Creating "Lexit": What is to be done?

[newbie]

So community as the concept of people who live together needs to be reestablished (rather than 'community' as an identity e.g. The gay community). And therefore within that, diversity as a lived reality needs to be shown to be an aspect of community. This can only come by living together, cooperating in common cause. It can't be dispensed from above, like a jug filling a vessel.

and yet you can't uninvent the internet or the car or the plane. Or the disposable income that's available to substantial numbers of people. Geographic community has limits these days when most have personal opportunities like never before: travel to get away from the home community in order to find people or places that are more interesting, sit at home or in the pub or cafe concentrating on a screen and the bunfight du jour on U75 or the latest kitten on youtube, or watch the telly or play Xbox.

My father has helped administer his local FA for half a century and more. He's also been active in his tenants association for almost that long. I know other people who have been involved for decades in other clubs or societies. Their common complaint is that it's becoming ever harder to keep these things going because few have the time or inclination to join, let alone to put in the hours keeping it all going. Villages have lost their football team because not enough of them wanted to keep it going. People who want to play travel to do so and quite possibly play in a 'community of interest' team.

Sorry to come at this with a depressing post, but in those conditions, basing a political strategy on geographic community isn't very workable, is it?

 

[danny la rouge]

and yet you can't uninvent the internet or the car or the plane

I don't want to. Why do you think I want to?

basing a political strategy on geographic community isn't very workable, is it?

Why not?

You and I are on the internet sharing ideas, and that's great. But if my neighbours and I want the footbridge mended (which the council won't mend) we might contact each other by email or a messaging app*, but in the end we're going to have to get together with wood and saws. You don't use this footbridge: the local kids here do.

(*We'll probably use our cars to transport wood, too).

 

[newbie]

You don't use this footbridge: the local kids here do.

of course: I wish you success in your endeavour.

 

[danny la rouge]

of course: I wish you success in your endeavour.

It's a trivial example, but you can probably think of other real things that real people can do to build solidarity which happen in a physical location. Things which are about taking back control of our lives. Things that are active rather than passive. Direction action: acting directly instead of being petitioning supplicants.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Are you reading the same thread as me? I'm not seeing despair.

If you're expecting sudden global change, then you really need to recalibrate your expectations. Not least because the superstructure in which you're putting your faith will not change independent of the base. Those structures - state, banks, political parties - service the property relations of our current mode of production. As emanymton said, they won't turn up for a cafe reservation in the name of Yanis, and vote to change themselves.

Look at previous overnight successes: the Spanish revolution, which seems to many to suddenly spring into being as a reaction against the military putsch, is described in Murray Bookchin's book The Spanish Anarchists: the heroic years 1868-1936. The title itself is a clue.

"Their movement's 'heroic years,' 1868 - 1938, were marked by a fascinating process of experimentation on organisational forms, decision-making techniques, educational goals, and methods of struggle". (p228)

In other words, there has to be groundwork. There has to be substance behind the ideals.

There were working class networks in the UK, but Thatcherism deliberately destroyed them. She didn't believe in society. She wanted individuals out for themselves.

And by and large she succeeded not only in smashing those solidaristic networks into flinders, but in instilling (perhaps that's too weak a term. Perhaps "indoctrination" sits better) into the general population - through references to "enemies within" and other opportunism - a fear of trade unionism that
is still there, still prevalent. Her greatest success was in slowly destroying the solidaristic network that was local authority social housing. The Tories hated them and what they stood for - communities that stood up for themselves.

So we need to rebuild community as a concept, an ideal; the worth of community needs to be reestablished, as well as communities needing to be reestablished as functioning social organs.

But more than that: Thatcher destroyed community because she knew it was a bulwark against the changes she wanted to make. She needed to break down the post war consensus and establish a new 'common sense', and strong community was an alternative power base. Communities can foster their own values, allowing people to question the establishment values propagated in the media. That's their danger.

Of course, with the current fad among local government for wiping out council estates through "regeneration", a perverse result has occurred. Homeowners on affected estates are solidly bonding with their tenant neighbours to fight that regeneration, in a way that would have Thatcher turning in her grave, and would wizen Major or Blair's genitals. My community is as strong, perhaps stronger than the communities I grew up in, and that frightens our local Labour council greatly.

But this requires rethinking what you think of as politics. Politics as defined by the BBC is the coming and going of groups of managers in government. But what if instead it's the battle of ideas in the culture and life of society, fought by establishing alternative relationships and alternative loci of management and decision making?

Politics is whatever you want to be political about. One of the community activism collectives I'm involved in goes in for a nice brand of agitprop based on "subvertising" our local authority's advertising, and satirising our Councillors and council officers. Liberals decry us for "gutter tactics", but none of what we say on this material is fiction - it's all fact. Our "politics" is to highlight those facts in a way that's accessible and amusing. It works a lot better than paper-selling, that's for sure!

