IWCA exasperated with mainstream politics

[sihhi]

The two Islington wards contested in 2002 and 2006 - Bunhill and Clerkenwell - will not have any IWCA candidates in 2010.

http://www.islingtontribune.com/new...y-islington-town-hall-battle-opens-all-fronts

Jane Lacey will stand down in Northfield Brook

Independent Working Class Association councillor Jane Lacey, who represents Northfield Brook, will also stand down in May.
Mrs Lacey said she had become disillusioned by the politics of the council but vowed to remain a community campaigner in Blackbird Leys.
She said: “I don’t do politics, I do community work. I will still be involved in Blackbird Leys as I have lived here all my life.”

http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/headlines/8092845.Greens_leader_quits_council/

In 2009 IWCA councillors (Craft and Lacey) did not attend the council budget meeting.

In 2010 they did and this is what they said:

IWCA leader Stuart Craft told the meeting: “I am glad we didn’t waste the time to put forward a budget because you don’t listen to reason. You are only interested in pushing your own agenda.”

A budget meeting can potentially be a time when rebel councillors from the party/coalition in power can kick up a fuss and allow alternatives to be aired and some kind of compromise budget is reached. I don't think anything meaningful has emerged from the Labour Lib Dem arguing over budgets.

Oxford council is elected by halves, one of the two posts in every ward is up for election every four years, with a two year gap between elections.
Basically Stuart Craft's seat is not up for election, but IWCA have decided not to stand a replacement for Jane Lacey.

So after May IWCA will have only one elected official - Stuart. But the grassroots organisation and IWCA-led youth and community activities remain strong in Blackbird Leys in particular.

Any thoughts or opinions?

 

[Das Uberdog]

... what is so particularly dispiriting right now?

 

[Nigel]

What did you expect!

 

[Lo Siento.]

was it that the electioneering was time-consuming or the council work was pointless?

 

[Nigel]

What's the new stategy then?

 

[mk12]

Bolshevism.

 

[Nigel]

Bolshevism.

Bit of an anachronism!

 

[JimPage]

And the sad thing here is that in the absence of the IWCA, the BNP are standing in Bunhill ward in May

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

“I don’t do politics, I do community work. I will still be involved in Blackbird Leys as I have lived here all my life.”

It's a shame she feels that an elected local position doesn't help to facilitate her community work. I'd like to have more detail on why she has developed that opinion.

 

[Sean]

Sad to see it happen, but it strikes me as being too few activists trying to do too much work and getting completely burnt out banging their heads against brick walls. The kind of work the IWCA does - and I hope it carries on doing it away from election campaigning if it isn't going to stand candidates again - requires intensive work and commitment. Council elections, along with the politicking that goes on to keep you out of the decision-making even when you get elected, make it even harder.

So, yeah, understandable but disappointing all the same.

 

[thegonzokid]

Yeah, voting is a dead-end...

http://theothercampaign2010.wordpress.com/

But much of the community work the IWCA did was excellent. The anti-capitalist left could learn a lot from them.

 

[the button]

Potentially positive, and an acknowledgement that real politics is elsewhere. The only IWCA-er I've met IRL always says electoralism is only a tactic, although I'm not sure how widespread this view is in the IWCA as a whole.

On balance, I'd be more likely to get involved in the IWCA if they de-emphasised electoral politics. Whether that's a positive or a negative is, of course, another question entirely.

 

[One_Stop_Shop]

Classic that some anarchos on here see this as some kind of turn from the IWCA towards class struggle anarchism

This just further sums up the failure of pro working class forces to get anywhere in the here and now. The IWCA hadn't made any breakthroughs for years now and this is a further backwards step.

Also whatever these real politics you speak of are, they aren't proving very successful in holding back the BNP.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

Also whatever these real politics you speak of are, they aren't proving very successful in holding back the BNP.

It's not their responsibility, it's the responsibility of everyone.

 

[BarryC]

The two Islington wards contested in 2002 and 2006 - Bunhill and Clerkenwell - will not have any IWCA candidates in 2010.

