Tony Benn

[Tommy-K]

Just a place to discuss your opinions of Tony Benn, his time in Cabinet under Harold Wilson and James Callaghan, and what (if anything) he did for Britain and for leftists world-wide.

I personally admire the man. He is a bit of a socio-democrat, but is much more radical that most.

He also attended the 2005 anti-war march aged 80 :D

Here is info if you know nothing about him: Tony Benn (Wiki) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Benn)

EDIT: Also just found a very good interview with him which details a lot of what he stands for: Tony Benn Interview (http://designermagazine.tripod.com/TonyBennINT1.html)

[Devrim]

He was part of a labour government that tried to limit public pay sector pay increase to 5% when inflation was running at over twenty percent. He played his role for the capitalists in their assaults on working class living standards.

Also, he was the first minister to order armed police against striking workers since Churchill.

Devrim

[Tommy-K]

Did he not support workers strikes?

He picketed with many workers on various strikes. I find it hard to believe that he ordered armed police against them.

[Devrim]

Originally posted by Tommy-[email protected] 01, 2007 10:52 am
Did he not support workers strikes?

He picketed with many workers on various strikes. I find it hard to believe that he ordered armed police against them.
Read about about workers' struggles in 1970's Britain. It is quite clear that when push comes to shove., however radical they sound, social democrats always come down on the side of the bourgeoise

Devrim

[Demogorgon]

Well we are getting the usual rubbish from people here determined to see the worst in everyone. Tony Benn was simply a member of the left wing of the Labour Party, a social demcorat, promoted to the Cabinet to placate Michael Foot. It was his time in Cabinet that radicalised him, as he realised how the world was really run. He said himself that he had not realised how undemocratic the world was until he had a while in Government to bring him to his senses.

Criticising him for what he did in Government is foolish for several reasons. Firstly Cabinet Ministers don't have much power and have to do as they are told, secondly he was as he has admitted completely constrained by the interests of international capital and thirdly it was before he became a proper socialist anyway.

His time in cabinet has however, given us a great insight into the way the British state actually functions and the way the firms strong arm the Government whenever it feels disinclined to do exactly what they want.

Sonce that time Tony Benn has been an excelent voice for socialism and will have persuaded a great many people. I really do wish people would stop shooting the Goose that lays the Golden Egg.

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 10:45 am
Also, he was the first minister to order armed police against striking workers since Churchill.

I was under the impression that he was the first minister to do that in Britain, full stop. And the last. And if anyone's interested, he justified his actions in terms of "national security".

On a lighter note, when I was first getting interested in radical politics, I really admired Tony Benn. He's like a more eloquent and intelligent Galloway, which makes him a very appealing political figure for those who've just started thinking about the issues he discusses.

[Devrim]

Originally posted by Amusing Scrotum+July 01, 2007 12:15 pm--> (Amusing Scrotum @ July 01, 2007 12:15 pm)
Originally posted by devrimankara+July 01, 2007 10:45 am--> (devrimankara @ July 01, 2007 10:45 am) Also, he was the first minister to order armed police against striking workers since Churchill. [/b]

I was under the impression that he was the first minister to do that in Britain, full stop. And the last. And if anyone's interested, he justified his actions in terms of "national security".

[/b]
Yes, Maybe I am wrong. I thought Churchill did.


[email protected]
Criticising him for what he did in Government is foolish for several reasons.

Right let's ignore what these people do in power, and listen to their 'pretty words' ouside of it.


Demogorgon
Tony Benn was simply a member of the left wing of the Labour Party, a social demcorat, promoted to the Cabinet to placate Michael Foot.

The Labour Party is now, and was then a viciously anti-working class party.

Devrim

[Demogorgon]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 12:26 pm
Right let's ignore what these people do in power, and listen to their 'pretty words' ouside of it.


