there was a initeresting workshop lead by the postie Dave Chappel at the NSSN where he talked, and there was some discussion about, the 1930s unemployed movement. was fascinating stuff and the point was about whether this was applicable now. while i am not against an unemployed movement or unemployed centres i think it is a false division .. workers are workers whether unemployed or not .. i think it is better to have community centres that cater to both employed unemployed long term sick parenst and carers etc .. and funded by the trade unions and the users
Unemployment Movement
- Thread starter terratech
- Start date
el-ahrairah
forward communism, forward gerbils!
Fuck asking the government for anything, just get out there and create credit unions, workers co-ops, local barter economies. Just do it.
i first signed on in 1978 .. and only once a week .. you could still sign on as a student in the holidays but i do not remember any talk of work camps! in the 1930s yes but 1977? are u sure?? are you not getting, or was your mate not getting, confused with WRP camps for the unemployed?? which most people would have wanted to escape from!!People might not realise you had to sign on twice a week thirty years ago for a cash payment of around £5.00. Work camps were also in place for the long term unemployed. A friend was sent to one - he escaped.
I'm not missing the point. this whole 'this is what we can do if we need to' thinking is stupid
it isn't about a few million pounds anymore. the working class just don't have any leverage against the government. if you turn it into a competition it's competing with the chinese rural working class. the idea of a mass movement in europe is stupid because the bosses don't rely on european workers for anything anymore
they could maybe increase the average wage by a fiver and make food and stuff a bit cheaper and everyone would be happy again, costing them maybe 5% of their profit
i think this is one thing that people just don't realise what they are up against. there is absolutely no chance of a european communist movement, there will be no fighting in the streets over politics, only over money
that isn't to say that it's a bad thing. unemployment is a great example. people see it as this terrible thing that you don't feel like going out to the pub or the shops because you are worried about money. like it would be so great if you could go to the pub and go shopping every day. but you have to sign on once a fortnight, the rest of your time is your own, and even on the dole you can afford a shitty flat a computer that would have been brilliant 5 years ago and the internet. so use that to your advantage and stop pretending to be oliver twist etc
the thing that pisses me off the most is how people rinse it about the government beign run by a bunch of self serving cunts and then rinse it about the benefits system. it's like moaning about darth vader
what a cunt darth vader is, lets organise a march on the deathstar
Well, Local Housing Allowance is now delivered and agreed locally and plenty of Tories and a few LP people like Field want to se local parish relief boards, etc brought back.The fact remains the second Welfare Reform Bill will be in the Queens Speech with its policy of forcing unemployed people, etc to work and wearing yellow(community payback) bibs on, and the response from the left and civil society has been abysmal.
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
No, it was 1971 when I first signed on. I remember that I'd told the cocky supervisors at the post office to stuff their job after returning to work after the thirteen week strike that we had lost.
I first came across the WRP at that time. They always seemed quite good at organising black youth through those centers. The work camp was not one of their ideas.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Or workers and non-workers are both members of the w/c or the community, rather than non-workers being seen as potential workers. Same thing, slightly different emphasis.
yeah. why does it have to be working class? why can't it just be community?
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
The ever-so-slight problem with that would be that many of the trade unions nowadays are uninterested in or unwilling to engage with anything beyond their immediate membership, and there's unfortunately always the "careerism" angle to deal with, where the union honchos are looking to the future and either being selected as an MP or getting a seat in the Lords. I don't think that what you call a "false division" is necessarily so. To me it seems rational for the unions to defend their interests (and how many unions can you name that allow long-term unemployed members?), and for the local groups of "unemployed" people to defend theirs. Union funds might very well be nice, but at what cost?
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
You're assuming that the core issue is one of jobs. It isn't. It's about being unemployed, and about being treated with a semblance of humanity.
As for leverage, the leverage that the unemployed have is the power to disrupt, as I made plain in my first post. If you had several hundred localised disruptions two or three times a week, every week, do you really think that it would be ignored?
i think the police are pretty used to low level disruption to be honest what with the current idea of a friday night
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
On the side of the street where I live is council housing where mainly the proles in and out of work live. On the other side of the street is expensive, privately bought housing, mainly with the self-employed, managers and employers living.
