IWCA statement on BNP

[cogg]

The IWCA have released this statement on its website about the victory of the BNP in the Euro elections and the plight of Labour and the left.

Labour got what it deserved – and so did the BNP

The Labour party is dying, and fascism is on the rise. Where does the working class go from here?


‘May you live in interesting times’ is an old Chinese saying. You might be forgiven for assuming it is a blessing but in actual fact it is intended as a curse. Of course, how you might regard the inherent implications of some major political or social upheaval most probably depends on what end of the political or social spectrum you inhabit.

In any event, for good or ill, ‘interesting times’ we are certainly in.

In 1994, at the beginning of the Blair era, Labour MP Roy Hattersley suggested that ‘the working class would continue to vote for Labour whatever the party does’. A number of years after New Labour had taken power in 1997, when the cracks between the governing party and the working class electorate were already beginning to emerge, mostly in the form of a collapsing turnout at elections, it was all airily waved away by current Justice Minister Jack Straw. He described the gathering disengagement as ‘the politics of contentment.’

The quotes are a useful reminder that New Labour’s problems did not begin with the ascension to power of Gordon Brown, or the credit crunch, or MP’s expenses. The real damage was done far earlier, goes far deeper and may indeed be irreversible.
The rest of the article is at: http://www.iwca.info/?p=10141

 

[cutandsplice]

The IWCA have released this statement on its website about the victory of the BNP in the Euro elections and the plight of Labour and the left.

Labour got what it deserved – and so did the BNP

The Labour party is dying, and fascism is on the rise. Where does the working class go from here?


‘May you live in interesting times’ is an old Chinese saying. You might be forgiven for assuming it is a blessing but in actual fact it is intended as a curse. Of course, how you might regard the inherent implications of some major political or social upheaval most probably depends on what end of the political or social spectrum you inhabit.

In any event, for good or ill, ‘interesting times’ we are certainly in.

In 1994, at the beginning of the Blair era, Labour MP Roy Hattersley suggested that ‘the working class would continue to vote for Labour whatever the party does’. A number of years after New Labour had taken power in 1997, when the cracks between the governing party and the working class electorate were already beginning to emerge, mostly in the form of a collapsing turnout at elections, it was all airily waved away by current Justice Minister Jack Straw. He described the gathering disengagement as ‘the politics of contentment.’

The quotes are a useful reminder that New Labour’s problems did not begin with the ascension to power of Gordon Brown, or the credit crunch, or MP’s expenses. The real damage was done far earlier, goes far deeper and may indeed be irreversible.
The rest of the article is at: http://www.iwca.info/?p=10141

Cogg, I posted this last night under the title, Labour got what it deserved – and so did the BNP.
Funny that no-one replied to that nor this. As I said on my thread this is an extremely important article.

 

[butchersapron]

I've just spent all day writing an article for elsewhere, that makes almost exactly the same points.

 

[Pickman's model]

I've just spent all day writing an article for elsewhere, that makes almost exactly the same points.

brilliant minds think alike

 

[butchersapron]

More, i suspect, a case of the situation we find ourselves in being so straightforward...

 

[poster342002]

A good article that makes sensible points - but I'm far from convinced that neoliberalism has been discredited here in the UK.

The media has done a relentless job of presenting this mess as a failure of "socialism" under Gordon Brown. Now we know this is utter crap, but most people have now accepted it as some kind of fact.

 

[durruti02]

yes simply correct

 

[newbie]

Why isn't it signed? Surely whoever wrote it has a name, why can't we know who it was?

 

[cutandsplice]

Why isn't it signed? Surely whoever wrote it has a name, why can't we know who it was?

Why do you think it wasn't signed?

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Agree with lots of it but there are a few things that made me say "eh?", specifically things like the quote from Gilligan (eh?) and

And if that wasn’t bad enough and if Nick Griffin is even half right (and at least some of his forecasts have actually been accurate before) racial/religious demarcations are due for a dramatic expansion too. Recently Griffin confidently announced that he expects the lid to come off the multicultural experiment some time soon. ‘Inter-communal violence’ will likely be a fact of life for many working class communities within, he believes, ‘three years’. The seemingly spontaneous demonstrations in Luton recently may be a portent. It is difficult to predict the short-term winners and losers from such a collective meltdown but it’s a fair bet it won’t be pretty.

The supported Gilligan quote says "The endless focus on race alienated many white working class Londoners, who got the impression that Labour was not interested in them and was even trying to deny their place in London" and I deny that. White working class Londoners get the impression that Labour is not interested in them because Labour isn't interested in working class Londoners, and makes no secret about it. It's not because of "multiculturalism" or the race divide implied here - like black working class Londoners thought any different or something, and like white w/c Londoners never talk to The Blacks.

I don't expect serious articles to give credence to Tory columnists slagging off lefty multiculcha on ideological grounds, and I don't expect them to uncritically support Griffin's rivers-of-blood stuff either.

 

[treelover]

SO, Livingstone and Jasper didn't focus on race, etc?

 

[FridgeMagnet]

You will have to expand on that comment, ideally with reference to what I said, if indeed it was a reply to me.

 

[editor]

Cogg, I posted this last night under the title, Labour got what it deserved – and so did the BNP.

Do you know each other?

 

[newbie]

Why do you think it wasn't signed?

I don't know, that's why I asked, it strikes me as odd.

 

[treelover]

"The endless focus on race alienated many white working class Londoners, who got the impression that Labour was not interested in them and was even trying to deny their place in London" and I deny that.

For better or worse, Livingslime and co did make multiculturalism and the celebration of the 'other' a central focus of their work, do you deny that?

