Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Cost of Living Crisis: Enough is Enough Campaign

Ĝasper said:
Considering the Rmt have been disaffiliated from Labour since the 00s (iirc Labour's choice, due to their funding for the Scottish socialist party - now imploded for over 15 years), you'd think Lynch would be bigging up others than Labour.
Click to expand...
Will the likes of Mick Lynch still be appealing to politicians and the Labour Party when the new trade union restrictions come into effect I wonder? And when they are directly or indirectly supported by the likes of Starmer?
 
Last edited:
AmateurAgitator said:
Loyal to the working class? By postponing strikes?

:facepalm:

Its always made sense not to trust the trade union bureaucracy
Click to expand...

Lynch won’t have called the strike off. It will have been an NEC decision. I’m presuming the NEC will have consulted activists before doing so. So if their position and mood of the shopfloor was to postpone then that would have been the right thing to do. Lynch makes the thinking pretty clear in the clip in my view.
 
Smokeandsteam said:
Lynch won’t have called the strike off. It will have been an NEC decision. I’m presuming the NEC will have consulted activists before doing so. So if their position and mood of the shopfloor was to postpone then that would have been the right thing to do. Lynch makes the thinking pretty clear in the clip in my view.
Click to expand...
I still don't think that loyalty is shown to the class by postponing strikes or that thats a good idea. Unfortunately some loyalty to the crown does appear to have been on display though.
 
AmateurAgitator said:
I still don't think that loyalty is shown to the class by postponing strikes or that thats a good idea. Unfortunately some loyalty to the crown does appear to have been on display though.
Click to expand...

Unless you are in the RMT it doesn't matter what you think though does it? It's them on strike and it's their dispute.

Lynch seems to be arguing that there was a clear mood on the shopfloor/among activists to postpone. I thought we wanted unions leaders to listen to the membership?
 
Reminds me of a meeting of a miners support group I was at decades ago that I brought some miners who were staying at my house to. There was an anarchist there whose contribution to the discussion was 'Arthur Scargill's being driven around in a chauffer driven car ' to which one of the striking miner's response was 'What do you want him to travel on round the country to the pickets lines, a bloody bicycle?'
 
Smokeandsteam said:
Unless you are in the RMT it doesn't matter what you think though does it? It's them on strike and it's their dispute.

Lynch seems to be arguing that there was a clear mood on the shopfloor/among activists to postpone. I thought we wanted unions leaders to listen to the membership?
Click to expand...
TBF, they would have lost all public support and been eviscerated in the media. Rightly or wrongly
 
Brainaddict said:
I see Cost of Living Action have changed their website and are now downplaying the idea of people setting up new local assemblies - looks like it's just going to be a map of actions. A bit of a damp squib, all in all.
Click to expand...

AFAIK they're not enough is Enough though! but something different to just promote stuff they get sent, they were never themselves going to 'set up assemblies' were they? They'll put pretty much whatever you send them on the map of strikes and actions.
 
Karl Masks said:
TBF, they would have lost all public support and been eviscerated in the media. Rightly or wrongly
Click to expand...

Personally I agree with you. It was a one day strike and not decisive in what is going to be a long war between our side and capital.

But, the more important point here is that it's a matter for RMT members (and CWU members who also called their action off). I'm not having a pop at AA here by the way, more those on twitter who've never organized a strike in their life sat on their phones criticizing workers in dispute. Middle class wankers.
 
Karl Masks said:
TBF, they would have lost all public support and been eviscerated in the media. Rightly or wrongly
Click to expand...

It totally makes sense when seen through the logic of the RMT and their strike and the media/public perception of it, which is of course important to them.

But it's a really difficult and problematic road to go down. Lynch in the video up-thread was justifying it using the 'take people with you', don't look like loons, etc. And there's some validity to that of course. But at what point do you not run stuff according to the lowest common denominator and most reactionary/conservative elements of your membership/the wider class? Following the argument he uses is how come the Labour Party ended up singing the national anthem at its conference and making anti-immigration mugs.

So at what point do you need to take a position that's unpopular with some and argue the case politically? And the answer with the unions is pretty much always "Not quite yet comrade." Given the current situation and how terrible it's likely to get in the coming months and years (multiple global crises on top of one another) surely now is the time to take risks, start breaking rules and laws, and push foward the struggle? If not now, then they might as well fully give up and admit they have no interest in changing society through collective power and just retreat to casework, selling life insurance and doing free wills for members.

