BBC - Owen Jones

[articul8]

The point for Owen is that this movement 'doesn't challenge labour - you have said this yourself when you decided for the PA's that they would not be standing ay candidates against labour. This movements central aim, it's central relationship is not to be with the class but with labour and its internal battles. And its generals and would be generals openly state this - look at the post i'm replying to for example.

A substantial section of the class either actively supports Labour or at least thinks that a Labour vote is a regrettable tactical necessity - so breaking from Labour into an electoral dead end would divide the movement and weaken its force. But this doesn't mean it doesn't challenge the politics of Labour, or might not evolve into something which needs to challenge Labour electorally further down the line...

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

You prat, he's being criticised for leading all that positive energy into supporting voting and joining labour. The party you have spent the last few years condemning , writing off and loudly proclaiming that every last member has gallons of blood on their hand. All forgot now that you've been in a room with him though.

And you don't even know what sectarian means as your increasingly shouty and can't be bothered to read what anyone else is saying posts show.

I've always found LRC to be just about an "acceptable face" as it happens. Of course I can slag off the war crime stuff, will continue to. But I'm far more inclined to do it once people get overtly partisan. I've never heard Owen Jones do that to be fair.

Why you think I should be so transfixed just by being within a couple of hundred metres of him is anyones guess.

And electioneering is to be expected at election time, not forgetting that most votes don't count anyway. But outside of election time I recognise that unless there is a broad spectrum of efforts we are fucked.

As I said, PA is commanding more activist enthusiasm than any party, it also predates this current run by many years as a concept. Sorry to not be so divisive on this occasion, I have faith in others to keep up the resentment and bitterness. I managed to avoid an ad hom attack too.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

A substantial section of the class either actively supports Labour or at least thinks that a Labour vote is a regrettable tactical necessity - so breaking from Labour into an electoral dead end would divide the movement and weaken its force. But this doesn't mean it doesn't challenge the politics of Labour, or might not evolve into something which needs to challenge Labour electorally further down the line...

UKIP have shown the politics of party X can be dragged in a given direction far better from outside than pushed from inside.

 

[articul8]

UKIP have shown the politics of party X can be dragged in a given direction far better from outside than pushed from inside.

Well, I'm all for building effective extra-parliamentary support for an alternative to austerity beyond the ranks of Labour - but I simply don't think that the conditions exist at present for an alternative left party to make a UKIP style breakthrough.

 

[butchersapron]

I've always found LRC to be just about an "acceptable face" as it happens. Of course I can slag off the war crime stuff, will continue to. But I'm far more inclined to do it once people get overtly partisan.

And electioneering is to be expected at election time, not forgetting that most votes don't count anyway. But outside of election time I recognise that unless there is a broad spectrum of efforts we are fucked.

As I said, PA is commanding more activist enthusiasm than any party, it also predates this current run by many years as a concept. Sorry to not be so divisive on this occasion, I have faith in others to keep up the resentment and bitterness. I managed to avoid an ad hom attack too.

The political points ignored in favour of more surlyism. You spent years arguing labour are beyond the pale, now you're wetting yourself at being able to sit in the same room as one of their generals and willing to follow his orders designed to derail any anti austerity movement into labours hands and even to openly argue that labour are a necessary part of any broad anti austerity front.

I'm not sure if you go as far as articul8 in arguing that the correct perspective of such a movement should be concentration on getting labour elected and establishing some form of institutional pressure on them, that it should revolve around labour and their interests. Do you? Or are you going to participate in his pro labour plans as an unpaid independent?

 

[treelover]

Something went badly wrong with the Sheffield one: they invited LP Councillor Jack Scott(who won't supports no cuts), etc as well as Owen, and Scott made an outrageous partisan speech saying not just vote Labour but join Labour!, cringingly long term SWP hack Ben Morris defended him and seemed to agree with him, a lot of unity was lost as the focus became Scott and the LP.

Apart from that, the turn out was massive, hundreds of young people, Owen was good but Mark Steel was superb and people nearly fell off their seats laughing.

I think it was largely organised by one guy, as student with a double barrelled name, he just wants unity I think and hadn't thought about the consequences of having a LP councillor on the panel, especially as SCC is imo right wing.

 

[treelover]

There's two implicit levels to this isn't there - you lot at the PA you do the legwork, the groundwork and come election time, we (labour) reap the rewards. Which is why they can afford to play around with non-party forces like this, as they know the involvement of Jones etc will only bring them credibility_+other things)-->votes, and votes among those who may be more likely to have broken with or thinking of breaking with labour.

All one big happy labour movement family urgh.

that was exactly how Scott phrased it, they clearly see the PA as a LP election vehicle, Owen afaicr never mentioned the LP.