You are determined to hate him. But he has done far more for socialism than most. There is no logic in criticising him for what he was before he was radicalised. Do we say Trotsky was right wing for holding liberal ideas before he became a Communist? Benn went into Government believing he could work to help the working class. Onc in Government he was pushed around by business interests and found out how mistaken he was. That does not mean he is really a right winger.
The Labour Party is now, and was then a viciously anti-working class party. You are ignoring the complexity of the history of the Labour Party. It was not oriiginally an anti-working class party. It was a rdical party tamed by the establishment. The establishment had it under it's thumb by the thirties, but nonetheless radical elements remained in it right into the eighties. Have you forgotten militant?

You cannot simply dismiss everyone who has ever been in the Labour Party as being anti-working class.

[Hit The North]

Also, he was the first minister to order armed police against striking workers since Churchill.

When did this happen?

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by Citizen [email protected] 01, 2007 02:43 pm


Also, he was the first minister to order armed police against striking workers since Churchill.

When did this happen?
A good question, because as far as I am aware benn has never held a government post which would place that kind of scenario under his control.

[Devrim]

Originally posted by Citizen Zero+July 01, 2007 01:43 pm--> (Citizen Zero @ July 01, 2007 01:43 pm)

Also, he was the first minister to order armed police against striking workers since Churchill.

When did this happen? [/b]
It was a nuclear plant around 1976/77. Benn was Minister for Technology, Power and Communications in the Labour government, or some such title and ordered armed police against the strike.

That Labour government also used troops against striking firemen. Remember the 'Green Godesses'?


Originally posted by [email protected]
The establishment had it under it's thumb by the thirties, but nonetheless radical elements remained in it right into the eighties. Have you forgotten militant?

No, weren't they the ones who thought that you struggled against the state by laying off your workers?

The Labour party is a wholly capitalist party, and was in the 70's, and 80's too.


Demogorgon
You cannot simply dismiss everyone who has ever been in the Labour Party as being anti-working class.

No, I don't, but the party is anti-working class.

Devrim

[Invader Zim]

It was a nuclear plant around 1976/77. Benn was Minister for Technology, Power and Communications in the Labour government, or some such title and ordered armed police against the strike.

I believe he was Secretary of State for Energy.

But I most certainly do not remember reading about this.

However, I have attempted to find information on this strike which Benn sent armed police in and found nothing.

[Demogorgon]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 02:44 pm

No, weren't they the ones who thought that you struggled against the state by laying off your workers?

The Labour party is a wholly capitalist party, and was in the 70's, and 80's too.

You evidently have forgotten them. Militant were a Trotskyist entrist group.

And as for Tony Benn, he was heavily constrained by the fact the capitalists had the Government completely under control at that point, even more so than usual. He should probably have resigned, but then someone else would have held his post and been even worse.

Anyway the Labour Party is a capitalist party but it is ridiculous to say every element of it has always been like that. And you cannot accuse Tony Benn of not being a socialist because of things he did before he flly embraced socialism.

[Amusing Scrotum]

Originally posted by Demogorgon+--> (Demogorgon)You evidently have forgotten them. Militant were a Trotskyist entrist group.[/b]

Nah, devrim's not forgotten them. Liverpool council, under the control of the Militant tendency, issued 90 day redundancy notices to 30,000 councils workers -- because, in their opinion, this was a viable tactic which they could use to get more central funding for the council.


Invader Zim
However, I have attempted to find information on this strike which Benn sent armed police in and found nothing.

There's a thread on libcom where this comes up -- unless memory deceives me, there are a handful of personal accounts from people around at the time, and a couple of references to sources. Can't be arsed to find the thread myself, but I'm sure you could find it with a little bit of searching.

[gilhyle]

It is less interesting to spot what was wrong with Benn at his worst than to spot what was wrong with him at his best. Left social democratic figures like him, particularly when good speakers, can seem hugely important figures. When he lost the labour deputy leadership by ....1% or some such miniscule figure, it seemed like a turning point. But in truth, Ton Benn relied on being in opposition. People like him, when they go into government, soften their views. His politics are based on not being able to implement them. Trotsky talks well on this in Trotsky on Britain. Michael Foot and Neil Kinnock both seemed very left social democrats once. Thon Blair at least had the decency never to seem anything but what he was.

