Griffin and BNP strategy

[LLETSA]

why didn't you just say that in the first place? A perfectly reasonable position, I agree with.


I cannot see a revolution immanent either, but then again that's is what Lenin said in 1916.

so what happens when capitalism ceases to function, when the ruling class can no longer rule in the same way, and the working class are no longer prepared to be ruled in the same way? you believe there could be a revolution then?

I didn't say it in the first place as I was talking of a seperate subject, if a related one.

This is not the Russian empire in 1916, as you might have noticed.

When capitalism ceases to function etc we will see what happens. It's unlikely to be the same as what happened in the past for reasons which are more than obvious.

 

[TremulousTetra]

When capitalism ceases to function etc we will see what happens. It's unlikely to be the same as what happened in the past for reasons which are more than obvious.

The problem is the happenings of the 1920s and 30s, the withholding of labour (strikes) and mass demonstrations over throwing regimes, has happened time and time and time again. What about the happenings of the overthrow of the USSR, can they repeat themselves? I just don't see how you can say those type of events are no longer possible. And if they are possible, revolutions of hope, why not revolutions of despair (Fascism)?

 

[TremulousTetra]

I get the feeling that whatever Griffins strategy for many on here the response is always the same:

A musical event
Call them fascist or Nazis
Vote anyone but the BNP
No platform

Throw in a few quotes from Trotsky, the Spanish Civil war and Cable Street.

so what would you suggest should be done instead?

 

[LLETSA]

The problem is the happenings of the 1920s and 30s, the withholding of labour (strikes) and mass demonstrations over throwing regimes, has happened time and time and time again. What about the happenings of the overthrow of the USSR, can they repeat themselves? I just don't see how you can say those type of events are no longer possible. And if they are possible, revolutions of hope, why not revolutions of despair (Fascism)?

This post is incoherent. How can you have the overthrow of the USSR (an anti-socialist revolution despite the nature of the Soviet Union) when the USSR doesn't exist?

I never said that such events are impossible, just that they are less likely now due to the drastic ways in which society has changed.

 

[durruti02]

This post is incoherent. How can you have the overthrow of the USSR (an anti-socialist revolution despite the nature of the Soviet Union) when the USSR doesn't exist?

I never said that such events are impossible, just that they are less likely now due to the drastic ways in which society has changed.

while i undestand where you are coming from actually there is a strong counter argumement

- communication ( internet etc) makes a global revolution more practical
- advances in technology make a revolution more likely to survive
- the ecologocal crisis makes a revolution more (!) neccessary
- education makes a backward reaction less likely

 

[TremulousTetra]

This post is incoherent. How can you have the overthrow of the USSR (an anti-socialist revolution despite the nature of the Soviet Union) when the USSR doesn't exist?

I never said that such events are impossible, just that they are less likely now due to the drastic ways in which society has changed.

your main thesis was that the tactics employed in the 1920s and 30s to overthrow states could not be repeated because we do not live in the 1920s and 30s, and that fascism couldn't come about for similar reasons. Now what I am saying, is that fundamentally society remains the same, it is a class society. Whilst history will never exactly repeat itself, there ARE many methods of struggle which are bound to repeat themselves, because they fit the class nature of this society. Political and economic crisis is inherent in the capitalist system, as is struggle. hence the example of the USSR, where methods of struggle used in the 1920s and 30s were redeployed in a later age.

OH yes, add to the list of Durrito the fact that working class has only actually become a majority in recent times. at the time of the Russian Revolution, the working class was a minority.

 

[LLETSA]

your main thesis was that the tactics employed in the 1920s and 30s to overthrow states could not be repeated because we do not live in the 1920s and 30s, and that fascism couldn't come about for similar reasons. Now what I am saying, is that fundamentally society remains the same, it is a class society. Whilst history will never exactly repeat itself, there ARE many methods of struggle which are bound to repeat themselves, because they fit the class nature of this society. Political and economic crisis is inherent in the capitalist system, as is struggle. hence the example of the USSR, where methods of struggle used in the 1920s and 30s were redeployed in a later age.

OH yes, add to the list of Durrito the fact that working class has only actually become a majority in recent times. at the time of the Russian Revolution, the working class was a minority.

It wasn't a thesis but a quick post on a message board.

I still don't see that, while we do still have class society and that crisis is indeed inherent in the capitalist system, it necessarily follows that political ideas devised to combat conditions found in societies in the century before last can still find the same kind of audience in western societies today, which are vastly different in so many ways.