So community as the concept of people who live together needs to be reestablished (rather than 'community' as an identity e.g. The gay community). And therefore within that, diversity as a lived reality needs to be shown to be an aspect of community. This can only come by living together, cooperating in common cause. It can't be dispensed from above, like a jug filling a vessel.

Community is lived experience, identity and - to a small degree - lifestyle, but community as identity should always be noted to be subordinate to lived experience within your geographic community. This isn't because communities of identity are less important, but because each and every one of us belongs to many - often intersecting - communities of identity. They're part of us, and they inform who we are and how we interact within our geographic communities, but they don't DEFINE us, however hard some people might claim that they do.

 

[Treacle Toes]

Sorry to come at this with a depressing post, but in those conditions, basing a political strategy on geographic community isn't very workable, is it?

Surely it depends what the 'political strategy' actually is?

If the strategy itself is to encourage/support local groups to come together and address issues of common concern as a way of building 'community', confidence, memories of success, learning along the way, tackling apathy, creating opportunities to share skills/learn new things etc..

 

[newbie]

It's a trivial example, but you can probably think of other real things that real people can do to build solidarity which happen in a physical location. Things which are about taking back control of our lives. Things that are active rather than passive. Direction action: acting directly instead of being petitioning supplicants.

I'm not doubting that your proposal has potential, just unsure how many people across the country have much interest in geographic community beyond the immediate need, like your footbridge.

 

[brogdale]

It's a trivial example, but you can probably think of other real things that real people can do to build solidarity which happen in a physical location. Things which are about taking back control of our lives. Things that are active rather than passive. Direction action: acting directly instead of being petitioning supplicants.

Spot on danny la rouge .
And yet...thinking back to chilango 's OP...(& not wishing to diminish such local organisation in any way)...I can't see how such action relates specifically to the 'opportunities opening up' as a result of 'Lexit'? I'm presuming you & your friends would have set to about the footbridge irrespective of the referendum result. I get that you're offering this up as an exemplar of what folk can achieve, but it's not conditional upon Brexit/'Lexit' is it?

 

[danny la rouge]

I'm not doubting that your proposal has potential, just unsure how many people across the country have much interest in geographic community beyond the immediate need, like your footbridge.

Immediate need is the driver of cooperation. And once cooperation becomes a natural thing, then networks can be built. So that in a circumstance similar to the general strike, communities can themselves cooperate.

 

[newbie]

Surely it depends what the 'political strategy' actually is?

If the strategy itself is to encourage/support local groups to come together and address issues of common concern as a way of building 'community', confidence, memories of success, learning along the way, tackling apathy, creating opportunities to share skills/learn new things etc..

The strategy is fine, all good, but only if there's an appetite for it.

 

[Treacle Toes]

The strategy is fine, all good, but only if there's an appetite for it.

My own experience of community organising is that not everyone will be, some will see the benefits and join in as they see impact or the commitment of others, some will see the efforts being made and join in as a way of building connections with people so that they themselves will have support for another issue they are passionate about. Others will fucking hate you and everyone else because they don't like change and whilst they are miserable and fully recognise the problems, actually fighting back can be tiring and scary and who the hell will we be if stop talking about how great it was when the local community was more closeknit, and actually do something about making it that way again

Still, can't please everyone.

 

[danny la rouge]

Spot on danny la rouge .
And yet...thinking back to chilango 's OP...(& not wishing to diminish such local organisation in any way)...I can't see how such action relates specifically to the 'opportunities opening up' as a result of 'Lexit'? I'm presuming you & your friends would have set to about the footbridge irrespective of the referendum result. I get that you're offering this up as an exemplar of what folk can achieve, but it's not conditional upon Brexit/'Lexit' is it?

No it isn't conditional upon Brexit, you're right. But it is what needs to be rebuilt. I think it can happen quite quickly if it's part of an overall ethos. Here we are back to talking about a uniting campaign with an immediate focus.

I think back to the days where one of the natural places you'd go to canvas interest in anything in my vicinity would be the miners' welfare club. Now there are no mines and the welfare club is no longer there: it's now Waitrose car park. We need to replace what has gone. (Not with a new miners' welfare: no point, there's no miners). We need purposes for cooperation that are relevant now.

 

[brogdale]

No it isn't conditional upon Brexit, you're right. But it is what needs to be rebuilt. I think it can happen quite quickly if it's part of an overall ethos. Here we are back to talking about a uniting campaign with an immediate focus.

I think back to the days where one of the natural places you'd go to canvas interest in anything in my vicinity would be the miners' welfare club. Now there are no mines and the welfare club is no longer there: it's now Waitrose car park. We need to replace what has gone. (Not with a new miners' welfare: no point, there's no miners). We need purposes for cooperation that are relevant now.

