Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
so why did you join the labour party? Did you agree with clause 4?
BBC - Owen Jones
- Thread starter Zabo
- Start date
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
I first joined Labour in 93(?) when John Smith was leader - because I wanted to see the back of the Tories. Also we had a really good Labourleft MP in Audrey Wise, and a decent local council being run by Labour led by her daughter Val. Clause iV - I wasn't in favour of scrapping it. But I don't think that the old top down state nationalisation model somehow scales up into socialism either. Socialism has to mean workers control.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Well, let's see, there's the "vote Labour, it's the only viable option" position; the "support the Lib-Dem electoral reforms" position; the "I was a member of the SP" position; the "c'mon kids, if we work together we can change Labour from the inside!"position...
I'm sure I'm missing a few hundred, but what's a few hundred, eh?
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Different from those of McDonnell and the unions?
Hmm, well, for a start, McDonnell's political position has remained the same for many years. He's a convinced parliamentary socialist, whereas you, you're whatever the moment calls for.
Can't put it simpler than that.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
To be fair (and sexist) I wouldn't blame him if he wanted to rim Reeves.
quality bants. epic
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Except that you've travelled that road via the many detours detailed in your posts over the years.
All those little hostages to fortune that keep on coming back to bite you in your arse.
I didn't accuse you of being a "fellow-traveller". Why would you think that?
Is there something you're feeling guilty about, that you haven't told us about?
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
And that's a bad thing...how?
Jeff Robinson
Marxist-Lentilist: Jackboots and Jackfruit
That can't be a source of comfort to you can it?
I prefer Gloria DiPietro
revol68
what, fucking what?
not really, but it's better than being a sell out careerist shitbag.
ItWillNeverWork
Messy Crimbobs, fellow humans.
This is boring now.
Quick tip for you here revol68, if you fancy a successful career in the Labour party, working for John McDonnell on behalf of the unions isn't the best way to go about it.
revol68
what, fucking what?
if you are looking a career in politics full stop you should kill yourself.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Kind of depends what you mean by "successful career", given that networking with all those still-somewhat-credible people makes one an ideal "point of contact" for the more mainstream parliamentary Labour Party member and/or their advisors.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Are you kidding? The labour movement employs thousands of people - it's one of the material basis (on the labour side of the capital relation) of a century of political reformism - and there's always been room for rhetorical leftism among its ranks, in fact it requires it. And that's why, despite the whinging, it's worth discussing in some detail. Especially now in fact.
Look, you're right on the theory here, but if articul8 really was the snakey weaselly serpent determined at all costs to make a successful career for himself in the Labour party that you say he is, then there's many easier ways of going about this than joining up with the LRC and working out of John McDonnell's office. Infact that's probably the hardest path to take, short of joining Socialist Appeal or the Posadists.
If he really was this evil guy you're making him out to be he'd be in Progress denouncing the ultra-left like all the other careerist shitbags.
Now I know there's still time for that to happen, but in the meantime I'm prepared to accept that Articul8 is sincere about why he's doing this, rather than it being some cynical ploy to further himself by consciously shafting the movement.
revol68
what, fucking what?
He's just aiming for the niche market.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
I guess you could apply that to just about everyone who enters the machine - determined to change it, determined not to let it change them...which is why we're talking about far more than bloody articul8 and his intentions here.
And no, on the specific case - being recommended for jobs in high profile nationally known MPs offices by unions is already part of it, this is already on the inside - this rhetorical leftism is perfectly fined and acceptable for those in charge, even welcomed at certain times. Do you really think they don't want mugs doing this sort of work for them? That they'll be chased out of the party and jobs? No chance - because the people in control know that these peoples project is doomed, is no internal threat to them whatsoever, can even be functional for them. Which is why this isn't about personal intentions - that's to ignore the history of this sort of thing.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Er...he already repeatedly denounces 'the ultra-left' - and now he does it from within the offices of the leading labour-left MP.
Starting to see the point?
Yeah slight contextual difference though butchers is that anyone to the left of James Purnell is ultra-left to the Progress and co. There's plenty of Luke Akehurst articles saying that Bennism is "ultra-left" for instance. Which is blatantly ridiculous to you and me, but inside the bubble it's a different story.
No arguments from me on this point, I've seen it with a lot of people I know in real life, and it's why I'm not in the Labour party any more. They'll change you before you change it. There's a quote from Leo Panitch from The End of Parliamentary Socialism that I put in my article that I know you love so much, and I think it's appropriate here.
“For its part, the Labour new left contributed to its own defeat through some major weaknesses. The most important of all was, evidently, that in concentrating on trying to change the Labour party it became trapped in that struggle. It never solved the problem of having to fight for its goals through unending party committee’s and conferences without becoming absorbed by them. For many it was a point of principle to try and win the party over to a new democratic socialist project by persuasion and the fullest use of the party’s existing democratic processes. But the bitterness of the right’s resistance prolonged the struggle over so many years that almost a whole political generation consumed their energies in this way.”
Yeah I can see where you're coming from, that it occasionally helps Labour to have some left-wingers they can call upon as cover every now and then, but I was talking about articul8 specifically. Also, I don't think that McDonnell or the LRC could ever really be called either high profile, or the inside, or in charge of anything. They're hopelessly, structurally, marginalized. They day that changes they'll be booted out, as you say. Which makes it the very last place you'd go to make a career for yourself.
Nigel Irritable
Five, Ten, Fifteen Years
As one of the few people here who actually used to know articul8 a bit, I don't think he's a scumbag. I just think that frogwoman's description "wrong about everything, ever" was spot on.
I disagree with Delroy that the McDonnell/LRC stuff is a particularly bad career move though. It would be a good way to get into the union job career ladder, if you were so inclined.
I disagree with Delroy that the McDonnell/LRC stuff is a particularly bad career move though. It would be a good way to get into the union job career ladder, if you were so inclined.
Ah but the unions is a slightly different thing to the LRC. The unions are way more powerful and important than the LRC, Unite specifically, and there's plenty of Unite members who are in Progress, Luke Akehurst and Peter Wheeler for example, for careerist purposes.
Nigel Irritable
Five, Ten, Fifteen Years
d
Sure. But there are plenty of unions and factions within unions who would regard having worked out of a Labour left MP's office, editing some union related website and doing some nonsense with union sponsored MPs, as a very solid background for an employee.
Well yeah you're right, it's a solid background for a TU employee, but the fact it's for McDonnell would almost certainly prevent him from getting anywhere with the bulk of the Labour party. Working for and with the LRC is like kryptonite to a lot of Labour people.
And I also don't think working for a Trade Union is like a sign of evil in itself. When we're talking about TU bureaucracy it's more about institutional conservatism than individuals being careerists or sell outs. Trade Union bureacracies don't move unless they're pushed.
And I also don't think working for a Trade Union is like a sign of evil in itself. When we're talking about TU bureaucracy it's more about institutional conservatism than individuals being careerists or sell outs. Trade Union bureacracies don't move unless they're pushed.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
No-one is making him out to be evil.
I'm implying that he's looking after number one first, and that, conveniently, working where he will be would be a very good "resource" for him.
Similar threads