I still don't know what you're going on about with regard to the USSR. What, exactly, happened in the 1920s and 1930s that was repeated at a later date? The idea that the ideas and methods of the Bolshevik revolution have relevance in this society now, because the working class is not the minority it was in early 20th century Russia (which is what I presume you are implying) is, frankly, absurd. While the working class might technically be a majority in this society, it is much more divided, and facing ever-increasing distractions of a kind that, mostly, reinforce capitalist values, not to mention profits (and actually less numerous if we are talking about the numbers who are unambiguously workers) than it was when the Russian revolution still had the power to motivate large numbers. Even then, when the revolution's example was more plausibly relevant, it failed to capture the imaginations of enough.

 

[LLETSA]

while i undestand where you are coming from actually there is a strong counter argumement

- communication ( internet etc) makes a global revolution more practical
- advances in technology make a revolution more likely to survive
- the ecologocal crisis makes a revolution more (!) neccessary
- education makes a backward reaction less likely

All of these points seem to be based more on wishful thinking than plausibility.

The first point may be true-but it also makes more practical the resistance of ruling classes and elites, and the many who would see themselves as having something to lose from revolution (leaving aside that the idea of global revolution is so abstract as to be meaningless.)

The second point is equally debatable for similar reasons.

The third point is the probably the least plausible. There is no real reason to think that socialism (or whatever people want to call it) would be any kinder to the environment than capitalism, if only because it is reliant on keeping the industrial system which is allegedly responsible for exacerbating the ecological crisis going at full pelt, if not accelerating it. After all, how else could working class living standards across the world be boosted? Those who oppose capitalism are, in any case, bitterly divided about the issue, to the extent that many deny that there even is an ecological crisis.

Fourthly, 'backward reactions' have often taken place in the most highly educated of societies. It is difficult to imagine, for example, that the society of 'I'm a Celebrity' and 'Strictly Come Dancing,' is a better educated one than was Germany in 1933...

I don't think we do ourselves any favours telling each other fairy tales.

 

[TremulousTetra]

It wasn't a thesis but a quick post on a message board.

I still don't see that, while we do still have class society and that crisis is indeed inherent in the capitalist system, it necessarily follows that political ideas devised to combat conditions found in societies in the century before last can still find the same kind of audience in western societies today, which are vastly different in so many ways.

I still don't know what you're going on about with regard to the USSR. What, exactly, happened in the 1920s and 1930s that was repeated at a later date? The idea that the ideas and methods of the Bolshevik revolution have relevance in this society now, because the working class is not the minority it was in early 20th century Russia (which is what I presume you are implying) is, frankly, absurd. While the working class might technically be a majority in this society, it is much more divided, and facing ever-increasing distractions of a kind that, mostly, reinforce capitalist values, not to mention profits (and actually less numerous if we are talking about the numbers who are unambiguously workers) than it was when the Russian revolution still had the power to motivate large numbers. Even then, when the revolution's example was more plausibly relevant, it failed to capture the imaginations of enough.

it's a bit like evolution, if something is efficient at achieving an end, you will see it replicated throughout species. And so in an environment, capitalism, where there is a particular inherent class system, you will see methods of struggle replicated geographically and overtime because they are efficient at achieving ends. When "the ruling class can no longer rule in the same way, and the working class are no longer prepared to be ruled in the same way", in times of extreme crisis, you will see continuously overtime, and in different cultural areas , workers Councils appear, why is this? likewise, you will see the ruling class reach for various forms of dictatorial rule, why is this?

so coming back to the thread, I still believe that given the right circumstances and historical forces 'fascism' can come to power. just because happened at a previous time, does not mean it cannot be repeated. The same goes for revolution.

 

[TremulousTetra]

All of these points seem to be based more on wishful thinking than plausibility.

The first point may be true-but it also makes more practical the resistance of ruling classes and elites, and the many who would see themselves as having something to lose from revolution (leaving aside that the idea of global revolution is so abstract as to be meaningless.)

The second point is equally debatable for similar reasons.

The third point is the probably the least plausible. There is no real reason to think that socialism (or whatever people want to call it) would be any kinder to the environment than capitalism, if only because it is reliant on keeping the industrial system which is allegedly responsible for exacerbating the ecological crisis going at full pelt, if not accelerating it. After all, how else could working class living standards across the world be boosted? Those who oppose capitalism are, in any case, bitterly divided about the issue, to the extent that many deny that there even is an ecological crisis.

Fourthly, 'backward reactions' have often taken place in the most highly educated of societies. It is difficult to imagine, for example, that the society of 'I'm a Celebrity' and 'Strictly Come Dancing,' is a better educated one than was Germany in 1933...

I don't think we do ourselves any favours telling each other fairy tales.

you're absolutely right, there is no certainty at all that we can achieve any better form of society. It's like Rosa Luxemburg said,our choice is socialism of barbarism.men make history but they do so under circumstances inherited from the past, and with those circumstances comes all kinds of mental baggage which shape our actions.


btw a global social revolution has occurred, the global transformation of societies capitalism.