I couldn't agree more...but...that would have been the case Brexit or not. I suppose I'm just interested in what it is we mean when we talk about the 'opportunities opened up by Brexit'?

 

[danny la rouge]

I couldn't agree more...but...that would have been the case Brexit or not. I suppose I'm just interested in what it is we mean when we talk about the 'opportunities opened up by Brexit'?

I think there was a huge missed opportunity to create a focus while the elite was in chaos. The focus could have been demands or assertion or a combination of both. It should have come from what people wanted. It could still. But I think the space is fast closing.

 

[Treacle Toes]

I couldn't agree more...but...that would have been the case Brexit or not. I suppose I'm just interested in what it is we mean when we talk about the 'opportunities opened up by Brexit'?

One thing could be approaching the division created between leave/remain voters? Past the initial joy and pain has either camp actually come out of this being fully confident that it will end up being what they wanted or can deal with? Meanwhile, we still have to get on with living, the local issues still exist and many of those will be of common interest.

 

[brogdale]

I think there was a huge missed opportunity to create a focus while the elite was in chaos. The focus could have been demands or assertion or a combination of both. It should have come from what people wanted. It could still. But I think the space is fast closing.

Yes, but the immediate disarray was pretty much limited to the professional, political elite; financialised capital and finance capital appear to have ridden the aftermath pretty smoothly. The Alanticist, Brexitory faithful were, after all, not working toward some chaotic outcome that would threaten the interests of their paymaster/clients.

 

[danny la rouge]

what is it mean when we talk about the 'opportunities opened up by Brexit'?

People probably mean different things. I have no idea what the official Lexit campaign meant. Rob Griffiths has done very little other than write in the Morning Star that Brexit 'should steer left'. How? Who will do it? So what he meant by the opportunities is unclear to me.


What I mean by the opportunities is a chance to change the power dynamic in the compromise between labour (small l) and capital. I wouldn't have chosen now from the point of view of a cohesive class, but it wasn't a timetable of our choosing. So start from where we are.

 

[danny la rouge]

Yes, but the immediate disarray was pretty much limited to the professional, political elite; financialised capital and finance capital appear to have ridden the aftermath pretty smoothly.

I agree. Although the markets were unconvinced at the start.

The Alanticist, Brexitory faithful were, after all, not working toward some chaotic outcome that would threaten the interests of their paymaster/clients.

I'm not so sure! I don't think they are wholly neoliberal. I think they're more chaotic in their value system.

 

[redsquirrel]

That really is the complete opposite of "depressing"; well said danny la rouge

Yep, danny's nailed it as usual.

 

[brogdale]

People probably mean different things. I have no idea what the official Lexit campaign meant. Rob Griffiths has done very little other than write in the Morning Star that Brexit 'should steer left'. How? Who will do it? So what he meant by the opportunities is unclear to me.


What I mean by the opportunities is a chance to change the power dynamic in the compromise between labour (small l) and capital. I wouldn't have chosen now from the pint of view of a cohesive class, but it wasn't a timetable of our choosing. So start from where we are.

Yes, and to rake over the coals of wtf 'Lexit' ever meant would be going explicitly against the desires of the OPer. But thinking about the opportunities afforded by such a nebulous notion is quite difficult...which is why, on reflection, it might have been useful to use the term 'brexit'...though fuknose what that means!

 

[brogdale]

I agree. Although the markets were unconvinced at the start.

I'm not so sure! I don't think they are wholly neoliberal. I think they're more chaotic in their value system.

Maybe so, but I've always regarded them as fundie/purist neoliberals, pushing for an acceleration of the project unhindered by the unhelpful legacy of interventionism latent within the grand European project.

 

[danny la rouge]

One thing could be approaching the division created between leave/remain voters? Past the initial joy and pain has either camp actually come out of this being fully confident that it will end up being what they wanted or can deal with? Meanwhile, we still have to get on with living, the local issues still exist and many of those will be of common interest.

Is there really division created by Brexit, though? I mean, does being a Leaver or Remainer signify anything other than as a symbol, a proxy, for divisions that were already there?

I don't know. Maybe there are. I'm not where you are. But that's not the impression I get where I am.

 

[brogdale]

Is there really division created by Brexit, though? I mean, does being a Leaver or Remainer signify anything other than as a symbol, a proxy, for divisions that were already there?

I don't know. Maybe there are. I'm not where you are. But that's not the impression I get where I am.

Tricky to say, but it obviously suits those who will gain from the accelerated neoliberalism of Brexit to maintain a divided electorate content to throw recriminations/anger at each other. The Soubry's of this situation have a role.

 

[danny la rouge]

Maybe so, but I've always regarded them as fundie/purist neoliberals, pushing for an acceleration of the project unhindered by the unhelpful legacy of interventionism latent within the grand European project.

