If the Labour Party was to split would you be more likely to join?

[emanymton]

I posted this on the split watch thread as well.

There are lot of people on here, including me, who would never join the Labour Party as it is. I'm wondering if this would change if the Labour Party was to split. Obviously we can't know exactly what form a split would take. But I assume that if there was a split then a large number of middle ground 'moderate' types would stick with whoever gets the name. Meaning that a left wing split from the Labour Party would be a very different beast than the Labour Party following a right wing split.

For me the answer would still be no, I think it's pretty much a dead end. However I don't think I could completely rule it out at some point the the future. Depending on how things develop politically, there might come a time when I feel signing up would be worthwhile. Especially if it was to engage in more than just parliamentary politics and actually start doing stuff.

I've also been wondering how the various trot groups would react? How likely would it be for the SP or the SWP to enter on mass*? Although I suspect they simply might not be allowed to do so?

*mass really doesn't seem the right word.

 

[chilango]

Yes.

I'd be more likely to join.

I'd be making a mistake though.

 

[inva]

the labour party was an enemy even when it had more going for it than anything a left leaning version could muster today.

 

[emanymton]

Yes.

I'd be more likely to join.

I'd be making a mistake though.

I think that at the moment, after so many years of defeats, many of us just want something, anything that we can feel positive about. I was thinking about your 'hate' post on the main Corbyn thread, and whatever I may think of Corbyn or his politics, him winning the leadership just felt like some kind of victory, tiny though it may be.

 

[twentythreedom]

If it splits into New Old Labour and Old New Labour then probably not

 

[chilango]

I think that at the moment, after so many years of defeats, many of us just want something, anything that we can feel positive about. I was thinking about your 'hate' post on the main Corbyn thread, and whatever I may think of Corbyn or his politics, him winning the leadership just felt like some kind of victory, tiny though it may be.

Absolutely.

In real life, I'm so utterly isolated Politically (though not so much politically if that makes sense?) that there'd be a very, very real temptation to seek the company of even the mildest social democrats.

 

[YouSir]

I think that at the moment, after so many years of defeats, many of us just want something, anything that we can feel positive about. I was thinking about your 'hate' post on the main Corbyn thread, and whatever I may think of Corbyn or his politics, him winning the leadership just felt like some kind of victory, tiny though it may be.

Aye, same when I joined up. I don't dislike Corbyn, or begrudge him his politics, but they're not what I'd really want. That said unlike a few here I'm not a veteran of age old battles, I've never seen anything even vaguely Left in power and any victory, any re-framing of the status quo is worth something to me. Covers his appeal for a lot of young(er) people I think, if you've only ever seen Major/Blair/Brown/Cameron then you're pretty starved of any hope.

 

[Hocus Eye.]

I posted this on the split watch thread as well.

There are lot of people on here, including me, who would never join the Labour Party as it is. I'm wondering if this would change if the Labour Party was to split. Obviously we can't know exactly what form a split would take. But I assume that if there was a split then a large number of middle ground 'moderate' types would stick with whoever gets the name. Meaning that a left wing split from the Labour Party would be a very different beast than the Labour Party following a right wing split.

For me the answer would still be no, I think it's pretty much a dead end. However I don't think I could completely rule it out at some point the the future. Depending on how things develop politically, there might come a time when I feel signing up would be worthwhile. Especially if it was to engage in more than just parliamentary politics and actually start doing stuff.

I've also been wondering how the various trot groups would react? How likely would it be for the SP or the SWP to enter on mass*? Although I suspect they simply might not be allowed to do so?

*mass really doesn't seem the right word.

Why do you think the SWP would suddenly transform itself into a Parliamentary party? You don't know what you are talking about.

 

[YouSir]

Why do you think the SWP would suddenly transform itself into a Parliamentary party? You don't know what you are talking about.

They asked if SWP members would join up as policy, didn't state or assert anything.

 

[danny la rouge]

I've seen en masse written phonetically as "on mass" a few times in the last couple of days, so I just thought I'd point out the correct spelling for anyone who was interested:

en masse - definition of en masse in English from the Oxford dictionary

 

[billy_bob]

On balance, no. I think it had to happen in the end - Labour's just too tainted. A split would at least create some interesting directions that things could go in. Could end up even worse off though.

 

[emanymton]

Why do you think the SWP would suddenly transform itself into a Parliamentary party? You don't know what you are talking about.

They (well the IS) used to be in the Labour party, they joined the SSP. I think they would have liked Respect to take off and become a significant social democratic party they could be a revolutionary tendency within. I don't think the current SWP would join. But it is not completely against their traditional and politics.

 

[marty21]

I had two conversations about Corbyn today , one with an ex swappie Union Rep (Now just a Union rep I guess) who left the SWP a while ago (possibly because of #rapegate but we didn't go into that) She joined the Labour Party because of Corbyn (She knows him via Stop the War) and is really excited about him being leader and staying as leader.

