Respect in Tower Hamlets.

[fanciful]

Funnily enough this gets right to the heart of the question. Fisher objects to the idea that socialists might use parliament as a revolutionary platform and sites that fact that Lenin wrote his famous pamphlet in 1920.
But what period was he reflecting on? The experince of the Bolsheviks after the 1905 revolution/counter revolution, and the debates around the use of parliament from 1907 onwards in the depths of counter revolution, when what happened was a load of rightists said the most important thing is to form any old workers party without a socialist programme (a lib-lab party) in the language of the time, whereas the leftists said we can't have nothing to do with parliament at all, cos the insurrections just around the corner.
Today of course the SP and Respect combine the worst of both sides, they drop the socialist message of a revolutionary party - paradoxically because they assert that the immanent collapse of capitalism is just around the corner.
Funny how things work out eh?

 

[Nigel Irritable]

edited out personal jibe at fanciful.

 

[mk12]

lol

 

[fanciful]

Point taken Nigel - I'll get right on it.

(just another small point - the only person on the left I've ever heard talking about wanking as much as you is Chris Bambery. Are you sure you're who you say you are?)

 

[cockneyrebel]

The time saved over the period of a year might be substantial, so I suggest you plan in advance how you are going to put it to use. Perhaps you could go out and recruit the 25th real revolutionary in the world. Alternatively you could use the time to wank into a bin while fantasising about workers militias. Permanent Revolution might get a much needed new member to make tea for your people's revolutionary committee. We get a few hours less of your company and insights. You get an apparently badly needed sexual outlet. Everyone's a winner.

Wait a minute, weren't you complaining a little while ago that I was wrong for getting personal by saying you were a posho? A tad hypocritical don't you think?

 

[Das Uberdog]

I love this forum.

 

[fanciful]

I thought the normal term of abuse was to call someone a wanker if you didn't like them - not to tell them to go and have a wank!
Still first time for everything. You can image the crowds at football matches shouting - "the referees a wanker", then nigel (irritable) comes along and says "no, no, you've got it all wrong - the referee needs to go away and have a wank - into a waste bin."
Doesn't really scan tho. Can't see it catching on.

 

[the button]

I thought the normal term of abuse was to call someone a wanker if you didn't like them - not to tell them to go and have a wank.

The task of having a wank is the task of the wankers themselves.

Or something.

 

[laptop]

http://www.barbequewithbobbyseale.com/

That's just the film. I've eaten at Bobby's

 

[cockneyrebel]

I love this forum.

You can fuck off

 

[laptop]

Wouldn't want to give the man the nitrogen of publicity by starting a new thread...

Galloway to be suspended from Commons over Iraq

GEORGE GALLOWAY, the MP who campaigned against the Iraq war, is to be suspended from parliament over his links to the United Nations oil-for-food programme in Iraq.

The parliamentary standards watchdog will rule this week that Galloway failed properly to declare his links to a charitable appeal partially funded from money made by selling Iraqi oil under Saddam Hussein, according to a source close to the inquiry. The one-month suspension for Galloway, often referred to as “Gorgeous George”, is one of the most severe given to an MP.

Sunday Times

So.

This bit of Tower Hamlets doesn't have an MP at all from next week.

 

[the button]

Obviously a great loss for the good people of Tower Hamlets.

The question remains, however, of how important Gallahway is to the RESPECT project.

 

[mutley]

The other point with this is that Galloway getting suspended won't necessarily impact negatively on Respect's base, it reinforces his image as the one rebel MP who stands up for the Muslims. The ST article even refers back to the US senate allegations, and a chance to wheel out the videos of GG's performance there will do him and Respect no harm at all.

 

[mk12]

one rebel MP who stands up for the Muslims.

As a homogenous mass?

 

[mutley]

As a homogenous mass?

I said his image as a MP who blah blah.. that doesn't mean I endorse the perception or the categories used.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

Nigel - you have repeatedly said we must get back to the main issues in this thread (which you started).

