Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

UAF vs UAF!!

Ex WP member who is heading down the path of increased cynicism. A purely destructive combination.

Not cynical at all. In fact I think there are some inspiring class struggle going on in the UK at the moment.

But I have no time for the UAF strategy, which for the reasons above I think are totally flawed. To be honest if anyone seems like a cynic around here it's your good self. Constant petty comments and digs are the hall mark of someone like that.

As for the statement, agree with fanciful. Typical over the top language that far left groups have a penchant from (and which sadly actually takes away from the points made), but essentially correct. The whole thing is a farce and the SWP/UAF do look like petty bureaucrats.
 
cockneyrebel said:
But I have no time for the UAF strategy, which for the reasons above I think are totally flawed.

cockneyrebel said:
I do think that self defence and no platform have a place (as recent events in Leeds have shown), but that is no answer to the problem of fascism in and of itself, far from it. Indeed in the current climate its effective use is limited, but still something that is needed.

Do keep us updated with the flawless "limited", but "needed" workers' defence squads wont you?
 
Do keep us updated with the "limited", but "needed" workers' defence squads wont you?

See what I mean. You can't help yourself. Another diggy (and indeed cynical) comment.

I don't think I mentioned workers defence squads anywhere did I? But I do think if anti-fascists and ethnic minorities are being attacked then the question of self defence is a very real question.

But you keep on with the "vote anyone but the BNP" line of the UAF if you think they're a good anti-fascist force.
 
cockneyrebel said:
But you keep on with the "vote anyone but the BNP" line of the UAF if you think they're a good anti-fascist force.

A builder friend I know in Keighley didn't need any "line" to understand that it was important to get out at the last election and tactically vote to keep the BNP out of the area he lives, whilst also giving the BNP candidate an ear bashing to show them that it wasn't going to be all plain sailing for them.
 
A builder friend I know in Keighley didn't need any "line" to understand that it was important to get out at the last election and tactically vote to keep the BNP out of the area he lives, whilst also giving the BNP candidate an ear bashing to show them that it wasn't going to be all plain sailing for them.

:confused:
 
You mean you've got some builder friends? More to the point its not hard to work out that its necessary to vote labour to stop the BNP. But that isn't the point. UAF think its necessary to vote UKIP or the Tories. Do you agree with them?
And why wouldn't you want to organise to bash up the fascists if you had the chance? The attack in Morley was pretty obvious confirmation of why such organisation was necessary.
Unfortunately, by their postering nonsense and sectarianism, WP/L5I bring the need for such organisation into disrepute, but that doesn't mean the way to deal with them is by absurd bureaucratic steps as in this dispute.
Which by the way you haven't said whether or not you support.
 
Does anyone know if the BNP's predicted/polled share of the vote nationally has gone up or down (and by how much) since the last GenElec
 
A builder friend I know in Keighley didn't need any "line" to understand that it was important to get out at the last election and tactically vote to keep the BNP out of the area he lives, whilst also giving the BNP candidate an ear bashing to show them that it wasn't going to be all plain sailing for them.

No I questioned it because I wondered why them being a builder had anything to do with it......but you keep voting Tory, UKIP or whoever else if you think that's the right way forward....and what a surprise, more petty insults. Bitter, not you :D

Anyway have a good night, I'm off out.....
 
cockneyrebel said:
No I questioned it because I wondered why them being a builder had anything to do with it......but you keep voting Tory, UKIP or whoever else if you think that's the right way forward....and what a surprise, more petty insults. Bitter, not you :D

Anyway have a good night, I'm off out.....

Hope you enjoyed your night out.

My point is about being working class and understanding the importance of coming out and voting tactically against a fascist party (which as I said didn't involve following any line), rather than abstaining and and then find the fascists winning by default. That doesn't mean voting for UKIP, or the tories for that matter, but it might mean (as in the case of the town mentioned) a choice of voting labour.
 
fanciful said:
You mean you've got some builder friends? More to the point its not hard to work out that its necessary to vote labour to stop the BNP. But that isn't the point. UAF think its necessary to vote UKIP or the Tories. Do you agree with them?

I know some working class builders who despise the BNP was my point and to be welcomed innit? I think the UAF believe it necessary to get the anti-BNP vote out, rather than as you spin it as voting tory, or UKIP (how many possible winnable seats are they in anyway?)