Later I was speaking to the owner of my local , he was hoping Corbyn wouldn't be on the ballot , thinks Corbyn is unelectable , that his win was all down to Student politics (as a 51 year old new member I disputed that ) He also offered me 10-1 odds on Corbyn not being PM. I didn't take the bet , because Corbyn (or Eagle ,or any Labour Leader) would have to take Scotland to win a General Election and I can't see that happening. Corbyn might get in via a coalition (with the SNP and others, maybe the other Labour Party ) I guess, but with Scottish Independence very likely ,that's probably not going to happen.

 

[Pugnax]

Absolutely.

In real life, I'm so utterly isolated Politically (though not so much politically if that makes sense?) that there'd be a very, very real temptation to seek the company of even the mildest social democrats.

Pretty much why I joined. I'm under no illusion about what the Labour party represent as a whole and how they operate, but Corbyn is the only candidate that has ever both resonated with me policy wise, and been accepted and engaged with by people at work and with family. Any time I talk about more radical politics (even incidentally, I don't lecture people) with them they at best just glaze over, at worst are actively hostile. Corbyn just feels like a very small victory and I want to be a bit less isolated.

 

[chilango]

Pretty much why I joined. I'm under no illusion about what the Labour party represent as a whole and how they operate, but Corbyn is the only candidate that has ever both resonated with me policy wise, and been accepted and engaged with by people at work and with family. Any time I talk about more radical politics (even incidentally, I don't lecture people) with them they at best just glaze over, at worst are actively hostile. Corbyn just feels like a very small victory and I want to be a bit less isolated.

Yeah. I get that.
I'm not actually going to join the Labour Party even if Corbyn wins and the right-wing defects/splits, for the reasons I gave on the other thread.

Yeah. Whilst "I wouldn't join the Labour Party as a matter of principle"...it isn't just that.

As Butchers notes above somewhere it's only worth doing if you're then going to put the effort into following the project through. Which I wouldn't, couldn't.

How could I square all those years arguing against Labour with suddenly piling in and arguing within the party for party stuff knowing that imminently I'm gonna have to turn around and try and organise against my new found comrades?

I just couldn't with any honesty or integrity or credibilility.

I'd lose credibility quicker than I did on here after predicting a 60%+ Remain vote (or when I insisted that Galloway had no chance in Bradford West or that Labour couldn't lose the 2012 election )...er....so actually with fuck all credibility left to lose maybe the Labour left suits me perfectly

 

[Pugnax]

That's fair, and definitely something I've worried about. I wan't to give it a shot though and hopefully can learn from it if things don't pan out.

 

[charlie mowbray]

no, I'm not.

 

[RubbishChessMan]

I don't think a split would help the left in general. The left is always splitting and dividing against itself. The right just get on with it. That's why the right is always winning. They present a sharper, simpler, and efficient message. Whether it's a truthful message matters less than whether it's a clear message, when it comes to winning votes.

 

[chilango]

I don't think a split would help the left in general. The left is always splitting and dividing against itself. The right just get on with it. That's why the right is always winning. They present a sharper, simpler, and efficient message. Whether it's a truthful message matters less than whether it's a clear message, when it comes to winning votes.

Yes. Absolutely. I mean look at the Tories, no divisions there, right?

Apart from that 30 year feud that's just led to some trifling referendum of course.

At least none of their MPs would defect. Would they?

Oh. Well, not counting the couple that went to UKIP that is.

Nah. Splitting is not the reason the Left is losing right now.

 

[RubbishChessMan]

No need for the snarky tone. The history of left wing politics is absolutely a study of weakness caused by division and endless complication. The right are renowned for their ability to present a clear and simplified message. Anyway whatever.

 

[RubbishChessMan]

Oh just to add though if you don't think the shambles that has been the labour MPs reaction to Corbyn has weakened the image of labour you're just wrong

 

[mauvais]

Yes. Absolutely. I mean look at the Tories, no divisions there, right?

Apart from that 30 year feud that's just led to some trifling referendum of course.

At least none of their MPs would defect. Would they?

Oh. Well, not counting the couple that went to UKIP that is.

Nah. Splitting is not the reason the Left is losing right now.

And yet for all this, and whilst a few bits fall off, the body remains intact and ready to do its job. The poster had a perfectly good point.

You have to go much further towards the far right and its bit players to find a comparable level of fraction and instability.

 

[inva]

Aye, same when I joined up. I don't dislike Corbyn, or begrudge him his politics, but they're not what I'd really want. That said unlike a few here I'm not a veteran of age old battles, I've never seen anything even vaguely Left in power and any victory, any re-framing of the status quo is worth something to me. Covers his appeal for a lot of young(er) people I think, if you've only ever seen Major/Blair/Brown/Cameron then you're pretty starved of any hope.

In a way for me it's the opposite. In my lifetime the Labour Party has made it abundantly clear it holds people like me in utter contempt. The first government I have any memory of is Blair's in the early 2000s, I don't remember a Labour Party that ever even pretended to be on my side.