 

[audiotech]

While the working class might technically be a majority in this society, it is much more divided, and facing ever-increasing distractions of a kind that, mostly, reinforce capitalist values, not to mention profits (and actually less numerous if we are talking about the numbers who are unambiguously workers) than it was when the Russian revolution still had the power to motivate large numbers.

...'backward reactions' have often taken place in the most highly educated of societies. It is difficult to imagine, for example, that the society of 'I'm a Celebrity' and 'Strictly Come Dancing,' is a better educated one than was Germany in 1933...

I don't think we do ourselves any favours telling each other fairy tales.

So, by those measures, it appears you've written off workers here as a revolutionary class?

Most too distracted by 'I'm a celebrity' and 'Strictly Come Dancing' then and thereby pointless fighting for radical change?

Meanwhile, the BNP appear 'radical' and fill the vacuum that's left.

It's not about telling "fairy tales", it's about building a revolutionary organisation able to provide an alternative to the forces of reaction. Anything else is just pie in the sky.

 

[durruti02]

just came across this .. from 1994 ..

http://pubs.socialistreviewindex.org.uk/sr176/bambery.htm


jPast Nazi Votes
The following figures put the Nazi vote into perspective. The Nazis are not able to do what the NF did in 1977 when they contested every London seat in the GLC elections. Neither are they able to achieve what they did in a Deptford by-election in 1976 when they polled 44 percent.

1973 local council elections NF votes
Feltham/Heston 7.7 percent
Hayes and Harlington 8.5 percent

Average NF vote May 1977
Greater London Council elections
Bethnal Green & Bow 19 percent
Stepney & Poplar 16.4 percent
Barking 9 percent
Bermondsey 10.2 percent
Deptford 14.5 percent
Newham South 15.1 percent

Average NF votes across area May 1982
BNP/NF vote April 1992 local elections
Bethnal Green & Stepney (BNP) 3.595 percent
Bow & Poplar (BNP) 2.96 percent
Dudley East (NF) 1.19 percent
Rochdale (BNP) 1.15 percent
Southwark & Bermondsey (BNP) 1.4 percent (NF) 0.4 percent

Other significant Nazi votes
March 1937 Bethnal Green 23.1 percent (British Union of Fascists)
Oct 1949 Sboreditch 15 percent (union Movement)
Dec 1972 Uxbridge by-election 8.2 percent (NF)
May 1973 West Bromwich by-election 16.2 percent (NF)
February '1974 general election Bethnal Green & Bow 7 percent (NF)

Average NF votes local elections 1976-1980

76 77 78 79 80
Rochdale 7.1 4.1 3.6 3.0 3.0
Birmingham 4.3 5.2 3.9 - 2.1
Dudley - 10.6 5.2 3.4 6.0
Sandwell 17.0 9.6 8.3 - 3.2
Solihull 3.5 6.7 5.1 3.6 1.8

also this is the GLC result from 77 when the NF peaked in london
http://www.election.demon.co.uk/glc/glcresults.html


1977: Electorate 5,183,660: T'out 43.3%: SWING +14.54

Party Votes % Ch.% Candidates Seats

C 1,177,390 52.5 +14.5 92 64
Lab 737,194 32.9 -14.5 92 28
L 174,405 7.8 - 4.7 91 -
NF 119,060 5.3 + 4.8 91 -
Nat Party 8,300 0.4 22 -
Com 8,267 0.4 - 0.2 24 -
GLCA 7,869 0.4 31 -
IMG 1,930 0.1 4 -
Ind 1,834 0.1 9 -
People 1,621 0.1 2 -
Ind C 1,025 0.0 1 -
Ind L 878 0.0 3 -
ENP 685 0.0 5 -
FP 552 0.0 1 -
SPGB 502 0.0 - 0.1 4 -
EP 298 0.0 1 -
NB 254 0.0 1 -
Total 2,242,064 100.0 474 92

 

[LLETSA]

So, by those measures, it appears you've written off workers here as a revolutionary class?

Most too distracted by 'I'm a celebrity' and 'Strictly Come Dancing' then and thereby pointless fighting for radical change?

Meanwhile, the BNP appear 'radical' and fill the vacuum that's left.

It's not about telling "fairy tales", it's about building a revolutionary organisation able to provide an alternative to the forces of reaction. Anything else is just pie in the sky.

I never said anything was pointless, merely tried to briefly sketch out the reality of our times.

Your last sentence is just an ahistorical mantra. In reality, and regardless of the rhetoric (not to mention the endless reams of analysis and tactical zig-zagging), the western left gave up building revolutionary organisations decades ago, aware deep down that they had been sidelined but too wedded to obsolete dogma to find a way out of their predicament.