And why wouldn't you want to organise to bash up the fascists if you had the chance? The attack in Morley was pretty obvious confirmation of why such organisation was necessary.

Did my share of that in the late 70's. It's not a tactic that is anyway useful for organising against the fascists today, despite the recent events in Morley. Nevertheless, if I found myself being confronted by fascist thugs I would defend myself.

Unfortunately, by their postering nonsense and sectarianism, WP/L5I bring the need for such organisation into disrepute, but that doesn't mean the way to deal with them is by absurd bureaucratic steps as in this dispute.
Which by the way you haven't said whether or not you support.

That is an absurd irrelevence to me, or to put it in other words it's pointless sectarian bollocks.
 
My point is about being working class and understanding the importance of coming out and voting tactically against a fascist party (which as I said didn't involve following any line), rather than abstaining and and then find the fascists winning by default. That doesn't mean voting for UKIP, or the tories for that matter, but it might mean (as in the case of the town mentioned) a choice of voting labour.

I haven't got a problem with voting Labour to stop the BNP (because I see it as a "bourgeois workers party"), but I have got a problem with voting Tory or UKIP, which is what the UAF advocates (anyone but the BNP). And if that's just "a spin", why doesn't the UAF just have the position of vote Labour to stop the BNP?

Also, I don't really much value in anecdotal stories about a mate. My family and mates are working class and would vote Labour to stop the BNP without a "line" as well, but think the wider picture is probably more important....

Anyway we're going round in circles now, might as well agree to disagree before you feel the urge to throw in some more petty digs.....
 
cockneyrebel said:
why doesn't the UAF just have the position of vote Labour to stop the BNP?

I think part of the reason may be that many members of the Lib Dems, Greens and Respect would be unlikely to support that position, at least not at a national level. So while it would make many on the far-left more comfortable that they were following the correct path in Trotsky's analysis of fascism in Germany in the 1930s to say 'vote Labour to stop the BNP', the slogan would be less effective in practice if far fewer people were actually campaigning for it - something that tiny groups on the far left don't have to worry about as they have no responsibility for building these organisations and retaining fairly large numbers of members to campaign against the fascists.

I don't mean to say that some members of far left groups (like yours, CR) aren't very reliable anti-fascists who regularly take part in united front activity - but when the eagerness to criticise everything that is so common on the left gets in the way of organising campaigning, then you can't really be surprised at the recent events at Leeds Uni(!)
 
Just more land of mike and honey politics, in all the time I’ve been in the UK all I’ve ever seen or heard from people who claim to be Socialist or fighting for the working-class is them attacking eachother.

It’s a good job they were born in a country where playing at politics is all that ever goes on.
 
I think part of the reason may be that many members of the Lib Dems, Greens and Respect would be unlikely to support that position, at least not at a national level. So while it would make many on the far-left more comfortable that they were following the correct path in Trotsky's analysis of fascism in Germany in the 1930s to say 'vote Labour to stop the BNP', the slogan would be less effective in practice if far fewer people were actually campaigning for it - something that tiny groups on the far left don't have to worry about as they have no responsibility for building these organisations and retaining fairly large numbers of members to campaign against the fascists.

I don't mean to say that some members of far left groups (like yours, CR) aren't very reliable anti-fascists who regularly take part in united front activity - but when the eagerness to criticise everything that is so common on the left gets in the way of organising campaigning, then you can't really be surprised at the recent events at Leeds Uni(!)

But that's the point, voting for bourgeois parties to stop fascism will actually make things worse. But anyway, as said, we're just going round in circles.

In terms of tiny left groups, the SWP is hardly the heart beat of the working class is it, it's also tiny, just bigger than the other irrelevant left groups out there. But anyway, whatever either of us think about anti-fascist activities I do think it was a total farce to expel WP/Revolution from Leeds uni UAF for the reasons that were given.

We'll have to see how effective UAF is over the next years, I'm more than happy to be proved wrong.....
 
