Hung Parliament

[Che' Guevara]

With the ever increasing chance of there bieng a hung parliament, is there more chance of there being a people's revolution, in which i mean that people will be rioting to get the government out, and trying too change britian for the better and for the future.

So my question is will there be a people revolution if there is no candidate selected. :confused:

Nick Clegg, Gordon Brown and David Cameron

[here for the revolution]

This is good news for evolutionary socialists-Clegg of course having announced that he will back either party on the condition that they agree with electoral reform, holding them to `ransom` as he has been accused.
To be honest, it's looking to be a hung parliament which means that electoral reform will happen sooner than expected meaning real socialist parties will have a chance of gaining political ground.
At the same time, a hung parliament would be more damaged by strikes and other social rebellions, which again will be good news. Whilst the climate will be vulnerable to a widespread revolution I'm pretty sure it wouldn't occur-the country is not ready for any thing such as left wing politics at this time. Yet as I said, this is good news for those who believe in the evolutionary path.

[Sam_b]

This is good news for evolutionary socialists-Clegg of course having announced that he will back either party on the condition that they agree with electoral reform, holding them to `ransom` as he has been accused.

No there isn't. Electoral reform will not stop the bourgeois democracy of Britain, where we check a box every four or five years to have the same members of the same rich class elected. Are you naive enough to think that Clegg does not support the jobs massacre in this country and will not go through with a neoliberal agenda?

The good news for revolutionaries would be if the whole rotten institution was rased to the ground.

[here for the revolution]

Woah, chill. It's still a step on the road surely? You replace the unfair voting system which maintains the three main parties (two really) with one which allows smaller, less popular parties the ability to have some level of influence within Westminster (such as small socialist parties). I'm not saying this is a massive leap and that revolution will surely follow in the next few years, what I am saying is that it will give some room for advancement in the established political institutions before they CAN be razed to the ground.

[Sam_b]

Reformism is not revolution. We are not interested in how the new incarnation of the ruling class manages itself in a way to help the movement - we build it ourselves.

[here for the revolution]

I'm perfectly aware that reformism is not revolution-but how does reformism harm the current situation or the path to or possibility of revolution? Out of curiosity, why do you have a link to the SWP if you do not support them, or the possible electoral reforms which could potentially allow them to actually have some say in the running of the nation?

[Che' Guevara]

So your saying if britain wants a revolution, thenwe have to build on it and the take it from there, is that what your saying?

[Sam_b]

Excuse me for not typing in your irritating name several times into quotes.

I'm perfectly aware that reformism is not revolution-but how does reformism harm the current situation or the path to or possibility of revolution?

It doesn't - but that does not make it 'good news for revolutionary socialists', does it?


Out of curiosity, why do you have a link to the SWP if you do not support them, or the possible electoral reforms which could potentially allow them to actually have some say in the running of the nation?

I am a member of the SWP. We do not stand for election, only some of our candidates do in coalitions such as TUSC, with the tactic of using the elections as a platform - with no real illusions that we will be elected.

I don't want the SWP to have 'more say in the running of the nation' - and I don't particularly care for the concept of the 'nation'. I want the working class to.

[Wanted Man]

With the ever increasing chance of there bieng a hung parliament, is there more chance of there being a people's revolution, in which i mean that people will be rioting to get the government out, and trying too change britian for the better and for the future.

So my question is will there be a people revolution if there is no candidate selected. :confused:

Nick Clegg, Gordon Brown and David Cameron

Why should it? There have been worse parliamentary crises over the last years, such as in Belgium at the moment, and they have never led to "rioting" or "people's revolution".

EDIT: also, if you live in Britain yourself, surely an everyday political conversation with people you know would be plenty of indication that there is no revolution imminent?

[here for the revolution]

It doesn't - but that does not make it 'good news for revolutionary socialists', does it?
Hmm, need to get rid of that `R` there I think, I said it was good news for evolutionary, not revolutionary socialists.




