The Labour Party

[Kez]

How did the traditional organisations of the working class develop?

-Well, we have the unions formation of small workplace unions, turning into industry unions, and the growth of class consiousness as unnions became national
-The unions in Britain in the early 20th Century formed the Labour Party, a party which would represent the workers interests in the bourgeoise parliament
-The Labour Party has always been a bourgeoise workers party, in that it is made of the workers and led by the bourgeoise, it has never been a out and out workers party.
-The workers have been betrayed in the past, but have always fought back against the right wing e.g. Callaghan in 1979 who attacked the workers visiously nationally and internationally
-The right wing is only allowed to rise if the unions do nothing, and the right wing in the unions rise if the activists do nothing, and the activists do nothing if were in a boom period. In 90's we had a boom, activism decreased, trade unions got right wing leaders eg. Lyons, Jackson et al, who supported the rise of the right in the Labour Party ie Blairism.

What is the situation today?

-There has been an end to the boom
-Activism is increasing e.g. look at hours lost increasing due to industrial disputes
-Trade unions members are becoming more radical, and hence the leaders are becoming more radical, eg Tony Woodley
-This therefore has an effect on the Labour Party, eg the increase in Left factions inside the party on dramatic increase as was evident on votes on tuition fees, PFI, NHS, War etc
-The right wing is losing the battle now. The CBI is now not backing Labour, and has gone back to the Tories, and along with it the scum right wing papers eg Express and Murdoch.

What should be done?
- Unionists should reclaim our party!
- By splitting we set the workers struggle back. Who represents the RMT? Nobody.
-We must fight to get rid of all right wing union leaders inside the trade union movement, as is already underway eg T&G, Amicus
-Then we must get to the next stage, and get rid of the right wing in the Labour Party.
-Workers of Britain either vote Labour, or dont vote at all (very few go for BNP or RESPECT). This is a Labour Voters "Strike". The same thing which is oging on in France and Germany and Italy.
-With the defeat of the right wing, this would allow workers to organise around the Labour Party once more. If we also are in the Labour Party, When workers turn to the LP for solutions, we will be there side by side with the workers, and will show them the marxist alternative to their problems.
-Once we win the ears of the workers, we can then make a real MASS workers party, for example by splitting from the LP with the workers with us, orbooting the non-marxists out (such as RSDLP happened)
-This is how to get to the workers, not to make silly sect fringe movements ala RESPECT, SWP, SP etc etc etc.

What are your views? Do we hand Blairism a victory? Or push foward progress to a true mass workers party with a revolutionary agenda?

[James]

-Workers of Britain either vote Labour, or dont vote at all (very few go for BNP or RESPECT). This is a Labour Voters "Strike". The same thing which is oging on in France and Germany and Italy.

Or tory.

[Funky Monk]

What about the 80s then? What is your take on the direction of the party under Thatcher?

[Kez]

With Foot or Kinnock?

[Funky Monk]

Mainly Foot.

[h&s]

The FBU just left "Labour" yesterday. Labour really need to get their act together.

[Kez]

Funk im not ignoring you, the question requires detailed explaination, and i cant afford that time at the moment mate, i'll come back to it later sorry

on the FBU, anyone surprised? not really.

Issue is where do unions go from here? Will they leave? who they gonna go to? or will they fight?

[cubist]

RESPECT party have formed a nice agreement with the FBU, Kez whilst i agree labour were the working class routes now they are far from it supporting them is a personal treason for any lefty

now you'll be pleased to know i voted respect and not tory after our heated debate in the CC about all that, but i still fail to see why you support a party that has forgotten who it represents

[guerrillaradio]

I can't believe kids are still talking about Labour and trade unions. Who cares if Labour veers ever so slightly to the left?? Such is politics that they'll swing back to the right again soon enough.

[cubist]

labour doesn't veer to the left every time it doesn't get in it has to be that inch more tory

KEZ forgot to say that the "working class" and "trade unionised" NEW Labour held on to 90% of majors Anti union regulations and the firm believer in education Tony blair was privately educated and enjoys a lovely private health care service and as he is a lawyer he doesn't need legal aide some Working class representative

[Misodoctakleidist]

One of Blaire's "red lines" in the EU constitution negotiations is no to give into France and Germany's plans to give trade unions more power.

The only way labour will move to the left is if they see people voting for smaller leftist parties, then they'll have to pander to the left to regain support.

[Kez]

the only way to push labour left is if the unions do it.

Remember, the only reason the right is on top at the moment is because the unions did fuck all against Blairism in late 80's early 90's.

Whatever happened in the Labour Party was with agreement of unions (who were led by right wing)

What does everyone think of right wing Trade Unions? do we fight inside them? Or make new ones?

[Kez]

just looking at Amicus website, are they looking to split or reclaim? you tell me.

"I think now is the time for reform and change. I am calling on the Leadership of the Labour Party to create a Constitutional Commission, lead by David Triesman, and to include representation from the length and breadth of the movement.

We don't want a return to the days when a week of Labour conferences on TV saw us lower in the opinion polls at the end than when we started, but we do desperately need a policy making system that once again makes the ideas and passion of the individual member the building block of party policy. Tony Blair should use his speech at this Labour Party conference to announce the creation of the commission to report back by 2004 conference with recommendations for reform.

This Labour Government is not the evil empire that some on the extreme left has railed against, it has done some great things for ordinary working people but it has become isolated from its owns supporters the longer it's been in power. I want Labour to win the next election and the one after that and all elections for long to come, but in order to do that it needs to reform and give power back to its people. This is the start of that reform process."

[Kez]

in fact, read the whole article

http://www.amicustheunion.org/main.asp?page=82

shows how there is difference between leadership and rank and file

[DaCuBaN]

The article is in reference to Clare Short - another member who jumped ship because of Labour (and more specifically the leadership's) policies

Read her letter of resignation here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3022139.stm)

I do not favour any specific political parties (for other reasons) but I do get the feeling that if the reforms mentioned in the previous article don't become reality that Labour is dead.