Pointless sectarian bollocks? Why do it then?
Unfortunately Mr T exactly illustrates the pernicious effect of the SWP's general turn away from class politics, towards the deliberately 'non-socialist' Respect, in UAF, even in the STWC where in Manchester today they held a meeting with a Liberal MEP.
Who turned out on the Blackpool picket against the BNP yesterday? Any liberal MPs? UKIP members? Assorted Tories? Without asking but with several years of experience of left people watching I'd guess none of the above. So how did it advance the struggle to advance this broad alliance as the most effective way of fighting the BNP? It didn't help at all, but rather limited its room of manouvre to tactics which these non-participating layers considered acceptable.
After all no one is saying that liberals, tories or whoever can't participate in the united front, but that the orientation of the united front cannot be towards them and that the price of their participation cannot be to limit its actions to what they may find acceptable. It's not at all an irrelevent historical debate about fascism in the 1930s, but rather about how best to confront the BNP today.
As I've said before, the one recent mass no platforming event to have taken place in the UK, the action against the Le Pen press conference in the Euro-elections was condemned by the UAF spokesperson present, who denounced it because it portrayed us, the anti-fascists in a violent light. Notwithstanding the fact it was aboslutely just and what's more the most effective action we've undertaken in years.
When it boils down to it, the UAF's obsession with a broad movement, doesn't in fact broaden it at all, but rather limits its ability to act to what is acceptable to the 'respectable' layers it wishes to cuddle up to, but who in fact deliver nothing in practice. And that's why the UAF won't work and hasn't worked in stopping the rise of the BNP. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
 
Josh FG said:
Why is that a joke? UAF has always been the strongest force in the anti racist movement opposed to Islamophobia. WOuld u like to back up that statement.
I have no need to; that you conflate UAF with some 'anti racist movement' and then with the bogus concept of 'islamophobia' says it all mate.
 
THe legal action was never threatened from central office dispite the office calling the WP members to clarify they have not been threatened by said office with legal action they have chosen to repeat the accusation just as befor there anouncement at the peace assembly they clarified with the stall no action has been threatened. This has gon from a mistake to wilfully missleading the movement which frankly says it all about the voracity of the claimes made by the individuals involved.

They should be ashaimed of themselves for acting thisway toward the anti fascist struggle particularly when the were non of there members on saturdays protest against a national fascist mobilisation.
 
But from what I understand the reason they were expelled was because the "criticised" UAF. What was the text of the resolution?
 
fanciful said:
But from what I understand the reason they were expelled was because the "criticised" UAF. What was the text of the resolution?
I don't know wasn't there have heard variousely they were expeled for lying and using there positions to attack the organisations and they were only expelled from the meeting not the organisation. The only thing I'm clear on is that nether Yorkshire UAF or National UAF has expelled them they have mealy been expelled from the student groupe. If one didn't already know there motives were to build there pathetic organisation on the back of missinformation then one would ask what all the fuss is about.
 
But what was the text of the resolution? How hard can it be? Clearly if no one wrote it down then by any measure it can hardly stand now can it, because any explusion must have an appeals procedure that can only take place if the people expelled know why.
So what was the text of the resolution?
 
The only person lying here is Josh.

We met with the woman who told us that UAF threatened us with legal action originally this morning. She confirmed that this is what she was told on the phone. The threat was made. That it was later recanted is good, but nevertheless, this does not negate the original threat.

Josh then says that we were not expelled from Leeds Uni UAF but only the meeting. This is a complete lie to cover up for the back tracking of UAF central office and the Leeds Uni and Met SWSS groups. The motion made it clear that all Revolution Society members were expelled from the Leeds Uni UAF group. I'm please to say that the woman who chaired the meeting that expelled us, told us this morning they are willing to withdraw the expulsion. Good. Perhaps then we can get on with building the movement. We will work to ensure that the movement has the maximum possible democracy, open and honest debate on the strategic questions and democratic accountability in its decision making structures.

I can't let Mr T's post go without comment. The classic argument of keeping Lib Dems, Greens, Tories, etc, on board in the anti-fascist movement. This is a complete joke. Activists from these parties are no where to be seen at the base of the movement. Their presence at the top allows them to act as a phantom right wing that checks the development of more radical approach to fighting the BNP (which is desperately needed) at the base.

The truth is the anti-fascist movement is tiny. Every day that goes by that sees UAF not addressing islamophobia (indeed, conducting threats and mini-purges against those that do want UAF to address it!) and refugee racism, the need for no platform, organised self defence, etc, is a day lost to the BNP. We will continue to raise these issues within the movement, fight for their adoption etc. We will also, leaving aside the outrageous slanders levelled at us from some quarters, do this in an entirely loyal fashion and in the context of unity.