I am a member of the SWP. We do not stand for election, only some of our candidates do in coalitions such as TUSC, with the tactic of using the elections as a platform - with no real illusions that we will be elected.

I don't want the SWP to have 'more say in the running of the nation' - and I don't particularly care for the concept of the 'nation'. I want the working class to.
Then really what is the point in the SWP existing? And yes, I would love the working class to have the say too-why not try and work towards that rather than saying what ultimate goal you wish for then proceeding to avoid one possible route of achieving it?

[Spawn of Stalin]

Having a hung parliament there is a chance that voters will become more conscious to the fact that all three parties represent the same thing. That's a plus I suppose. I say this as someone who doesn't really care about this election, I think a hung parliament is the most desirable outcome, but only marginally

samb, I find it strange that you would hold such an opinion on the election when your party is openly calling on people to vote for Labour candidates.

[Sam_b]

Hmm, need to get rid of that `R` there I think, I said it was good news for evolutionary, not revolutionary socialists.


I assumed it was a typo, because the concept of 'evolutionary socialism' is ridiculous, bordering on non-existant, and would be used in this case as a by-word for reformism.


Then really what is the point in the SWP existing?

Reeks again of more reformism. "Why do you exist if you're not going to play the parliamentary game that has sold out the class for over a century?". The point of any working class organisation, I would have thought, was to be a strategic and tactical alliance of class-conscious workers with the goal of raising class consciousness so we can move towards a revolutionary situation; not by standing in elections of the ruling class and praying that Nick Clegg helps kick the poor old workers into shape :rolleyes:

Enjoy your restriction!

[Sam_b]

samb, I find it strange that you would hold such an opinion on the election when your party is openly calling on people to vote for Labour candidates

We are, in fact, openly calling for workers to vote for TUSC. If you fancy linking where we openly call for a Labour vote, feel free!

[Che' Guevara]

I guess your right "wanted man" but pretty soon people are going to rebel against the government, I'm not saying it could happen, or that it is or ever going to happen.But what if it was to happen.Because to be honest i don't want a buffoon to run my country and for there to be another credit crunch because i don't think that people will be able to handle.

and most of my friends aren't politically active, they don't care about politics, like i do.:thumbup1:

[Wanted Man]

samb, I find it strange that you would hold such an opinion on the election when your party is openly calling on people to vote for Labour candidates.

They called for people to vote Labour in places where TUSC are not participating, if I recall correctly. Now, one can definitely argue with that as well, but I'm sure several other left groups in Britain would give that kind of advice too.

What I do wonder is why the SWP are backing the TUSC; didn't they basically reject No2EU before, as a "nationalist" project? What are the main differences?

[Sam_b]

TBH, I think its the right call to vote for Labour in tactical areas to keep out the Tories but mostly to keep up the momentum we've built up against Labour, but whatevs. I've obviously not seen the article in question then.

TUSC is nothing like the NO2EU UKIP-lite project, especially in Scotland where the majority of candidates are SWP members. I don't particularly see it as a 'nationalist' project - there certainly isn't the hoo-ha anti-immigration politics that NO2EU has, that we would certainly not support.

[Che' Guevara]

Sorry to go a bit off topic, but what are you all?:lol:

Communist, Socialist, Maoist etc.

[here for the revolution]

Reeks again of more reformism. "Why do you exist if you're not going to play the parliamentary game that has sold out the class for over a century?". The point of any working class organisation, I would have thought, was to be a strategic and tactical alliance of class-conscious workers with the goal of raising class consciousness so we can move towards a revolutionary situation; not by standing in elections of the ruling class and praying that Nick Clegg helps kick the poor old workers into shape :rolleyes:

Enjoy your restriction!

Which would surely be easier with all the media surrounding MPs etc? I am fully in favour of revolution, I simply don't see why evolution and revolution should be mutually exclusive...

