Ed Milliband wins Labour Party elections

[Antifa94]

Thoughts?

[hatzel]

Personally I'm pretty happy with the result. He stood on a good platform, and, unlike many of our politicians, hasn't really put a foot wrong over the last few years. I think he'll take the party in the right direction, which can only be a good thing.

[Dimentio]

If nothing spectacular happens, it could be a repetition of 1983 (if he moves Labour to the left).

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

I think we'll see a period of left populism that will coincide with the huge wave of discontent that the cuts will bring.

Realistically, the only way that Labour can become a real opposition, in terms of parliamentary politics, is if they adopt a left position. Ed Miliband is lucky enough to have a fairly clean record in relation to his brother. They're all the same though; bourgeois, career politicians.

[hatzel]

I love how everybody seems to be asking whether or not he'll take the party towards the left, as if that would be somehow controversial. The Labour party being further left than the Lib Dems?! Surely not! I thought everybody just wanted three dead-centre parties, and just voted on whether or not they find red, blue or yellow ties more attractive on a man :rolleyes:

[Zeus the Moose]

All I know is, with a Millie in charge of the Labour Party, it must be Neil Kinnock's worst nightmare!

Seriously though, I doubt there will be much of a change. Sure, Ed was the Milliband that positioned to the left, but I don't think there was much substantive difference than David, and any meaningful shift to the left inside the Labour Party will probably be on the grassroots level.

[Antifa94]

I miss the Militant tendency. -____________-

[Lolshevik]

I miss the Militant tendency. -____________-

there's still the socialist appeal group, part of the former Militant tendency, inside Labour. With Militant Labour having long since changed their name to Socialist Party of England and Wales they oughtta switch back to 'Militant', sounds so much more badass than socialist appeal.

[durhamleft]

I think with Ed winning the leadership it would be worth some of us genuine lefties trying to infiltrate again, and hopefully shift Labour further left.

I understand people say 'oh well, don't you know labour didn't get in power in the 80s when they were too left wing?', but it strikes me that during the current climate of being attacked by Tory Libdem cuts the public will begin to prefer a leftist not centralist party.

[pranabjyoti]

I just wonder why people still have some faith on parliamentary political parties like the Labor Party or something else. What Milliband can do maximum is to give the British state a left mask, NOTHING MORE.

[Queercommie Girl]

Ed Milliband is to the Labour Party what Hu Jintao is to the Chinese Communist Party, they are both "left masks".

[ed miliband]

This thread offers a glimpse into everything wrong with the British left.

[Dimentio]

I love how everybody seems to be asking whether or not he'll take the party towards the left, as if that would be somehow controversial. The Labour party being further left than the Lib Dems?! Surely not! I thought everybody just wanted three dead-centre parties, and just voted on whether or not they find red, blue or yellow ties more attractive on a man :rolleyes:

People today, or at least those in the centre, doesn't want ideology. They just want someone to deliver. That is the main problem. Otherwise Blair or Clinton wouldn't have been so successful.

[Lyev]

I don't really care. It's near-irrelevant for Marxists, or at least it shouldn't been seen as a minor-victory, positive move forward or small consolation. Yes, he might be considered "close" to the British trade union movement, but what does this entail? I'm inclined to think this is worse for the 7 million union-members in the UK, because a bourgeois, reformist party like (New) Labour will do everything they can to slow down, and quash the militancy of, any decisive strike action, I would think. Brown described the recent BA strikes here, which didn't really go anywhere, as "deplorable", if I remember rightly. Anyway, Milliband, just like every other candidate, is firmly sided with capital and serves bourgeois interests, not labours interests, unfortunately. Having said that, there are some actual socialists at a grassroots level in the party but, partly due to the increasing internal lack of democracy in Labour, they are becoming a forever marginalised and dwindling force.

[nuisance]

Are revolutionaries really concerned with minor changes on the bourgoeis playing field? The structures are the same.

[The Hong Se Sun]

Labor party is a old proven to be failed idea. Let's not forget that the LP voted to attack Iraq, Afghanistan etc etc and are imperialist to the bone

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100926/ap_on_re_eu/eu_britain_labour

[Antifa94]

Labor party is a old proven to be failed idea. Let's not forget that the LP voted to attack Iraq, Afghanistan etc etc and are imperialist to the bone

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100926/ap_on_re_eu/eu_britain_labour


I don't support Labour but the "Labour" leadership that supported that was pseudo-thatcherite new labour.

