Crisis in Working Class Representation

[LLETSA]

Well said agricola. Unions like PCS are not affiliated to any party and passed a motion at this year's conference to stand trade union candidates on a platform of protecting public sector jobs/values. Whether this sees the light of day - who knows.

A general election coming and a left party supporting working class aspirations is nowhere. SP have campaigned for yours for a new workers party - where is it? RMT pushing for some sort of initiative. Respect tiny in a few areas. SWP sends out an open letter for something to happen.

Here we are in a recession, millions on the dole giving monies to banks to prop up a discredited financial system. It should be a great time for the left but it is in a sorry state in the UK. Depressing but we must be hopeful. The struggle continues - it is not over yet.

In some countries on mainland Europe parties like the one being proposed are cobbled together, but even where their votes are highest they can never hope to be elected. Nor will they find their way to power any other way. In some countries, Britain being one of them, they don't get off the ground at all. And they won't.

The reason for this, and for why the worst recession in decades (in reality a stifled worldwide depression), has seen no significant shift to the left is that it was all up for socialism some time ago. But capitalism won a pyrrhic victory. Consumer capitalism will collapse under the impact of inevitable resource scarcity and the wars it will cause, but the best that left/working class movements can hope for is to offset the barbarism that will arise. I used to laugh at the slogan of 'socialism or barbarism,' but it's becoming clearer by the day that children growing up today will be faced in their lifetimes with the choice of barbarism or something less dire.

 

[treelover]

Was also told that an SWPer asked if they could announce that Chris Harman had died and they were told they couldn't. Pretty low if true.
Reply With Quote

Actually thats pretty crap, I have no time for the SWP or indeed CH, he once seemed to defend the Serbs, etc, but a death is a death, he was a left winger and it was a left wing meeting, there would have been people there, not SWP, who would have known him.

 

[articul8]

if the story is true of course, but it sounds unlikely

 

[Lo Siento.]

Actually thats pretty crap, I have no time for the SWP or indeed CH, he once seemed to defend the Serbs, etc, but a death is a death, he was a left winger and it was a left wing meeting, there would have been people there, not SWP, who would have known him.

why? maybe they thought a political conference was an inappropriate place to tell people that a friend of theirs had died.

 

[glenquagmire]

What's wrong with defending Serbs? Are they less deserving of support than other groups of people?

 

[articul8]

I assume he means defending the Serbian regime that ethnically cleansed Bosnia of Croats and muslims? (not saying this is true of CH - it's perfectly possible to condemn NATO bombing of Belgrade without defending Milosevic etc.)

 

[glenquagmire]

Well he should have written that then.

 

[CyberRose]

No one can vote for a union in an election, but the unions obviously represent their members (it's what unions do).

Yes obviously but "representation" in the context of this thread surely means political representation, doesn't it?

 

[Joe Reilly]

That's being too kind.

Probably one of the worse conferences I've been to and that's saying something.

You were given a leaflet as you went through the door saying that an alliance had been decided by Bob Crow, SP and CPB but that there was no name and nothing had been decided about the politics.

You could get involved by writing in to an email address. Great.

Then there were a series of tedious speakers, with Crow being the only one who was quite charasmatic (Matt Wrack wasn't too bad).

Speakers were taken by name, but the chair pretended that they were taking speakers from the floor.

Overall totally undemocratic, boring and nothing came out of it other than a stitch up and an email address.

Almost unbelievably they have learned nothing from the failures of the SLP, SA, Respect, No to EU!...still in absolute denial. While the speakers mostly spoke in cliches,the audience seemingly think in cliches. White, white collar, middle aged, culturally middle class. Conservative.

"Unions still the way forward, still calling for a vote for Labour MP's, No to EU vote is 'something to build on', BNP vote down, Labour right wing to blame in any case.

If the BNP had to invent an opposition this would be it.

 

[TAE]

Yes obviously but "representation" in the context of this thread surely means political representation, doesn't it?

Does it? Does it have to? I'm really not sure it does. I mean if a union can stand up for its members and represent their interests? Perhaps seeking solutions 'outside the political playground' of the main parties is a way to explore. Not sure tbh, just wondering.

 

[love detective]

one of the speakers mentioned the need for an independent working class initiative/alternative - although the whole thing had a feeling about it that the intention was, despite that rhetoric, for the movement to be independent of the working class

 

[Silver_Fox]

Very true love detective.

Almost unbelievably they have learned nothing from the failures of the SLP, SA, Respect, No to EU!...still in absolute denial. While the speakers mostly spoke in cliches,the audience seemingly think in cliches. White, white collar, middle aged, culturally middle class. Conservative.

"Unions still the way forward, still calling for a vote for Labour MP's, No to EU vote is 'something to build on', BNP vote down, Labour right wing to blame in any case.

If the BNP had to invent an opposition this would be it.

Don't you know that it's never been a better time to be a socialist

Actually what is amazing is the almost seemless transition from the SWP organising this kind of thing to the Socialist Party doing it. If anything it seemed even less democratic and even more how you describe above.

