialist Worker by the working class. What I mean is, Socialist Worker could not have forced two million people to march against the war, but when Socialist Worker recognized that many people were concerned about the war it was able to play a central role in organising.

Socialist Worker continuously looks for those issues most likely to involve masses of people. If you think there are issues for which masses of people would like to mobilise, please point them out and we would surely "jump on the bandwagon", as we are often accused of doing.

PS. Having said that there are limits. There are some issues, capital punishment for example, we wouldn't back with a bargepole.

 

[treelover]

Oh dear....

 

[TremulousTetra]

Oh dear....

what's the problem?

 

[TremulousTetra]

This is what bothers me, to. The left seems unable to champion a workers' cause unless they can find some way of hitching it to a racial issue. Why they insist on doing this, I really can't understand.

How would you know?

I have just received an internal e-mail from my Socialist worker district. It mainly addressed two items, supporting the post strike, and fighting the sacking of a local Unison worker (Socialist worker member). The Socialist worker member has absolutely massive support as she has done lots of work over the last 20 years as a trade unionist. It is for this very reason, the management are out to get her once again.

There is some truth though to some of the observations of posters on this thread. I think historically Socialist worker has concentrated more on organised workers, than communities. That is a politically based tactic.

 

[Blagsta]

I can think of at least two campaigns that aren't racial and are based in issues that affect working class people. Defend Council Housing and Keep Our NHS Public.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Even visiting the front page of the Socialist Worker site, I see only a couple of articles out of a dozen or two which could be termed "racial" - "Rock Against Racism: beating time, beating the Nazis", and "Gordon Brown tries to hide war link to bomb attacks" which refers to Muslims being scapegoated. The rest looks mostly like pieces about domestic labour disputes, lots of postal worker stuff for instance.

Have I just caught them on a good day or something? I'm not exactly the most frequent visitor to the site but I don't recall anything very different. Or is this just a bit of Nick Cohenism?

 

[Blagsta]

I'm not the most ardent fan of the SWP, however, from talking to someone who used to be fairly involved a few years ago (my partner), I get the impression that lots of nonsense is posted about them on these here boards.

 

[poster342002]

a call centre supervisor and goes to the Med twice a year

The call-centre supervisor can shove off and get stuffed along with other bosses. The call-centre workers, however...

 

[dennisr]

The call-centre supervisor can shove off and get stuffed along with other bosses. The call-centre workers, however...

dangerous delusions there poster - arn't call-centre workers just lackies of thier supervisor???

Posters thoughts for the day: "Its the foriegners I don't trust, ...actually, northern basterds generally are a bit fishy, ... for that matter, all those outside of london, greedy bastards ...actually, north of the river can't be trusted, ...actually, the lot from the neighbouring borough are pretty dodgy, ...and, the other wards down the road, ...actually, that reminds me - eyes too close together outside of my street, ...come to think of it, wouldnt give my dodgy neighbours the snot from my nose. ...that makes me wonder... my flat, no, my room, I loves my room - I'm never leaving it again... never again" (is this a hierarchy of depression?)

 

[poster342002]

dangerous delusions there poster - arn't call-centre workers just lackies of thier supervisor???

Posters thoughts for the day: "Its the foriegners I hate, ...actually, northern basterds generally are a bit fishy, ... for that matter, all those outside of london, greedy bastards ...actually, north of the river can't be trusted, ...actually, the lot from the neighbouring borough are pretty dodgy, ...and, the other wards down the road, ...actually, that reminds me - eyes too close together outside of my street, ...come to think of it, wouldnt give my dodgy neighbours the snot from my nose. ...that makes me wonder... my flat, no, my room, I loves my room - I'm never leaving it again... never again"

Yet more tedious misinterperatation. Come on, you can do better than that.

 

[dennisr]

Yet more tedious misinterperatation. Come on, you can do better than that.

I thought that was quite a good one

*goes off to cry in corner alone*

ps - come on - snap out of it mate (added: - thats a gentle, friendly smile)

 

[nino_savatte]

I'm not the most ardent fan of the SWP, however, from talking to someone who used to be fairly involved a few years ago (my partner), I get the impression that lots of nonsense is posted about them on these here boards.

Agreed. I'm not a great fan either. I have read Socialist Worker on occasion and I have to say, I always find "The Things They Say" rather funny. I always thought it was a better read and more entertaining than either Militant or The Next Step.

 

[dennisr]

Agreed. I'm not a great fan either. I have read Socialist Worker on occasion and I have to say, I always find "The Things They Say" rather funny. I always thought it was a better read and more entertaining than either Militant or The Next Step.

*feigns shock and horror*

Arseparts, The Militant - it was a laugh a minute...

"regrets typing that post in retrospect*

 

[ViolentPanda]

This is what bothers me, to. The left seems unable to champion a workers' cause unless they can find some way of hitching it to a racial issue. Why they insist on doing this, I really can't understand.

I have to disagree. They've historically (and currently) always been happy to "champion a worker's cause" if it benefits themselves (as different factions and fractions of "the left") too.

Just a shame that some workers get suckered into placing their faith in the broad "left" instead of in themselves.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Oh dear....

come on, spit it out, explain your comment!.I dare you.

 

[TremulousTetra]

I have to disagree. They've historically (and currently) always been happy to "champion a worker's cause" if it benefits themselves (as different factions and fractions of "the left") too.

Just a shame that some workers get suckered into placing their faith in the broad "left" instead of in themselves.

yes but you would say that, because you want everybody to do things your way, and hate diversity of approach in the movement.

 

[belboid]

is poster ever going to respond to the criticisms of his posts i wonder, he has made 3 'meaningful' comments, each of which was immediately rebutted, but he has simply ignored that fact and keeps on talking more tosh without any simple recognition of his earlier errors. bad form i say

 

[ViolentPanda]

yes but you would say that, because you want everybody to do things your way, and hate diversity of approach in the movement.

I'd love someone to say that to me, exactly because I don't want anyone (let alone everyone!) to do things my way, and what I'd actually love to see is "diversity of approach in the movement"!

Mostly because I believe it's the lack of diversity of opinion, and a "vanguardist" approach that cause alienation from much "left" politics.

 

[TremulousTetra]

I'd love someone to say that to me, exactly because I don't want anyone (let alone everyone!) to do things my way, and what I'd actually love to see is "diversity of approach in the movement"!

Mostly because I believe it's the lack of diversity of opinion, and a "vanguardist" approach that cause alienation from much "left" politics.

you contradict yourself. you are seeking to limit the movement. A vanguard approach, is one element of diversity. Practise what you preach, instead of blaming the vanguardist for your failures.

 

[ViolentPanda]

you contradict yourself. you are seeking to limit the movement. A vanguard approach, is one element of diversity. Practise what you preach, instead of blaming the vanguardist for your failures.

Ah, but nowhere have I actually blamed "the vanguardist", I've merely drawn attention to "the vanguardist" method.
As for seeking to limit, I've made it quite plain that I'm not attempting to impose a vision of "my way" of doing things.

Really comrade, I'm shocked and surprised at the obvious bias and prejudice in your replies to me!

 

[TremulousTetra]

Ah, but nowhere have I actually blamed "the vanguardist", I've merely drawn attention to "the vanguardist" method.
As for seeking to limit, I've made it quite plain that I'm not attempting to impose a vision of "my way" of doing things.

Really comrade, I'm shocked and surprised at the obvious bias and prejudice in your replies to me!

Mostly because I believe it's the lack of diversity of opinion, and a "vanguardist" approach that cause alienation from much "left" politics.

Okay I accept you didn't mean to write you believe the vanguardist causes alienation from left politics.