Hackney Independent are not contesting Haggerston ward in May. They came second to Labour in 2002 and 2006 (In 2002 as Hackney IWCA).

 

[butchersapron]

Classic that some anarchos on here see this as some kind of turn from the IWCA towards class struggle anarchism

This just further sums up the failure of pro working class forces to get anywhere in the here and now. The IWCA hadn't made any breakthroughs for years now and this is a further backwards step.

Also whatever these real politics you speak of are, they aren't proving very successful in holding back the BNP.

Except for the fact that no one has suggested anything at all like this. No one.

I suppose this has been part of the still unanswered question from the start - how do you work towards building up levels of community self-confidence without dealing with the local state (and by extension wider 'democratic' structures) in some manner? You can't just ignore them or that way you end up - in the defensive conditions we've found ourselves for the last few decades - simply fighting reactive battles. Anything like the ideal of imposing community demands on the local state in these conditions is helped by having elected officials exclusively concerned with those demands. But that, as we can see, can lead to the above situation.

 

[sihhi]

Hackney Independent are not contesting Haggerston ward in May. They came second to Labour in 2002 and 2006 (In 2002 as Hackney IWCA).

This was decided some time back when HI canvassed supporters to see if they wanted to work for having councillors some years later. The response was mixed but basically seemed to say there was no confidence that having councillors will mean anything.

I suppose this has been part of the still unanswered question from the start - how do you work towards building up levels of community self-confidence without dealing with the local state (and by extension wider 'democratic' structures) in some manner? You can't just ignore them or that way you end up - in the defensive conditions we've found ourselves for the last few decades - simply fighting reactive battles. Anything like the ideal of imposing community demands on the local state in these conditions is helped by having elected officials exclusively concerned with those demands. But that, as we can see, can lead to the above situation.

But this is the same question that an anti-electoral approach would have to face. If you organise something independent of local democratic structures, sooner or later you have to negotiate with those local democratic structures.

So do you have to struggle against democratic structures, not going by the rules? I don't know. In 2000, Hackney IWCA attempted to organise non-payment of rent increases, it was a serious threat, it meant TA meetings were alive again and housing concerns were dealt with. It was before my time so I don't know exactly what happened. Criticising the whole system of bureaucracy, managerial positions within local government during PCS one-day strikes was another attempt.

On OSS's point above, the BNP have passed the threshold of recognition and 'not being loonies'. BNP means No immigration. On their first go in new areas, they can pick up votes without much effort now, it's not surprising that they can outscore electoral efforts from the left.

 

[butchersapron]

this is the same question that an anti-electoral approach would have to face. If you organise something independent of local democratic structures, sooner or later you have to negotiate with those local democratic structures.

That was my point though, that you can't ignore them - certainly not if you want local credibility. The question i was posing (or was suggesting might lie behind the sort of impasse so often reached) how do you do that in the largely defensive situation that we've face for the last 30 years plus? Not in the ideal situation of powerful self-confident communities identifying their own needs then coming up with plans to deal with them then imposing them on the local state, but in the real conditions we've faced.

 

[sihhi]

That was my point though, that you can't ignore them - certainly not if you want local credibility. The question i was posing (or was suggesting might lie behind the sort of impasse so often reached) how do you do that in the largely defensive situation that we've face for the last 30 years plus? Not in the ideal situation of powerful self-confident communities identifying their own needs then coming up with plans to deal with them then imposing them on the local state, but in the real conditions we've faced.

In those defensive conditions, staking an electoral path can diminish credibility aswell. The local democratic structures have become the enemy even if they're not singled out as such.

Just this morning from 18'00'' - 25'00'' as an example.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00rz86w/Broadcasting_House_18_04_2010/

Ex-spin doctor author Jo Phillips is trying to persuade people to vote.

 

[One_Stop_Shop]

It's not their responsibility, it's the responsibility of everyone.

Agree.

Except for the fact that no one has suggested anything at all like this. No one.

I was reading behind the lines and also not being entirely serious.