His focus on the Labour party is also a mess. In what way does he think the RMT etc. are going to play a role in shaping Labour now? Corbyn was pretty much the best chance they had for that and that has failed completely. It looks like there's been little reflection on that, and the plan is to try and do it again, but of course with even less hope of it working this time.

I do get criticising Lynch etc. for some of this stuff is a bit like me being annoyed at my cat for not being more like a dog, but it does also raise some questions for the wider left about the 'strategy' (for want of a better work) for changing stuff...
 
Totally understand people's discomfort with RMT postponing strike action during the dead queen shit. But the objective of any union that is about to take strike action is to ensure that any action will be as solid and united as possible. If you ain't doing that, then you're doing it wrong. It's fair to assume that a sizable proportion of RMT members would have some sypathy for the lizard queen. This would make any strike action during the "royal mourning" time potentially much less solid and united. So, strategically it was a good move; politically, it's disappointing for all us anti-roayalists. But as far as strikes go, it's whatever has the most impact, so fair fucks to 'em.
 
Yeah, agreed that there's a big vital difference between appealing to some vague specter of "public opinion", which tbf the RMT has historically been good at ignoring where necessary, and listening to the views of members whose participation is needed for strike action. It's a shit position to be in, and tbf as someone who's not working in either the post or the railways I can't claim to know what the shopfloor mood would be like, but I can reluctantly see why it might've been the right/least worst call.
LDC said:
So at what point do you need to take a position that's unpopular with some and argue the case politically? And the answer with the unions is pretty much always "Not quite yet comrade." Given the current situation and how terrible it's likely to get in the coming months and years (multiple global crises on top of one another) surely now is the time to take risks, start breaking rules and laws, and push foward the struggle? If not now, then they might as well fully give up and admit they have no interest in changing society through collective power and just retreat to casework, selling life insurance and doing free wills for members.
Click to expand...
Well, I suppose you could say that's why you need different forms of organisation - a union is set up to carry out one set of tasks, a specific political organisation, for instance, is for a different set of tasks. As breaking the law goes, I'd love to see unions doing it but that doesn't seem likely, so that's where you might want, for instance, an autonomous informal grouping of workers to carry out particular actions?
 
hitmouse said:
Yeah, agreed that there's a big vital difference between appealing to some vague specter of "public opinion", which tbf the RMT has historically been good at ignoring where necessary, and listening to the views of members whose participation is needed for strike action. It's a shit position to be in, and tbf as someone who's not working in either the post or the railways I can't claim to know what the shopfloor mood would be like, but I can reluctantly see why it might've been the right/least worst call.

Well, I suppose you could say that's why you need different forms of organisation - a union is set up to carry out one set of tasks, a specific political organisation, for instance, is for a different set of tasks. As breaking the law goes, I'd love to see unions doing it but that doesn't seem likely, so that's where you might want, for instance, an autonomous informal grouping of workers to carry out particular actions?
Click to expand...
Breaking what laws ?
 
The39thStep said:
Breaking what laws ?
Click to expand...


Well, we'll have to wait and see what Truss' promised new laws actually look like, but I reckon once they're in place they'll probably need breaking for a start. Beyond which, stuff like secondary actions targeting agency firms or spreading strikes faster and more effectively than the legal balloting process allows for would be nice, also things like actual workplace occupations would be a good idea but not something the unions are likely to do?
 
LDC said:
But it's a really difficult and problematic road to go down. Lynch in the video up-thread was justifying it using the 'take people with you', don't look like loons, etc. And there's some validity to that of course. But at what point do you not run stuff according to the lowest common denominator and most reactionary/conservative elements of your membership/the wider class? Following the argument he uses is how come the Labour Party ended up singing the national anthem at its conference and making anti-immigration mugs.

So at what point do you need to take a position that's unpopular with some and argue the case politically? And the answer with the unions is pretty much always "Not quite yet comrade." Given the current situation and how terrible it's likely to get in the coming months and years (multiple global crises on top of one another) surely now is the time to take risks, start breaking rules and laws, and push foward the struggle? If not now, then they might as well fully give up and admit they have no interest in changing society through collective power and just retreat to casework, selling life insurance and doing free wills for members.
Click to expand...