 

[treelover]

I suspect the SP now seem to think they are the 'growing force' in left wing politics such as it is, and all the hubris the SWP displays will now be on display with the SP, sad really, as most of the time the SP have been very reasonable people with integrity.

 

[JimPage]

I suspect the SP now seem to think they are the 'growing force' in left wing politics such as it is, and all the hubris the SWP displays will now be on display with the SP, sad really, as most of the time the SP have been very reasonable people with integrity.

I know, the SP have been whinging about the SWP's lack of democracy for years, but they come up with this little stitch up- which seems to exclude the SWP- who probably have ten times their membership- and Respect

 

[socialistsuzy]

We (SP) didn't organise the conference, the RMT did, as they were mandated to at their national conference. At which they also agreed to not have a resolution based conference, which we would have prefered. We weren't chairing, we didn't exclude anyone, the SWP are responsible for the way the RMT see them, not us.

We are by no means they driving force in the new coalition but are pushing for it's development in time for the elections. The conference was a good step forward, new left parties don't fall out of the air perfectly formed, it took two decades to create the Labour Party. This is the first movements of a national trade union into the political field since then and is an important step in what could be a very long process.

 

[The39thStep]

We (SP) didn't organise the conference, the RMT did, as they were mandated to at their national conference. At which they also agreed to not have a resolution based conference, which we would have prefered. We weren't chairing, we didn't exclude anyone, the SWP are responsible for the way the RMT see them, not us.

We are by no means they driving force in the new coalition but are pushing for it's development in time for the elections. The conference was a good step forward, new left parties don't fall out of the air perfectly formed, it took two decades to create the Labour Party. This is the first movements of a national trade union into the political field since then and is an important step in what could be a very long process.

one step beyond

 

[The Black Hand]

one step beyond

Why?

 

[Prince Rhyus]

Am I the only one confused by the call of organisations that call themselves parties calling for a new workers party?

Also, why are so many socialist events/conferences held in that working class bastion of London that is Bloomsbury? I'm sure there are many more suitable community centres that they could hold them in that are in the middle of working class communities?

 

[Manzil]

Surely its far too late for realignment though? They have had for a considerable time the means with which to influence Labour policy and have utterly failed to do so. As for conducting an "internal review" before this election, frankly that is cowardice of the worst kind and will no doubt be replaced by "well, we have to fight the Tories..." once they win.

Of course what makes everything much worse is that, if they had influenced Labour policy, the Labour party would be in a considerably better position electorally and politically than it currently is (and the country would be in a much better position financially as well). To take the railways as one example, had they enforced the 1997 Labour manifesto committment to renationalization then we would have had a cheaper (both to users and in terms of subsidy), safer and almost certainly better railway.

I'm not sure to what extent PCS' review is motivated by fear of upsetting the apple cart and letting in the Tories. They have no love of the Labour government and have never been politically affiliated: it takes time for shifts in attitude to take effect and from what socialists in the civil service said during the weekend, progress is being made, however slowly.

I'm not denying the Labour party and the workers' movement would be in a better position had the trade unions been able to influence government policy. Unfortunately they didn't, indeed could not happen, and in substantive issues probably never will again. So we can either keep chastising ourselves for recent history being what it is, or decide how to move forward. I believe the working class is unrepresented and needs to organise politically in our communities, and that a new workers' party is needed for that task. It will happen in fits and starts, but it is the goal we should be working towards.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

I know, the SP have been whinging about the SWP's lack of democracy for years, but they come up with this little stitch up- which seems to exclude the SWP- who probably have ten times their membership- and Respect

Jim, when did you start being a lunatic? Seriously.

 

[glenquagmire]

Am I the only one confused by the call of organisations that call themselves parties calling for a new workers party?

Also, why are so many socialist events/conferences held in that working class bastion of London that is Bloomsbury? I'm sure there are many more suitable community centres that they could hold them in that are in the middle of working class communities?

Halls with enough seats are not that common. And anything aiming to be a national conference has to be held in zone 1 really, for transport reasons.

 

[JimPage]

Jim, when did you start being a lunatic? Seriously.

Sorry for your response, as I agree with much of the SP;'s politics, however ever since the euros elections the SWP seem to have been offering their hand to other left grooups, such as the proposed meeting a week before this conference

The SWP seemed to offer the only workable solution to left unity before the General Election- a non agression pact, everyone standing under their own names but with "Left unity" tagged on the end. This perfectly sensible solution seems to have been rejected by the SP and others

 

[Fedayn]

Halls with enough seats are not that common. And anything aiming to be a national conference has to be held in zone 1 really, for transport reasons.

Btw, there is a public transport network outside of London....