[Vanguard1917]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 12:36 pm

The Labour Party is now, and was then a viciously anti-working class party. You are ignoring the complexity of the history of the Labour Party. It was not oriiginally an anti-working class party. It was a rdical party tamed by the establishment.
It was a party of the establishment. We can look at Labour (specifically pre-1979 Labour) as the substitute party of the system - relied upon by the establishment to tame the working class (due to its influence in the organised working class) whenever the Tories (the 'natural' party of British government) could not. The Labour Party played an invaluable role in maintaining capitalist rule in Britain - not least because it had people like Tony Benn at hand to provide the necessary socialist rhetoric.

[CornetJoyce]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 05:21 pm
Left social democratic figures like him, particularly when good speakers, can seem hugely important figures. When he lost the labour deputy leadership by ....1% or some such miniscule figure, it seemed like a turning point. But in truth, Ton Benn relied on being in opposition. People like him, when they go into government, soften their views. His politics are based on not being able to implement them. Trotsky talks well on this in Trotsky on Britain.
Yes, Trotsky too was a good speaker in opposition. In power, he sent in the troops. This is why a revolutionary party should sacrifice its leaders every month on the full moon and choose new ones.

[bolshevik butcher]

Benn has failed the working class in government, he's typical of the left social democrats, he can talk alright until he touches government. The most significant thing that Benn did in parliament was to pour lots of money into a plane that flew the rich over the atlantic in luxury to make business dealings more efficent.

Benn only seems to mention socialism to knock it and belittle attempts at building it. I'd point to his talk about how great it was that Venezuela wasnt trying to have anything to do with the dictatorship of the proletariat in his speech at the Hands Off Venezuela conference in 2005 (hope he's a bit more scared now).

[gilhyle]

Originally posted by CornetJoyce+July 01, 2007 07:01 pm--> (CornetJoyce @ July 01, 2007 07:01 pm)
[email protected] 01, 2007 05:21 pm
Left social democratic figures like him, particularly when good speakers, can seem hugely important figures. When he lost the labour deputy leadership by ....1% or some such miniscule figure, it seemed like a turning point. But in truth, Ton Benn relied on being in opposition. People like him, when they go into government, soften their views. His politics are based on not being able to implement them. Trotsky talks well on this in Trotsky on Britain.
Yes, Trotsky too was a good speaker in opposition. In power, he sent in the troops. This is why a revolutionary party should sacrifice its leaders every month on the full moon and choose new ones. [/b]
Nice idea - but you need a priest to lead the sacrifice.

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by bolshevik [email protected] 01, 2007 08:21 pm
Benn has failed the working class in government, he's typical of the left social democrats, he can talk alright until he touches government. The most significant thing that Benn did in parliament was to pour lots of money into a plane that flew the rich over the atlantic in luxury to make business dealings more efficent.

Benn only seems to mention socialism to knock it and belittle attempts at building it. I'd point to his talk about how great it was that Venezuela wasnt trying to have anything to do with the dictatorship of the proletariat in his speech at the Hands Off Venezuela conference in 2005 (hope he's a bit more scared now).

Benn has failed the working class in government, he's typical of the left social democrats, he can talk alright until he touches government. The most significant thing that Benn did in parliament was to pour lots of money into a plane that flew the rich over the atlantic in luxury to make business dealings more efficent.

Other than the fact that Benn's leftwing views hardened significantly after he saw how futile office was.

[bluescouse]

Originally posted by Amusing Scrotum+July 01, 2007 04:49 pm--> (Amusing Scrotum @ July 01, 2007 04:49 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected]
You evidently have forgotten them. Militant were a Trotskyist entrist group.