Not sure how you arrive at deciding that calling off a one day strike because the Queen died could be characterized as pandering to the most reactionary elements of the RMT membership. I'd also argue that, if anything, the RMT has often gone too far the other way citing their 'no one likes us, we don't care' slogan nicked off their favourite team. A look at their activity over the past 20 years or so indicated it's well wide of the mark to suggest the RMT don't do anything bar free wills basically.

LDC said:
His focus on the Labour party is also a mess. In what way does he think the RMT etc. are going to play a role in shaping Labour now? Corbyn was pretty much the best chance they had for that and that has failed completely. It looks like there's been little reflection on that, and the plan is to try and do it again, but of course with even less hope of it working this time.
Click to expand...

Yes. The EiE rally on Friday had a similar problem where on one hand everybody recognized that Labour was part of the problem and not the solution. but again and again ideas and demands were raised which seemed designed to pressure Labour or change Labour into something that it never has been (even under Corbyn).

It's pretty frustrating for many of us and some of it - from some quarters - is idiotic stuff that needs to be dispended with.

But, Labourism is so ingrained and embedded in the movement that expecting anything other than confusion, contradiction and incoherence at times is inevitable. That's why I've been keen to see EiE take on a more concrete and long term form (and why the position of my own union and others is a massive setback). The best activists will learn and develop through activity and doing stuff rather than arriving fully formed. It's important to remember that hundreds of thousands have signed up for EiE, I estimate over 40,000 have or will come to rallies. The crowd in Birmingham was mainly young (once the usual suspects are discounted). The young stewards I was with loved it and came away from the meeting and the beer after buzzing. What they think, what they learn and what they then do is as important as what Mick Lynch or Dave Ward think.

If the position of anarchists is to sit back and wait for EiE to arrive at the 'right' approach then it'll be a long wait. But since Corbyn this is the most energy and engaged we've maanged on our side. And, noting the contradictions, it is explicitly outside of Labour, outside of its control (and also outside of the control that of the cobweb left) and workplace and community based. As such its potential should be obvious and from that some perspective.
 
hitmouse said:
Well, we'll have to wait and see what Truss' promised new laws actually look like, but I reckon once they're in place they'll probably need breaking for a start. Beyond which, stuff like secondary actions targeting agency firms or spreading strikes faster and more effectively than the legal balloting process allows for would be nice, also things like actual workplace occupations would be a good idea but not something the unions are likely to do?
Click to expand...
Not against any of this . However this the sort and level of rank and file activity and organisation that takes some time to build. Be interested to know which posters on here feel they could pull 2-3 or 4 or five from their work places to do these sorts of actions ?
 
Smokeandsteam said:
Not sure how you arrive at deciding that calling off a one day strike because the Queen died could be characterized as pandering to the most reactionary elements of the RMT membership. I'd also argue that, if anything, the RMT has often gone too far the other way citing their 'no one likes us, we don't care' slogan nicked off their favourite team. A look at their activity over the past 20 years or so indicated it's well wide of the mark to suggest the RMT don't do anything bar free wills basically.
Click to expand...

I said the suggestion that Lynch made about on the video was a dangerous and difficult road to go down, and it is. And I didn't say that eh RMT only made wills did I? I suggested that unions generally need to start being less risk adverse and more militant. It's easy to point at the RMT as they're pretty decent compared to lots of unions.
 
Smokeandsteam said:
But, Labourism is so ingrained and embedded in the movement that expecting anything other than confusion, contradiction and incoherence at times is inevitable. That's why I've been keen to see EiE take on a more concrete and long term form (and why the position of my own union and others is a massive setback). The best activists will learn and develop through activity and doing stuff rather than arriving fully formed. It's important to remember that hundreds of thousands have signed up for EiE, I estimate over 40,000 have or will come to rallies. The crowd in Birmingham was mainly young (once the usual suspects are discounted). The young stewards I was with loved it and came away from the meeting and the beer after buzzing. What they think, what they learn and what they then do is as important as what Mick Lynch or Dave Ward think.

If the position of anarchists is to sit back and wait for EiE to arrive at the 'right' approach then it'll be a long wait. But since Corbyn this is the most energy and engaged we've maanged on our side. And, noting the contradictions, it is explicitly outside of Labour, outside of its control (and also outside of the control that of the cobweb left) and workplace and community based. As such its potential should be obvious and from that some perspective.
Click to expand...