[Kez]

hows that relevant, it merely reaffirms my point there is a clear difference between leadership and rank&file

[DaCuBaN]

Yes, it outlines the flaws in any society whereby we have clear 'leaders', elected or otherwise.

As to the relevance, I'm merely asserting that labour is a sinking ship, and that if it's to stay afloat some serious work needs done.

In effect, I'm agreeing with you - so don't knock it :lol:

[cubist]

AS long as BLIAR is in charge the ship will sink, i still don't see how we can get blair out KEZ, maybe a big poster campaign of DO US A FAVOUR TONY, QUIT!

maybe the elections and losing newcastle will be a wake up call

[Kez]

pressure from inside the branches and the unions will get rid of him, and more importantly his "third way", i think the irish have it right when they call it the "turd way"

[T_SP]

Trying to Reform Labour will be like trying to get blood from a stone! How the Fuck do you think the unions will do it? They can't even get a decent pay deal when they strike!! No, a new mass workers party needs to be setup for and controlled by the working class. There is nothing left in the Labour party anymore and Kez you are kidding yourself if you think otherwise. I know a great deal of Grant and Sewells outfit they no nothing of Marxism anymore, Ted Grant was a great man and Peter Taaffe would never be the fine leader of our party he is today with out him but the self righteous crap that comes out of the SA is frankly sickening and while your lot are sat twiddling their thumbs, we are getting things done.

As for Kinnock!! He let down the miners in a big way he and Scargill could have made a huge difference but didn't.

[Kez]

oi oi, calm down, if u wanna stay on thsi board, and not leave from frustration, u gotta take it easy mate!

Let us not mince our words, the LP at the moment is more or less empty of the working class correct? Nobody is saying this is where the workers are currently active in now. Fuck no.

However, who do the workers turn to today? Nobody, Labour Voters either vote Labour, or dont vote "Labour Strikers". This is what ive found.

Lets look at the elections, respect pompously declared it would win 2 MEP's, the BNP declared 2-3 MEP's. They both got bollocks all. Why? Because these 2 parties are not the parties which the workers turn to in a time of crisis.

I believe, when the crisis does hit us (and it has already started to do so), we will see return of workers to Labour. This was the case while Callaghan was in power and he betrayed the workers, until Foot came in, that time, our and your lot were doing the correct thing, and when the workers were active in the LP, we (Militant) won 10,000 members, this is because we took the non-secterian approach and worked ALONGSIDE the workers.

Apart from this, it is difficult to ignore the obvious Trade Union links, who have 50% of the votes in the Party, as well as the grassroots members (who i hope you will agree, are on the majority, honest lefties, for example at my last branch meeting last night, a Labour comrade died and as his wish we sang "The Red Flag" at the branch, this is just an indication of how left the grassroots are).
You know as well as i do the Trade Unions are making a clear shift Left, in T&G and Amicus in particular.

On top of this, the CBI has left Labour, and so have the right wing press, the right wing in the Party are becoming smaller and smaller, and with less power and influence.

Anyway, there is a Labour Party thread we can discuss this about.

The Labour party is still a Left Party, and this means we should have supported it in the elections, against the Tories, the LD, the BNP and so on.

Ive always maintained good debates with CWI members, i hope we can do the same also.

fraternally,

PS im a youth member, so im quite offended at being with Scargills lot!!

[T_SP]

Okay so your a Grantite, to put it into 'Che-lives' speak. I have outlined some views on the SA already and sorry for the SLP dig, it was one or the other!

I only came on here for a look but when I saw the guy who had signed up to the SWP, I registered immediately!
I imagine you'll have a good dig at me now for splitting the Labour vote, IMO if they were worth voting for people would. I stood as a local councillor in Lincoln, there it's out! The tories won, Labour second me third! Cue tirad of abuse from Kez

[Kez]

well, no, if you see your mistaken, then fine.

what is needed is constant discussion, without which we will always make mistakes.

I heard you got a few councillors in Coventry, which is good, should shit the Blairites in coventry up, more importantly shit up the non-blairities who have lost their jobs due to SP wins.

What was the vote difference between tories and labour? and how many votes u gain?

[T_SP]

I don't feel like I made a mistake at all Kez!! I just know your politics mate.

If I remeber rightly I got
329
Labour 768
Tory 1015
I got 16% of the vote!

Here's a link for our election results elsewhere:
Election Results SP (http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/TheSocialistContents.htm)
Click on 'Socialist party election success'.
If your interested.

[Kez]

so if you had said to your voters to vote Labour, Tories wouldnt have won? PLease dont say Labour and Tory are same.

[T_SP]

At least our councillors get things done instead of showing up only when they want re-electing, Kez! Also they raise awareness about Socialism! Surely that's a good thing ain't it?

[T_SP]

Here's an article for you Kez, please take the time to read it. There is a downloadable version. It may open your eyes:

Grant/Sewell Reply. (http://www.marxist.net/grantreply/reply2frame.htm?intro.htm)

[Kez]

Of course it is.

What about Liverpool Councillors, If fact it was Taffe who was doing a good job for Labour in Liverpool, doing what your doing now "raise awareness about Socialism"
but, instead of talking to a few people, he did it inside the worker's party, to the ears of the workers, not a small sect.

[T_SP]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2004, 06:44 PM
Of course it is.

What about Liverpool Councillors, If fact it was Taffe who was doing a good job for Labour in Liverpool, doing what your doing now "raise awareness about Socialism"
but, instead of talking to a few people, he did it inside the worker's party, to the ears of the workers, not a small sect.
Yes but we are, as union members, discussing it within the unions. A new workers party would not have the 'stigma' the Labour party is now stuck with no-one will ever trust them again, even with new leadership. Come on Kez surely you can see that?

[Kez]

if i believed that was the case i wouldnt be there now.

I outlined above why i think we should work inside the party, and talking to some of your comrades, theyve said if (instead of when) workers return to Labour, you would come back in.

Its an issue of whether the workers will turn to Labour, and how much power the unions haveand will have, and the position of the Right int he Party.