 

[Delroy Booth]

UKIP have shown the politics of party X can be dragged in a given direction far better from outside than pushed from inside.

UKIP have been able to move the Tories right by standing candidates against them and getting good results in their safest areas. The People's Assembly is going to do no such thing, it will funnel all the indignation about cuts into the Labour sphere of influence. Bottom line = vote Labour.

 

[articul8]

I'm not sure if you go as far as articul8 in arguing that the correct perspective of such a movement should be concentration on getting labour elected and establishing some form of institutional pressure on them, that it should revolve around labour and their interests. Do you? Or are you going to participate in his pro labour plans as an unpaid independent?

The movement;s objective is not to get Labour elected, the movement's objective is to mobilise support for an anti-austerity politics. But, do I hope this exerts pressure on the direction of the Labour party? Yes, I do.

 

[treelover]

its clear what Scott's agenda was, it was partisan and outrageous, he abused his position on the panel, we never had anyone who is suffering from the cuts on the panel.

 

[articul8]

its clear what Scott's agenda was, it was partisan and outrageous, he abused his position on the panel, we never had anyone who is suffering from the cuts on the panel.

Sounds very inappropriate, yes. I don't think PA should be talking about standing candidates generally, certainly at this stage. But it must be completely free to criticise Labour where necessary.

 

[butchersapron]

The general speaks! Only after having already decided no candidates are to stand against labour though.

 

[butchersapron]

Why no discussion on candidates? Because it would mean people like you have to leave. Or come out into the open before you are ready to.

 

[articul8]

Why no discussion on candidates? Because it would mean people like you have to leave. Or come out into the open before you are ready to.

The discussion on electoral candidates would, for the most part, be divisive and distracting from the main task which is to mobilise as much support as possible around a common anti-austerity platform. Or at least that discussion should take place in a way that avoids shedding key constituent parts of the coalition (like Labour, Labour-affiliated unions, Greens, nationalists maybe).

Otherwise, you'll end up not with a mass coalition against austerity but a small group of isolated left fragments (like Left Unity or Tusc). Obviously, in circumstances where a mass movement comes into existence and finds itself pitted against a Labour party trying to push through cuts then this might have to be revisited.

 

[butchersapron]

Yeah divisive for you and your stay-behinds - exactly as i said. Anything that you're not in control of or that isn't moving in the direction that you want is 'divisive'.

 

[articul8]

This is not about "control" - if it was, or was seen as, simply a Labour controlled front, it wouldn't succeed either.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

its clear what Scott's agenda was, it was partisan and outrageous, he abused his position on the panel, we never had anyone who is suffering from the cuts on the panel.

The problem is only that he was too crude and stirred up a resentful backlash. But what he was arguing is the core agenda of the PA's union bureaucrat paymasters. And the people they've outsourced the management of the PA to, Counterfire, know that and will be entirely loyal as long they are able to put Rees and German etc on stage in front of large audiences and as long as they are able to recruit themselves.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

Well, I'm all for building effective extra-parliamentary support for an alternative to austerity beyond the ranks of Labour - but I simply don't think that the conditions exist at present for an alternative left party to make a UKIP style breakthrough.

I didn't happen to say a party necessarily had to do it

("UKIP have shown the politics of party X can be dragged in a given direction far better from outside than pushed from inside.")

In the case of "left of labour" I think you are right. The conditions don't exist (thanks to generations of naval gazing, fetishised rhetoric, sectarianism and one up-ship that has utterly fucked things in that regard)

What I suggest is that a broad movement can and should scare almighty fuck out of the government with concerted confrontation / civil disobedience etc. I wouldn't expect the Labour Party on board per se. Far from it, though many activists might be.

This is workable and it's important because

1) Most people can not change who the next government is, only a small number of swing voters in a small number of seats. We can argue for ever about who we should vote for but when it comes down to who has most seats at Westminster it's almost certainly an academic question in most cases.

2) Who ever forms the next government will behave better if we stand up to them, though we will need our narrative straight and plenty of seeming neutrals to be quite sympathetic. This is what gets me out of the "you're only ultimately working for Labour" bind.

The next government will be dominated by Labour or Tory anyway (no one ever seems to consider the mathematically sensible option of a Lab/Con coalition - not so much a policy issue, more that it would give the game away).

The point is to stand up to these psychopaths and criminals now.

3) If we don't kick up a big stink as a collective now then other anti establishment stinks could kick off and we will have missed the boat. Again. These could be reactionary, somewhat aimless or something else. But for the broad left not to take a united and confrontational stand at a time like this is actually letting a lot of people down anyway.