[Sam_b]

Why don't you go onto www.socialistworker.co.uk (http://www.socialistworker.co.uk) and find out for yourself? :)

[Wanted Man]

I guess your right "wanted man" but pretty soon people are going to rebel against the government, I'm not saying it could happen, or that it is or ever going to happen.But what if it was to happen.Because to be honest i don't want a buffoon to run my country and for there to be another credit crunch because i don't think that people will be able to handle.

and most of my friends aren't politically active, they don't care about politics, like i do.:thumbup1:

So what do you do? Surely most people are not politically active; does that mean their opinions don't matter? Who else is going to "rebel"? Only a small group of people who are already care about politics like you do?


TUSC is nothing like the NO2EU UKIP-lite project, especially in Scotland where the majority of candidates are SWP members. I don't particularly see it as a 'nationalist' project - there certainly isn't the hoo-ha anti-immigration politics that NO2EU has, that we would certainly not support.

I see. I thought there was pretty much a direct continuation, but I guess not. I hope TUSC will do well.

[Spawn of Stalin]

It was in SW back in January of February, the article is called 'Who should you vote for?". Obviously it was mostly about TUSC, but I do remember the writer saying that voting for Labour candidates where there is no alternative to keep the Tories out should be a priority for socialists. Voting for Labour is clearly a hotly debated issue on the left, I just happen to be of the opinion that Labour are no better than the Tories right now

[bailey_187]

No there isn't. Electoral reform will not stop the bourgeois democracy of Britain, where we check a box every four or five years to have the same members of the same rich class elected. Are you naive enough to think that Clegg does not support the jobs massacre in this country and will not go through with a neoliberal agenda?

The good news for revolutionaries would be if the whole rotten institution was rased to the ground.

but dont forget to vote labour

[Crux]

TBH, I think its the right call to vote for Labour in tactical areas to keep out the Tories but mostly to keep up the momentum we've built up against Labour, but whatevs. I've obviously not seen the article in question then.

TUSC is nothing like the NO2EU UKIP-lite project, especially in Scotland where the majority of candidates are SWP members. I don't particularly see it as a 'nationalist' project - there certainly isn't the hoo-ha anti-immigration politics that NO2EU has, that we would certainly not support.
And, frankly, I still resent that remark. No to EU, yes to Democracy was not anti-immigration. If you don't know the difference between opposing the EU's "freedom of movement for labour", deliberately put in quotes, and being anti-immigration...I mean geez, yes the platform was limited, yes the name was bad but calling it "anti-immigration" and "nationalist-lite" is just BS. I posted the platform before when people claimed that and it seems people have still not found any indication what so ever for that, beyond jumping the media bandwagon of "oh the oil refinery strikes were soo about British jobs for British workers".

[Che' Guevara]

It wasn''t meant to sound *****y, course peoples views matter or else whats the point in politics, because people have different views and understanding, i just get excited when they mension communism or socialism in the newspaper.

[Crux]

Yeah, and I agree SWP's stance of on Labour is unfortunate. But in the end not that huge of a deal.

[Proletarian Ultra]

EDIT:


No there isn't. Electoral reform will not stop the bourgeois democracy of Britain, where we check a box every four or five years to have the same members of the same rich class elected...The good news for revolutionaries would be if the whole rotten institution was rased to the ground.


We are, in fact, openly calling for workers to vote for TUSC.

Well f***! What's your problem here?

As the result of workers' increasing rejection of all bourgeois parties - class struggle at work, folks - the British electoral system is moving toward a crisis wherein the ruling class may be forced to adopt an electoral system that will make it easier for your favored TUSC candidates to enter parliament.

People act like anything other than complete Armageddon is worthless.

[Crux]

Well f***! What's your problem here?

As the result of workers' increasing rejection of all bourgeois parties - class struggle at work, folks - the British electoral system is moving toward a crisis wherein the ruling class may be forced to adopt an electoral system that will make it easier for your favored TUSC candidates to enter parliament.I am sorry I don't see how your response has anything to do with your quote from sam_b. Could you please clarify?