[The Hong Se Sun]

Yeah but the "LEFT" supported him also. I was pointing out that he said that he wasn't a red.

[genstrike]

Honestly, I thought that all three main candidates were so similar that they would eventually merge into an amorphous blob of neoliberal New Labour bullshit called Ed Miliballs.

David Miliband: I think your 3% titanium tax goes too far
Ed Miliband: I think your 3% titanium tax doesn't go too far enough!
...
Ralph Miliband: I said the Labour Party could never bring socialism. Looks like my idiot sons proved it.

[genstrike]

Also, this is as true today as it was the day it was written: http://flag.blackened.net/liberty/labor-illusion.html

[Crux]

I just wonder why people still have some faith on parliamentary political parties like the Labor Party or something else. What Milliband can do maximum is to give the British state a left mask, NOTHING MORE.
If he had been wielding a gun however...

I don't think Miliband will represent any change to the left, at most rhetorically, if even that.

[Sam_b]

Ed Milliband winning the leadership contest is immaterial. He was simply a vehicle used by many members and the unions against his brother, rightly seen as an example of the most rotten and neoliberal elements of New Labour alongside such scoundrels as Mandelson. This is a tokenistic, perhaps symbolic, break from the Blair Brown legacy.

But remember the reality here; Milliband voted for the war, and in the hustings said nothing about the fightback against Tory cuts. Where Diane Abbott, to her credit, labelled the attacks on public services as 'ideological not inevitable', Ed yearned for restraint. Labour is a project that the left should of course not get involved in, but that doesn't mean we should be agitating. The key now is to get the rank-and-file grassroots labour membership, many who still identify on the left, with supporting the demonstration at the Tory Conference this Sunday, uniting against the cuts in all sectors, and agitating in the unions for a general strike.

[vyborg]

We seriously miss the father...

[Demogorgon]

If nothing spectacular happens, it could be a repetition of 1983 (if he moves Labour to the left).
Not really, in truth the "left wing" label has largely come from more libertarian social policies, he opposes, well says he opposes, ID cards, draconian anti-terror laws and so forth. That just puts him in agreement with David Cameron. There is some minor leftward movement on economic policy but it isn't particularly substantial.

Of course what really matters is how the media reports him. The press has gotten so out of hand in Britain that he could make Blair look like a RevLeft member and still get portrayed as a foaming at the mouth lefty and many would believe it. He is going to have a real job at hand dealing with a predominantly right wing press that is determined to see him that way.

[Devrim]

I don't support Labour but the "Labour" leadership that supported that was pseudo-thatcherite new labour.

On the other hand, the Labour Party that supported British participation in the Third Ashanti Expedition, The Anglo-Aro War,the Expedition to Tibet, the First World War, intervention in Soviet Russia, the Armenian-Azerbaijani war, the Estonian War of Independence, the Latvian War of Independence, the Turkish War of independence, the Third Afghan War, The Irish War of Independence, the Second Saud–Sharif War, the Arab Revolt, the Second World War, the first Vietnam War, the Indonesian national revolution, the First Indo-China War, the Greek civil War, the so called 'Malayan Emergency', the Korean War, the Mau Mau rising, the Suez intervention, the Indo-Malaysian war, the intervention in Ireland, the Falklands War, and the first Gulf War, was not "pseudo-Thatcherite 'New Labour'".

Devrim

[Wanted Man]

His first speech was aimed at reassuring the Tories that he is not an evil bolshie at all: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/sep/26/ed-miliband-no-lurch-to-left

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Some serious mis-information here.

Labour, after the 1983 election, moved right, not left.
Ed Miliband did not vote for the Iraq war.

Right, now that's settled, remember this:

Even if the Labour Party is clearly not, and will never be, a Marxist party, it is still an important left vehicle in this country. I'm not talking about Tony Blair or the rest of the 'New Labour' clique being anything other than reconstructed Thatcherites. I'm talking about the unions and their millions of ordinary working class people being affiliated to Labour politics, i'm talking about hundreds of thousands of grassroots activists and supporters of left-wing politics being part of the Labour Party. This cannot be forgotten.