We all live in this 'community', but I can't see the employer ever joining in a movement against their own class interests? Neither is it likely that those in a supervisory position would support a 'community campaign' to abolish their perceived class previledges?
As for the self-employed supporting such a 'community campaign'? Well that's not for certain either, unless the outcome is seen as serving their own interests?
I would expect if a 'community campaign' was launched against unemployment most on the other side of the street here would sneer and use the usual epithets directed against the unemployed.
Organising a campaign which specifically targets the work place, rather than 'the community', avoids these anomolies and has the potential to involve larger numbers of people from many communities. I would say more powerful too.
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
I speak to some of them when our paths cross. The self-employed, now retired, ex milkman up the road in particular and I'm not prejudiced against him. Just that our world view is different.
chilango
Ha! Ha! Armageddon
This is true.
...and could in theory be used by any struggle. I know there have been occassions when these possibilities have been looked at but never really materialised.
The whole "self-reduction" style tactic is also one that could in theory be used as well.
but...
One thing a workplace tends to do is put fellow workers in proximity and communication with each other.
The social factory is designed NOT to do this.
communication, recognition of shared material interests and then mutual aid and solidarity are process that have to be gone through before we can realistically attempt to apply any of this to a specific struggle.
Thats a long way away ime.
Course, and this is the important bit, it'll all happen, or not, regardless of me.
undeniable points VP .. but maybe thats the stuff that needs challenging
terratech
Active Member
Gearing Up
Wow!!! The discussion for the first 24 hours has been great, Thank You All. Does this mean you will all be joining and fighting back over the raw-rap we get? I hope so as it is a site that wants your participation to mould the pages and content of the site, however if not completely impressed I hope you will all take this to your respective communities, twitter pages, blogs and websites etc and impress on them the real `FOCUS` that this movement is trying to garner.
I hope it can be taken that a lot of the argument has been gone over in considering the demands and yes they are ambitious but none more so than to get environmental issues addressed, which are now recognised if not acted upon fully. I however believe we are living through an unprecedented times and a new focus will be needed on how, why and the way we work, as already Gordon Brown in a speech to the CBI stated that as much as 5million Jobs could be lost over the next 5 years (without the assistance of the depression) as the focus turns away from hard labour.
So these times, need different answers and the first is in how our society will be shaped. The focus here in the first instance is on how we first must survive this onslaught; the political answer to any future will lie here as the demands made encompass a new set of rationalities, which could come about with the achievement of the first demand i.e. change in the work ethos, precariousness, citizen’s income. These questions being for a different group as our focus now must be on our survival and we are not without the experience to know that as night follows Day the unemployed will be attacked again if not under the most hideous assault now.
Wow!!! The discussion for the first 24 hours has been great, Thank You All. Does this mean you will all be joining and fighting back over the raw-rap we get? I hope so as it is a site that wants your participation to mould the pages and content of the site, however if not completely impressed I hope you will all take this to your respective communities, twitter pages, blogs and websites etc and impress on them the real `FOCUS` that this movement is trying to garner.
I hope it can be taken that a lot of the argument has been gone over in considering the demands and yes they are ambitious but none more so than to get environmental issues addressed, which are now recognised if not acted upon fully. I however believe we are living through an unprecedented times and a new focus will be needed on how, why and the way we work, as already Gordon Brown in a speech to the CBI stated that as much as 5million Jobs could be lost over the next 5 years (without the assistance of the depression) as the focus turns away from hard labour.
So these times, need different answers and the first is in how our society will be shaped. The focus here in the first instance is on how we first must survive this onslaught; the political answer to any future will lie here as the demands made encompass a new set of rationalities, which could come about with the achievement of the first demand i.e. change in the work ethos, precariousness, citizen’s income. These questions being for a different group as our focus now must be on our survival and we are not without the experience to know that as night follows Day the unemployed will be attacked again if not under the most hideous assault now.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
It's a lot harder to find a justification to twat someone who isn't acting belligerently and isn't pissed, especially when you've got 20 or 50 or 100 people all standing peacefully, putting their message across.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
I have, and you know what? My experience indicates that MC5 is sadly probably right.
Here gather the ghosts of ‘liberty’, ‘equality’ and ‘justice’; those immortal phantoms which haunt whomsoever would betray kith, kin or society just to line their own pockets. Here is the icy breath of fate that the rich feel on the back of their bloated necks – a constant reminder that the great Levelling was not defeated, merely postponed.