I suppose this has been part of the still unanswered question from the start - how do you work towards building up levels of community self-confidence without dealing with the local state (and by extension wider 'democratic' structures) in some manner? You can't just ignore them or that way you end up - in the defensive conditions we've found ourselves for the last few decades - simply fighting reactive battles. Anything like the ideal of imposing community demands on the local state in these conditions is helped by having elected officials exclusively concerned with those demands. But that, as we can see, can lead to the above situation.

Good post. The problem is that because the IWCA was seen as a change for the ever diminishing returns and totally out of touch problems of the far left I always got the feeling that any criticisms were responded to in a defensive manner and with a bit of the ostrich head in the sand. It's been fairly obvious for years there has been problems with the IWCA strategy not only not spreading but going backwards. However the problem is that no workable alternative has been developed yet and we are left with the far left carrying on going round in circles with ever diminishing returns and influence, to the point where, by and large, they are now only relevant to themselves.

On OSS's point above, the BNP have passed the threshold of recognition and 'not being loonies'. BNP means No immigration. On their first go in new areas, they can pick up votes without much effort now, it's not surprising that they can outscore electoral efforts from the left.

No it's not and that comes out of the total failure of the left over the past 20 to 30 years. There has been opportunities for the left/pro working class organisations both in wider movements that have come about in the past 10 to 15 years, the attacks on workers and communities since the recession and the widespread disillusion with the Labour Party and mainstream political organisations generally. But because of a total inability to move beyond the same old tired way of going about things, we are left with what we have now.

So do you have to struggle against democratic structures, not going by the rules? I don't know. In 2000, Hackney IWCA attempted to organise non-payment of rent increases, it was a serious threat, it meant TA meetings were alive again and housing concerns were dealt with. It was before my time so I don't know exactly what happened. Criticising the whole system of bureaucracy, managerial positions within local government during PCS one-day strikes was another attempt.

These seem like good things to do to me. One problem, for me, with the IWCA was they never seemed to/don't make much effort with the trade unions. The best campaigns should, IMV, make an effort to link up local trade union branches and campaigns with community groups, campaigns and TRAs, and it's something we've done where I work with limited, but some success.

The problem with trying to by pass local state, is the same in the unions with trying to bypass the bureaucracy at a local, regional and national level. I've thought recently that while these problems have always existed the union bureaucracies now have the advantages of over 100 years of honing their trade with more and more expertise. UNISON is a good example of this. We're facing 0% pay increases, large scale lay offs and witch hunts from the bureaucracy on a big scale yet the response so far has been muted at best, which is a reflection of a state of networks at a member level, which in most branches are non-existant. There is a big task to try and change this and yet again the far left go round and round in circles.

The defensive problems that butchersapron has mentioned are a very real problem both in local fight backs and in trade unions.

 

[sihhi]

Agree.



I was reading behind the lines and also not being entirely serious.

Good post. The problem is that because the IWCA was seen as a change for the ever diminishing returns and totally out of touch problems of the far left I always got the feeling that any criticisms were responded to in a defensive manner and with a bit of the ostrich head in the sand. It's been fairly obvious for years there has been problems with the IWCA strategy not only not spreading but going backwards. However the problem is that no workable alternative has been developed yet and we are left with the far left carrying on going round in circles with ever diminishing returns and influence, to the point where, by and large, they are now only relevant to themselves.

No it's not and that comes out of the total failure of the left over the past 20 to 30 years. There has been opportunities for the left/pro working class organisations both in wider movements that have come about in the past 10 to 15 years, the attacks on workers and communities since the recession and the widespread disillusion with the Labour Party and mainstream political organisations generally. But because of a total inability to move beyond the same old tired way of going about things, we are left with what we have now.

These seem like good things to do to me. One problem, for me, with the IWCA was they never seemed to/don't make much effort with the trade unions. The best campaigns should, IMV, make an effort to link up local trade union branches and campaigns with community groups, campaigns and TRAs, and it's something we've done where I work with limited, but some success.