[Wanted Man]

It was in SW back in January of February, the article is called 'Who should you vote for?". Obviously it was mostly about TUSC, but I do remember the writer saying that voting for Labour candidates where there is no alternative to keep the Tories out should be a priority for socialists. Voting for Labour is clearly a hotly debated issue on the left, I just happen to be of the opinion that Labour are no better than the Tories right now


but dont forget to vote labour

As long as they don't spread ridiculous illusions about Labour... I do think there are alternatives, but surely pretending that abstaining from voting and "marching with the Stalin flag" is a revolutionary act is not one of them. :rolleyes:

[Spawn of Stalin]

Marching with the Stalin flag is not revolutionary. It's just fucking awesome

But I can't really call voting for Labour a revolutionary act either

[sotsialist]

As long as they don't spread ridiculous illusions about Labour... I do think there are alternatives, but surely pretending that abstaining from voting and "marching with the Stalin flag" is a revolutionary act is not one of them. :rolleyes:

link to post where he asked us to do that ?

[Crux]

Where only bourgeoisie parties stand, focus on the worker's struggle on the ground. Our "recommendations" for voting won't do that much of difference either way other than being confusing, if we urge people to vote for a party who's policies we strongly reject.

[Lyev]

As long as they don't spread ridiculous illusions about Labour... I do think there are alternatives, but surely pretending that abstaining from voting and "marching with the Stalin flag" is a revolutionary act is not one of them. :rolleyes:I would really like to make this clear: TUSC and all the parties affiliated with it are spreading no illusions at all about New Labour. They're a big business party through and through who have abandoned the working-class in favour of privatisation and illegal war. In fact, New Labour are being directly and unanimously opposed and campaigned against by TUSC, SWP and SPEW.

[Spawn of Stalin]

....But the SWP is still calling on workers to vote for them?

[Wanted Man]

Marching with the Stalin flag is not revolutionary. It's just fucking awesome

Right. :rolleyes:


But I can't really call voting for Labour a revolutionary act either

Indeed, it isn't. That's why I said that they shouldn't spread silly illusions.


link to post where he asked us to do that ?

None, but what alternatives did they present? I didn't see any, so I figured that perhaps this was it.


I would really like to make this clear: TUSC and all the parties affiliated with it are spreading no illusions at all about New Labour. They're a big business party through and through who have abandoned the working-class in favour of privatisation and illegal war. In fact, New Labour are being directly and unanimously opposed and campaigned against by TUSC, SWP and SPEW.

Thanks. I figured as much.

[Spawn of Stalin]

Indeed, it isn't. That's why I said that they shouldn't spread silly illusions.

Illusions like "Labour are better than the Tories, not just by a little bit, but by so much that it's actually worth going out and voting for them"? That's an illusion if I ever saw one

[Wanted Man]

Illusions like "Labour are better than the Tories, not just by a little bit, but by so much that it's actually worth going out and voting for them"? That's an illusion if I ever saw one

Surely that could also be "a little bit"? I don't think it's a particularly good position; I just don't see how it's any worse than saying, "If TUSC doesn't run, you should abstain." Both positions only point out the fact that political struggle outside and against New Labour does not yet exist everywhere in the country.

Past discussion on this: http://www.revleft.com/vb/socialist-workers-party-t129057/index.html?t=129057

[Spawn of Stalin]

Yeah I get what you're saying and can almost sympathise with your position, I just don't see how voting for imperialists does socialism any favours, I don't want a Tory government either but I don't see a big enough difference between the two parties to justify walking the 20ft to my polling station. I'd rather stay home and smoke cigarettes all day.

[Sam_b]

But I can't really call voting for Labour a revolutionary act either

Who says it is?

[Spawn of Stalin]

Nobody I hope. But reading some of your earlier remarks led me to believe that the SWP was interested in revolutionary actions and only revolutionary actions. My mistake pal.

[Sam_b]

I should clarify that my remarks were in opposition to the illusion that a Hung Parliament would fundamentally change anything or set further groundwork for a revolutionary movement.