“‘The past is not dead, it is living in us, and will be alive in the future which we are now helping to make.’”
Ian Bone has been enthusing about various anti-election strategies of late – Vote Nobody, None of the Above etc etc – but you just know they’ll all be an inconsequential wash out in reality and I’ve long since realised that most people who cant be arsed to vote couldnt be arsed to save you from drowning either! Theres an interesting article in the latest FREEDOM about the anarchist holy principle of not voting and arguing for a vote. It’s always amused me that many anarchists say ‘By any means necessary’ – being apparently keen to wage havoc with a machine gun but not to vote! So let’s debate the unthinkable – standing candidates at the General Election:
Thanks to everyone who’s contributed to the mostly thoughtful thread on standing for election. Surprisingly most people were in favour of standing candidates which must indicate a bit of a sea change in ideas…but…Where now?
The seagreen society are seriously considering standing in the next elections, but if we ever going to achieve any real and lasting change then we need (collectively) to consider long term strategies. Most importantly we have to create a coherent and continual identity for our movement.
The following idea has more to do with marketing than politics and it will count for nothing if it is not combined with solid groundwork in working class communities. But I think it’s safe to say that, thanks mainly to moribund left, we have some work to do on the identity front.
With regard to creating a cohesive identity I think we could do a lot worse than look at the first (and possibly the only…) people’s political party in England, The Levellers.
This idea isn’t half as crazy as it sounds. The Levellers were committed broadly to the abolition of corruption within the Parliamentary and judicial process, toleration of religious differences, the translation of law into the common tongue, and the expansion of suffrage… Any of this sound remotely relevant today?
A new Leveller Party could celebrate what E.P.Thompson identified as the core working-class values of solidarity, collectivism, mutuality, political radicalism and self-determination. Furthermore, by citing these values historically, we can counter the right’s stranglehold on ‘tradition’.
Last but not least the use of colour has always played a major role in party politics and the sea-green ribbons associated with the original Levellers can provide us with a very powerful visual identity. Sea-green flags and rosettes could prove to be very effective marketing tools.
It’s just an idea (albeit a bit of a weird one), but I think it has some merit. What do other people think?
In July, 1646 ‘Freeborn’ John Lilburne was arrested and imprisoned in the Tower of London for denouncing his former commander, Edward Montagu the 2nd Earl of Manchester, as a traitor and Royalist sympathiser. It wasn’t unusual for Lilburne to be imprisoned – he remains the only man to be tried for treason by both king and parliament – but on this occasion the campaign to free him led to the formation of the political party known as the Levellers. The Levellers are arguably the first ever (some may argue only ever…) party of the people.
The Levellers were committed broadly to the abolition of corruption within the Parliamentary and judicial process, toleration of religious differences, the translation of law into the common tongue, and the expansion of suffrage. Sadly many of the Leveller’s aims remain relevant today.
363 years later we’re still suffering the effects of corruption in Parliament and we have a judicial system controlled by a non-elected self-serving elite who use a language all of their own. So the question we have to ask ourselves is where is our Leveller Party?
“I do think that the poorest man in England is not at all bound in a strict sense to that government that he hath not had a voice to put himself under.”
The Levellers knew a thing or two about political corruption and the open abuse of power. When we read the Great Leveller Petition of September 11th, 1648 we can’t help thinking that democracy would be a lot healthier if this document had become law. Whilst we have seen some improvements in the last 360 years reading the Levellers reminds us just how undemocratic modern democracy is. These are the principles put forward in the petition…
The truth is ( and we see we must either now speak it, or for ever be silent, ) We have long expected things of an other nature from you, and such as we are confident would have given satisfaction to all serious people of all Parties.
As,
1. That you would have made good the supreme authoritie of the people, in this Honourable House, from all pretences of Negative Voices, either in King or Lords.
“‘The past is not dead, it is living in us, and will be alive in the future which we are now helping to make.’”