 

[butchersapron]

What I suggest is that a broad movement can and should scare almighty fuck out of the government with concerted confrontation / civil disobedience etc. I wouldn't expect the Labour Party on board per se. Far from it, though many activists might be.

What does this mean as regards labour party activists being on board. Like Owen.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

The political points ignored in favour of more surlyism. You spent years arguing labour are beyond the pale, now you're wetting yourself at being able to sit in the same room as one of their generals and willing to follow his orders designed to derail any anti austerity movement into labours hands and even to openly argue that labour are a necessary part of any broad anti austerity front.

I'm not sure if you go as far as articul8 in arguing that the correct perspective of such a movement should be concentration on getting labour elected and establishing some form of institutional pressure on them, that it should revolve around labour and their interests. Do you? Or are you going to participate in his pro labour plans as an unpaid independent?

Owen Jones is hardly a "general", certainly not at this point. I have no continence issues as of yet, and ask you to allow me the grace of aging somewhat before bringing in that kind of jibe. Nor would I "follow his orders" at the drop of the hat. Where do you get this stuff? Why do you make it up? You know full well that your arguments can carry good weight and challenge effectively, there is no need for the psychic act, but you keep having to be told :-0

As for other points, I hope my immediately previous post speaks to them on the whole : We can not change that Labour or Tory will govern : In that regard, all we can do is scare this lot as much as possible and make the next lot behave better.

 

[butchersapron]

They don't - and now, today Jones is their only general.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

What does this mean as regards labour party activists being on board. Like Owen.

It means being on board more as individuals than as with their hat on. I've been involved in loads of campaigns down the years with people from all parties and none, including LRC. We were all capable of not being partisan. Electioneering in election time with little aggression. It's not as if it's a huge amount of the time anyway. I've honestly not found Owen Jones to be partisan.

There's a good speech somewhere that he gave to the SP. Managed to mention plenty loads of left groupings and parties, though not the SWs, perhaps from diplomacy. Fuck knows what is going on between those 2. I do know that TUSC is disfunctional in my locality, and it gives me no pleasure.

 

[butchersapron]

So, pretend that they're not labour and not using you to to ensure some sort of anti-tory bloc.

 

[sihhi]

Can you explain why Owen Jones gets a free pass on his partisanship for Labour, whilst John McDonnell doesn't?

I've been involved in loads of campaigns down the years with people from all parties and none, including LRC. We were all capable of not being partisan. Electioneering in election time with little aggression. It's not as if it's a huge amount of the time anyway. I've honestly not found Owen Jones to be partisan.

Is that John McDonell of the Parallel Universe Nothing To Do With War, Privatisation and Authoritarianism Labour Party?
Ah yes, the poor sod who couldnt even get enough signatures to challenge The Supreme Leader.
The guy the Morning Star denialists continually refer to as "Left MP" because they cant admit that he is a member of a right wing capitalist project that seeks to fingerprint and eyescan us for a database?
He's going on about climate change isnt he?
Is he the guy in the party committed to building more roads, airport expansion and nukes?
Course he is.
Best thing he could do is disown that sack of shits altogether and be an independent, Green or Libdem MP.

You wrote of John McDonnell and the Labour Left he is the head of:

Labour continues to defacate on the working class and the planet, pursuing crazed fundementalist policies on behalf of the global elite. Thanks to the likes of JM, plenty of deluded people will continue to vote for this bastion of the corruptocracy.

Have you changed your mind? Is Labour a "bastion of the corruptocracy" your phrase?
If you have changed your mind, what influenced this?
Please answer without lashing out at other posters like Citizen66 for listening carefully to what people are saying.

 

[muscovyduck]

I don't understand the Twitter eBooks accounts joke but Owen Jones has one

Edit: this explaination of Horse eBooks (the most well known eBook account) doesn't help at all

 

[Delroy Booth]

Seeing people arguing with the Zizek ebooks as though it's really him is one of the few things about twitter I miss

 

[muscovyduck]

LLESTA eBooks

 

[muscovyduck]

Also https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/250992973997809666

He Tweeted this:

OK, Twitter, bit of an odd one, but I've been told to come up with 5 ideas for How To Be A Good Left-Winger. Thoughts?! #howtobeagoodlefty

I'd say not voting Labour is a big one?

 

[Delroy Booth]

following @delroybooth would've been pretty high on the list at one time I'm sure...

 

[sihhi]

Also https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/250992973997809666

He Tweeted this

Shameless - he crowdsourced - LOL (but didn't pay his appearance fee out) to make this tripe:



saying
1 have some kind of aim
2 don't be like Militant, Socialist Worker, Red Action, Class War or class struggle anarchism (Black Flag)
3 join a trade union and obey its picketing rules
4 don't hate people for being born posh
5 pay tax