[T_SP]

Too many if's there Kez! Yeah if you chuck a good 60% of the Labour party out you might have something to work with but a new Mass Workers party would be easier to build, people are looking for an alternative party, they have lost all faith in the major parties, look at the huge losses in the recent elections! Labour may regain support if Brown gets in but he's no better than Blair himself he won't return to the 'Old' Labour ways and even if he did all the work you guys have been doing will be a loss! You can't keep flogging a dead horse you have been trying to reform Labour for years and they've turned into a Capitalist Party,

You said ( Kez) "so if you had said to your voters to vote Labour, Tories wouldnt have won? PLease dont say Labour and Tory are same."

Prove they aren't the same, look at both these parties plans for the NHS! It's a spot the difference competition!!
I don't believe that if we campaigned for Labour they would have won, we had many people vote for us who wouldn't have bothered I know this for a fact because 10 of my friends in the ward voted me saying they wouldn't have bothered if I wasn't standing. Labour is NOT an alternative to Tory. Don't think people are stupid and naieve they know Labour and Tory are more or less the same.
I won't start on the war just now, but lets just say that Blair ( and Bush) have a lot of blood on their hands and how you can support him ( Because lets be honest if your voting Labour your supporting Blair, there's no getting away from that) is beyond me. What is your view on the missing WMD's???

Thanx for the exchange Kez it's been good so far.

Would you consider working with us???

[Scottish_Militant]

I am a Labour Party member, I am secretary of my (large) local branch and youth officer of my CLP. We have recently had speakers at our branch from the striking nursery nurses in Scotland whom we helped raised money for, my branch has also taken up the 'hands off venezuela' campaign which has gained much support.

Good luck with your "new workers party", if you are "getting things done" then great, I have to say however that i've never once came across an SP member in real life, hardly the signs off a mass movement but do keep trying...

[Scottish_Militant]

I also noticed you are talking about us "supporting Blair", where on earth did you dig that up?? :blink:

[Conghaileach]

New Labour has had a serious drop in membership during Blair's reign - from a peak of 407,000 in 1997 to under 250,000 in 2002. This comes from that Save the Labour Party (http://www.savethelabourparty.org/) website.

Those who believe that getting rid of Blair will suddenly make everything better, exactly who do they plan on replacing him with? Brown? Prescott? Clarke? Blunkett?

[Louis Pio]

The big flaw of the SP reasoning as that they see themselves as "the new workers party" like the SWP did back in the 80'ies, without really analysing the situation. In almost all countries they follow that route, like in for exampel Sweden were they run for national elections and get a pathetic vote of 3000 in a country of 9 million. In Sweden the social democratic youth is quite leftwing and there is also the youth of the left party who attract young people. So I guess the setting up of new parties has become a dogma, in my oppinion the reason is that they won't admit the mistake because they would loose face, and if you don't correct mistakes they become a tendency as a old CWI document said.
In Britain we now see you use the same arguments as you refuted in the past, without any indeepth analysis of how the role of Labour has changed. Just the old oneliner of "Labour has become bourgios"

[T_SP]

Teis: The big flaw of the SP reasoning as that they see themselves as "the new workers party" like the SWP did back in the 80'ies, without really analysing the situation.

T_SP: This is incorrect, we actually see ourselves as a revoulutionary party a Vanguard if you like, we would not be calling for a 'New workers' party otherwise would we ;) I also think you'll find our parties grasp of Dialectical and historical materialsim is very good and we are well in tune with the working class.
You don't agree that a vote count of 329 is good for a branch that has only been present in our city for a year??

Teis: In almost all countries they follow that route, like in for exampel Sweden were they run for national elections and get a pathetic vote of 3000 in a country of 9 million. In Sweden the social democratic youth is quite leftwing and there is also the youth of the left party who attract young people. So I guess the setting up of new parties has become a dogma, in my oppinion the reason is that they won't admit the mistake because they would loose face, and if you don't correct mistakes they become a tendency as a old CWI document said.


T_SP: I think you are underestimating the activeness of our councillors in the areas where we have seats, they don't sit around picking there asses untill election time comes back round. The impact we have made on local communities is HUGE, you only need take the example of the Liverpool council during the 1980's or the huge campaign against the poll tax that toppled Thatcher.

Teis:In Britain we now see you use the same arguments as you refuted in the past, without any indeepth analysis of how the role of Labour has changed. Just the old oneliner of "Labour has become bourgios"

We actually explain quite clearly in our propaganda ( based on fact as opposed to the novels Labour and other parties put out) why Labour are bourgeois! You clearly do not agree that they are, yet it is so blatantly obvious, and where are these differences between Labour and the Tories? You have not come up with one yet? Our political analysis of Labour has led us to no other conclusions, don't you think we would be in this 'Workers party' if Labour really represented the working class? Hey if they ever do give us a call until then we will continue to spread the word about Socialism and building a mass workers party through our tireless campaigns.

Sorry for the late reply to busy campaigining. :D

Once again thank you for your civilized debate I await your reply.
T_SP

[T_SP]

Originally posted by [email protected] 24 2004, 04:27 PM
I also noticed you are talking about us "supporting Blair", where on earth did you dig that up?? :blink:
You are a Labour party member, Yes? You pay a sub yes? You put your cross next to the Labour candidate? Therefore, using my brilliant deduction and political analysis you support him, no? If you vote a Labour candidate because you agree with the candidate this STILL means you are supporting the whole party, a candidate can only be as radical as the party allows or they get chucked out for not towing the party line, right?

[Kez]

nope.

i dont toe the party line.

Im still in. Anyway, what bout Euro opposition, they wont toe the line on the backbenches.

[T_SP]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 05:10 PM
nope.

i dont toe the party line.

Im still in. Anyway, what bout Euro opposition, they wont toe the line on the backbenches.
Livingstone, Short, Galloway!


Tony has his clique, anyway the backbenchers are ALWAYS made to see sense, tution fees!!!
I'm talking about something really radical, like the Liverpool council.
No comments on the rest of my post Kez?
How ya bin?

[Kez]

i got 2 fuckoff exams 2morrow, andmy last one on thursday, after which i will make time for a proper reply.