The problem with trying to by pass local state, is the same in the unions with trying to bypass the bureaucracy at a local, regional and national level. I've thought recently that while these problems have always existed the union bureaucracies now have the advantages of over 100 years of honing their trade with more and more expertise. UNISON is a good example of this. We're facing 0% pay increases, large scale lay offs and witch hunts from the bureaucracy on a big scale yet the response so far has been muted at best, which is a reflection of a state of networks at a member level, which in most branches are non-existant. There is a big task to try and change this and yet again the far left go round and round in circles.

The defensive problems that butchersapron has mentioned are a very real problem both in local fight backs and in trade unions.

All the criticisms here came from the leftists, they were eager to knock it down on any and everything being called anti-asylum, pro-privatisation of council housing, racist, anti-immigrant and 'de facto pro-imperialist'.
Unsurprisingly, you have to toughen up your defences against the endless slander.

Name a non-problematic strategy there isn't one, another thing is that strategies change and form over time with experience.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

All the criticisms here came from the leftists, they were eager to knock it down on any and everything being called anti-asylum, pro-privatisation of council housing, racist, anti-immigrant and 'de facto pro-imperialist'.

There were also other criticisms of the IWCA's strategy made her. More pertinent ones about the limitations of their strategic model.

It was pointed out here at some length that it was going to be very difficult to sustain their local base building efforts in the long run and that they had no strategy at all to spread their base to neighbouring areas, let alone wider swathes of the country. They showed that it was possible to build a local electoral base in a small area by prolonged, hard, community focused work in that area. The thing is, that was already known. What they never even began to show was what comes next.

The responses were, as OSS notes, nearly always defensive.

 

[chilango]

Is the problem, or a part of the problem, the limitations posed by the centrality of a narrow concept of "Working Class"?

I'm asking, rather than stating this.

Way back when the IWCA was launched it was, for me, a concern that their ideas of of what constituted the Working Class, was too narrow, and very limiting to who/where they could build.

Class consciousness etc etc. how many "actually" working class people really identify with the either the name or the concept?

I dunno, it's a difficult one to put my finger on, but this seems to me to be a key issue.

Alomg, of course with the increasing absence of "community".

"Working Class Communities" are pretty hard to find these days, no?

 

[butchersapron]

There were also other criticisms of the IWCA's strategy made her. More pertinent ones about the limitations of their strategic model.

It was pointed out here at some length that it was going to be very difficult to sustain their local base building efforts in the long run and that they had no strategy at all to spread their base to neighbouring areas, let alone wider swathes of the country. They showed that it was possible to build a local electoral base in a small area by prolonged, hard, community focused work in that area. The thing is, that was already known. What they never even began to show was what comes next.

The responses were, as OSS notes, nearly always defensive.

That the IWCA was born in difficult times and would involve hard work is not a revelation - nor is the fact that there's no guaranteed method of turning local victories into wider ones (unless you've been keeping a model that doesn't work on an example basis up your sleeve?). In fact these insights were pretty much taken for granted and writ into the thing from the start.

 

[butchersapron]

Is the problem, or a part of the problem, the limitations posed by the centrality of a narrow concept of "Working Class"?

I'm asking, rather than stating this.

Way back when the IWCA was launched it was, for me, a concern that their ideas of of what constituted the Working Class, was too narrow, and very limiting to who/where they could build.

Class consciousness etc etc. how many "actually" working class people really identify with the either the name or the concept?

I dunno, it's a difficult one to put my finger on, but this seems to me to be a key issue.

Alomg, of course with the increasing absence of "community".

"Working Class Communities" are pretty hard to find these days, no?

Nope, that's not the problem - the term didn't put people off in the areas where people organised. And the model was never tied to the name anyway.

 

[chilango]

Nope, that's not the problem - the term didn't put people off in the areas where people organised. And the model was never tied to the name anyway.

You think?

I'm not so sure.

I remember there being much "talk" before hand about "estates", the "white working class" etc etc. Which, sure, was applicable to some areas. But many areas with a less "homogenous" and more transitory, mobile, diverse population?

I dunno.

I think the model as I saw it (bearing in mind I'm looking at it from the outside) was never really a goer in many many areas because of the narrow "target constituency" if you like.