Whilst the Labour Party will never lead us to Socialism by itself, it must always be part of the broad left-wing movement in this country, if we are ever to defeat Capitalism.

I happen to think that Ed Miliband's election victory is a positive thing. It means we can leave behind New Labour and, as he says 'brutish, US style Capitalism'. No, he's not a Socialist, but we know that and people shouldn't expect him to be. But hopefully (if he ever became PM), he will not start more wars, not privatise and not attack working people to the extent that Blair/Brown/Thatcher have done in the last 30 years. This means that, instead of spending our energy on anti-war, anti-privatisation efforts, we can spend our time and effort building up a real grassroots movement for Socialism and 19th century style Social Democracy (i.e. non-doctrinaire Marxism, NOT post-Communist Social Democracy garble).

Also, the Maoists who dismiss completely that parliamentary politics is of any importance to working people in the UK clearly have little understanding of the reality of UK politics.

[Devrim]

Ed Miliband did not vote for the Iraq war.

Obviously not. He wasn't an MP at the time.


I'm talking about the unions and their millions of ordinary working class people being affiliated to Labour politics, i'm talking about hundreds of thousands of grassroots activists and supporters of left-wing politics being part of the Labour Party. This cannot be forgotten.

Just over 200,000 union members voted in the Labour leadership elections, not millions of people.


There are 12 unions still affiliated to the Labour party, and majorities in only five of them voted for Ed, but these included all the big unions – Unison, Unite, the GMB and Ucatt. In the union section 211,234 first preferences were cast, and 75,219 went to Ed from just three unions – Unite (47,439), Unison (9,652) and GMB (18,128).By contrast, Usdaw one of the few unions to back David Miliband, managed to garner for him only 8,264 votes, on a turnout of 4.3% of its 352,645 levy payers.


Most workers in the unions don't even bother to vote. As it say above only 4.3% of USDAW members bothered t vote, and as Unite has over 1,000,000 members the figure in that union must be roughly similar.


Millions of working class people clearly aren't interested.



But hopefully (if he ever became PM), he will not start more wars, not privatise and not attack working people to the extent that Blair/Brown/Thatcher have done in the last 30 years.


Hopefully I will win the lottery on Wednesday, but as I haven't bought a ticket, there is exactly the same change as their is of a Labour government not faithfully serving the capitalist state, continuing its pro-imperialist policy, and attacking the working class.


Devrim

[nuisance]

Also, the Maoists who dismiss completely that parliamentary politics is of any importance to working people in the UK clearly have little understanding of the reality of UK politics.
No, what we've seen is a gradual withdrawal from parliamentary politics in the UK by the working class. Most people realise that voting is null and void and that government has free-reign after election. I think you'll find that the majortive reason for voting is the 'lesser of two evils' arguement or not liking one particular party leader moreso than the other. Aswell as the media playing an equal, if not larger, role in the vote count than policies.
However this still doesn't indictate why aesthtics of bourgeois politics is of any importance to those wanting the destruction of such social relationships.

[Wanted Man]

Even if the Labour Party is clearly not, and will never be, a Marxist party, it is still an important left vehicle in this country. I'm not talking about Tony Blair or the rest of the 'New Labour' clique being anything other than reconstructed Thatcherites. I'm talking about the unions and their millions of ordinary working class people being affiliated to Labour politics, i'm talking about hundreds of thousands of grassroots activists and supporters of left-wing politics being part of the Labour Party. This cannot be forgotten.

One of the first things "Red Ed" did after his victory was to assure his opponents that these elements do not have his backing at all, and that he's strictly in it for "the middle classes". This was topped off with the usual token criticism of "some of the excesses at the top of society" (bonuses for bankers and stuff like that, I assume) that every politician always makes.

[Queercommie Girl]

Even if the Labour Party is clearly not, and will never be, a Marxist party, it is still an important left vehicle in this country. I'm not talking about Tony Blair or the rest of the 'New Labour' clique being anything other than reconstructed Thatcherites. I'm talking about the unions and their millions of ordinary working class people being affiliated to Labour politics, i'm talking about hundreds of thousands of grassroots activists and supporters of left-wing politics being part of the Labour Party. This cannot be forgotten.


It used to be to some extent, but not anymore.