It's one reason why I don't trust Corbyn. OK, he tacks mildly to the left, but he was content to stay in the party through all those years of attacks on the working class, on the vulnerable, not to mention the wars. He might have voted against these things but at the end of the day he still played the token left role and helped shore up the vote, he still campaigned against better alternatives.

I guess he's better than the Tories, but so was Ed Miliband, just. From my point of view, there's got to be better uses of my time than getting sucked in to some draining factional fight in Labour to support someone whose politics I don't even believe in, surely...

 

[chilango]

No need for the snarky tone. The history of left wing politics is absolutely a study of weakness caused by division and endless complication. The right are renowned for their ability to present a clear and simplified message. Anyway whatever.

Apologies for the tone. I don't think my morning coffee had kicked in...

I don't agree, at all.

The right is just as divided as the left.

mauvais suggests that you have to look to the far-right to see "a comparable level of fraction and instability." Again, I disagree. The entire Conservative Party has been consumed by an internal war on Europe for decades now.

The weakness of the Left is not to do with division, it's to do with repeatedly getting drawn away from it's w/c support base by electoral short-cuts, identity politics and misguided good intentions of overly influential m/c "leaders".

imho of course.

Now division doesn't help, I'll give you that. But its a symptom, not a cause of the Left's weakness.

 

[inva]

Apologies for the tone. I don't think my morning coffee had kicked in...

I don't agree, at all.

The right is just as divided as the left.

mauvais suggests that you have to look to the far-right to see "a comparable level of fraction and instability." Again, I disagree. The entire Conservative Party has been consumed by an internal war on Europe for decades now.

The weakness of the Left is not to do with division, it's to do with repeatedly getting drawn away from it's w/c support base by electoral short-cuts, identity politics and misguided good intentions of overly influential m/c "leaders".

imho of course.

Now division doesn't help, I'll give you that. But its a symptom, not a cause of the Left's weakness.

I'd add that a lot of the divisions in the left are over serious and important differences that can't just be papered over. that shouldn't necessarily be a barrier to working together but it's easy to say we should all get over our differences and join together, more difficult when you've got very different ideas about your goals and how to reach them.

 

[mauvais]

The right is just as divided as the left.

mauvais suggests that you have to look to the far-right to see "a comparable level of fraction and instability." Again, I disagree. The entire Conservative Party has been consumed by an internal war on Europe for decades now.

Yes. Which it's largely kept internal. It's been able to form and maintain a faintly coherent government several times throughout those decades. As has the centre-right of the Labour Party.

So you have to look to the BNP and similar, and to a slightly lesser extent UKIP, to see parties destroying themselves or in open, whole-party warfare over leadership or policy such that it renders them unelectable or unable to get on with the job.

 

[emanymton]

I don't think a split would help the left in general. The left is always splitting and dividing against itself. The right just get on with it. That's why the right is always winning. They present a sharper, simpler, and efficient message. Whether it's a truthful message matters less than whether it's a clear message, when it comes to winning votes.

This seems to assume that a split in the Labour Party is somehow a split on the left, it isn't. Large sections of the Labour Party are in no way on the left. The division in the Labour Party is between the left and the right. The Labour party is not the left and the left is not the Labour party.

 

[RubbishChessMan]

Well I suppose I used the term the left in a generalised sort of way but yes, in terms of Labour itself, the party should be making a meal of the Tories easily - since last year definitely. But it's been too busy fighting itself instead.

It's true that the divisions can't be papered over I suppose but still, that seems to me like one of the biggest problems throughout the last however long. Be that the soft vs harder left battle, the communist vs anarchist battle, or the battle between different branches of the Labour Party which still is a sort of party of the left to some degree.

True the Tories fight amongst themselves but everyone knows what they stand for. Most of us haven't really got a clue what the Labour Party stands for these days.

 

[ViolentPanda]

And yet for all this, and whilst a few bits fall off, the body remains intact and ready to do its job. The poster had a perfectly good point.

I'm not sure that "ready to do the job" applies now in the same way it did 30 or even 20 years ago. There's much more of a need now to take both the parliamentary and the national memberships along with the general policy initiatives (which is where May has played a good hand - she's catered to a broad range of prejudices with her appointments and with the few policy-related issues she's commented on) than there used to be. Top-downism used to be the order of the day, but now you have to carry thememberships with you, which can make doing substantive "jobs" very difficult indeed.

You have to go much further towards the far right and its bit players to find a comparable level of fraction and instability.

Inaccurate.

The only real difference between the Labour left and the Tory right, is that the Labour left air their issues in public, whereas the Tories keep a tight lock on news about dissent, and do everything under cover. Talk to any member of a local right-oriented Conservative club, and they're just as full of tales of shenanigans as any leftward Labour party, they merely resist publicising the war between the "traditional" Tories; the one-nationers; the business-oriented "modernists"; the neoliberals; the Thatcherites, and the headbanging rabid everythingophobes.

 

[Xenonxenon]

Would be good if the left could keep it in the dressing room too. Won't hold my splitter breath.