Hows the leaps and bounds coming?
329 votes? mass party voting that is...

[DaCuBaN]

Keep it up Trotskyis_SP - I firmly believe you are taking the 'right' course of action here.


On the link with Labour, the argument centred on whether the union should continue to affiliate to the Labour Party at a reduced level while, at the same time, supporting other political organisations, a position similar to the rail union RMT's. This was proposed by the union's executive.

The alternative was immediate disaffiliation, in a composite motion proposed by the Northern Ireland and Strathclyde FBU regions.

The composite proposing complete disaffiliation was passed by 35,105 to 14,611


Pretty damning, eh? ;)

Admittedly, those labour supporters out there do command my respect - it's a battle they cannot win, yet you persevere nonetheless - highly commendable - but personally I'd advise you to take the FBU's departure as an omen that the ship is sinking.

[T_SP]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 05:48 PM
i got 2 fuckoff exams 2morrow, andmy last one on thursday, after which i will make time for a proper reply.

Hows the leaps and bounds coming?
329 votes? mass party voting that is...
16% mate! You sarccy bastard :D

[T_SP]

Dacuban: Admittedly, those labour supporters out there do command my respect - it's a battle they cannot win, yet you persevere nonetheless - highly commendable - but personally I'd advise you to take the FBU's departure as an omen that the ship is sinking.

T_SP: Yup, and you ain't gonna do much bailing with a bucket with holes in it!

[Louis Pio]

I think you are underestimating the activeness of our councillors in the areas where we have seats, they don't sit around picking there asses untill election time comes back round. The impact we have made on local communities is HUGE, you only need take the example of the Liverpool council during the 1980's or the huge campaign against the poll tax that toppled Thatcher.


Well I mostly know about Sweden and in the last election there you even went back. As far as I remember you have one stronghold but that's not really helping you. People go to the social democratic youth or the left party's yout anyway.
And Liverpool and the poll tax was done as a integrated part of the labour movement, back when you worked in Labour. Not by a group on the fringe of the Labour movement. So I wouldn't see that as a Sp victory.


This is incorrect, we actually see ourselves as a revoulutionary party a Vanguard if you like, we would not be calling for a 'New workers' party otherwise would we

True. But so are workers liberty, swp etc. Most people can't distinguish all those groups from eachother. Quite naturally.


We actually explain quite clearly in our propaganda ( based on fact as opposed to the novels Labour and other parties put out) why Labour are bourgeois! You clearly do not agree that they are, yet it is so blatantly obvious, and where are these differences between Labour and the Tories? You have not come up with one yet? Our political analysis of Labour has led us to no other conclusions, don't you think we would be in this 'Workers party' if Labour really represented the working class? Hey if they ever do give us a call until then we will continue to spread the word about Socialism and building a mass workers party through our tireless campaigns.


Yes we disagrre. You belive that a workers party can't do bourgious politics. I think it's a rather superficial way of seeing things.
And what was the difference with former rightwing Labour leaderships in the past? They sold out the working class time and again. Still you didn't join the sects and shouted "bourgios party" back then.

Sorry for the short reply but am a bit busy. And have discussed this numerous time with your comrades. The thing that im a bit sorry to see is that it seems none of your young people have been schooled in the traditions you used to have. Together with the big centre it seems to have been thrown in the dustbin.

[Daymare17]

Dave Cotterill said in the early 90's: "The Labour Party would wither on the vine.". In fact the whole policy of Militant Labour/SP in the early 90's was pointed towards this goal. In 1997 Labour won tremendously. This should set the alarm bells ringing no?

[Kouros]

If I'm honest I can't be bothered to read all your posts but it seems to meyou're missing the point that labour and every other Political party in England no longer have principles. "Pragmatism instead of principles". ie. Parties only care about getting into power and not looking out for the nation. theyn will do anything to gain power even abandon their principles. EG. The change from Labour to New Labour in the early nineties to gain power. And it worked (eventually)

[T_SP]

Kouros: If I'm honest I can't be bothered to read all your posts .

T_SP: Therefore you have no reason to doubt my points then.


it seems to meyou're missing the point that labour and every other Political party in England no longer have principles.

No I'm not missing that point I agree they don't have principals!





"Pragmatism instead of principles". ie. Parties only care about getting into power and not looking out for the nation.

T_SP: They persistantly put big business before the working class. Don't you agree??

Kouros: theyn will do anything to gain power even abandon their principles. EG. The change from Labour to New Labour in the early nineties to gain power. And it worked (eventually)

T_SP: Which as I have pointed out they have. And if you mean " It worked" by Labours continued privitasation of almost anything they can get away with and the increase in Thatcherite policies, then yes " It worked" does this party really represent you??

[siare]

Gordon Brown will be a much better leader of the labour party than Tony Blair. However Blair is reluctant to let go of power

[T_SP]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2004, 05:24 PM
Gordon Brown will be a much better leader of the labour party than Tony Blair. However Blair is reluctant to let go of power
AhahahahahahahhahahahahaAhahahahahahahhahahahahaAh ahahahahahahhahahahahaAhahahahahahahhahahahahaAhah ahahahahahhahahahahaAhahahahahahahhahahahahaAhahah ahahahahhahahahahaAhahahahahahahhahahahahaAhahahah ahahahhahahahahaAhahahahahahahhahahahahaAhahahahah ahahhahahahahaAhahahahahahahhahahahahaAhahahahahah ahhahahahahaAhahahahahahahhahahahahaAhahahahahahah hahahahahaAhahahahahahahhahahahahaAhahahahahahahha hahahahaAhahahahahahahhahahahahaAhahahahahahahhaha hahahaAhahahahahahahhahahahahaAhahahahahahahhahaha hahaAhahahahahahahhahahahahaAhahahahahahahhahahaha haAhahahahahahahhahahahahaAhahahahahahahhahahahaha AhahahahahahahhahahahahaAhahahahahahahhahahahahaAh ahahahahahahhahahahahaAhahahahahahahhahahahahaAhah ahahahahahhahahahahaAhahahahahahahhahahahahaAhahah ahahahahhahahahaha.