[Queercommie Girl]

Honestly, I thought that all three main candidates were so similar that they would eventually merge into an amorphous blob of neoliberal New Labour bullshit called Ed Miliballs.

David Miliband: I think your 3% titanium tax goes too far
Ed Miliband: I think your 3% titanium tax doesn't go too far enough!
...
Ralph Miliband: I said the Labour Party could never bring socialism. Looks like my idiot sons proved it.

Good joke! :laugh:

Honestly I think classical British left-wing humour is much better than its American counter-part.

[Zanthorus]

Also, the Maoists who dismiss completely that parliamentary politics is of any importance to working people in the UK clearly have little understanding of the reality of UK politics.

This seems to imply that only Maoists 'dismiss' parliamentary politics, which is slander.

[ed miliband]

This seems to imply that only Maoists 'dismiss' parliamentary politics, which is slander.

Typical trick of those who endorse the Labour Party; those who disagree with you are either ultra-leftists who hate the working class or Maoists / Stalinists (lol).

[Zeus the Moose]

If he had been wielding a gun however...

I don't think Miliband will represent any change to the left, at most rhetorically, if even that.

It seems likely that there will be some sort of shift to the left in terms of the Labour Party's rhetoric, though probably because they're in opposition rather than any shift in the leadership. So for people only looking at the surface of things, Ed Milliband might be credited for shifting Labour to the left, though a more sophisticated look would argue that that's not true.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Typical trick of those who endorse the Labour Party; those who disagree with you are either ultra-leftists who hate the working class or Maoists / Stalinists (lol).

Nope, if you look earlier in the thread there is a user who dismisses the relevance of these elections or the Labour Party. I was addressing that user.

So, wrong you are.:rolleyes:

[nuisance]

Nope, if you look earlier in the thread there is a user who dismisses the relevance of these elections or the Labour Party. I was addressing that user.

So, wrong you are.:rolleyes:
I ain't a Maoist though, smartarse.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

I just wonder why people still have some faith on parliamentary political parties like the Labor Party or something else. What Milliband can do maximum is to give the British state a left mask, NOTHING MORE.

Edelweiss - This was the post I was referring to.

But, to avoid confusion, i'll include Anarchists in my initial posting, along with Maoists;)

[brigadista]

the labour flag is deepest pink
its not as red as people think.....

no change - another blairbot

[RebelDog]

The neo-liberal agenda has been set on course for years and it will continue. The only real issue here is how many books he can sell and how much he will make per speech after he has lied, privatised and bombed. Ed Milliband is a nothing event for the UK left.

[Wanted Man]

Nope, if you look earlier in the thread there is a user who dismisses the relevance of these elections or the Labour Party. I was addressing that user.

So, wrong you are.:rolleyes:

Well, when I look at who's wrong about what in this thread, I'd rather be in Edelweiss Pirate's position than in yours. It's kind of a silly thing anyway, since you didn't quote the maoist guy, you just spouted off in everyone's direction. There are so many good counter-arguments here (most of which you haven't cared to respond to) that one can't be expected to remember them all.

Anyway, the time is long gone when large amounts of working people get drawn in by Labour, whether it's their new leaders or people like you who provide "left" cover for everything they do. If there's anything good about politics these days, it's that nobody really believes any more that the social-democrats somehow have the ability to institute socialism, or even that elite-educated career politicians are somehow going to bring back "19th century social-democracy" (surely you're having a laugh).

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

I am not providing 'left' cover for Labour's actions. I am not a Labour apologist and I am more often than not castigating their policies. However, the myriad of little Socialist sects in this country have shown that there needs to be at least some involvement of the Labour Party and its affiliated unions, if we are to bring about a left-ward shift in the UK, otherwise any initiative without them will just sink without trace, as most of the minor left-wing parties are doing right now.

And when I was talking about 19th century Social Democracy, I don't really see what was wrong with that. I was thinking more orthodox Marxism, pre-Lenin, than Bernstein.

[IndependentCitizen]

He's a social democrat.

Not a good thing, he'll remain in the centre, and the only thing that's considerably left wing would be his social policies, not his economical ones.

[Rainsborough]

I'm talking about the unions and their millions of ordinary working class people being affiliated to Labour politics, i'm talking about hundreds of thousands of grassroots activists and supporters of left-wing politics being part of the Labour Party. This cannot be forgotten.