 

[LLETSA]

it's a bit like evolution, if something is efficient at achieving an end, you will see it replicated throughout species. And so in an environment, capitalism, where there is a particular inherent class system, you will see methods of struggle replicated geographically and overtime because they are efficient at achieving ends. When "the ruling class can no longer rule in the same way, and the working class are no longer prepared to be ruled in the same way", in times of extreme crisis, you will see continuously overtime, and in different cultural areas , workers Councils appear, why is this? likewise, you will see the ruling class reach for various forms of dictatorial rule, why is this?

so coming back to the thread, I still believe that given the right circumstances and historical forces 'fascism' can come to power. just because happened at a previous time, does not mean it cannot be repeated. The same goes for revolution.

Such as this-there isn't really all that much you can say about such faith-based, mechanical dogmatism. As if the conditions that prevailed at a certain time, giving rise to certain methods of struggle, have remained the same, for a start.

Oh well.

 

[LLETSA]

btw a global social revolution has occurred, the global transformation of societies capitalism.

If you mean that capitalism has spread to every part of the globe than I'd agree. But, as already said, it doesn't follow that socialist revolution will do likewise (even though it might have seemed halfway plausible when the theories on which the radical left still depends were concocted.) The methods by which the two systems are spread are different for one thing, with far more resources at the disposal of those who seek to spread capitalism, as well as minimal self-sacrifice on the part of those who lead the institutions responsible for doing it.

 

[LLETSA]

So, by those measures, it appears you've written off workers here as a revolutionary class?

Most too distracted by 'I'm a celebrity' and 'Strictly Come Dancing' then and thereby pointless fighting for radical change?

This point was in response to Durruti's remarks about a better educated society being less likely to have 'a bad reaction' to certain political events. As I said, there's no shortage of examples of well-educated societies lapsing into bloodthirsty tyranny or nihilism. Here's some more: Yugoslavia almost certainly had a better educated population at the beginning of the 1990s than we have, with the market-oriented training that now passes for education for the vast majority in this country. Look what happened there. The very well-educated Soviet population was powerless to prevent a descent into gangster-capitalism and abject poverty once the Commiunist-ruled system abdicated. Lack of political freedom, and hence experience of organising politically, certainly played it's part in those societies, but nobody can say that the people weren't well-educated. As already noted, nobody could possibly claim that the well-educated German population lacked political experience in 1933.

 

[durruti02]

This point was in response to Durruti's remarks about a better educated society being less likely to have 'a bad reaction' to certain political events. As I said, there's no shortage of examples of well-educated societies lapsing into bloodthirsty tyranny or nihilism. Here's some more: Yugoslavia almost certainly had a better educated population at the beginning of the 1990s than we have, with the market-oriented training that now passes for education for the vast majority in this country. Look what happened there. The very well-educated Soviet population was powerless to prevent a descent into gangster-capitalism and abject poverty once the Commiunist-ruled system abdicated. Lack of political freedom, and hence experience of organising politically, certainly played it's part in those societies, but nobody can say that the people weren't well-educated. As already noted, nobody could possibly claim that the well-educated German population lacked political experience in 1933.

hey mate look it's all percentages .. look i never said it was going to makeit happen JUST that there is a counter arguement .. doesn't make it fact .. tbth i think the chances of people ever running their lives in a real democratic society are pretty minimal .. but it was ever so .. but what has that got to do with teh attempt to do that? as i said to poster the other day just cos something got harder doesn't mean you get out or does it?? to me being human means fighting for my species my family my community .. I can not see it anyother way nor in any other context .. i do not blame people for being tried and cycnical but if you think we who not, are purely in fairy land or faith based, you are very wrong .. i am absoutely aware of how bleak it is .. it is just that that does not stop me having a go 'optimism of the will .. pessimism of the intelect'

p.s. i'm short .. and part welsh and part jewish .. we never give up!

 

[TremulousTetra]

Such as this-there isn't really all that much you can say about such faith-based, mechanical dogmatism. As if the conditions that prevailed at a certain time, giving rise to certain methods of struggle, have remained the same, for a start.

Oh well.

what are you talking about? it is nothing to do with faith. it is observable fact that when the ruling class, those who control the means of production, can no longer rule through democratic means, they resort to any means necessary, including fascism, to maintain that rule. equally so, it is observable there are phenomena in the methods of working-class struggle that consistently repeat themselves.

now what you seem to be saying is that we should throw a couple hundred years of observation out of the window.

Even if they did want to do it, it's beyond the power of even the strongest 'Euronationalist' party to smash bourgeois democracy.

The left's problem is that it still lives in an era of mass revolutionary movements and fascist backlash (or the potential for them.) Neither are any longer possible.

so go one explain, why is it impossible for there to be crisis where those who control the means of production might turn to fascism to smash bourgeois democracy? exactly what has changed in the nature of capitalism?