Yes, people loved it. But like you say what are they being told? What are they learning? It's clear that the underlying direction is towards the Labour Party as a vehicle for change. And I know that is understandable historically, but it's a busted strategy, and they're struggling to admit it, let along re-orientate themselves to others ways of doing stuff. So what are they going to do? Where are the discussions happening to try and deal with that? What steps are they taking to try and link with other struggles outside workplaces? I dispute it's community based from what I've seen. Acorn seems to be the sole 'community' element of EiE. They've had rallies (Labour MPs a headline speakers ffs) and now they're having standard leftie demos they're calling 'actions' on the 1st. Then what? I really hope to be surprised and wrong, but so far it doesn't look like anything different to what that part of the left does every few years. I hope this time the conditions are different and it works....

I don't at all suggest anyone sit back and wait for the right approach to magically emerge, and I keep meaning to try and write something on that as well... and FWIW I'm not suggesting some kind of political purity as an important point, I agree we have to work with what's going on and where, and that includes the unions and things like EiE. But working with includes criticism and trying to make stuff 'better'.
 
Last edited:
LDC said:
AFAIK they're not enough is Enough though! but something different to just promote stuff they get sent, they were never themselves going to 'set up assemblies' were they? They'll put pretty much whatever you send them on the map of strikes and actions.
Click to expand...
It was a more ambitious idea of social movement coordination at the outset I think. They wanted to be a broader church than EIE, and had John McDonnell attached. But they moved too slowly, and seem to have now downscaled even the ambitions they wrote on their website initially about local assemblies. I think it's a bit of a shame that the EIE and COLA people didn't get together at the beginning, as I feel that the EIE is going to be a bit bound by its big union roots, and something with broader influences would have felt more hopeful to me. But I don't really know why it didn't happen - possibly they didn't even know about each other until too late, or possibly they couldn't see a way to work together.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LDC
Might be me being gormless, but I can no longer see any reference to 'local groups' on the website. There's 'learn about events in my area', but that's different. I don't underestimate the work involved in kick starting local initiatives, but this looks more there's been a withdrawal from that idea. Even now, hope to be proved wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LDC
Wilf said:
Might be me being gormless, but I can no longer see any reference to 'local groups' on the website. There's 'learn about events in my area', but that's different. I don't underestimate the work involved in kick starting local initiatives, but this looks more there's been a withdrawal from that idea. Even now, hope to be proved wrong.
Click to expand...
Theres a small outside hope it could be some marketing or website design oversight. A lot of web design templates will have default copy and design for events but not for groups
 
LDC said:
Yes, people loved it. But like you say what are they being told? What are they learning? It's clear that the underlying direction is towards the Labour Party as a vehicle for change. And I know that is understandable historically, but it's a busted strategy, and they're struggling to admit it, let along re-orientate themselves to others ways of doing stuff. So what are they going to do? Where are the discussions happening to try and deal with that? What steps are they taking to try and link with other struggles outside workplaces? I dispute it's community based from what I've seen. Acorn seems to be the sole 'community' element of EiE. They've had rallies (Labour MPs a headline speakers ffs) and now they're having standard leftie demos they're calling 'actions' on the 1st. Then what? I really hope to be surprised and wrong, but so far it doesn't look like anything different to what that part of the left does every few years. I hope this time the conditions are different and it works....

I don't at all suggest anyone sit back and wait for the right approach to magically emerge, and I keep meaning to try and write something on that as well... and FWIW I'm not suggesting some kind of political purity as an important point, I agree we have to work with what's going on and where, and that includes the unions and things like EiE. But working with includes criticism and trying to make stuff 'better'.
Click to expand...

Some important points in your reply, I’ll try to write a proper response at some point. However, something I want to emphasise (again) is the potential importance of EiE in breaking with labourism rather than being captured by it (as you seem to believe is it’s future).

If we accept that Labourism can be understood as i) an emphasis on elections and electoralism; (ii) an understanding of the state/state power as neutral; and (iii) a top-down conception of social democracy then EiE is a clear break with 1, visibly rejects 2 through strikes and community action and is still working things out in respect of 3 where there is contradiction and confusion.

As for what my fellow stewards learned - along with the usual solidarity stuff - it was this: nobody is coming to save us, there is only us. Not even Zara Sultana is going to save their jobs and communities. That’s a big thing to grasp.

They also got the need to create independent networks across workplaces breaking out of intra union and inter union sectarianism, the importance of shop stewards networks and the importance of taking this approach into their communities.