Nah, devrim's not forgotten them. Liverpool council, under the control of the Militant tendency, issued 90 day redundancy notices to 30,000 councils workers -- because, in their opinion, this was a viable tactic which they could use to get more central funding for the council.


Invader Zim
However, I have attempted to find information on this strike which Benn sent armed police in and found nothing.

There's a thread on libcom where this comes up -- unless memory deceives me, there are a handful of personal accounts from people around at the time, and a couple of references to sources. Can't be arsed to find the thread myself, but I'm sure you could find it with a little bit of searching. [/b]
I dont mean to sidestep the discussion, but as most people are aware the 90 day redundancy notices were a tactic to gain time. No one was ever made redundant, and it was never intended to make anyone redundant. It was a struggle against a vicious tory government, and some of the militant councilors are still struggling to pay of the fines.

[R_P_A_S]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 10:45 am
He was part of a labour government that tried to limit public pay sector pay increase to 5% when inflation was running at over twenty percent. He played his role for the capitalists in their assaults on working class living standards.

Also, he was the first minister to order armed police against striking workers since Churchill.

Devrim
ahhh i forgot! that all REAL socialist are supposed to be perfect and follow the manifesto word for word. damn all those fakes! :rolleyes:

[Leo]

Also, he was the first minister to order armed police against striking workers since Churchill.

ahhh i forgot! that all REAL socialist are supposed to be perfect and follow the manifesto word for word. damn all those fakes! :rolleyes:

<_< Yeah, it is perfectly in line with socialism to order armed police against striking workers.

What is against the interests of the working class is automatically anti-communist, period - no matter how "left-wing", "socialist" or even "communist" the guy sounds.

[luxemburg89]

Thon Blair at least had the decency never to seem anything but what he was.

Well Blair actually claimed to be a socialist in the mid-eighties - so he&#39;s a liar as well.

Also there have been many cases of armed police moving in worker&#39;s strikes. Ramsay MacDonald (First Labour Prime Minister 1923-24, 1929-33) refused to condemn Stanley Baldwin (Conservative Prime Minister 1920-23, 1924-1929, 1933-35) when he sent in the police to crush the General Strike because he wanted Labour to appeal to everyone and appear to be a &#39;Party fit to govern all&#39;. Churchill did send in armed police to stop worker strikes and protests when he worked in the Liberal Party and in the Conservative Party, Thatcher you must surely know sent in police to crush workers when she felt like it. Labour have simply been traitors from Ramsay Macdonald onwards. Yet Tony Benn, Atlee and even Ken Livingstone now are moderately better than usual - though obviously there are reservations to be held over Livingstone. I don&#39;t think we should reject these figures entirely.

[Devrim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10, 2007 08:26 pm
Also there have been many cases of armed police moving in worker&#39;s strikes. Ramsay MacDonald (First Labour Prime Minister 1923-24, 1929-33) refused to condemn Stanley Baldwin (Conservative Prime Minister 1920-23, 1924-1929, 1933-35) when he sent in the police to crush the General Strike because he wanted Labour to appeal to everyone and appear to be a &#39;Party fit to govern all&#39;. Churchill did send in armed police to stop worker strikes and protests when he worked in the Liberal Party and in the Conservative Party, Thatcher you must surely know sent in police to crush workers when she felt like it. Labour have simply been traitors from Ramsay Macdonald onwards. Yet Tony Benn, Atlee and even Ken Livingstone now are moderately better than usual - though obviously there are reservations to be held over Livingstone. I don&#39;t think we should reject these figures entirely.
The point was about armed Police (with guns).
Devrim

[R_P_A_S]

Originally posted by Leo [email protected] 10, 2007 08:11 pm


Also, he was the first minister to order armed police against striking workers since Churchill.

ahhh i forgot&#33; that all REAL socialist are supposed to be perfect and follow the manifesto word for word. damn all those fakes&#33; :rolleyes:

<_< Yeah, it is perfectly in line with socialism to order armed police against striking workers.