Ian Bone has been enthusing about various anti-election strategies of late – Vote Nobody, None of the Above etc etc – but you just know they’ll all be an inconsequential wash out in reality and I’ve long since realised that most people who cant be arsed to vote couldnt be arsed to save you from drowning either! Theres an interesting article in the latest FREEDOM about the anarchist holy principle of not voting and arguing for a vote. It’s always amused me that many anarchists say ‘By any means necessary’ – being apparently keen to wage havoc with a machine gun but not to vote! So let’s debate the unthinkable – standing candidates at the General Election:
Thanks to everyone who’s contributed to the mostly thoughtful thread on standing for election. Surprisingly most people were in favour of standing candidates which must indicate a bit of a sea change in ideas…but…Where now?
The seagreen society are seriously considering standing in the next elections, but if we ever going to achieve any real and lasting change then we need (collectively) to consider long term strategies. Most importantly we have to create a coherent and continual identity for our movement.
The following idea has more to do with marketing than politics and it will count for nothing if it is not combined with solid groundwork in working class communities. But I think it’s safe to say that, thanks mainly to moribund left, we have some work to do on the identity front.
With regard to creating a cohesive identity I think we could do a lot worse than look at the first (and possibly the only…) people’s political party in England, The Levellers.
This idea isn’t half as crazy as it sounds. The Levellers were committed broadly to the abolition of corruption within the Parliamentary and judicial process, toleration of religious differences, the translation of law into the common tongue, and the expansion of suffrage… Any of this sound remotely relevant today?
A new Leveller Party could celebrate what E.P.Thompson identified as the core working-class values of solidarity, collectivism, mutuality, political radicalism and self-determination. Furthermore, by citing these values historically, we can counter the right’s stranglehold on ‘tradition’.
Last but not least the use of colour has always played a major role in party politics and the sea-green ribbons associated with the original Levellers can provide us with a very powerful visual identity. Sea-green flags and rosettes could prove to be very effective marketing tools.
It’s just an idea (albeit a bit of a weird one), but I think it has some merit. What do other people think?
In July, 1646 ‘Freeborn’ John Lilburne was arrested and imprisoned in the Tower of London for denouncing his former commander, Edward Montagu the 2nd Earl of Manchester, as a traitor and Royalist sympathiser. It wasn’t unusual for Lilburne to be imprisoned – he remains the only man to be tried for treason by both king and parliament – but on this occasion the campaign to free him led to the formation of the political party known as the Levellers. The Levellers are arguably the first ever (some may argue only ever…) party of the people.
The Levellers were committed broadly to the abolition of corruption within the Parliamentary and judicial process, toleration of religious differences, the translation of law into the common tongue, and the expansion of suffrage. Sadly many of the Leveller’s aims remain relevant today.
363 years later we’re still suffering the effects of corruption in Parliament and we have a judicial system controlled by a non-elected self-serving elite who use a language all of their own. So the question we have to ask ourselves is where is our Leveller Party?
“I do think that the poorest man in England is not at all bound in a strict sense to that government that he hath not had a voice to put himself under.”
The Levellers knew a thing or two about political corruption and the open abuse of power. When we read the Great Leveller Petition of September 11th, 1648 we can’t help thinking that democracy would be a lot healthier if this document had become law. Whilst we have seen some improvements in the last 360 years reading the Levellers reminds us just how undemocratic modern democracy is. These are the principles put forward in the petition…
The truth is ( and we see we must either now speak it, or for ever be silent, ) We have long expected things of an other nature from you, and such as we are confident would have given satisfaction to all serious people of all Parties.
As,
1. That you would have made good the supreme authoritie of the people, in this Honourable House, from all pretences of Negative Voices, either in King or Lords.
The full petition can be read here.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Thanks for yet another cut 'n' paste, Moz.
fuck you there are links to the info where it is from, oh i know attack is all some people know, i placed it there to create debate but wankers are just that in any walk of life, so if i had just done cut n past ie no links then fair point but here is linked to where i have got the info from and read not all is as you say.
Pickman's model
sunset spires and twilight woods
don't get yourself in a blather.
is that all you have try harder:
Pickman's model
sunset spires and twilight woods
eh?
christ your tiresome are you not try harder..
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Big deal.
Really.
Big fucking deal.
Except that I've never attacked you, you paranoid twat.
The problem here is your assumption that anyone is actually bothered about reading "history of anarchism and leftist politics 101" stuff that they probably first read years ago.
Why not actually engage in debate yourself rather than posting an almost constant barrage of other peoples' words?
Similar threads