Oh God I've never laughed so hard!! You should be a comedian!!

[Conghaileach]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 05:40 PM
T_SP: This is incorrect, we actually see ourselves as a revoulutionary party a Vanguard if you like, we would not be calling for a 'New workers' party otherwise would we ;) I also think you'll find our parties grasp of Dialectical and historical materialsim is very good and we are well in tune with the working class.
Vanguard? :blink:

Where exactly are you from? Probably a different planet, but that's beside the point. Actually referring to yourselves as some kind of revolutionary vanguard of the workers stinks of pretentiousness and arrogance, which to be honest I've come to expect from a shower of middle-class dickheads that makes up a large part of the Socialist Party (and the SWP too).

Trust me, the working class is better off without 'leaders' like you.

[T_SP]

One for Kez:

Marvellous Result For Socialist Party Candidate

SOCIALIST PARTY member Martin Powell-Davies received 6,482 first-
preference votes in the National Union of Teachers' general
secretary election. This was 12.5% of the vote on a turnout of just
under 22%. Right-wing candidate Steve Sinnott won the election.

Ken Smith

Although Martin was knocked out on the first round of transferable
voting his result is a marvellous one for a candidate standing for
the first time. Martin, unlike the other candidates, had no national
position in the union and had very limited resources to campaign
with.

Martin's result indicates some positive signs for the development of
the Left in the union. Over half of Martin's transfers went to
another Left candidate Ian Murch who came second with 22,134 votes
after transfers. The combined Left vote of nearly 45% is up from 36%
when Christine Blower challenged the incumbent general secretary
Doug McAvoy five years ago.

Martin mobilised many teachers who would not otherwise have been
inspired to vote in the election and his clear call for a number two
transfer vote for Ian Murch paid off in winning thousands of extra
votes for Ian Murch. When Ian Murch stood last year for the national
treasurer's position he gained 17,000 votes.

Martin's decision to stand in the election has been justified by the
increase in the Left's vote and the fact that all the candidates
moved to the Left ? in words at least ?during the course of the
campaign.

NUT activists will have concerns that the more hardline right-wing
candidate ? Steve Sinnott ? won the election. However, the terms of
debate inside the union have been shifted to the Left by Martin's
standing. Sinnott won partly because he was not outgoing general
secretary Doug McAvoy's chosen successor and tried to portray
himself as the unity candidate and being above factions in the union.

Yet, Sinnott is likely to face a short honeymoon and will be under
increasing pressure on issues like workload and pensions.

McAvoy's chosen successor, John Bangs, did very poorly in the
election.

Martin received 13 nominations and got roughly 500 votes per
nomination. Ian Murch got 43 nominations and received an average of
350 votes per nomination ? a reflection of the degree of enthusiasm
generated by the respective campaigns.

There will be a wide-ranging debate likely to take place amongst the
Left organizations in the NUT after this election. One of the issues
they will need to address is how to build a more vibrant, effective
Left to inspire many of the 78% of NUT who didn't vote to turn out
in this election and vote for a candidate that will genuinely
advance the interests of the majority of NUT members.

There will be a fuller article in next week's the socialist.

Results

Candidate Round 1 Round 2 Round 3

John Bangs 10,109 11,190

Ian Murch 15,360 18,643 22,134 (45%)

Martin Powell-Davies 6,482

Steve Sinnott 20,359 21,533 27,287 (55%)

Turnout: 52,310 first-preference votes - 21.7% (900 votes were not
transferred on the first transfer and over 2,000 votes were not
transferred in the final transfer).

[T_SP]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2004, 03:04 PM
Vanguard? :blink:

Where exactly are you from? Probably a different planet, but that's beside the point. Actually referring to yourselves as some kind of revolutionary vanguard of the workers stinks of pretentiousness and arrogance, which to be honest I've come to expect from a shower of middle-class dickheads that makes up a large part of the Socialist Party (and the SWP too).

Trust me, the working class is better off without 'leaders' like you.
Umm, yeah okay. So

1. The workers are gonna just know exactly what Socialism is.
2. They are gonna know how to carry through a revolution.
3. They are gonna know presicely how to stave off a counter revoultion.
4. They will organise themselves, with no problems at all.

Get real, I'm not saying the working class are naieve or stupid but just telling them they need Socialism and expecting them to get on with it is ludicrous. All the revolutions have been failures and because of what? Bad leadership where the leadership did not see the revoultion through. The miners strike, Liverpool. Russia, China, Cuba, Spain, Germany, Portugal, Chile. Need I go on?

[Funky Monk]

Just a quick question here, who amongst the current Labour Leadership (or even the past leadership in the Blair regeime) do you or have you had support for.

I have to admit that i quite like Robin Cook as a man who sticks true to his feelings.

[T_SP]

At a push I would say Tony Benn. Wouldn't call him 'ultra left' though as he has been referred to in the past.

[Kez]

One For Secterians of the SP:
Why did u weaken the BroadLeft slate and split the vote?

The election for NUT General Secretary was won by Broad Left candidate Steve Sinnott. Sinnott won around 20,000 of the first preference votes against about 16,000 for Ian Murch. John Bangs, who stood as the 'independent of all factions' / Doug McAvoy candidate got 10,000 votes and Martin Powell-Davies (Socialist Party) 6,400. The combined first preferences of Murch and MPD would have been higher than Sinnott. When the votes of MPD and then Bangs were redistributed Sinnott had 27,000 and Ian 22,000.

This is a pretty strong showing by Murch who entered the race very late and initially with a split left. When that left reunified itself the SP remained outside that and run an essentially pointless and distracting campaign. Although the bulk of MPD's second preferences went to Ian it is notable that Bangs and Sinnot got over 1000 each of these votes and about 100 didn't give a second preference.

The result suggests that a single left candidate throughout the campaign could certainly have won. John Illingworth, in other words, could have won. Sinnott is the most conventional, 'modernising' of the candidates, the most friendly to the NASUWT and the most likely to want to get back in the Govt's good books and find a way of signing up to the Workforce Agreement. He said in the hustings at conference 'I will never sign that agreement' but we have heard that sort of thing before and the key word in that pledge is 'that'. With a small bit of renegotiation and some minor tweaks it could, of course, become a different agreement which he could sign.