Finally, for all their talk of unity, etc, its worth pointing out that there is an artificial split in the anti-racist and anti-fascist movement since Searchlight left UAF eighteen months ago. Its funny that SWP members always "talk left" when they are making venomous attacks on Searchlight - "Labour Party bastards", etc - but their politics are not qualitatively different to UAF's, they just advocate a Labour vote, and, it has to be said, tackle some local issues (admittedly from the perspective of right wing social democracy). There is a probably a case for arguing that there needs to be a national conference (call it a people's assembly?) of all forces that want to campaign against racism and fascism in Britain to discuss the way forward.

Cheers,

Luke
 
Although we still haven't seen the motion, if the motion made it clear what did it say? In other words, what were the exact words not the hearsay version.
This is rather important because while clearly its encouraging that the UAF are retreating on the matter, it'd be good to know what exactly they are retreating from. And of course if they can't produce the motion, as would appear to be the case, then by definition the explusion cannot go ahead as the expelled have the right to know what the reason was why they were expelled in the first place.
 
Flavour said:
Does anyone know if the BNP's predicted/polled share of the vote nationally has gone up or down (and by how much) since the last GenElec

hard to say as no by elections fought for westminster by BNP since then- but at council level a 3-5% up in wards they have fought before sicne the 2006 local elections -and some pretty horrific first time votes as well in wards they havent fought before in rotherham, loughborough and redbridge(20-30%). they key to me is organisational growth- and they are growing at the rate of about 4 new units being formed a month
 
MC5 said:
A builder friend I know in Keighley didn't need any "line" to understand that it was important to get out at the last election and tactically vote to keep the BNP out of the area he lives, whilst also giving the BNP candidate an ear bashing to show them that it wasn't going to be all plain sailing for them.

but mc the BNP did really really well in west yorks!!

when the appeal has been made, in hundreds of thousends of leaflets in lancs essex and yorks to "vote to keep the BNP out!" it has been a total failure and in fact maybe worse as it totally discredits the left as they are seen to be encouraging people to vote for the very party that is in the offensive against the w/c ..
 
durruti02 said:
but mc the BNP did really really well in west yorks!!

In March 2006 the BNP lost its safest council seat after the voters of Keighley West turned to Labour in large numbers. This in comparison to the result in 2004 when the BNP won 51.2% of the vote, leaving Labour trailing well behind.

As for doing "really well" in West Yorkshire overall? A regional breakdown of the BNP vote in the 2006 local elections shows that in Yorkshire and The Humber the BNP gained one councillor with their vote increasing by 3.4%.
 
I can't beleive this thread is still going on:confused: :eek:
Is their any action to be taken against the peole responsible for this disreputable display!!!1;)
Teach these Cliffite/Post Cliffite :mad: :D Vermin a lesson!!!!
 
Students With Placards

Is anyone going throughthe procedure of building up a case and following it through with action against these beaurocratic slimeballs or is this all 'Hot Air'?
 
Threads like this are great to show how politics in the UK has become; life is so easy here now that people only have eachother to fight.

How different it is in reality to what I used to read 35 years ago when many Anarchist and Socialists from the developing world used to look at places like the UK with real envy and believed you were winning the fight, but what you have “won” isn’t much really.

God help the working-class of the UK ;)
 
MC5 said:
In March 2006 the BNP lost its safest council seat after the voters of Keighley West turned to Labour in large numbers. This in comparison to the result in 2004 when the BNP won 51.2% of the vote, leaving Labour trailing well behind.

As for doing "really well" in West Yorkshire overall? A regional breakdown of the BNP vote in the 2006 local elections shows that in Yorkshire and The Humber the BNP gained one councillor with their vote increasing by 3.4%.


hey UAF are good for one thing .. their figures show the bnp increased their vote in keighly west

.. and are you really disputing the bnp do not do well where they stand??? on these ward figures they increased their vote by significantly more than regional 3.4% .. maybe 7 or 8% which is large increase at this level

leeds would be my case in point .. i imagine there was a lot of leafletting and demos there

as with the wages/migration debate you are looking at the general/higher level so much you are missing the specific .. or i could say you are missing the wood for the trees

http://www.uaf.org.uk/resources/0606ELwards.pdf
 
Back
Top Bottom