 

[TremulousTetra]

hey mate look it's all percentages .. look i never said it was going to makeit happen JUST that there is a counter arguement .. doesn't make it fact .. tbth i think the chances of people ever running their lives in a real democratic society are pretty minimal .. but it was ever so .. but what has that got to do with teh attempt to do that? as i said to poster the other day just cos something got harder doesn't mean you get out or does it?? to me being human means fighting for my species my family my community .. I can not see it anyother way nor in any other context .. i do not blame people for being tried and cycnical but if you think we who not, are purely in fairy land or faith based, you are very wrong .. i am absoutely aware of how bleak it is .. it is just that that does not stop me having a go 'optimism of the will .. pessimism of the intelect'

p.s. i'm short .. and part welsh and part jewish .. we never give up!

agreed. pretty pessimistic myself, but it isn't impossible.

 

[audiotech]

just came across this .. from 1994 ..

http://pubs.socialistreviewindex.org.uk/sr176/bambery.htm


jPast Nazi Votes
The following figures put the Nazi vote into perspective. The Nazis are not able to do what the NF did in 1977 when they contested every London seat in the GLC elections. Neither are they able to achieve what they did in a Deptford by-election in 1976 when they polled 44 percent.

I've been saying this for bloody years and have been flamed constantly for it.

 

[The Black Hand]

you are too then a liar and a smear artist - you have already admitteded you were, disgracefully, NOT working from the stats, were NOT using the actual election results, as i and others have been,

and then your smear artist prejudice comes in, that assumes comment on the dangerous reality of a nationally increasing vote/spread for the scum of the BNP is some sort of 'bnp worship' .. sad

and this is 'autonomous marxism' LOL

and you think "What is seriously 'embarrassing' is being unable to spell embarrassing correctly" FFS

ho ho ho you selective answerer (i reproduce the entire post so you can get round to a competant reply next time.

'Working from the stats' - what a load of cok and bull. The problem is that the stats are not as innocent as they seem. You can play all sorts of tricks with stats...

BUT to answer your question with an even cleverer reply - YOU are the one not working from all the stats at all, as the national stats shows the BNP as completely and utterly useless, incompetant, marginal - of no significance whatsoever. A national vote (if you count seats where they don't stand) in the region of <1% - an estimate but I would be very surprised if it was over that.

The problems is that you and t'others are helping to hype the BNP issue up out of all proportion to their importance as a class struggle - that is why you have an apriori position of BNP/griffin worship. A provocative but an honest autonomous Marxist description of what you do on U75.



Au contraire Durutti2 - I never said things 'are clear'. I think you have 'prejeudiced and myopic' theory and practice. I ground my views in the real world, from grounded theory and practice, and proper analysis of voting trends. You as I said, have adopted an apriori 'bnp worship position' - for you the BNP are 'always on the up and are always doing well';

First off - you are off the mark with your analysis of the significance of the BNP. THeir 500 votes at their high point was NOT deserved, reflected no serious changes or a social base- but was based on racist hype, in the context of old prejeudices of a declining imperial power. All it did was encourage and recruit some of the apolitical conservative racist right who normally stumble along, who mouth 'coon' when they see black people.

Hence you (independent old leftists - iwca etc) lot went OTT about how well they were doing. This misreading left you subequently unable to acknowledge let alone explain their decline in 2006/7/8.

How would you describe their decline from a vote per candidate total of 500, down to 311.9 votes then. I called it a 'dramatic decline' because proportionately it is for a BNP supposedly 'on the up'!! It is a decline of 37.606% in their vote - significant in everybodies book except you lot for some reason.

That sort of vote crisis would provoke huge trauma in large parties - it is just that you lot and Griffin could help to portray the vote tumble as them 'spreading', and so help to NOT provoke a larger trauma for the bnp.

I long ago said, and first btw, that is is you lot who bluster when real results go against your perspective. No whining from me pal and it is you who huff and puff when confronted by ideas which do not fit your preconceived notions of ultra left politics.

What is seriously 'embarrassing' is being unable to spell embarrassing correctly, you are whinging, whinging, huffing and making school boy errors just like you accuse me of doing.

What is pathetic is the ultra left being unable to engage with serious Marxist analysis.

As for your ps question - do you think that perhaps it is possible that they have only recruited elements already existing with conservative imperial Britain, so that their 'growth' has been at the expense of the social constituencies they would need to grow any further?

So that they have recruited 'old stylee racists' - which seems probable given their coverage in the media. That they have recruited not because of, but in spite of these politics? They have got bigger organisationally, but at the expense of a large import into 'the general public'. Certainly it is a reading I think is worth exploring.

 

[The Black Hand]

just came across this .. from 1994 ..

http://pubs.socialistreviewindex.org.uk/sr176/bambery.htm


jPast Nazi Votes
The following figures put the Nazi vote into perspective. The Nazis are not able to do what the NF did in 1977 when they contested every London seat in the GLC elections. Neither are they able to achieve what they did in a Deptford by-election in 1976 when they polled 44 percent.