Looks like the left's candidate for Deputy General Secretary will be Christine Blower. She can certainly win and that would place some constraints on the Broad Left.

[James]

Tony Benn has "retired from parliament to spend more time on politics".

Who would you see as a good leader, in the labour party today?

[Kez]

John McDonnel, written a few articles in the Morning Star under the regular heading "True Labour: The voice of the majority"

[Conghaileach]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2004, 05:53 PM
Umm, yeah okay. So

1. The workers are gonna just know exactly what Socialism is.
2. They are gonna know how to carry through a revolution.
3. They are gonna know presicely how to stave off a counter revoultion.
4. They will organise themselves, with no problems at all.
Another example of this conceited and condescending attitude of the ultra-left whereby they argue that the working class are like sheep whop need to be guided by the "revolutionary vanguard" who are the only ones who know the way to the achievement of glorious socialism! A viewpoint that only proves that they really aren't part of the working class, and look upon it with disdain.



Get real, I'm not saying the working class are naieve or stupid but just telling them they need Socialism and expecting them to get on with it is ludicrous.
And you feel that you can just come along and tell them exactly what they need to do in order to achieve Socialism? Wow, that's some liberation - replacing the bosses and capitalist domination with the domination of your particular ultra-leftist sect.



All the revolutions have been failures and because of what? Bad leadership where the leadership did not see the revoultion through.
But yet you feel that your leadership is a good leadership that will know what it's doing? I take it then that your party's leadership is made up of psychics and clairvoyants?

If a revolutionary situation were to develop, I'd pity the working class that was led by the likes of the SP or SWP. The only army they could ever encompass would be an army of paper-sellers. These parties have no revolutionary credentials. They are opportunists who use whatever situation or movement they can get their claws into to sell a few papers and recruit a few members, then leave that movement to whither and die after they've fulfilled their own little motives.

[Conghaileach]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2004, 06:16 PM
Tony Benn has "retired from parliament to spend more time on politics".

Who would you see as a good leader, in the labour party today?
What about Ken Livingstone? What's he doing with himself?

[Funky Monk]

I imagine Ken Livingstone is playing with himself.

[James]

Whats the opinion of the trots on Red Ken?
I know the media hate his guts - may influence performances in elections, and thus the willingness of the party to take him on.

[Saint-Just]

Another example of this conceited and condescending attitude of the ultra-left whereby they argue that the working class are like sheep whop need to be guided by the "revolutionary vanguard" who are the only ones who know the way to the achievement of glorious socialism! A viewpoint that only proves that they really aren't part of the working class, and look upon it with disdain.

Revolutionaries emerge from all classes. So, a working class person can become a revolutionary, in such a case it would seem odd for a working class person to look upon the working class with disdain. Is Kez even working class? Perhaps Trotskist_SP is, but he could easily be working class too.

In addition, socialism is a good thing and I would hope you could recognise this if you call yourself a socialist. I don't know why you prefix socialism with the word 'glorious' so contemptuously.


And you feel that you can just come along and tell them exactly what they need to do in order to achieve Socialism? Wow, that's some liberation - replacing the bosses and capitalist domination with the domination of your particular ultra-leftist sect.



Being liberated from wage labour, as socialists aim to do is liberation. Also, I don't think their Trotskyist sect is ultra-leftist. I was under the impression it was quite reformist.


then leave that movement to whither and die after they've fulfilled their own little motives.

What are their 'own little motives'?

[Kez]

What do i think of Red Ken? a motherfucking sellout, i'd dare him to cross an RMT picketline.

[h&s]

Yeah, but you've got to admire him for calling 4x4 drivers, "complete idiots."
It is a shame he has sold out though.

[Conghaileach]

Originally posted by Chairman [email protected] 30 2004, 10:16 PM
Revolutionaries emerge from all classes. So, a working class person can become a revolutionary, in such a case it would seem odd for a working class person to look upon the working class with disdain.
But these type of ultra-left sects stand outside the working class, which is why the term vaugard exists.



In addition, socialism is a good thing and I would hope you could recognise this if you call yourself a socialist. I don't know why you prefix socialism with the word 'glorious' so contemptuously.
I am socialist. I was attacking their sloganising, and their arrogant view that only they can lead the workers to socialism.



Also, I don't think their Trotskyist sect is ultra-leftist. I was under the impression it was quite reformist.
They're completely opportunist. I take the term 'ultra-leftist' to mean a person or group of people who really has no idea of the needs of the working class, beyond what they decide the workers need. For instance, here in the six counties, in the European election Eamonn McCann ran in a SWP front called the Socialist Environmental Alliance. According to McCann, the occupation of Iraq was the number 1 issue on the agenda. This when there are five thousand more British troops in the six counties than in Iraq. He argued that the national and border questions were irrelevant, and for his 'socialism' only interested himself in a few bread and butter issues. He got 1.6% of the vote. This is ultra-leftism to me. It's also gas and water socialism, but that's more of an Irish issue.



What are their 'own little motives'?
Sell a few papers, gain a few recruits/paper sellers.

[siare]

Labour party has become the party of the middle class and is now defdinetly in the middle, like the other 2 major parties in britain]
It is also intersting to note on the local scale the rise of the independent working class assosiation in oxford and its sucess against the labour party here.

[Conghaileach]

I've heard nothing but good things about the IWCA and want to congratulate them on their successes.

[Scottish_Militant]

Things are pretty decent in my Labour branch, everyones working class, everyone hates Blair, there are no right wingers, fair enough it's hardly the USSR but it aint what SWPers and SPers and other sects want you to think, a middle class blairite chess club. The level of debate I get is always good and campaigns like the Hands off Venezuela one are well supported, I can also get plenty funding for public meetings and leaflets.

I'd rather be there than sitting with two men and a dog at a sect branch, whining about how union leaders are traitors and Blair is a prick and thinking they are having the slightest bit influence in changing that.

