IWCA v BNP, on your radio

[love detective]

The only way to counter it is to appear on the same programme? How many listen to this radio station? Where is the potential reservoir for the BNP in this area? What evidence do the IWCA etc have that not appearing on the show will be a disaster for pro-working class politics?

Well speaking in local terms, I'm sure Stuart Craft knows the area he lives and organises in far better than you or I - and what you and I both know about Stuart is that I am sure he is best placed to judge what is appropriate to do in this situation in relation to what is happening in blackbird leys

 

[Fedayn]

I agree, but the situation in the here & now is that he has been invited on by the radio station and could use that to do exactly as you say - the choice then is, when invited to counter exactly the kind of thing you allude to above, should the IWCA just refuse and give them a free reign, in their own backyard in BBL?

Stuart's position will be one of attacking the kind of multiculturalism (i.e. lots of separate mono cultural communities) pushed by the BNP, black nationalists, liberal multiculturalism, and all other kinds of reactionary identity politics - in favour of a working class perspective

I'm not doubting Sturarts ability to see off their argument, however there's been no evidfence provided that he needs to do so on the same show, that if he doesn't appear on the show it will be bad news. That's rather patronising to those who might hear Darby is it not? As if they'll hear him and think yup that's it, Euro-nationalism for me.

 

[Fedayn]

Well speaking in local terms, I'm sure Stuart Craft knows the area he lives and organises in far better than you or I - and what you and I both know about Stuart is that I am sure he is best placed to judge what is appropriate to do in this situation in relation to what is happening here in blackbird leys

But being local doesn't mean he's right or immune to making a bad decision does it?

 

[love detective]

I however there's been no evidfence provided that he needs to do so on the same show, that if he doesn't appear on the show it will be bad news. That's rather patronising to those who might hear Darby is it not?

I would say it is rather patronising for Stuart, that he is being judged here as not being in the best position to decide whether to take part in a debate in blackbird leys, the area he lives in, organises in and is local councilor for

 

[belboid]

he's not incapable of making a mistake

 

[love detective]

But being local doesn't mean he's right or immune to making a bad decision does it?

No, but being local surely puts you in a better place, being much closer to the ground, to have the relevant information that is required to be able to stand a chance of making a decision that is appropriate and relevant to this particular local issue, no?

 

[Fedayn]

I would say it is rather patronising for Stuart, that he is being judged here as not being in the best position to decide whether to take part in a debate in blackbird leys, the area he lives in, organises in and is local councilor for

No it's not patronising to say he has made a bad decision, no-one said he was incapable of making acorrect decision anywhere. It's a difference of opinion that's all.

 

[Fedayn]

No, but being local surely puts you in a better place, being much closer to the ground, to have the relevant information that is required to be able to then make a decision that is appropriate and relevant, to this particular local issue, no?

The SWP in Glasgow are local, they live here, some represent thousands in organised workplaces and are elected every year, they made many daft decisions on demos and workplace issues up here. You see it's not really a brilliant line of argument.

 

[love detective]

No it's not patronising to say he has made a bad decision, no-one said he was incapable of making acorrect decision anywhere. It's a difference of opinion that's all.

the comment wasn't about the decision, i was saying it was somewhat patronising to assume he wasn't in the best position to in terms of assembling the information required to make that decision

 

[love detective]

The SWP in Glasgow are local, they live here, some represent thousands in organised workplaces and are elected every year, they made many daft decisions on demos and workplace issues up here. You see it's not really a brilliant line of argument.

somewhat disengenious - the decisions made by the type of people in the SWP are largely daft because of the type of people who are in the SWP

the line of argument is that if you have sensible people like Stuart (we are agreed on this yes?) who are in a position on the ground to be in better breast of the local conditions than you or I, then these two things together make it more likely that a sensible decision will be made. It doesn't rule out the possibility of something else however, but all i am saying is the combination of these two things are more likely to lead to a better decision being made than either i) a sensible person without the necessary information or ii) a mental person with the necessary information, would

anyway, i need to head out now - will need to agree to disagree

 

[Fedayn]

the comment wasn't about the decision, i was saying it was somewhat patronising to assume he wasn't in the best position to in terms of assembling the information required to make that decision

I'm not disagreeing his being local might give him a better view, doesn't make him right though.

 

[Fedayn]

somewhat disengenious - the decisions made by the type of people in the SWP are largely daft because of the type of people who are in the SWP

the line of argument is that if you have sensible people like Stuart (we are agreed on this yes?) who are in a position on the ground to be in better breast of the local conditions than you or I, then these two things together make it more likely that a sensible decision will be made. It doesn't rule out the possibility of something else however, but all i am saying is the combination of these two things are more likely to lead to a better decision being made than either i) a sensible person without the necessary information or ii) a mental person with the necessary information, would

anyway, i need to head out now - will need to agree to disagree

But if the SWP are local they might well have a better view surely? Of course i've no dispute re Stuarts ideas being better than the SWP, but the 'local' bit is a tad of a cover all imho.

