How big is the far left?

[treelover]

aye, a big shout now for the non -aligned lefties

What about non-aligned lefties in the Trade Unions and elsewhere - they must number more than the Trots by a long way. And are probably the biggest single group.

 

[belboid]

Yes opposition to fox hunting is rightist in that it seeks to limit the personal freedom of individuals.

That the fox hunters are engaged in an activity that is cruel and unneccesary is not germane to the issue as top whether it is or is not a left wing cause.

That much of the so called left gets all dewy eyed over foxes goes someway to explaining the irrelevance of that same so called left.

what a bizarre set of statements.

ultra-individualism regardless of wider issues is not inherently 'left-wing', far from it really.

opposition to unnecessary crulety is not right-wing, tho, no, its not inherently left-wing either.

and who is going dewy eyed? that's the same old right-wing tosh that the upper-class opponents of the ban came out with, ignoring all the other issues (to do with land ownership, and ensuring there is a sustainable countryside and suchlike).

Never realised you were just a petty-bourgeoise individualist.

 

[rednblack]

* AKEL in Cyprus - 34.7% of vote in the 2001 legislative elections.

about as leftwing as david blunkett ime

 

[rednblack]

OI! We're not part of the far left!

sometimes i agree, sometimes i think we are....

 

[neprimerimye]

what a bizarre set of statements.

ultra-individualism regardless of wider issues is not inherently 'left-wing', far from it really.

opposition to unnecessary crulety is not right-wing, tho, no, its not inherently left-wing either.

and who is going dewy eyed? that's the same old right-wing tosh that the upper-class opponents of the ban came out with, ignoring all the other issues (to do with land ownership, and ensuring there is a sustainable countryside and suchlike).

Never realised you were just a petty-bourgeoise individualist.

Oh come now my dear chap most of the 'left' is incapable of rising to the level of petty bourgeois individualism.

And is it not true that the left must act as the tribune of the rights of the people? All the people not merely those we like.

In which case I suggest that it is only correct and proper to defend the rights of the filthy rich to rip apart defenceless creatures. A right which they exercise collectively I note hunting in packs.

That said I do not suggest the the left actually raise a finger to defend the rights of the filty rich. Rather we should limit our protests on this subject to dignified statements.

Nor by the way am i ignoring related issues such as land ownership which you raise. I'm all in favour of state ownership of the land and for the land to be controled by those who work upon it. Few of whom would appear to be native to this country. Which rather gives a novel twist to the alliance of city and country workers.

 

[Chuck Wilson]

Oh come now my dear chap most of the 'left' is incapable of rising to the level of petty bourgeois individualism.

And is it not true that the left must act as the tribune of the rights of the people? All the people not merely those we like.

In which case I suggest that it is only correct and proper to defend the rights of the filthy rich to rip apart defenceless creatures. A right which they exercise collectively I note hunting in packs.

That said I do not suggest the the left actually raise a finger to defend the rights of the filty rich. Rather we should limit our protests on this subject to dignified statements.

Nor by the way am i ignoring related issues such as land ownership which you raise. I'm all in favour of state ownership of the land and for the land to be controled by those who work upon it. Few of whom would appear to be native to this country. Which rather gives a novel twist to the alliance of city and country workers.

Any evidence of this ?

 

[belboid]

And is it not true that the left must act as the tribune of the rights of the people? All the people not merely those we like.

as tribunes of the rights of the oppressed surely? The ruling-class don't need us as tribunes.

 

[neprimerimye]

Any evidence of this ?

Yes there is plenty of evidence that Portugese workers, for example, are employed in large numbers in the agricultural sector. I think it is Ipswich Trades Council that is running a project to get them into unions. The problem of such low waged labour is pretty general throughout East Anglia or so I'm led to believe.

The workers at Bernard Matthews factories are, again this comes from locals, Portugese. Also we have the Chinese cockling gangs.

 

[neprimerimye]

as tribunes of the rights of the oppressed surely? The ruling-class don't need us as tribunes.

So you would not as tribune for a woman, thus a member of an oppressed group, belonging to the boss class being beaten by her husband? Shame on you sir.

 

[redsquirrel]

So you would not as tribune for a woman, thus a member of an oppressed group, belonging to the boss class being beaten by her husband? Shame on you sir.

Right so people getting beaten up don't count as the oppressed in your world.

 

[rednblack]

So you would not as tribune for a woman, thus a member of an oppressed group, belonging to the boss class being beaten by her husband? Shame on you sir.

alright chief?

 

[gurrier]

That much of the so called left gets all dewy eyed over foxes goes someway to explaining the irrelevance of that same so called left.