Depends how serious the individual is concerned about changing things, many just want to 'play Lenin' and be high up in 'the party' because 'the revolutionary party' has around 15 paying members...

"IWCA" lol, independant of the working class perhaps?

[T_SP]

I am working class and the vast majority of our party is working class!! You yourself just a kid, I imagine, and have no idea of the struggles we have have to endure daily and our involvment within the trade unions and the working class is very deeply rooted!
The leaders of the revoulution will be working class people democratically voted in not handpicked by some sort of an elite! And yes what are 'our own little motives' eh? Clearly you seem to think you know a great deal of our party yet in your ignorance you prove you no nothing!

How much did you, or do you, know about Socialism before you got involved? very little I imagine, as did I, but, when looking for an alternative I looked towards a group that was anti-rascist ( ruling out rightwing parties) and went for the party I felt best reflected my political views.
We have a set Socialist plan, which is changable with the mood of the working class and changes in society. We also seek to teach people about the alternative to the major parties and disscus socialist issues with actual people on the streets, you know those who are REALLY suffering under Capitalism. If we did not do this we would be handing support directly to the likes of UKIP and the BNP the real opprtunistic parties who only want to spread there policies of hatred and division.

The people would not be sheep! How can the revolution happen without some sort of organisation? As I said you aren't taught about Socialism and revolution elsewhere how are the people gonna know how the revolution will work? How will you stave off the threat of a counter revoulution without people who are trained in doing so? We have learnt from our pown past experiences ( Liverpool) and the experiences of other failed revoultions and are always willing to hold our hands up and admit our mistakes but your saddening belief in the bourgeois media means you may never understand or know the truth.

[T_SP]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2004, 04:14 PM
Things are pretty decent in my Labour branch, everyones working class, everyone hates Blair, there are no right wingers, fair enough it's hardly the USSR but it aint what SWPers and SPers and other sects want you to think, a middle class blairite chess club. The level of debate I get is always good and campaigns like the Hands off Venezuela one are well supported, I can also get plenty funding for public meetings and leaflets.

I'd rather be there than sitting with two men and a dog at a sect branch, whining about how union leaders are traitors and Blair is a prick and thinking they are having the slightest bit influence in changing that.

Depends how serious the individual is concerned about changing things, many just want to 'play Lenin' and be high up in 'the party' because 'the revolutionary party' has around 15 paying members...

"IWCA" lol, independant of the working class perhaps?
Yes, the point is how much campaigning do you do? You are restricted in your activism because any attacks you make on your party will mean getting kicked out!



I can also get plenty funding for public meetings and leaflets.




That's nice, what about the funding for the public services?

[socialistfuture]

end the bollocks

[Scottish_Militant]

Yes, the point is how much campaigning do you do? You are restricted in your activism because any attacks you make on your party will mean getting kicked out!

The party is in no state to kick anyone out at the moment, this is another SWP/SP myth. I have always been very open about my Marxist stance, yet my branch appointed me secretary (which they asked me to do) and I was elected youth officer in the CLP. I have campaigned for a number of socialist issues and never once have I been threatened with expulsion!


That's nice, what about the funding for the public services?

I am a Marxist, you shouldn't even need to ask my opinion on this question. What are you doing though? critiscism from the sidelines is very easy...

[Conghaileach]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2004, 10:15 AM
I am working class and the vast majority of our party is working class!! You yourself just a kid, I imagine, and have no idea of the struggles we have have to endure daily and our involvment within the trade unions and the working class is very deeply rooted!
You did say you were a member of the Socialist Party, didn't you? Just checking.



The leaders of the revoulution will be working class people democratically voted in not handpicked by some sort of an elite! And yes what are 'our own little motives' eh? Clearly you seem to think you know a great deal of our party yet in your ignorance you prove you no nothing!
You spelt know incorrectly.



We have a set Socialist plan, which is changable with the mood of the working class and changes in society.
No, you opportunistically jump aboard any movement with a scent of leftism about it, suck it dry and toss it aside when you're done.


We also seek to teach people about the alternative to the major parties and disscus socialist issues with actual people on the streets, you know those who are REALLY suffering under Capitalism.
Indeed, and many of these people will walk away and consider you no different than those bible-bashing weirdoes you find in town/city centres. Trust me, they've approached me and a number of my friends and comrades.



The people would not be sheep! How can the revolution happen without some sort of organisation?
And what makes you believe you are the person, and the party, to be the organisers?



As I said you aren't taught about Socialism and revolution elsewhere how are the people gonna know how the revolution will work? How will you stave off the threat of a counter revoulution without people who are trained in doing so?
What kind of revolutionary training do you get exactly?



We have learnt from our pown past experiences ( Liverpool) and the experiences of other failed revoultions and are always willing to hold our hands up and admit our mistakes
There's a joke if ever I've heard one.



but your saddening belief in the bourgeois media means you may never understand or know the truth.
What have I said that comes from bourgeois media?


The ultimate problem with the likes of the SP and SWP is that you are not revolutionary vanguards, you are opportunist tailists. You jump aboard any movement that you think will lend you some credence among working class people, whether it be anti-water tax protests or the anti-war movement, but they are never fooled by your propaganda, your lies.

[socialistfuture]

CiaranB - what group are you part of?

seems there is a stigma attached to the swp and some other groups, accusations of sectarianism. well the best way to combat it if for people of the different groups to work together. in scotland the ssp did that - a united platform of differen leftiest groups. they did well in the elections considering they were so new, and it looks like they will continue to grow. some people are maybe unable to do that.

there are people in the swp that work really well, and some great literature put out by them. i am a memeber of the nz branch - so call me biased if u will. we have to get pass past differences and move on. to people who have critisms be specific and suggest ways to remedy them - instead of name calling and party bashing.

[Guerrilla22]

Labour Party? I fail to see what aspects of labour this party is actually promoting. Tony Blair and his lackies have done nothing but promote the advancement of neoliberalism even further into UK policy at the same time, they have allowed the US to basically put a lease around the neck of the UK and lead it around like a lap dog.