What is against the interests of the working class is automatically anti-communist, period - no matter how "left-wing", "socialist" or even "communist" the guy sounds.
BWAH&#33; I never ment to say it LIKE that.

i meant is not like he is a real or perfect socialist

[Vanguard1917]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10, 2007 08:26 pm
Yet Tony Benn, Atlee and even Ken Livingstone now are moderately better than usual - though obviously there are reservations to be held over Livingstone. I don&#39;t think we should reject these figures entirely.
Atlee (who the Labour left views as some kind of saint) sent troops to break strikes and sent militant activists to prison. He also maintained rations and brought in wage restraints to restore the profitability of the post-war British economy.


Labour have simply been traitors from Ramsay Macdonald onwards.

Even before him. Labour have been actively betraying the working class ever since &#39;union man&#39; Arthur Henderson was brought into the Cabinet in 1915 to discourage the unions from striking during the war.

The Labour Party did an invaluable service to British capitalism at its most vulnerable times.

[Random Precision]

I like Lenin&#39;s answer to the British Communists when they asked him if they should support the Labour Party. He said, "Yes. The same way a noose supports a hanged man."

[Marion]

Originally posted by devrimankara+July 01, 2007 12:26 pm--> (devrimankara &#064; July 01, 2007 12:26 pm)
Originally posted by Amusing [email protected] 01, 2007 12:15 pm

[email protected] 01, 2007 10:45 am
Also, he was the first minister to order armed police against striking workers since Churchill.

I was under the impression that he was the first minister to do that in Britain, full stop. And the last. And if anyone&#39;s interested, he justified his actions in terms of "national security".


Yes, Maybe I am wrong. I thought Churchill did.

[/b]
I think the main incident relating to Churchill is the strike in Tonypandy (Google it for loads of info) where the Met Police were sent in to break a strike.

Re. Benn. If he felt being in Cabinet was futile then why has he remained a member of the Labour Party? He very much still believes that the Labour Party can make a difference, albeit that it needs to be reinvigorated by the &#39;left&#39;. I heard him speak about three or four years ago and this was basically his key point, although he mixed in some awful crap about him being old so he should be allowed some indulgence in his support for Labour. For someone who was supposed to be a great orator it was all a bit embarrasing...

[Tommy-K]

Wasn&#39;t it his position in the Cabinet that turned Tony Benn more radical? When he saw first hand the corruption of the Labour Party? To this extent can he be excused for his actions (such as ordering armed police against striking workers) prior to this realisation and consequent radicalisation and can these actions be put down to naivity and ignorance as to the true nature of the Labour Party?

[Marion]

Still begs the question of why he is still in the Labour Party though, and why he still advocates people voting for them, doesn&#39;t it?

[Tommy-K]

Here&#39;s a thought. Are you sure some of these rumours are not just part of the huge smear campaign launched against Benn by Thatcher and her government?

In retaliation to this smear campaign, didn&#39;t they start making badges that said &#39;Tony Benn for no. 10&#39;?

[Leo]

What does that have to do with this person still being in the Labour Party and advocating people voting for them?

[Tommy-K]

Originally posted by Leo [email protected] 14, 2007 08:45 am
What does that have to do with this person still being in the Labour Party and advocating people voting for them?
It doesn&#39;t. I wasn&#39;t referring to that post.

I don&#39;t know, it does seem a bit odd. Maybe he still hopes the Labour Party will one day see sense.