I think you've cracked it. If the left starts supporting fox hunting the proles will sign up in droves. It makes such perfect sense.

 

[audiotech]

So you would not as tribune for a woman, thus a member of an oppressed group, belonging to the boss class being beaten by her husband? Shame on you sir.

I seem to recall a Hogarth painting depicting said scene.

 

[neprimerimye]

Right so people getting beaten up don't count as the oppressed in your world.

My comment clearly suggests that violence against women, including rich women, is a matter of gender specific opppression. That you read it to mean the exact opposite explains why your species is endangered.

 

[neprimerimye]

I think you've cracked it. If the left starts supporting fox hunting the proles will sign up in droves. It makes such perfect sense.

Quite the contrary dear boy if 'the left' were to support hunting I suspect even the filthy rich would turn away from that pursuit. Support from 'the left' is usually a good way to kill a cause is it not?

Rather like children who when something is forbidden them redouble their efforts the idle rich will be attracted to hunting due to its popular stigma. Keep telling them that what they are doing is naughty then they will continue to be attracted to a leisure pursuit that few would otherwise be concerned by.

 

[Chuck Wilson]

Yes there is plenty of evidence that Portugese workers, for example, are employed in large numbers in the agricultural sector. I think it is Ipswich Trades Council that is running a project to get them into unions. The problem of such low waged labour is pretty general throughout East Anglia or so I'm led to believe.

The workers at Bernard Matthews factories are, again this comes from locals, Portugese. Also we have the Chinese cockling gangs.

This is evidence that there are people wirking in agriculture who come from abroad.Where is the evidence that "Few of whom would appear to be native to this country" The country doesn't stop at East Anglia and whilst Chinese cockling gangs sounds really exciting , cockling is confined to very few areas of the country.

 

[neprimerimye]

This is evidence that there are people wirking in agriculture who come from abroad.Where is the evidence that "Few of whom would appear to be native to this country" The country doesn't stop at East Anglia and whilst Chinese cockling gangs sounds really exciting , cockling is confined to very few areas of the country.

Chuck I wrote that few of those working in agriculture would appear to be from this country. I did not write that few working in agricuture are from this country there is a difference you know old boy.

The point remains however that a considerable portion of the workforce in the agricultural sector is consituted from migrant workers of one kind of another. That most such workers are legal and a few deemed illegal by the boss class is, in my opinion, besides the point.

The real point here is that what we have is an entire sector of the economy in which imported labour plays a large role and that these workers are almost totally non-union. For the same reason none of these workers are franchised in this democratic country.

So what we have is a sector of the economy which is non-union and disenfranchised. And it is almost unknown to read anything about this sector in the publications of the left which says something about why that same left is in decline.

 

[gurrier]

Quite the contrary dear boy if 'the left' were to support hunting I suspect even the filthy rich would turn away from that pursuit. Support from 'the left' is usually a good way to kill a cause is it not?

Rather like children who when something is forbidden them redouble their efforts the idle rich will be attracted to hunting due to its popular stigma. Keep telling them that what they are doing is naughty then they will continue to be attracted to a leisure pursuit that few would otherwise be concerned by.

yes, yes, "dear boy". Very clever and hilariously witty. What ho!

you silly, patronising and ridiculously unfunny muppet

 

[exosculate]

Chuck I wrote that few of those working in agriculture would appear to be from this country. I did not write that few working in agricuture are from this country there is a difference you know old boy.

The point remains however that a considerable portion of the workforce in the agricultural sector is consituted from migrant workers of one kind of another. That most such workers are legal and a few deemed illegal by the boss class is, in my opinion, besides the point.

The real point here is that what we have is an entire sector of the economy in which imported labour plays a large role and that these workers are almost totally non-union. For the same reason none of these workers are franchised in this democratic country.

So what we have is a sector of the economy which is non-union and disenfranchised. And it is almost unknown to read anything about this sector in the publications of the left which says something about why that same left is in decline.

Are there more than a 1000? How many are there? Where exactly do they work? And what exact agricultural work do they all carry out?

Lets have some concrete information on this!

 

[totaladdict]

there are fairly substantial numbers of immigrants working in agriculture, especially within east anglia.

this from bbc (2 years old - numbers have gone up since this article):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cambridgeshire/3280131.stm

"There are over 200,000 Portuguese workers in the UK, with the largest percentage in East Anglia."

or this from the trades union council:

http://www.tuc.org.uk/international/tuc-6850-f0.cfm

 

[neprimerimye]

Are there more than a 1000? How many are there? Where exactly do they work? And what exact agricultural work do they all carry out?