 

[FridgeMagnet]

For better or worse, Livingslime and co did make multiculturalism and the celebration of the 'other' a central focus of their work, do you deny that?

I stated quite explicitly what I denied. There was no "endless focus on race", but more importantly, whatever "focus on race" there was was not responsible for white working class Londoners thinking they were abandoned by Labour. That was Labour paying no attention to the working class.

NB "livingslime" omg nushamebore

 

[treelover]

NB "livingslime" omg nushamebore
Reply With Quote



Bliar

 

[FridgeMagnet]

micro$oft!

 

[treelover]

can' t follow that, don't see the logic....

 

[FridgeMagnet]

They are all distortion of names supposedly for satirical effect. See also AmeriKKKa.

 

[sevenstars]

hmmm

So I read this, but saying 'we were right all along' raises the question - so what did you do about it then yourself ?

I dont agree the 'pilot schemes' where successful, in that for the most part they didnt last. Part of the reason for this I think is the sectarian approach of the organisation to other activists on the left. Its not clear if people like me are the enemy or potential allies of the IWCA, with that level of ambivalence even those of us who have left the traditional left parties and are sympathetic to the analysis have not seen the IWCA as anything better.

There may well be other reasons for the IWCA's own failure to grow but there seems to be a strong aversion to talking about them here. Maybe, as with other far left outfits, its culture doesnt allow for serious examination of its own mistakes?

Until the IWCA seriously looks at where they went wrong themselves I think they are just part of the problem to be honest. I hope you can think about that and get past it, in the meantime I guess I will carry on doing my own thing and hope something better emerges.

 

[cutandsplice]

Do you know each other?

It was probably my mother.

 

[articul8]

Currently they are effortlessly riding two horses. Alongside their work in former Labour heartlands they are equally at home in tapping into a sort of ‘hang ‘em and flog ‘em’ time-honoured conservatism in the more upmarket neighbourhoods.

Agree - but this opportunity has opened up for them through the structural need for mainstream parties to triangulate and occupy the centre ground rather than appeal to their core votes.

Cruddas is right that PR would potentially be a game changer and give both mainstream parties to change their approach and also to allow new forces to emerge, and this space can be closed down.

 

[treelover]

Alongside their work in former Labour heartlands they are equally at home in tapping into a sort of ‘hang ‘em and flog ‘em’ time-honoured conservatism in the more upmarket neighbourhoods.

I think you will find plenty of WC people have that 'time honoured conservatism' many voted for Thatcher after all

 

[Joe Reilly]

Agree with lots of it but there are a few things that made me say "eh?", specifically things like the quote from Gilligan (eh?) and

The supported Gilligan quote says "The endless focus on race alienated many white working class Londoners, who got the impression that Labour was not interested in them and was even trying to deny their place in London" and I deny that. White working class Londoners get the impression that Labour is not interested in them because Labour isn't interested in working class Londoners, and makes no secret about it. It's not because of "multiculturalism" or the race divide implied here - like black working class Londoners thought any different or something, and like white w/c Londoners never talk to The Blacks.

I don't expect serious articles to give credence to Tory columnists slagging off lefty multiculcha on ideological grounds, and I don't expect them to uncritically support Griffin's rivers-of-blood stuff either.

Does Gilligan's track record give any indication that he has Tory leanings? Quite the opposite.

As for the white working class Londoners, what he was talking about here was their perception of 'Red Ken's' priorities. This is what led them to vote Tory. Incidentally the BNP also called for supporters to transfer their second vote to Boris so the triangle was sort of complete.

Finally your 'rivers of blood' remark suggest you would prefer that people other than the BNP did not talk of racial/religious tensions at all - even - or particularly if they are true?

Who does that help at the end of the day? Half of the reason the BNP are where they are today is because the establishment/media/left tactitly supported the censorship of any analysis of their chances, other than a damning one. The only people really fooled by this nonsense are the likes of UAF.

Indeed even on here anti-fascists who called it right were themselves accused of actually being secret admirers. Not good. Not healthy.

 

[liampreston]

I think you will find plenty of WC people have that 'time honoured conservatism' many voted for Thatcher after all

My father came from a family in Wigan where his father was a miner from his teenage years to retirement. His decision to be a Thatcher and Major voter, initially, came from his attitude that the Labour Party he knew from his youth in the 60s and especiallly 70s was a dictating, "top down" party he could not stand. I was brought up with him telling me how the right to buy council homes was the best policy Labour had never come up with.

 

[treelover]

Joe said

Indeed even on here anti-fascists who called it right were themselves accused of actually being secret admirers. Not good. Not healthy.

Prophets are often attacked first before being acknowledged...

 

[brasicritique]

I stated quite explicitly what I denied. There was no "endless focus on race", but more importantly, whatever "focus on race" there was was not responsible for white working class Londoners thinking they were abandoned by Labour. That was Labour paying no attention to the working class.

NB "livingslime" omg nushamebore

And you have the statistical research data to back this up? I am sick of middleclass idiots like you who claim to have some sort of deep political insight into the 'working class'. Your confusing being a mod with the reality of how many working class people percieve things regardless of what we may think of these perceptions.

 

[brasicritique]

Indeed even on here anti-fascists who called it right were themselves accused of actually being secret admirers. Not good. Not healthy.

Exactly and IMO this is where the real danger is. To have a political voice these days you have to be middleclass end of story.

 

[newbie]

I'm not convinced that anonymity helps a political voice to be taken seriously. Maybe it does, and I'm missing some fundamental point somewhere