Sure, people will not be too bothered about the name if the strategy is working, but I'm not sure the strategy as framed (working class communities) can be applied in many places because:

a) people don't see themselves (or their neighbours) as Working Class.

b) they don't know who the neighbours are

c) they don't feel part of the community

d) they've just moved in, or are planning to move out/on.

Now, I do think the IWCA was almost the right idea...but too limited. I can't imagine it being attempted in pretty much any area that I've lived in.

I might be wrong about the reasons why though...

 

[butchersapron]

You think?

I'm not so sure.

I remember there being much "talk" before hand about "estates", the "white working class" etc etc. Which, sure, was applicable to some areas. But many areas with a less "homogenous" and more transitory, mobile, diverse population?

I dunno.

I think the model as I saw it (bearing in mind I'm looking at it from the outside) was never really a goer in many many areas because of the narrow "target constituency" if you like.

Sure, people will not be too bothered about the name if the strategy is working, but I'm not sure the strategy as framed (working class communities) can be applied in many places because:

a) people don't see themselves (or their neighbours) as Working Class.

b) they don't know who the neighbours are

c) they don't feel part of the community

d) they've just moved in, or are planning to move out/on.

Now, I do think the IWCA was almost the right idea...but too limited. I can't imagine it being attempted in pretty much any area that I've lived in.

I might be wrong about the reasons why though...

I don't think you're separating the name that had local resonance from the model sufficiently there tbh. The model (local participant led democratic politics) can/does work in any area where there's interests -all areas -if it doesn't we've already lost the war. Specific examples of organising with that in mind along those lines can take many forms, for those of us on the left concerned with economic democracy or wider issues it makes sense to organise around the common element as a simple marker. The people involved don't go around muttering working class childrens cinema working class trip to france

 

[chilango]

I don't think you're separating the name that had local resonance from the model sufficiently there tbh. The model (local participant led democratic politics) can/does work in any area where there's interests -all areas -if it doesn't we've already lost the war. Specific examples of organising with that in mind along those lines can take many forms, for those of us on the left concerned with economic democracy or wider issues it makes sense to organise around the common element as a simple marker. The people involved don't go around muttering working class childrens cinema working class trip to france

No. Of course.

But there's the difference between once you have the model being implemented and and attempting to get it running.

I dunno.

As I said I think the idea is along the right lines, but ideas of class and community are both fragmenting.

You can see it here in Italy. Formerly "red" neighborhoods splintering. Gentrification, property speculation, immigration/emmigration, the collapse of previous forms of social solidarity and organisation....yet the Lega and Berlusconi are putting out a message people seem to want to hear despite it not being in their interests.

 

[butchersapron]

No. Of course.

But there's the difference between once you have the model being implemented and and attempting to get it running.

I dunno.

As I said I think the idea is along the right lines, but ideas of class and community are both fragmenting.

You can see it here in Italy. Formerly "red" neighborhoods splintering. Gentrification, property speculation, immigration/emmigration, the collapse of previous forms of social solidarity and organisation....yet the Lega and Berlusconi are putting out a message people seem to want to hear despite it not being in their interests.

Not being funny, but the history and traditions of the Italian left (which were always strongly cultural and associationist) can't be mapped onto here - not when the point we're starting from is the already happened atomisation of society. There are parallels i'm sure, and the name is just a marker - it's the activity that counts.

 

[chilango]

Not being funny, but the history and traditions of the Italian left (which were always strongly cultural and associationist) can't be mapped onto here - not when the point we're starting from is the already happened atomisation of society. There are parallels i'm sure, and the name is just a marker - it's the activity that counts.

Not at all.

But if even here the ideas of community based activity is struggling we are looking at a trend of atomisation/fragmentation that can't be airbrushed over.

Activity alone is not the answer.

At this point I think it's well worth pausing for thought and asking why the IWCA model is not being more widely or succesfully adopted.

Of course the name alone is not the reason, but the name is no accident and perhaps gives us a hint or a clue. Perhaps.

I don't know the answers here. At the moment I'd be content with finding the right questions to ask.