Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
err...yeah that too 
IWCA in the North
- Thread starter soulman
- Start date
hibee said:
Can you explain what tactical advantage is gained for the working class by the IWCA standing in local or national elections?
I'm not sure what you mean here. If you mean am I against using the structures on principle I'd say it's more about thinking it out practically. How can you build something new, something concrete when the existing system by it's very existance doesn't allow for it. Not only doesn't it allow for it but the existing structures have been created in such a way (representative rather than direct, hierarchical rather than horizontal, competition rather than cooperation) that they are the complete opposite of what you hope to see achieved.
soulman said:
Raising the profile of the group in question is the most obvious advantage that springs to mind. Being given a raised platform. Not that I think this would necessarily be appropriate in every community.
[QUOTE}
I'm not sure what you mean here. If you mean am I against using the structures on principle I'd say it's more about thinking it out practically. How can you build something new, something concrete when the existing system by it's very existance doesn't allow for it. Not only doesn't it allow for it but the existing structures have been created in such a way (representative rather than direct, hierarchical rather than horizontal, competition rather than cooperation) that they are the complete opposite of what you hope to see achieved.[/QUOTE]
But I don't think anyone has suggested that they would expect to build alternative structures through the old ones. If you can find any examples of the IWCA saying this I'd be interested to see it. But there might be all sorts of other reasons for standing in elections, as outlined above. Fair enough if you disagree with this, but at least make the right argument.
hibee said:
So standing in elections is part of the IWCA strategy because it generates some publicity for the group. It doesn't have any tactical advantage for the class. It's about raising the profile of the group and the IWCA accept that the time, money, energy and enthusiasm expended in pointless elections can be justified by the publicity it creates for the group.
I think I've made a good argument for not using the existing electoral system.
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
Chuck Wilson said:
That is of course true. However it must also be remembered that the winning of the day to day struggles will, nine out of ten, be achieved by outmanouevering councillors, from middle class parties like Labour or the Lib Dems.
It surely follows that having defeated/or shown them to be corrupt or incompetent on innumerable occassions the obvious challenge when the elections come round, is to set out to replace them as delegates/representatives of whatever working class community they might preside over.
To duck the challenge is to adopt the 'apolitical' approach promoted by so many dillettantes on here, which when distilled means condeming working class communities to basically accept the natural order: 'middle class rule in working class areas.'
Having councillors elected is just part of the process of foregrounding working class interests and concerns. It is the Gieger counter of work in progress in areas where the strategy is applied.
Louis MacNeice
Autumn Journalist
soulman said:
One tactical advantaged gained by (not for) the working class - in this instance as voters - is that they cease to be misrepresented by Labour, Liberal, etc councillors and are instead represented by my members of their own communities (elected specifically on the basis of reasserting working class interests) who through day to day contact, sustained survey work and on going surgeries are both knowledgeable and accountable (when the people you represent are your neighbours, the passengers on your bus etc, it's difficult not be!).
Cheers - Louis Mac
hibee said:
erm that actually would be quite funny,
Imagine you could have an IWCA campaign to rebuild the pet shop to raise the profile of the group and win some day to day concessions for the budgies, more seed, better newspaper.
Louis MacNeice said:
So IWCA councillors will preside over a community, reinforcing the old illusion that real, concrete and permanent change can be achieved on behalf of the working class by voting in representatives to work within the constraints of the existing political structure.
Donna Ferentes
jubliado
Yes! It's "illusions"!
soulman said:
but it will have raised profile and created a new layer of leaders, i can smell the emancipation in the air.
hibee said:
I could not agree more
rednblack said:
didnt know you were into electoralism and failed political tactics....had you down as a contender, but alas another lick spittle of LLETSA.
Louis MacNeice
Autumn Journalist
soulman said:
Where have I or the IWCA said any of the above; this is an absolutely genuine question so I would appreciate some actual evidence of either myself on these boards, or the IWCA on our various websites, pushing the notion of 'presiding over communities' or acheiving a pro-working class transformation of society (which is what I'm assuming you mean by real, concrete and permanent change) through the ballot box?
Louis Mac
mattkidd12 said:
electoralism, marxism, community leaders.. the idea if we only manage our poverty we will be better off, do i need to continue.
Harold Hill
Jay Emm forgot his p/word
Looks like you took my advice and took a day off yesterday. Now how about jumping in front of that bus?
Herbert Read said:electoralism, marxism, community leaders.. the idea if we only manage our poverty we will be better off, do i need to continue.
I'll wager that Herbie heard the term, 'managing your own poverty' from one of the intellectual giants of the comedy wing of British anarchism.
I'll also wager that he can't explain what he means by it, even though this doesn't stop him bandying it around as if he knows what he's talking about.
soulman said:
You apparently seek to deny working class voters the opportunity of electing representives from outside of the political mainstream. It has already been explained that the IWCA seeks to put forward people for election from within local communities, and that the immediate purpose of this is the winning of day-to-day issues, which is in itself a part of the struggle for 'real, concrete and permanent change' (if, indeed, anything can be said to be guaranteed permanent.) As long as elected representatives do not gain anything materially from their positions, and are seen to acting upon what they said they would do, I don't see what your problem is. After all, if the working class voters of a given locality are not satisfied, they will vote out any IWCA councillors.
Your approach is, it seems, no better than the routine leftie theory-first-and-foremost one. Ultimately, it is just another we-know-what's-best-for-you approach. Ironically, this is how you seek to caricature the IWCA approach. It falls down because you choose to ignore the fact that it aims to give working class voters a genuine chance to vote for somebody other than the mainstream, on a programme about which they themselves have been consulted. It also ignores the fact that electoral politics is only one aspect of the IWCA's approach. Ultimately your theory falls down because, it dismisses the fact that, however many people currently abstain from the electoral process, it is nonetheless the only one that people can see at present. You choose to ignore the concrete reality we have and jump to an idealised higher stage, where communities are setting up alternative power structures. It is just another example of propaganda politics, designed to warm the cockles of the hearts of the adherents of your particular ideology.
soulman said:
This is an example of what I say above. You seemingly have no strategy for getting from where we are now to what you claim to desire. The existing structures are, after all, a concrete reality; to ignore them is merely to pretend they can be sidestepped-which you have admitted, maybe without realising it, is merely an illusion.
i think herbert read .. the real one .. would have been interested in the iwca .. not that it matters ... the point is that the iwca are not in any way interested in managing capialism ... i find it quite bizarre that any one with any political sense could draw that conclusion .. there tactics are based on trying to rebuild a w/c that can genuinely confront capitalism .. a w/c that has been shafted primarlily by neo liberalism but also by the idiiot left and m/c @
durruti02 said:
Im sure the real herbert read would be interested he was a bogus middle class sell out who took a knighthood.
Working calss rule in working class areas smacks of managing our own ghettos to me.
LLETSA said:
What about all the other wank bag socailist groups out there, im not sure there actually is a difference. The IWCA are proposing nothing new or radical just the same old socailist/reformist wank bag trotted out in a different package. Im sure any other trot/socailist electoral group would spout the same crap as you have done, its just tedious and boring..... you keep fighting for the class LLETSA im sure you will win in the end.
hibee said:
Well the middle class would be managing there area and the upper theres im sure they will be happy to let you have the shit end of town after all thats why the working class was put there.
Emancipation through managing a ghetto
Harold Hill said:
I love it when you actually point out to the IWCA drone bots how consistently shit there politics are they reply, shut up, jump in front of a bus. It really is just spectacular.
Similar threads