In post number 35 point 1 you made an unsubstantiated allegation that Respect had declined in its share of the vote between 2004 GLA elections and the 2006 council elections. By implication you were claiming that Respect's claim to be in with a chance of winning a seat in the GLA in 2008 was weak.

In post 42, I produced a ward by ward account that showed that Respect had increased its share of the vote compared to 2004 GLA election in 80% of wards contested in 2006. Thus refuting your inuendo that the momentum is against Respect being in with a chance of a GLA seat.

Despite posting on issues other than the main point of this thread (hilariously I must admit, but wholly off the point of the thread), you have not commented yet on this.

Any comment on the refutation of your position in post 42? [Like an ... <bated breath> apology for making an incorrect claim?]

 

[cockneyrebel]

I have to say that Nigel complains about sectarianism but his contempt for the rest of the left (either the ra-ra-ra revolutionaries/tiny sectarians, reformists swamp of the IWCA or centrist SWP) is fairly clear and, in my view, ends up tainting the way he goes about things.

An example of this is the near unconcealed pleasure that the RMT candidate will cause problems for the SWP. While I think that RESPECT would have to seriously consider standing aside for real candidates of struggle I can also see how after building up a base in London that would be a real dilemma for them.

But rather than engage in that in a comradely way it’s done in a manner of glee. You can deny it all you want, but it’s obviously true.

And lastly while you can dismiss fanciful’s points with that rather pathetic post/jibe you put up the fact of the matter is that the logic and politics of the CNWP is near identical to that of RESPECT in terms of reformism. The only different being which forces to orient to.

 

[mutley]

He's basically a bit of a tosser, and runs away from any arguemnts where he might actually get into difficulties. An example of this is the SP's big 'throw toys out of pram' performance in walking out of the STA. In spite of numerous requests, he refuses to engage in a discussion over the issue.

Partly, this is because his organisation's performnce there is in stark contrast to the line he's advocating Respect should adopt. People he doesn't agree with should always stand down for a more widely suported operation, and to not do so 'borders on the criminal'. However the SP have full permission to break with the rest of the organisd left in the NUT and stand their own unity wrecking candidate.

 

[cockneyrebel]

I actually think it's not as clear cut as nigel makes out.

Now personally I disagree with the RESPECT/CNWP tactic and the politics behind that method. But as the SWP do think that's the way to go and have built up a real base in East London, then stepping aside for the RMT candidates might not be such a clear cut choice.

 

[Macullam]

The only different being which forces to orient to.

a mere secondary issue then ?

 

[cockneyrebel]

a mere secondary issue then ?

Not a secondary issue. But personally I think the same political faults/mistakes in terms reformism apply equally to RESPECT and the CNWP.

If RESPECT changed direction and approached the kinda forces that the SP wanted them to, then those faults would still remain.

 

[dennisr]

He's basically a bit of a tosser, and runs away from any arguemnts where he might actually get into difficulties. An example of this is the SP's big 'throw toys out of pram' performance in walking out of the STA. In spite of numerous requests, he refuses to engage in a discussion over the issue.

Partly, this is because his organisation's performnce there is in stark contrast to the line he's advocating Respect should adopt. People he doesn't agree with should always stand down for a more widely suported operation, and to not do so 'borders on the criminal'. However the SP have full permission to break with the rest of the organisd left in the NUT and stand their own unity wrecking candidate.

Except I did answer the accusations you made mutley - the fact you choose to ignore the replies and repeat the same distortion weeks later shows you to be a 'bit of a tosser' mate. I've just looked through the old threads to add a link to it - but it looks like there has been some spring cleaning of the p+p threads. I'm not going to repeat it now.

 

[dennisr]

Not a secondary issue. But personally I think the same political faults/mistakes in terms reformism apply equally to RESPECT and the CNWP.

