14th November Movement for Left Unity

[chilango]

I can't know the polticis of every person in every part of the country.

No. But if you're gonna complain about the far-left being unable to mount any sort of serious electoral challenge and moan at posters' cynicism it'd be sensible to do a little bit of research into the recent history of the electoral far left, no?

It's easy enough to find this stuff out too.

Some previous projects you can look up include: Respect, no2EU, Socialist Alliance and the Socialist Labour Party. A quick glance at Wikipedia or something ought to be enough for you to see the basic common threads.

You can then start to think about why the same pattern gets repeated again and again.

There's a tonne of threads on here about each these too where you can read posters' takes on the matter.

 

[belboid]

So how do they break thorugh if they can't even get invited to a discussion to at least put their point across?

UKIP didnt get invited till they started winning. Same with Respect.

Seems unfair to criticise them for the system they have to operate in.

I'm not doing. I'm criticising them for being shit and refusing to recognise the fact

 

[chilango]

So how do they break thorugh if they can't even get invited to a discussion to at least put their point across?

Seems unfair to criticise them for the system they have to operate in.

They don't have a mandate to be invited onto any platform. Their votes show a complete lack of popular support.

However, other tiny parties have forced their way in...the Greens, the BNP and UKIP are all examples. It takes time, perseverance, and a willingness to engage in "dogshit politics" on the doorstep though.

 

[butchersapron]

Surely then they'll be seen as pro-EU lefy commie types? They can't win.

In the local elections last year Radio Bristol had a 'discussion' with the candidates. Even ukip got invited. Tusc only got a mention as 'tusc are also standing'. Noone was invited to speak from them nor was their cause even explained. They were relegated to the same platform as the Monster Raving party.

TUSC have been on radio bristol many times.

You seem to be arguing for some from of non-political politics - one with no disagreements, or positions or principles. Or one where they are least hidden away from view. Very odd.

 

[butchersapron]

I'm not aware of other attempts. All i know is that the left seems hell bent on self destruction while the soceity is torn to shit by right wingers racists, bigots, corporations and cunts. It'd be nice to have some answers.

In next years vote the only choices on my ballot paper will be either Tory, who recently took over from the Libdems, who have traditionally held sway here. Labour won't get a look in, but are the only real chance of ousting this nighmare even though they aren't up to much. The rest are independent candidates, like Katie Hopkins, or BNP (if they stand - or some other England for teh English party) or UKip.

No left choice at all. Something needs to change, but it seems noone wants that to happen; either, as you say, through self destruction, or through sniping from the sidelines. Open season for the right wing gutter press.

You had a green candidate in your seat. He got 1.3% of the vote. Presumably you voted for him and would today argue that doing so is the winning ticket and if people disagree they should just shut their mouths and stop sniping and being sectarian? As for disagreeing with his politics, again, keep it zipped or he won't get on the radio.

 

[Awesome Wells]

No. But if you're gonna complain about the far-left being unable to mount any sort of serious electoral challenge and moan at posters' cynicism it'd be sensible to do a little bit of research into the recent history of the electoral far left, no?

It's easy enough to find this stuff out too.

Some previous projects you can look up include: Respect, no2EU, Socialist Alliance and the Socialist Labour Party. A quick glance at Wikipedia or something ought to be enough for you to see the basic common threads.

You can then start to think about why the same pattern gets repeated again and again.

There's a tonne of threads on here about each these too where you can read posters' takes on the matter.

Do you know of any specific sites or articles to recommend?

The use of the word 'moan' is facile. We want answers we want to see something that will work. That won't be achieved by slagging everything off.

Ian Bone sat outside the People's Assembly big meeting last June. What did he achieve standing outside the tent pissing in? That's not to say the PA aren't deserving of criticism (and I have been critical, particularly to them on Twitter), but people are just not going to respond to a wall of negativity when all they see is 'this is shit, they're shit' (and not all those attending the PA are politically expert).

 

[chilango]

Do you know of any specific sites or articles to recommend?

Here?

Do a search of past threads about those groups.

It'll save a lot of people being asked to repeat themselves!

Just read the Wikipedia entries on the groups too. It'll give enough of a flavour.

 

[Awesome Wells]

They don't have a mandate to be invited onto any platform. Their votes show a complete lack of popular support.

However, other tiny parties have forced their way in...the Greens, the BNP and UKIP are all examples. It takes time, perseverance, and a willingness to engage in "dogshit politics" on the doorstep though.

Maybe, but they were standing and so surely the BBC of all people ought to do more than mention them in mere passing.

 

[Awesome Wells]

Here?

Do a search of past threads about those groups.

It'll save a lot of people being asked to repeat themselves!

Just read the Wikipedia entries on the groups too. It'll give enough of a flavour.

I just wondered if you knew of any sites that might have articles worth reading. People repeat themselves all the time, it's not much of an imposition is it.

 

[butchersapron]

Maybe, but they were standing and so surely the BBC of all people ought to do more than mention them in mere passing.

They did - i heard it - and more than once.

And why on earth should simply standing mean you should get in depth coverage?

 

[butchersapron]

I'm not wading through hundreds of pages of threads, comments (informed or otherwise - how woudl i know?), bias, abuse, and jokes. I just wondered if you knew of any sites that might have articles worth reading. People repeat themselves all the time, it's not much of an imposition is it.