With reference to that,

Only 8.7% of affiliated trade union members bothered to vote! The mountain - in this case right wing trade union leaders - laboured and produced a mouse.
Shop workers' union Usdaw, which backed the elder Miliband, David, to the hilt, achieved a phenomenal turnout of 4.3%! The Unison leaders have spent more time witch-hunting militant fighters in the union's ranks than fighting the cuts.
They argued against the disaffiliation of the union from New Labour. But they achieved just 6.7% turnout with only 28,000 votes cast out of 419,000 ballot papers distributed.
Added to this were the 15% spoiled ballots in the union section. This cannot be explained away by confusion over voting procedure. It indicates most probably a conscious decision by a significant layer to spoil their ballots because none of the candidates reflected their urge for radical socialist policies to meet the challenge of the current devastating economic crisis.
(Editorial from The Socialist, issue 640 )



Dont be looking to Ed Milliband to return the Labour Party to something it never was in the first place.

[Zanthorus]

However, the myriad of little Socialist sects in this country have shown that there needs to be at least some involvement of the Labour Party and its affiliated unions, if we are to bring about a left-ward shift in the UK, otherwise any initiative without them will just sink without trace, as most of the minor left-wing parties are doing right now.

This is incredibly fallacious reasoning. Most of the sects you mention are sects precisely because they have crypto-labourist politics. The SWP is probably the most blatant example. Their failure is probably due more to the fact that they offer something which already exists. A 'leftward' shift would better be brought about by making an actual political break with Labourism.


And when I was talking about 19th century Social Democracy, I don't really see what was wrong with that. I was thinking more orthodox Marxism, pre-Lenin, than Bernstein.

To put it bluntly, you are speaking nonsense, Lenin was just such an 'Orthodox Marxist'.

[Vanguard1917]

Probably the most vacuous 'leader' in the history of the Labour Party. That's quite an accomplishment. He makes Gordon Brown look like a man of principle, which is prety depressing.

And the look on the faces of Woodley and Simpson at the Labour Conference when their glorious leader dissed union action was priceless. Union bureaucrats have always got the Labour leader that they deserved, and this is no exception.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

This is incredibly fallacious reasoning. Most of the sects you mention are sects precisely because they have crypto-labourist politics. The SWP is probably the most blatant example. Their failure is probably due more to the fact that they offer something which already exists. A 'leftward' shift would better be brought about by making an actual political break with Labourism.



By such logic, every left-wing party in the UK, outside Labour, is 'crypto-labourist', since they all fail to draw support from the unions and from the working class. Labour, however disgraceful some of it's policymaking has been, is still a party that has the affiliation of the unions and an already established infrastructure of party branches, members and online networks.

I appreciate that Labour never has been, isn't and never will be a communist party. The Bennites were viewed as the hard-left of the Labour Party, and he is still viewed as the high watermark of the 'extreme left' of the party. However, given the strong network of grassroots activists and unions who are often (i'm talking about people on the ground here, not the big union bureaucrats with their 6 figure salaries) far to the left of the leadership, the Labour Party must at least play a part in any attempt to bring Socialism to the UK.

I happen to agree with your point about the SWP, mind.

[Manic Impressive]

Has anyone read anything by his father Ralf Miliband I'd not heard of him until this leadership election? any good?

I don't think any of the candidates were going to shift significantly from the centre. I think the real issue is how the mainstream media has jumped on this as a "Red Scare" the BBC is sounding like Fox news, with people jumping all over the unions like they're a bad thing without any kind of balanced argument.

This really makes me feel a little sad and slightly sick about our society.

[Queercommie Girl]

Also, the Maoists who dismiss completely that parliamentary politics is of any importance to working people in the UK clearly have little understanding of the reality of UK politics.

Actually you are wrong here. Maoists don't reject parliamentary politics in the Western European context, only in the Chinese context.

If the Chinese Maoist MCPC has a branch in the UK, they'd be doing entryist politics too.

My friend in the MCPC, while ultra-leftist with respect to China, actually said he thinks in developed countries socialism can be built gradually through parliamentary action in principle.

In Trotskyist terms both Labourism and Maoism represents a kind of petit-bourgeois bureaucratism, though in different forms. Of course, I only partially agree with this idea.