1973 local council elections NF votes
Feltham/Heston 7.7 percent
Hayes and Harlington 8.5 percent

Average NF vote May 1977
Greater London Council elections
Bethnal Green & Bow 19 percent
Stepney & Poplar 16.4 percent
Barking 9 percent
Bermondsey 10.2 percent
Deptford 14.5 percent
Newham South 15.1 percent

Average NF votes across area May 1982
BNP/NF vote April 1992 local elections
Bethnal Green & Stepney (BNP) 3.595 percent
Bow & Poplar (BNP) 2.96 percent
Dudley East (NF) 1.19 percent
Rochdale (BNP) 1.15 percent
Southwark & Bermondsey (BNP) 1.4 percent (NF) 0.4 percent

Other significant Nazi votes
March 1937 Bethnal Green 23.1 percent (British Union of Fascists)
Oct 1949 Sboreditch 15 percent (union Movement)
Dec 1972 Uxbridge by-election 8.2 percent (NF)
May 1973 West Bromwich by-election 16.2 percent (NF)
February '1974 general election Bethnal Green & Bow 7 percent (NF)

Average NF votes local elections 1976-1980

76 77 78 79 80
Rochdale 7.1 4.1 3.6 3.0 3.0
Birmingham 4.3 5.2 3.9 - 2.1
Dudley - 10.6 5.2 3.4 6.0
Sandwell 17.0 9.6 8.3 - 3.2
Solihull 3.5 6.7 5.1 3.6 1.8

also this is the GLC result from 77 when the NF peaked in london
http://www.election.demon.co.uk/glc/glcresults.html


1977: Electorate 5,183,660: T'out 43.3%: SWING +14.54

Party Votes % Ch.% Candidates Seats

C 1,177,390 52.5 +14.5 92 64
Lab 737,194 32.9 -14.5 92 28
L 174,405 7.8 - 4.7 91 -
NF 119,060 5.3 + 4.8 91 -
Nat Party 8,300 0.4 22 -
Com 8,267 0.4 - 0.2 24 -
GLCA 7,869 0.4 31 -
IMG 1,930 0.1 4 -
Ind 1,834 0.1 9 -
People 1,621 0.1 2 -
Ind C 1,025 0.0 1 -
Ind L 878 0.0 3 -
ENP 685 0.0 5 -
FP 552 0.0 1 -
SPGB 502 0.0 - 0.1 4 -
EP 298 0.0 1 -
NB 254 0.0 1 -
Total 2,242,064 100.0 474 92

This shows that the left has always electorally done badly against the fascists.

 

[durruti02]

I've been saying this for bloody years and have been flamed constantly for it.

LOL .. you fell right into that mate didn't you!!.. that is the swp talking in 1994!!!! not now .. and the point is that the bnp vote is higher in a london that is radically less fertile ground for them and when they were not even able to stand candidates in most of the seats ..

 

[durruti02]

1) 'Working from the stats' - what a load of cok and bull. The problem is that the stats are not as innocent as they seem. You can play all sorts of tricks with stats...

2) BUT to answer your question with an even cleverer reply - YOU are the one not working from all the stats at all, as the national stats shows the BNP as completely and utterly useless, incompetant, marginal - of no significance whatsoever. A national vote (if you count seats where they don't stand) in the region of <1% - an estimate but I would be very surprised if it was over that.

3) The problems is that you and t'others are helping to hype the BNP issue up out of all proportion to their importance as a class struggle - that is why you have an apriori position of BNP/griffin worship. A provocative but an honest autonomous Marxist description of what you do on U75.

4) Au contraire Durutti2 - I never said things 'are clear'. I think you have 'prejeudiced and myopic' theory and practice. I ground my views in the real world, from grounded theory and practice, and proper analysis of voting trends. You as I said, have adopted an apriori 'bnp worship position' - for you the BNP are 'always on the up and are always doing well';

5) First off - you are off the mark with your analysis of the significance of the BNP. THeir 500 votes at their high point was NOT deserved, reflected no serious changes or a social base- but was based on racist hype, in the context of old prejeudices of a declining imperial power. All it did was encourage and recruit some of the apolitical conservative racist right who normally stumble along, who mouth 'coon' when they see black people.

Hence you (independent old leftists - iwca etc) lot went OTT about how well they were doing. This misreading left you subequently unable to acknowledge let alone explain their decline in 2006/7/8.

6) How would you describe their decline from a vote per candidate total of 500, down to 311.9 votes then. I called it a 'dramatic decline' because proportionately it is for a BNP supposedly 'on the up'!! It is a decline of 37.606% in their vote - significant in everybodies book except you lot for some reason.

7) That sort of vote crisis would provoke huge trauma in large parties - it is just that you lot and Griffin could help to portray the vote tumble as them 'spreading', and so help to NOT provoke a larger trauma for the bnp.