I think the sense I had of them was that they were a throw back to an older formulation of the New Right ethos, the pre baby boomer generation and those who longed for that time when women weren't members of the golf club. Lacking the sophistication of neoliberalism as it became.

 

[brogdale]

I think the sense I had of them was that they were a throw back to an older formulation of the New Right ethos, the pre baby boomer generation and those who longed for that time when women weren't members of the golf club. Lacking the sophistication of neoliberalism as it became.

UKIP, yes...but the Atlanticist tories have been at this for decades, haven't they? Of course the public face of their game was always nation, patriotism and sovereignty...but all that fluff was a very effective disguise for their real agenda of unshackling their project (Fatcherism/neoliberalism) from the dead hand of the supra-state.

 

[Treacle Toes]

Is there really division created by Brexit, though? I mean, does being a Leaver or Remainer signify anything other than as a symbol, a proxy, for divisions that were already there?

I don't know. Maybe there are. I'm not where you are. But that's not the impression I get where I am.

It's a good question and of course I can't answer it for everyone.

My point was one more about perception...The campaign narrative used the language of 'absolutes', in or out, whereas many people could see the benefits of either, or had concerns about what either decision would mean. I see and hear confusion from people all the time about it, the what will happen now void and worry for both is real.

Now you have asked I wonder how many see their leave/remain vote as a symbol or a proxy. Perhaps you can share how this has played out/become evident where you are?

 

[danny la rouge]

Tricky to say, but it obviously suits those who will gain from the accelerated neoliberalism of Brexit to maintain a divided electorate content to through recriminations/anger at each other. The Soubry's of this situation have a role.

Yes, I think this idea of division being sewn in the media is useful to the elite. But I don't get the sense that the fault-line is about Remain or Leave as such. I'm thinking of the film that John Harris made where he spoke to two women in the Manchester area (I think) who said that people with money would vote Remain and people without money would vote Leave.

 

[brogdale]

Yes, I think this idea of division being sewn in the media is useful to the elite. But I don't get the sense that the fault-line is about Remain or Leave as such. I'm thinking of the film that John Harris made where he spoke to two women in the Manchester area (I think) who said that people with money would vote Remain and people without money would vote Leave.

Who can say they're right here? Perception is all, isn' it?
My 2pworth is that the fault-line is there and will become accentuated as the shit increasingly hits the fan. It will suit both base & superstructure to set the electorate against itself as the realities of the Brexit aftermath emerge.

 

[danny la rouge]

Now you have asked I wonder how many see their leave/remain vote as a symbol or a proxy. Perhaps you can share how this has played out/become evident where you are?

My feeling was that the referendum was a non-event here. There was no discussion. No engagement. No posters. Nothing.

It was in huge contrast to the independence referendum, where there was huge engagement over a prolonged period. Strangers would come up to you in the street and talk to you about the Indy referendum. I don't mean canvassers, I mean people passing on the pavement. The barber shop I go to was a buzz with independence conversation. This literally happened.

Not the Brexit ref.

This contrasts heavily with my visits to the Stoke on Trent area (where Mrs la Rouge is from) where there was a sense of engagement (not quite at the Indy ref level in my experience, but still there). People were talking about it. I know "anecdote is not the singular of data" and all that, but since I'm being asked I think Scotland was definitely different to the English Midlands in its experiences of the Brexit referendum.

Might just have been voter fatigue. But I just don't think the choice meant the same in Scotland.

One thing I have seen since here the result (though not during the campaign) is houses in council schemes ostentatiously festooned with EU flags. These are nationalists asserting a cause for indyref2.

 

[Sue]

My feeling was that the referendum was a non-event here. There was no discussion. No engagement. No posters. Nothing.

It was in huge contrast to the independence referendum, where there was huge engagement over a prolonged period. Strangers would come up to you in the street and talk to you about the Indy referendum. I don't mean canvassers, I mean people passing on the pavement. The barber shop I go to was a buzz with independence conversation. This literally happened.

Not the Brexit ref.

This contrasts heavily with my visits to the Stoke on Trent area (where Mrs la Rouge is from) where there was a sense of engagement (not quite at the Indy ref level in my experience, but still there). People were talking about it. I know "anecdote is not the singular of data" and all that, but since I'm being asked I think Scotland was definitely different to the English Midlands in its experiences of the Brexit referendum.

Might just have been voter fatigue. But I just don't think the choice meant the same in Scotland.

One thing I have seen since here the result (though not during the campaign) is houses in council schemes ostentatiously festooned with EU flags. These are nationalists asserting a cause for indyref2.

I was in Scotland during Indyref and yes, people were talking about it everywhere and there was a very strong feeling of engagement. (I was in a strong no area btw.)

I was in London for the EU referendum -- living in one of the strongest remain areas -- and there was pretty much no engagement at all and very little discussion.

The contrast between the two couldn't have been more marked.