 

[JimPage]

We (SP) didn't organise the conference, the RMT did, as they were mandated to at their national conference. At which they also agreed to not have a resolution based conference, which we would have prefered. We weren't chairing, we didn't exclude anyone, the SWP are responsible for the way the RMT see them, not us.
.

if i am correct 3 of the 8 speakers were SP, one CPB- and Bob Crow- whose politics are unkown other than he went on from themeeting last saturday meeting to a Stalinfest organised by the clearly mad CPGB-ML (www.cpgb-ml.org)

Where were Respect? Where were the SWP? What effort has been made to incude these?

 

[Silver_Fox]

We (SP) didn't organise the conference, the RMT did, as they were mandated to at their national conference. At which they also agreed to not have a resolution based conference, which we would have prefered. We weren't chairing, we didn't exclude anyone, the SWP are responsible for the way the RMT see them, not us.

We are by no means they driving force in the new coalition but are pushing for it's development in time for the elections. The conference was a good step forward, new left parties don't fall out of the air perfectly formed, it took two decades to create the Labour Party. This is the first movements of a national trade union into the political field since then and is an important step in what could be a very long process.

I would believe this more if two thirds of the speakers (if you included so called contributions from the floor) weren't from the socialist party. Just like the National Shop Stewards Network conference which was like a Socialist Party conference.

Also I didn't hear any of the Socialist Party speakers say that it should have been a resolution based meeting, or that it was bad that the SWP and others weren't more involved or that that meeting should have been far more democratic or even in any way democratic.

Instead after having meetings behind closed doors they gave out leaflets that the Socialist Party had printed off saying that an alliance had already been decided and yet more meetings behind closed doors would decide the politics and the name. But heh ho, you could email in your ideas.

What was slightly bizarre was that Joe Higgins said everyone should know that it was wrong to set up things for the elections a few months in advance as it won't work and you need proper community work. But as you say the SP is:

pushing for it's development in time for the elections.

Which will be......in a few months time!

This is the first movements of a national trade union into the political field since then and is an important step in what could be a very long process.

Actually Bob Crow said he was only supporting it in a personal capacity. Another noticeable point about the meeting was the almost total lack of RMT members, it seems RMT members are not exactly busting a gut to get involved. Still, maybe they're all emailing in.

 

[glenquagmire]

Btw, there is a public transport network outside of London....

Yep, I was talking about meetings which are held in London - it has to be central London rather than further out.

You could have a big debate about whether it would be better for all organisations to hold their annual meetings in Birmingham or Manchester. The likelihood is that most left wing groups are disproportionately strong in London, though whether that is cause or effect I don't know...

 

[socialistsuzy]

I would believe this more if two thirds of the speakers (if you included so called contributions from the floor) weren't from the socialist party. Just like the National Shop Stewards Network conference which was like a Socialist Party conference

like i say, we didn't chair it, Joe Higgins was the only pre-confirmed speaker from the SP. Dave Nellist was pretty last minute. As for speakers from the floor, we didn't chair it, we can't predict who will be brought in. We are by no means in control of the RMT!

What was slightly bizarre was that Joe Higgins said everyone should know that it was wrong to set up things for the elections a few months in advance as it won't work and you need proper community work. But as you say the SP is:
Which will be......in a few months time!

we want something to be announced asap. ideally at the conference itself or before, but these things don't work to a timetable, do we condemn it because it will be launched with limited time again? no. we will do whatever we can to make it a success in the time we have whilst pushing for it to be asap.

 

[Silver_Fox]

like i say, we didn't chair it, Joe Higgins was the only pre-confirmed speaker from the SP. Dave Nellist was pretty last minute. As for speakers from the floor, we didn't chair it, we can't predict who will be brought in. We are by no means in control of the RMT!

But none of your speakers criticised the fact that everything has and will be done behind closed doors, that far more could be done to get others on board (including the SWP) and that the day was uninspiring and a stitch up or that the only input people could have was through an email address. At the end of the day this alliance couldn't go ahead without the members of the SP so you could have exerted a lot of pressure both before and at the conference. But the SP didn't.

we want something to be announced asap. ideally at the conference itself or before, but these things don't work to a timetable, do we condemn it because it will be launched with limited time again? no. we will do whatever we can to make it a success in the time we have whilst pushing for it to be asap.

It was announced, it had already been decided behind closed doors.

I'm not saying condemn it but what is being done is exactly what Joe Higgins shouldn't be done. On that I agree with him.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

...

Where were Respect? Where were the SWP? What effort has been made to incude these?

I understand that there were 10 supporters of Socialist Resistance, which supports Respect, present. One was called to speak.
A leaflet was distributed by SR:
http://socialistresistance.org/?p=723


SR will be arguing inside Respect at the conference this coming saturday for support for any left unity initiatives.
http://socialistresistance.org/?p=736


I've also been told that the principal representative of the SWP had his hand in the air for the whole conference but was not called to speak.

 

[JimPage]

I've also been told that the principal representative of the SWP had his hand in the air for the whole conference but was not called to speak.

The latest issue of SW reports that they will engage with this project positively, but infantile actions like this from the chair of the meeting would hardly help matters