8) I long ago said, and first btw, that is is you lot who bluster when real results go against your perspective. No whining from me pal and it is you who huff and puff when confronted by ideas which do not fit your preconceived notions of ultra left politics.

9) What is seriously 'embarrassing' is being unable to spell embarrassing correctly, you are whinging, whinging, huffing and making school boy errors just like you accuse me of doing.

10) What is pathetic is the ultra left being unable to engage with serious Marxist analysis.

11) As for your ps question - do you think that perhaps it is possible that they have only recruited elements already existing with conservative imperial Britain, so that their 'growth' has been at the expense of the social constituencies they would need to grow any further?

So that they have recruited 'old stylee racists' - which seems probable given their coverage in the media. That they have recruited not because of, but in spite of these politics? They have got bigger organisationally, but at the expense of a large import into 'the general public'. Certainly it is a reading I think is worth exploring.

1) this is scientific nonsense

2) you are not capable of you at what things mean rather than a simple number .. yes of course you are right .. they are tiny .. but when looked at in terms of white w/c the become more significant .. that is what is of interest not the static picture you see

3) don't be a wanker .. you do not defeat fascism by subverting it on an obscure internet site but by creating a movement in the class

4) you have no practice ( if i am wrong then tell us it please) .. and your theory illustrates this .. for many white w/c people the bnp hs become an option .. if you had contact with w/c people you would know this .. this is a very dangerous position ..

5) you are contradicting the research from JRF Essex Uni etc .. there is no doubt much of there support comes from the group you describe but again you miss the important bit is that they have expanded out of this group

6) oh dear .. yes a decline in % vote as they expand out of their core areas .. not unusual at all .. and obviously on top of this has been their split in west yorks / west mids

7) er yes! the reason it has not caused total trauma is as their vote and cllrs continues to go up nationally and particulalry in new areas e.g. south yorks. you do not defeat fascism by subverting it on an obscure internet site but by creating a movement in the class. tbh i think teh state via griffin probabaly will bring them down .. that though will not diminish the support / desire for reaction in thsi country and will probabaly herald a more mainstream authoritarian govt


8) pre conceived .. mate if ANYONE on here is operating from preconceived it is you .. i certainly am not

9) this to me is the thing that really shows you up .. you are more concerned about spelling mistakes .. pathetic

10) explain why your ananlysis is marxist please i see no evidence

11) yes there is evidence of this .. this has been explored by JRF ansd essex and as i said above it is their break out of this constituency that is worrying and dangerous

 

[The Black Hand]

1) this is scientific nonsense

2) you are not capable of you at what things mean rather than a simple number .. yes of course you are right .. they are tiny .. but when looked at in terms of white w/c the become more significant .. that is what is of interest not the static picture you see

3) don't be a wanker .. you do not defeat fascism by subverting it on an obscure internet site but by creating a movement in the class

4) you have no practice ( if i am wrong then tell us it please) .. and your theory illustrates this .. for many white w/c people the bnp hs become an option .. if you had contact with w/c people you would know this .. this is a very dangerous position ..

5) you are contradicting the research from JRF Essex Uni etc .. there is no doubt much of there support comes from the group you describe but again you miss the important bit is that they have expanded out of this group

6) oh dear .. yes a decline in % vote as they expand out of their core areas .. not unusual at all .. and obviously on top of this has been their split in west yorks / west mids

7) er yes! the reason it has not caused total trauma is as their vote and cllrs continues to go up nationally and particulalry in new areas e.g. south yorks. you do not defeat fascism by subverting it on an obscure internet site but by creating a movement in the class. tbh i think teh state via griffin probabaly will bring them down .. that though will not diminish the support / desire for reaction in thsi country and will probabaly herald a more mainstream authoritarian govt


8) pre conceived .. mate if ANYONE on here is operating from preconceived it is you .. i certainly am not

9) this to me is the thing that really shows you up .. you are more concerned about spelling mistakes .. pathetic

10) explain why your ananlysis is marxist please i see no evidence

11) yes there is evidence of this .. this has been explored by JRF ansd essex and as i said above it is their break out of this constituency that is worrying and dangerous