Jesus christ - and he's moaning about people moaning and sniping!

 

[chilango]

I just wondered if you knew of any sites that might have articles worth reading. People repeat themselves all the time, it's not much of an imposition is it.

Start with wiki. Then search here. In all honesty the debates on here will cover most everything you need.

 

[chilango]

Maybe, but they were standing and so surely the BBC of all people ought to do more than mention them in mere passing.

Why? Why should they?

 

[Awesome Wells]

Why? Why should they?

They are paid by the people. I personally think if you're going to cover a local election then you should give some airtime to everyone who's name is on the ballot paper, if only so voters can make more of an informed choice. That seems to me entirely proper for the BBC.

Of course they don't because they are not interested in socialism or left wing politics.

 

[Awesome Wells]

Start with wiki. Then search here. In all honesty the debates on here will cover most everything you need.

Indeed, but you do realise that would be like looking for a needle in a very large haystack. One made of other needles.

 

[chilango]

Indeed, but you do realise that would be like looking for a needle in a very large haystack. One made of other needles.

If you can't be bothered just say so. I wouldn't blame you. But you oughta accept that plenty of people here have been bothered to do their research (or in many cases have actually been personally involved) so you might wanna rein in the criticism of the people who have.

 

[inva]

Indeed, but you do realise that would be like looking for a needle in a very large haystack. One made of other needles.

try this one:
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/the-socialist-alliance.215581/

 

[butchersapron]

They are paid by the people. I personally think if you're going to cover a local election then you should give some airtime to everyone who's name is on the ballot paper, if only so voters can make more of an informed choice. That seems to me entirely proper for the BBC.

Of course they don't because they are not interested in socialism or left wing politics.

They did. I heard it. As i believe i've said already.

 

[butchersapron]

Can anyone source the claim about the BBC in this tusc piece?

Next May there will be elections in England for over 4,000 councillors in local authorities across the country. To get what the BBC calls 'balanced media coverage', parties need to contest 15% of the seats up for election - that means 625 TUSC candidates.

 

[belboid]

Can anyone source the claim about the BBC in this tusc piece?

hmm, pretty much the only place the phrase appears on the BBC website is about, uhh, the Scottish Premier League

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

try this one:
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/the-socialist-alliance.215581/

an excellent and well debated thread on the whole, hardly any flaming or rages.

 

[belboid]

Can anyone source the claim about the BBC in this tusc piece?

actually, I think its this:

Other registered parties should qualify for a PEB if they are contesting one sixth or more of the seats up for election in the case of first-past-the-post, multi-constituency elections such as a General Election.

http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN03354.pdf

 

[butchersapron]

actually, I think its this:

Other registered parties should qualify for a PEB if they are contesting one sixth or more of the seats up for election in the case of first-past-the-post, multi-constituency elections such as a General Election.

http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN03354.pdf

Cheers. So it's specifically concerning election broadcasts rather than just general coverage.

 

[inva]

actually, I think its this:

Other registered parties should qualify for a PEB if they are contesting one sixth or more of the seats up for election in the case of first-past-the-post, multi-constituency elections such as a General Election.

http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN03354.pdf

was just about to post a link to the BBC guidance thing which I think is the same thing:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/page/peb-2013-3-20

 

[belboid]

Cheers. So it's specifically concerning election broadcasts rather than just general coverage.

I'd have to assume so. Even if they stand in enough seats they wont get much coverage, because they have, what is it, two councillors? And very very rarely get more than 5% of the vote

 

[Awesome Wells]

If you can't be bothered just say so. I wouldn't blame you. But you oughta accept that plenty of people here have been bothered to do their research (or in many cases have actually been personally involved) so you might wanna rein in the criticism of the people who have.

Depends how big the thread is. I'm not going to read through hundreds and hundreds of pages.

I also haven't criticised people that have. I have criticised the attitude of 'this that and the other is shit' because that's all i'm hearing. It doesn't matter how well informed the person behind that is if that's all he's saying. How are things to improve from that persopective?

 

[Nigel Irritable]

[reposted from the SWP squabbles thread as it's more relevant here]

I was at a meeting in the Teachers Club in Dublin a few weeks ago, held by the Left Forum on the subject of the need for a united left party. I was at a meeting in the same venue five years ago, held by the Campaign for an Independent Left on the subject of the need for a united left party. I was at an Irish Socialist Alliance meeting in the same venue a dozen years ago on the need for a united left party.

12 years ago, I was in the youngest 20% of the audience. Five years ago I was in the youngest 20% of the audience. A few weeks ago I was in the youngest 20% of the audience.

This is a demographic of nice, well meaning, decent people who are, unfortunately, incapable of learning. It's also a demographic hostile to the existing groups (or at least endlessly patronising about their "sectarianism") yet both created by those groups and permanently stuck in their world. Even when they self-consciously try to get around the existing groups, they end up producing just another such group but with the added ineffectuality and political softness characteristic of the milieu - like Left Unity.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

Depends how big the thread is. I'm not going to read through hundreds and hundreds of pages.

It's only 7 pages.

 

[Awesome Wells]

It's only 7 pages.

That was a general comment. I'm reading that thread as we speak.

Far as I can tell it just seems to be a case of 'my gang's better than yours'. Who knows who's right?

 

[belboid]

Who knows who's right?

I was