If RESPECT changed direction and approached the kinda forces that the SP wanted them to, then those faults would still remain.

The fauly being not to raise the violent overthrow of capitalism as the key element of any programme as PRs way of attracting and pulling the wool from the eyes of those reformists?

 

[cockneyrebel]

The fauly being not to raise the violent overthrow of capitalism as the key element of any programme as PRs way of attracting and pulling the wool from the eyes of those reformists?

Now now, no need for that, you know that's not what I mean

But I do think there is a clear difference between a united front and an electoral organisation that, ultimately, is there to try and take power (however distant that might seem at the moment). There are cases for intervening in reformist organisations that come up out of the workers movement, but it's not a postive thing for revolutionaries to try and build reformist organisation from scratch.....

Hmmmmm I feel a sense of de ja vu

I do think that nigel could tone down his glee at the problems of groups like the SWP, in terms of stuff like the RMT candidates.

 

[mutley]

Except I did answer the accusations you made mutley - the fact you choose to ignore the replies and repeat the same distortion weeks later shows you to be a 'bit of a tosser' mate. I've just looked through the old threads to add a link to it - but it looks like there has been some spring cleaning of the p+p threads. I'm not going to repeat it now.

Ok i'll take your word for that, I've been away on and off, and could easily have missed that discussion.

 

[dennisr]

Hmmmmm I feel a sense of de ja vu

Indeed.

I tihkn the approach of the SP is very different from that of the SWP - we would agree with the idea of a genuine 'united front' of the various strands of working class opinion - a united and independent working class party in which different ideas - reformist and th various revolutionary stands could be discussed while working together for a common minimal platform on which we all agree. Like you say, we have been through this before...

I do think that nigel could tone down his glee at the problems of groups like the SWP, in terms of stuff like the RMT candidates.

I cannot speak for Nigel by my personal glee would be for the important step being taken by a layer of trade unionists that represents a definate break with New Labour in the direction of such an independant formation.

 

[dennisr]

Ok i'll take your word for that, I've been away on and off, and could easily have missed that discussion.

No problem - but i honestly did put forward the reasons the SP Teachers group saw breaking with the STA not as a break with a genuine united left in the NUT and the changing nature of the STA (someone else pointed out how the SWP Teachers had themselves broken with the original rank-and-file STA in the past)

 

[cockneyrebel]

I cannot speak for Nigel by my personal glee would be for the important step being taken by a layer of trade unionists that represents a definate break with New Labour in the direction of such an independant formation.

And that's fair enough.

Also I don't think the method of the CNWP/RESPECT is a united front, because otherwise revolutionaries wouldn't vote down positions they agreed with.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

So folks - would you regard it as positive if Lyndsey German (and possibly another Respect member) was on the GLA or not?

We know fanciful would say "not", because Respect is not putting a bolshevik position, complete with 1905/1917 terminology.

But how about the rest of you, especially the SP?

We can discuss tactics in elections until the cows come home, but ultimately the immediate question is that.

Whether and on what basis the RMT stands candidates is a highly hypothetical question and a bridge that will have to be crossed if and when it happens. In the absence of a definite decision, there is no reason not to get behind Respect for the List section as the best hope of left wing representation, and in my view people can choose who they like for the constituency section as it will not make a difference to the result.

 

[cockneyrebel]

So folks - would you regard it as positive if Lyndsey German (and possibly another Respect member) was on the GLA or not?

We know fanciful would say "not", because Respect is not putting a bolshevik position, complete with 1905/1917 terminology.

You're not actually engaging with what fanciful is saying, you're just coming out with this nonsense. I would also say it wouldn't be a good thing because I don't see RESPECT as a positive development. The most I could say is that it's positive that people are voting for something that is to the left, but as an actual political development I think it's a negative thing.

That's not out of a wish to use Bolshevik language or saying "revolution now", but because I think that it's a politically flawed method for revolutionaries to vote down their own positions and sow illusions in left reformism.