Lets have some concrete information on this!

You want concrete accurate information on illegal workers? By definition this cannot be had.

As for concrete accurate information on legal workers in agriculture this too does not exist.

I'm sure that once we have national ID that such information will be far easier to gather but until then we are in the realm of guesswork.

In which case i would suggest that both legal and illegal labour constitute a sizeable fraction of the agricultural labour force. That at least one trades council in East Anglia have initiated a campaign to unionise such labour suggests such a conclusion. The nature of the work force at bernard matthews factories similarly suggests such a conclusion. As do the cockling gangs.

Agricultural labour is by definition seasonal and largely casual. Which means it is low skill and low wage. It follows that in areas characterised by high living costs and labour shortages, such as the south east and east anglia, that migrant labour will be a factor.

Flippant as it may seem Londoners no longer take holidays in the hop fields of Kent. Nor do any urban workers engage in seasonal agricultural labour as was once quite common. At the same time soft fruits are not harvested by machines are they? Too soft so the wastage rate is uneconomic. So somebody must be doing the picking and if it ain't British citizens then it must be somebody else.

Does anyone actually dispute the above assertions? Does anyone actually suggest that migrant labour is of no importance in british agriculture?

 

[exosculate]

You want concrete accurate information on illegal workers? By definition this cannot be had.

As for concrete accurate information on legal workers in agriculture this too does not exist.

I'm sure that once we have national ID that such information will be far easier to gather but until then we are in the realm of guesswork.

In which case i would suggest that both legal and illegal labour constitute a sizeable fraction of the agricultural labour force. That at least one trades council in East Anglia have initiated a campaign to unionise such labour suggests such a conclusion. The nature of the work force at bernard matthews factories similarly suggests such a conclusion. As do the cockling gangs.

Agricultural labour is by definition seasonal and largely casual. Which means it is low skill and low wage. It follows that in areas characterised by high living costs and labour shortages, such as the south east and east anglia, that migrant labour will be a factor.

Flippant as it may seem Londoners no longer take holidays in the hop fields of Kent. Nor do any urban workers engage in seasonal agricultural labour as was once quite common. At the same time soft fruits are not harvested by machines are they? Too soft so the wastage rate is uneconomic. So somebody must be doing the picking and if it ain't British citizens then it must be somebody else.

Does anyone actually dispute the above assertions? Does anyone actually suggest that migrant labour is of no importance in british agriculture?

I don't dispute their are foreign agricultural workers both legal and illegal. I just wanted some concrete info on it. Which you clearly don't have. Having weighty opinions with feather light evidence is problematic. Do you get what I'm saying?

 

[neprimerimye]

I don't dispute their are foreign agricultural workers both legal and illegal. I just wanted some concrete info on it. Which you clearly don't have. Having weighty opinions with feather light evidence is problematic. Do you get what I'm saying?

I'm sure that the immigration and naturalisation trash will have some of the data you're looking for. Do you get what I'm saying?

 

[exosculate]

I'm sure that the immigration and naturalisation trash will have some of the data you're looking for. Do you get what I'm saying?

No I don't.

 

[redsquirrel]

My comment clearly suggests that violence against women, including rich women, is a matter of gender specific opppression. That you read it to mean the exact opposite explains why your species is endangered.

Then perhaps you should read people's posts

as tribunes of the rights of the oppressed surely? The ruling-class don't need us as tribunes.

 

[Epicurus]

I’m not sure that the size of the “far left” is relevant to anything, in my view it is the effectiveness of the “far left” that is relevant and sadly the lack of almost any coordinated action by the far left says all that people need to know.

 

[neprimerimye]

Then perhaps you should read people's posts

Indeed I did and my comment was a reply to Belboid. The point being that however filthy rich a woman might be she can still suffer from the oppression that is the lot of all women. It is therefore right and proper to defend even the richest of women if they are victims of oppression. For example I suspect that all here would support the right of rich Saudi women to drive their own cars.

 

[neprimerimye]

No I don't.

I'm sure you're quite clever enough to have understood my meaning.

 

[namaps]

Aw comeon boxinghefner ----- you know it's not the size that counts, it's what you do with it - or so I am told

Actually, you can estimate the numbers belonging to left leaning organisations, but many people lean to the left (Dress on the left), and they don't even know it....... it's a state of mind

 

[exosculate]

I'm sure you're quite clever enough to have understood my meaning.

I'm sure I don't know what the turn of phrase immigration and naturalisation trash means, I have never seen it used in discourse on the subject, perhaps you could explain it to me.