DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
that had not occurred to me. Widen it to workers of the world and you have...nothing new except a laudable aim.
14th November Movement for Left Unity
- Thread starter chilango
- Start date
that had not occurred to me. Widen it to workers of the world and you have...nothing new except a laudable aim.
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
what's your point, caller? Doing away with 'motions' in no way broadens involvement (altho that is precisely what Blair claimed it would do), it actually narrows involvement, and makes it even more in the hands of cliques (elected or self-selecting)
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Don't do this.
Getting rid of motions means doing way with the union-based structure of groups begging a top table to do something - the relentless and alienating way of doing things. It doesn't mean doing way with either popular participation (which this motion model ensures does not happen) or membership control. What's the model that you have for motion removment? The labour party? So that's it? No other way to do things ever? Never?
Seriously, if you substitute motions for democratic involvement then you're missing both the capture of those groups by boring cunts via the motion haggling long winded guff and the lack of anything else happening in the wider group.
Please don't post this filth at me again or special privileges will be revoked.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
Where is your evidence motions alienate people? Sounds like rubbish to me. They are not the be all and end all of discussion, but they are, or can be, an important part of it. In order to make decisions a motion will be laid, whether formally or informally. It is far better for it to be open, and so more democratic and involving, enabling people to know what is actually going to be discussed.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
27% union membership. Turnout at local groups. 0.1%.
Don't tell me how motions work - it's irrelevant. Look at that waffle above. What would my mum think of that?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Well there was the best sort of evidence that you can get.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
So how do we make them better? You need to actually propose something better. How does a group make a decision on how to act without there being some kind of motion? And if there is a motion, it should be known in advance, rather than cobbled together at the last minute. The problem is not having motions, its having motions that are irrelevant to people lives, and/or which have zero chance of being implemented.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
naah. btw, you know your 'fanclub' are posting this lot up on twitter
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
How do groups usually make decisions? What pub to go to? Whose round is it? Shall we take the kids to the park? Etc etc.
The problem is more than just irrelevant and unrealistic motions (though they exacerbate it) it's political organising that mimics the form of work rather than of play. That is above and beyond everyday life.
People organise as groups, successfully, all the time, without even thinking of it.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
naah. btw, you know your 'fanclub' are posting this lot up on twitter
27% membership - no involvement. That's pretty telling. And the the rigmarole of motions has no role to play.
Don't know what to do about them any more mate - ignoring = tried, letting people know what they're doing = tried. Grassing them up thus making ern get sacked and his wife leave him, him being struck off the state school register, losing house, kids etc = not tried
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
I am the sword of Damocles for that middle class freak basically.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
all of which usually involve someone making a proposal (aka, a motion) and then it being discussed and decided upon. And such informality is great with a group of mates, but when everyone doesnt know each other fairly initimately, something more formal is required.
Motions and discussion are rarely a part of work, tho. There we get instruction and are simply told what to do. I do agree with the general point, but still dont think 'motions' are playing the role you are saying.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
motions are shit because the wide grouping is shit, not the other way round tho. Cart/horse
well, pretty much everyone does know I guess, subtlety is not exactly their strong point.
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
We need to get to the point where political organising Is done amongst groups of mates, informally. Not much point in making a big fuss about adopting positions on big (inter)national issues till we're at that point frankly.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
No, you're looking at the content and saying well if there were better content the process and what it produces would be fine. But the process is putting people off so much that there is no content beyond what the tireless bureaucrats produce. That is the cart and horse problem. Plus, there is neither a cart nor horse.
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
"Modern" workplaces tend to involve a lot of faked participation in the decision making process.
...but anyway. A slight digression perhaps.
I think motions are a symptom, not a cause, of a left that knows no other way of operating other than the one it learned in the NUS. And too many people have a vested interest in keeping it working in this way. The groups who fill their their schedules with building this, and winning that.
Corpses in their mouths. The lot of 'em.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
They don't though. Easy if they did.
emanymton
A cat politely sat on the flaming gardener.
You could have a system were you have a discussion about something then 3 people get nominated to write up a little report about the discussion then everyone votes if they thing it is an accurate account. Oh hang on...
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
I choose my mates, I dont choose my work colleagues, or other people who join any organisation I belong to. That'd be a club.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
No, it isn't simply the content (altho that can/does make matters worse), it's the lack of ability to implement any motion.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Let's get 0.1 % of them involved because, shit, that's just the way we do things round here. Yee hah!
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
you've still failed to actually answer any point or propose any alternative.Let's get 0.1 % of them involved because, shit, that's just the way we do things round here. Yee hah!
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
So you have neither horse nor cart. But someone who thinks they're both horse and cart substituting themselves. Look at that drivel motion above. Politically it's worth nothing. It's worth the same as me typing these words. But i only took 30 seconds.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
I have not failed to answer any point - i've responded to every post of yours. What's not been answered is why there is - in such a such a harsh climate - 27% union membership and no membership involvement?
Proposals as to getting rid of rigid things that alienate people - ask them why they alienate them and how they would like things to change? Make people aware that there are other ways of doing things? Stop pretending that motions = control from below?
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
Just quoting membership figures is not an answer, its just quoting a symptom. And do you not think that those questions have already been asked? They have. And the answer people give is nothing to do with there being motions, its about the meetings being powerless, motions or not. There is no pretence that motions are control from below, stop introducing straw men. They are just a bit more democratic than most of the alternatives (tho obviously not the ones you haven't mentioned yet).
Soz butch, but you've said nothing to back your claim up so far, nor come up with any alternative.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
You've missed the point - 27% is good. 0.1% is good. I'm talking about participation rates within that 27%. It doesn't matter if your motion to support palestine has nay power if there's only the normal 3 people there. And there are the normal three people there because of the utterly alienating way that unions are run - and that LU mirrors. Explain the gap otherwise? The on,ly other option is that it'll turn good when things change. Not really good enough given that they're supposed to be part of that change.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
the only reason people dont go to meetings is cos of how they are run??!! What utter, utter, anti-materialist drivel.
People dont go to meetings cos they dont think they will achieve anything, because unions have been emasculated. And that didnt happen because they had too many motions. Fer gawds sake man, when did you become such an idealist?
Similar threads
