a question

[camilo_cienfuegos]

where do all you comrades stand on the british labour party?

[camilo_cienfuegos]

so then comrades, we have no opinions what so ever about the ruling party of the 4th richest capitalist state in the world?

[JKP]

It sounds as if you already know the answer...

[Amusing Scrotum]

Comrade, patience is a virtue.

I recently wrote a short piece on the Labour Party called "Labour after Blair." You can view it here (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=40912). Although you won't find anyone here who supports "New Labour," you will find some members, myself included, are of the opinion that the Labour Party can be stolen back from the bureaucratic Stalinist impostors who control it now.

[camilo_cienfuegos]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2005, 01:25 AM
Comrade, patience is a virtue.

I recently wrote a short piece on the Labour Party called "Labour after Blair." You can view it here (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=40912). Although you won't find anyone here who supports "New Labour," you will find some members, myself included, are of the opinion that the Labour Party can be stolen back from the bureaucratic Stalinist impostors who control it now.
awww yes we might very well be able to steal it back, but would it then not be unelectable again, as it was in the 80s and early 90s?

[Amusing Scrotum]

awww yes we might very well be able to steal it back, but would it then not be unelectable again, as it was in the 80s and early 90s?

.....but if a Socialist Party is unelectable then that means the class consciousness of the general public is not yet at a sufficient level. Even if we didn't steal the Labour Party back and tried instead to instigate a full scale revolution, this would fail if the working class did not want the revolution.

Anyway I'd rather have an unelectable workers' party than an electable Capitalist party.

[drain.you]

Don't get me wrong, I've been ashamed of some of the legislation they've passed so far this term in office but I want them to stay in office. Why? Because I smell the death of the Conservatives. They've had how many failed leaders now? If they make the wrong decision in this leader's election then the Tories will have allowed Lib Dems to gain alot more power. And I hope in ten years time or less that Lib Dems will be in power :)
They the best option in sight, so yeah, go Lib Dems

[Sir Aunty Christ]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2005, 09:11 AM
... I smell the death of the Conservatives.
I don't, unfortunately. Mainly because David Cameron will become the leader and he is their Blair.

I also have a theory that if he takes the Conservatives more to the left, Gordon Brown will be forced to bring Labour back to the left and we could see the resurgence of mainstream socialism.

[h&s]

Originally posted by camilo_cienfuegos+Oct 26 2005, 01:42 AM--> (camilo_cienfuegos @ Oct 26 2005, 01:42 AM)
[email protected] 26 2005, 01:25 AM
Comrade, patience is a virtue.

I recently wrote a short piece on the Labour Party called "Labour after Blair." You can view it here (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=40912). Although you won't find anyone here who supports "New Labour," you will find some members, myself included, are of the opinion that the Labour Party can be stolen back from the bureaucratic Stalinist impostors who control it now.
awww yes we might very well be able to steal it back, but would it then not be unelectable again, as it was in the 80s and early 90s?[/b]
The idea that a party with a socialist platform is unelectable is a complete myth.
After the Labour Party Conference that decided upon the 1945 manifesto one of the leaders told another that the socialist(ish) platform just decided upon had just 'lost us the election.' - Labour won with its first ever overall majority.
After Kinnock betrayed the miners, kicked us Trots out the party and shifted the party to the right the consensus was that what he had done had 'won us the election.' They lost. Badly.
The leaders never know what's right, and thats the reason why Labour lost elections. People didn't vote Labour not becasue Labour were on the left, but because they had been betrayed by Labour.
Labour never went far enough, which inevitably meant that it did things that betrayed its working class base, like refusing to repeal the ban on strikes after the war, and taking part in imperialist wars such as that in Korea.
And when Labour moved to the right, the betrayals obviously got worse.

I personally believe that Labour is too far gone to be taken back - all democracy in the party has gone, and their going to kick out the unions if they get their way.
Bascially I refuse to fund and support a party that attacks the working class.
We need a new party, but I really can not be arsed to get into that debate, again.



I also have a theory that if he takes the Conservatives more to the left, Gordon Brown will be forced to bring Labour back to the left and we could see the resurgence of mainstream socialism.
Oh because Gordan Brown isn't the architect of New 'Labour' at all.... :rolleyes:
Even if he does go to the left ( :lol: ), he's not likely to go far.
Cameron's impact is more likely to be one where politics is all fought over image (like in the US) as both partys are identicle.

[slim]

As far as i see the three main parties are all the same. They are opposed only on unideological issues such as Europe and how to run the NHS. They are all capitalist and New Labour has been shown to be similar to Thatcherism.

Unfortunatly they are not people's parties. Their conferences avoid the main issues to keep unity. They dont care about the people, they only care about how to keep power.

This will all end soon.

Do chara,

Slim. HRA.

[Sir Aunty Christ]

Originally posted by h&[email protected] 26 2005, 10:12 AM

I also have a theory that if he takes the Conservatives more to the left, Gordon Brown will be forced to bring Labour back to the left and we could see the resurgence of mainstream socialism.
Oh because Gordan Brown isn't the architect of New 'Labour' at all.... :rolleyes:
Even if he does go to the left ( :lol: ), he's not likely to go far.
Cameron's impact is more likely to be one where politics is all fought over image (like in the US) as both partys are identicle.
Y'see, my reasoning is that a Cameron lead Tory party might be able to win back "natural" Conservative's who've voted Labour since 1997 so with that loss of the New Labour base, what choice would Gordon Brown have?

[somebodywhowantedtoleaveandnotcomeback]

Labour/Conservatives ; it's a lose-lose situation

[bolshevik butcher]

The labour party isn't a beugoirse organization as sutch. If more of the unions were reclaimed like the fire fighters one has been then the labour party could again be more left wing. By the way, even when it was first formed it was never really soiclaist, but it has always had elements at least that were a voice for socialism, and the working class.

[h&s]

Originally posted by Sir Aunty Christ+Oct 26 2005, 04:48 PM--> (Sir Aunty Christ @ Oct 26 2005, 04:48 PM)
h&[email protected] 26 2005, 10:12 AM

I also have a theory that if he takes the Conservatives more to the left, Gordon Brown will be forced to bring Labour back to the left and we could see the resurgence of mainstream socialism.
Oh because Gordan Brown isn't the architect of New 'Labour' at all.... :rolleyes:
Even if he does go to the left ( :lol: ), he's not likely to go far.
Cameron's impact is more likely to be one where politics is all fought over image (like in the US) as both partys are identicle.
Y'see, my reasoning is that a Cameron lead Tory party might be able to win back "natural" Conservative's who've voted Labour since 1997 so with that loss of the New Labour base, what choice would Gordon Brown have? [/b]
I don't think that will result in a loss of the New Labour base, just that it would be shared out between the two parties.
In the past this kind of thing would have froced Brown left, but Brown hates the left so much I think he would just stick to his New Labour guns.