I understand there is strong opposition to Blair and his policies within the party itself. Being an American I'm not familiar with anyone else in the party, so perhaps a comrade from the UK would care to elaborate on the opposition and please answer the question, of whether or not this opposition can take charge of the party and head it in a new direction, or will it cause a rift in the party that will ulimately lead to a great demise in the party's power. I saw that they already have lost quite a few positions in the recent elections.

[Scottish_Militant]

I would also like to add to Trotskyist_SP the point about 'socialist parties' and there relivance to the working class. For example, the SSP are far bigger than the SP, yet many people up here still refer to them as the SWP, I know many small self proclaimed 'socialist parties' have this problem, if you are out on the streets selling papers for the SP/SPGB/SLP/WP/AWL/WRP etc many folk will ask you "are you in the SWP then?"

And then of course the classic reply comes.... "No Sir, we arent from that socialist party, we are from another socialist party - the difference is that we are the genuine revolutionary party and they are just a sect"

You can then use a few examples of your slight difference in policies and state the areas where you have a couple of elected councilors etc.

The puzzled worker then buys a paper (probibly to get you off his back) and hurries off, only to bump into another party paper seller 500 meters down the street who tells him/her exactly the same thing about their own 'revolutionary party'

What does the worker think? "bloody lunatics" perhaps?

The only worse thing I can think of is for a worker to bump into a RESPECT campaigner - this could be anyone from an islamic fundamentalist to a christian monarchist, at least they don't talk about socialism anymore though!

[Conghaileach]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2004, 09:17 AM
CiaranB - what group are you part of?
None. In the past I have helped a number of different parties, and still do, but I've never joined any.



seems there is a stigma attached to the swp and some other groups, accusations of sectarianism. well the best way to combat it if for people of the different groups to work together. in scotland the ssp did that - a united platform of differen leftiest groups. they did well in the elections considering they were so new, and it looks like they will continue to grow. some people are maybe unable to do that.
It was tried fairly recently. A conference was called to create a left alternative to fight in elections. At the inital meeting, a member of the IRSP was put down by a woman from the SWP, at the meeting as an official representative of the Anti-Racism Network, who said that they'd never work with the IRSP because "they want to reunite the country".



there are people in the swp that work really well, and some great literature put out by them. i am a memeber of the nz branch - so call me biased if u will. we have to get pass past differences and move on.
Then keep up the good work. The SWP and SP, and the like, I criticise are the Irish ones - and since they all but placate to what their British counterparts are doing draw a lot of heat.

[T_SP]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2004, 06:20 PM
You did say you were a member of the Socialist Party, didn't you? Just checking.



You spelt know incorrectly.



No, you opportunistically jump aboard any movement with a scent of leftism about it, suck it dry and toss it aside when you're done.


Indeed, and many of these people will walk away and consider you no different than those bible-bashing weirdoes you find in town/city centres. Trust me, they've approached me and a number of my friends and comrades.



And what makes you believe you are the person, and the party, to be the organisers?



What kind of revolutionary training do you get exactly?



There's a joke if ever I've heard one.



What have I said that comes from bourgeois media?


The ultimate problem with the likes of the SP and SWP is that you are not revolutionary vanguards, you are opportunist tailists. You jump aboard any movement that you think will lend you some credence among working class people, whether it be anti-water tax protests or the anti-war movement, but they are never fooled by your propaganda, your lies.
Once again ignorance prevails, I spelt 'know' incorrectly, surely I know that no this this is not incorrectly spelt.










What have I said that comes from bourgeois media?

No, you opportunistically jump aboard any movement with a scent of leftism about it, suck it dry and toss it aside when you're done.

Indeed, and many of these people will walk away and consider you no different than those bible-bashing weirdoes you find in town/city centres. Trust me, they've approached me and a number of my friends and comrades.




The ultimate problem with the likes of the SP and SWP is that you are not revolutionary vanguards, you are opportunist tailists. You jump aboard any movement that you think will lend you some credence among working class people, whether it be anti-water tax protests or the anti-war movement, but they are never fooled by your propaganda, your lies.

All of the above!!!!!!!!!


A training based on Marxist teachings.

[Conghaileach]

Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2004, 11:14 PM
Once again ignorance prevails, I spelt 'know' incorrectly, surely I know that no this this is not incorrectly spelt.
I threw that up because I thought it'd be funny, considering how you said "in your ignorance you prove you no nothing!"



"What have I said that comes from bourgeois media?"

...

All of the above!!!!!!!!!
I've never seen that in the bourgeois media before, though that's not to say it hasn't appeared. My statements were made based on personal experience.



A training based on Marxist teachings.
So you believe you will able to perform as 'revolutionary vanguard' because you read and discussed a bit, or even all, of Marx's work?

[cubist]

truth is blair sold out kez labour are the same as the tories the working class nearly aren't reprsented at all when this finally happens our revolution will begin

[DaCuBaN]

Airstrip One, here we come!


when this finally happens our revolution will begin

There are no political parties that represent the left, and so why any 'leftist' would continue to support 'Labour' is beyond me. The sooner we can drag those misguided wretches away, the quicker we can start bringing around Technocratic Communism ;)

[cubist]

indeed Dacuban, playing with the bourgeoise is a dying game for the weak and incapable i am not going to vote at all MY GOVERNMENT WILL MAKE ME HATE MY COUNTRY NO MATTER WHO THEY ARE,

i am rapidly changing my political opinions i believe revolution has never been closer, i mean labour lost tyneside the working class capital of the UK and did they vote tory no they didn't vote, in a world where more people vote for the evictions of big brother is it suprising that we have the worse government ever

[DaCuBaN]

in a world where more people vote for the evictions of big brother is it suprising that we have the worse government ever

It shows how out of touch the system is. Electronic voting is an absolute necessity to their survival, yet they still do not embrace it. Technocracy all the way :)

[cubist]

why have voting why not just let them lie and cheat themselves of our money, why not let them sit in a big stone room taking the piss out of each other like they do anyway, how about we rid the bourgoise of there false status styrip them of there clothers and make them walk among thieves in prisons like the thieves taht they are