1) Then you my friend are very niave.
2) DOh! Of course I know what 'they mean', interms of the working class and from a working class pov they are still tiny. They still stand in an absolute minority number of working class areas by a considerable margin. Au contraire, I have constantly emphasised movement and dynamism, normally through praxis. It is you who have ultra left politics from the distant past who has stasis. My theory is grounded and developed in these times rather than a romantic ultra left past - you shouldn't have read the ICC or other left communist heandbangers/loons - delete as applicable.
3) Doh! Whoever said that????? You and others objectively do fetishise the BNP repeatedly, how else could you realistically describe the evidence a plenty on u75?
4) You're wrong.
5) Researchers often disagree. I do not think their 'expension' if it could be called that is of any relevance yet.
6) But totally overlooked and not explained by you lot.
7) It is totally marginal growth, of no significance statistically in proportion to the big picture.
8) Oh ho ho. Preconceived? Moi Au contraire - i developed this position out of conditions after you lot had ample opportunity to poisen the wicket with your 'theory'. Mine was a reaction to your (iwca/RA/CW/ Searchlight/o'Hara etc) dross/toss - delete as applicable.
9) You started the schoolboy jibes - do not be surprised if it gets hurled back in your face to expose your own contradictions. This is immanent critique Marxism btw.
10) Then you do not know very much about Marxism then - there is enough of my writing in public, mags and on the web to see its' pedigree. It is NEW Autonomous Marxism within the tradition of the British Marxist Historians - rather than ULTRA LEFT CAK.
11) Looks like I will have to grapple with the Essex uni research to see the flaws - there are always some... I will concentrate on what evidence there is for a break into new social constitutencies.

 

[audiotech]

LOL .. you fell right into that mate didn't you!!.. that is the swp talking in 1994!!!! not now .. and the point is that the bnp vote is higher in a london that is radically less fertile ground for them and when they were not even able to stand candidates in most of the seats ..

Nice one!

Good article in the lastest Searchlight btw. It's saying a lot of what you have been saying on 'where now for anti-fascists'? Although in a more reflective, calm manner. "Thinking nationally, acting locally" is the main editorial. I suggest you get hold of a copy.

 

[durruti02]

Nice one!

Good article in the lastest Searchlight btw. It's saying a lot of what you have been saying on 'where now for anti-fascists'? Although in a more reflective, calm manner. "Thinking nationally, acting locally" is the main editorial. I suggest you get hold of a copy.

he he

cheers .. will take a look at that .. sounds interesting .. be interested to see if it is nick knowles and whether the hackney discussion has had an influence

and hey pal who you accusing of not being reflective and calm!

he he

 

[durruti02]

1) Then you my friend are very niave.
2) DOh! Of course I know what 'they mean', interms of the working class and from a working class pov they are still tiny. They still stand in an absolute minority number of working class areas by a considerable margin. Au contraire, I have constantly emphasised movement and dynamism, normally through praxis. It is you who have ultra left politics from the distant past who has stasis. My theory is grounded and developed in these times rather than a romantic ultra left past - you shouldn't have read the ICC or other left communist heandbangers/loons - delete as applicable.
3) Doh! Whoever said that????? You and others objectively do fetishise the BNP repeatedly, how else could you realistically describe the evidence a plenty on u75?
4) You're wrong.
5) Researchers often disagree. I do not think their 'expension' if it could be called that is of any relevance yet.
6) But totally overlooked and not explained by you lot.
7) It is totally marginal growth, of no significance statistically in proportion to the big picture.
8) Oh ho ho. Preconceived? Moi Au contraire - i developed this position out of conditions after you lot had ample opportunity to poisen the wicket with your 'theory'. Mine was a reaction to your (iwca/RA/CW/ Searchlight/o'Hara etc) dross/toss - delete as applicable.
9) You started the schoolboy jibes - do not be surprised if it gets hurled back in your face to expose your own contradictions. This is immanent critique Marxism btw.
10) Then you do not know very much about Marxism then - there is enough of my writing in public, mags and on the web to see its' pedigree. It is NEW Autonomous Marxism within the tradition of the British Marxist Historians - rather than ULTRA LEFT CAK.
11) Looks like I will have to grapple with the Essex uni research to see the flaws - there are always some... I will concentrate on what evidence there is for a break into new social constitutencies.

whatever .. i am sure you mean well but you are totally out of touch .. there is no more point in debating with you as your analysis has no basis in reality but only in your academic magazine world .. it is not good enough

p.s. 6) i started a thread about it .. shakes head and walks away

 

[butchersapron]

Result from last week:

Chard, Crimchard Ward.
Lib-Dems 423 votes
Cons 320 votes
BNP 154 (17.2%)

 

[durruti02]

Average NF votes local elections 1976-1980

...................76.....77 78 79 80
Rochdale.......7.1% 4.1 3.6 3.0 3.0
Birmingham....4.3% 5.2 3.9 - 2.1
Dudley............ - 10.6 5.2 3.4 6.0
Sandwell.....17.0% 9.6 8.3 - 3.2
Solihull.........3.5% 6.7 5.1 3.6 1.8


Local authority
.................2006.... 2007.......2008

Sandwell
................33.0% ....24.6% .....17.4%

Dudley
.................26.5% ... 18.7% .......14.7%

Kirklees
.................18.4% ...16.5% .......14.4%

Burnley
.................30.0% ...25.1% .......22.8%