This is all obvious stuff, but I’m genuinely confused as to the reasons for the palpable sense of some to see it fail. What else is there?
 
Smokeandsteam said:
Not sure how you arrive at deciding that calling off a one day strike because the Queen died could be characterized as pandering to the most reactionary elements of the RMT membership. I'd also argue that, if anything, the RMT has often gone too far the other way citing their 'no one likes us, we don't care' slogan nicked off their favourite team. A look at their activity over the past 20 years or so indicated it's well wide of the mark to suggest the RMT don't do anything bar free wills basically.



Yes. The EiE rally on Friday had a similar problem where on one hand everybody recognized that Labour was part of the problem and not the solution. but again and again ideas and demands were raised which seemed designed to pressure Labour or change Labour into something that it never has been (even under Corbyn).

It's pretty frustrating for many of us and some of it - from some quarters - is idiotic stuff that needs to be dispended with.

But, Labourism is so ingrained and embedded in the movement that expecting anything other than confusion, contradiction and incoherence at times is inevitable. That's why I've been keen to see EiE take on a more concrete and long term form (and why the position of my own union and others is a massive setback). The best activists will learn and develop through activity and doing stuff rather than arriving fully formed. It's important to remember that hundreds of thousands have signed up for EiE, I estimate over 40,000 have or will come to rallies. The crowd in Birmingham was mainly young (once the usual suspects are discounted). The young stewards I was with loved it and came away from the meeting and the beer after buzzing. What they think, what they learn and what they then do is as important as what Mick Lynch or Dave Ward think.

If the position of anarchists is to sit back and wait for EiE to arrive at the 'right' approach then it'll be a long wait. But since Corbyn this is the most energy and engaged we've maanged on our side. And, noting the contradictions, it is explicitly outside of Labour, outside of its control (and also outside of the control that of the cobweb left) and workplace and community based. As such its potential should be obvious and from that some perspective.
Click to expand...
Just on your last post, I'm not sitting back, I'm going to the Manchester day of action on the 1st October and... waiting to hear about the local groups. I'm not a purist and when it was originally announced there would be local groups I thought they'd have been set up with a broadly pro-Labour outlook, wouldn't be ready for an all out assault on neoliberalism and all the rest. In fact I expected there'd be battles with labourists from day one. But the main thing about community groups was, initially, that they would exist. A Corbyn detour is irrelevant, but they would have had the potential to do stuff that the Momentum/Corby project never really did. There's be an opportunity to start building resistance, mutual aid in the face of penury, extending the 'left' into people's actual lives. There also might have been a recognition by big unions that bottom up organisng was... acceptable.

I still think that could happen, but the idea this might be a movement that actually 'organises' in communities, seems to be slipping.
 
Wilf said:
Just on your last post, I'm not sitting back, I'm going to the Manchester day of action on the 1st October and... waiting to hear about the local groups. I'm not a purist and when it was originally announced there would be local groups I thought they'd have been set up with a broadly pro-Labour outlook, wouldn't be ready for an all out assault on neoliberalism and all the rest. In fact I expected there'd be battles with labourists from day one. But the main thing about community groups was, initially, that they would exist. A Corbyn detour is irrelevant, but they would have had the potential to do stuff that the Momentum/Corby project never really did. There's be an opportunity to start building resistance, mutual aid in the face of penury, extending the 'left' into people's actual lives. There also might have been a recognition by big unions that bottom up organisng was... acceptable.

I still think that could happen, but the idea this might be a movement that actually 'organises' in communities, seems to be slipping.
Click to expand...
I agree local groups essential to the success of the movement, fears about losing control will contribute to people's alienation from the campaign imo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

RevolutionSound
Enough is Enough
Replies
23
Views
891
RevolutionSound
RevolutionSound
Pickman's model
rip jax, a police dog who said enough's enough
Replies
11
Views
1K
Shippou-Sensei
Shippou-Sensei
tim
Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby's time is up.
2 3 4
Replies
115
Views
4K
weltweit
weltweit
AmateurAgitator
Anarchist/Left Libertarian Articles on the Cost of Living Crisis
2
Replies
31
Views
1K
danny la rouge
danny la rouge
Yossarian
Crappy concrete crisis
6 7 8 9 10
Replies
293
Views
15K
SpookyFrank
SpookyFrank
Back
Top Bottom