 

[love detective]

not gone out yet....

lets explore the local side a bit more then

Stuart will stand down as a councilor in May after ten years service. During that time he has carried considerable support among a large section who have become understandably disillusioned with and disenfranchised by the mainstream political establishment. The withdrawl from the electoral arena will clearly put that electoral support up for grabs. It's not unreasonable to imagine a situation where the BNP, or any other far right outfit, could seek to start to lay the ground as a replacement for the political alternative that the IWCA offered in the electoral arena. So with that in mind, and perhaps with signs of that even starting to happen re their interest in appearing on a local BBL radio show - is it really so hard to understand why the local IWCA would see it as a sensible thing to do to take part in that debate to show that the BNP are not the radical alternative they profess to be (likewise the IWCA locally are to continue their holding to account of labour as they undoubtedly seek to capitalise on the situation also)? This along with the ongoing commitment of the IWCA in Oxford to redouble their efforts on the independent community organising front seems like a sensible twin pronged approach to me.

Anyway - some latest news just in on this - when the BNP were informed that the IWCA had been invited on to the show to take them on, they got in touch with the radio station today and refused to take part if the IWCA were to be present. The contact at the radio station said "the BNP are scared to debate with you”

So, the BNP who are happy to take on the mainstream parties and the liberal elite on national tv, cower when faced with a political opponent on local radio in the shape of the IWCA. What does that say about their thinking? They do not feel threatened by debate with the mainstream as they present themselves as the radical alternative in that arena, but when faced with a credible threat to their speel, in an area they have their sights on, they threaten to run away. Yet it is claimed here by some that the IWCA partaking in this debate would have the opposite effect, i.e. a boost to the BNP, and not the damage that even the BNP can see it would have.

So it turns out that the IWCA will now be denied the opportunity to take part in this debate as the station wants to air the BNP 'show' as scheduled

At least some on this thread will be happy that the BNP are now not going to be given any credibility by erm, having a free reign to spout their shite in an area they clearly have their eye on, without a credible counter argument from a local pro working class progressive organisation

 

[past caring]

I am assuming Stuart is going to insist on having his own slot at a later date - where he can counter what the BNP come out with - if the station have bowed to the BNP in not having him on this time?

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

because you are giving them credibility.

I think 2 MEPs, a GLA member and however many councillors and millions of votes over the last 10 or so years already gives them credibility.

 

[The39thStep]

Funnily enough i was debating with a local BNP supporter in a pub last week and after a few beers can't resist it.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

Funnily enough i was debating with a local BNP supporter in a pub last week and after a few beers can't resist it.

Stop giving them credibility you swine

 

[cantsin]

perhaps, but that would be a question for the radio station no?

once invited however, and the invitation then extended to the IWCA to counter his crap - what would be the most politically appropriate response - to decline and give them a free ride, or accept and use the opportunity to push a pro working class progressive alternative?

so goodbye to 'no platform ' ? was that position always open to interpretation according to circumstances in your opinion, from Cable St to Oxford Com radio ? if not, what has changed, and when ?

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

In a multi media/new media/social networking era what does no platform even mean?

 

[articul8]

In a multi media/new media/social networking era what does no platform even mean?

Don't give them a credible platform - let them stick to looking like twats on Youtube?

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

Don't give them a credible platform - let them stick to looking like twats on Youtube?

Is that what would have happened if Crafty hadn't challanged them on his local radio station?

Ignoring the fact that their electoral record over the last 10 years or so already gives them credibility and blogs and twitter and youtube are all credible as far as mainstream politics are concerned.

 

[butchersapron]

Don't give them a credible platform - let them stick to looking like twats on Youtube?

What's a credible platform? How have you decided for us?

 

[articul8]

What's a credible platform? How have you decided for us?

It's to be determined. Getting airtime for their views on BBC 1 is different from some minor corner of the web

 

[butchersapron]

By who? How and why have you determined that this is not a credible platform for the rest of us. Just so we know like. Let's see your workings.

 

[Citizen66]

The other being what idiot invites them on the first place.

Probably the sort of idiot that has deduced that a bit of controversy could boost audience figures.

 

[articul8]

By who? How and why have you determined that this is not a credible platform for the rest of us.

eh? I haven't said anywhere in particular isn't a credible platform. I'm saying that some platforms reach more people and a more influential than others. This is a statement of the obvious, that even you are going to struggle to dispute.

 

[killer b]

I think 2 MEPs, a GLA member and however many councillors and millions of votes over the last 10 or so years already gives them credibility.

This really. No platform doesn't have any relevance anymore - they already have one, and credibility of a sort, much as we'd like them not to.

 

[Mr Smin]

Is it just Craft who is not standing in Oxford, or the whole IWCA? If the latter I wondered why but can't find anything obvious on their website.

 

[ayatollah]

The "NO PLATFORM" position has been perfectly well understood, on the "LEFT" anyway, for as long as I can remember. You DON'T enter into cozy "DEBATES" with the bastards - you picket the radio station/TV station where any airing of fascist views is proposed and demand that the fascists are given NO PLATFORM for their poison. This is a HUGE miscalculation by the IWCA guys. Believe me you will NEVER live it down. This error will haunt you for ever more. BIG MISTAKE !

Also for the IWCA "stuart's position" will be far too nuanced and difficult to separate from hostility to what is much more generally accepted as "multiculturalism" in popular parlance, rather than the IWCA's "special" meaning, not to fall into appearing to simply agree with the BNP that "multiculturalism is a bad thing". Suggesting on a short radio discussion that it is the BNP that is FOR "multiculturalism" will simply secure a denial of this from the BNP speaker --- and an invitation to the IWCA to join WITH the BNP to fight together against "multiculturalism" !


You are going to be IN BIG TROUBLE guys !

 

[killer b]

BIG TROUBLE!!!!