[ern]

Vanguard1917 sums up labour role within the British state pretty well. And it is not only against workers&#39; strike that they have done their duty to the national capital. At the imperialist level they have always played the sole of the recruiting Sargent of British capitalism. In WW1 and WW2 it was labour that enabled the state to mobilise the class for the slaughter. And during the Cold War labour was at the forefront of the gaining of nuclear weapons for the British state. In the 1970&#39;s whilst it was carrying out brutal attacks on workers&#39; living and working conditions, it was doing all it could to maintain and strengthen the British war machine. Benn was fully implicated in all of this, so to try and justify his actions is the same as justifying British imperialism.
Apart from using armed troops against the class -just after the war they used troops to break a dockers strike, and others- Labour has used its own goons to attack those who criticise it. In 1979 in Central Hall, I saw labour goons killing the shit out of a couple of anarchists (who had the nerve to call for a general strike) and being told to shut for protesting about this.

[Vanguard1917]

In the 1970&#39;s whilst it was carrying out brutal attacks on workers&#39; living and working conditions, it was doing all it could to maintain and strengthen the British war machine.

And let&#39;s not forget that Labour governments maintained British troops in Ireland and that Tony Benn refused to support their immediate withdrawal.

[Sugar Hill Kevis]

Originally posted by devrimankara+July 01, 2007 12:26 pm--> (devrimankara @ July 01, 2007 12:26 pm)
Originally posted by Amusing [email protected] 01, 2007 12:15 pm

[email protected] 01, 2007 10:45 am
Also, he was the first minister to order armed police against striking workers since Churchill.

I was under the impression that he was the first minister to do that in Britain, full stop. And the last. And if anyone&#39;s interested, he justified his actions in terms of "national security".


Yes, Maybe I am wrong. I thought Churchill did [/b]
During the British general strike under Baldwin&#39;s govt where Churchill held some cabinet post I know that churchill was very militant in how to deal with the strike. I&#39;ve heard reports than churchill himself shot at striking miners but don&#39;t know how valid that is.

Personally, I&#39;m quite a fan of Benn. As far as the parliamentary British left goes he&#39;s a shining star. Benn expresses belief in workers control of the means of production and has been a stark critic of the Iraq war, I went to see him speak a few months back and despite being over 80 he was great. He pussyfooted around a bit on the question of Milosevic&#39;s genocide in Bosnia when asked, but other than that it was enjoyable to watch him speak.

Tony Benn owning Jon Bolton (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuqNWG9sbuE&mode=related&search=)

[Marion]

Well, it clearly depends entirely upon what you mean by "workers control" - loads of people in Labour in the 70&#39;s and 80&#39;s used to mouth off about workers control but saw it as entirely compatible with their brand of leftism, parliamentary politics, trade unionism and the state. Perhaps someone can clarify exactly what Benn meant by the term but I&#39;d very very much doubt that it was anti-capitalist in the slightest.

I know entirely what you mean by seeing Benn as a "shining star" as far as the British parliamentary left. On the other hand, as you&#39;d probably agree, I think it says a lot about how capital can make use of socialist rhetoric. Its quite noticeable that when Benn says he began to re-evaluate communism in the 70&#39;s it was because his first reading of the Communist Manifesto showed that he, unknowingly "shared Marx&#39;s view" rather than because it caused him to re-evaluate his positions (see http://politics.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,32...118923,00.html) (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,329656447-118923,00.html)).

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 11:10 pm
Nice idea - but you need a priest to lead the sacrifice.
My vote is for Cornet Joyce - surely he is pure and incorruptable.

Luís Henrique

[catch]

Sometimes the opposition of civil servants borders on outright sabotage. Thus Brian Sedgemore, in his recent book The Secret Constitution (1980), points out that when Tony Benn was Minister of Energy during a strike at Windscale, his civil servants informed him that unless troops were used to move nitrogen across a picket line a "critical nuclear explosion would take place". Sedgemore diplomatically comments that these warnings were "unfounded". The Civil Contingencies Unit at the Cabinet Office had prepared a plan "to break the strike with troops, thus leaving Tony Benn as a sort of latter-day Churchill" {The Times, 29 May 1980).

There&#39;s a section about it in the Benn diaries http://bbc.ask-adders.com/series/The%20Benn%20Tapes/

not listened to them though.