Left conversion

[GroovySunday]

The trouble with saying things like that is that it’s also what the fash say.

It's also true.

Some fash are syncretic and claim to have elements of both right and left (while infact being far right) and they often call themselves nationalists (which they are).

We can meanwhile genuinely reject both left and right and be genuinely revolutionary and for our own class interests.

The left is the left hand of capital and 'left libertarian' doesn't make sense and doesn't really mean anything IMO, if you ask me it's not real. How is one supposed to be both libertarian and with the left hand of the ruling class? That's how I see things anyway. And I don't regard so-called 'right libertarianism' to be real. They're not at all 'libertarian' they're very authoritarian corporatocratist reactionaries. So for me it's also the case that if there's no 'libertarian right' there's also no 'libertarian left'. There is only anarchism/genuine libertarianism mixed with genuinely communist economics.

 

[redsquirrel]

Mainly it has to stop trying to be the right. It has to stop being apologetic and remind people, constantly, that if you poll people on it, time and again, almost everyone wants 'left-wing' policies like higher tax on the ultra rich and on business profits, nationalisation etc and the people who are telling you you don't want those things because they are 'socialist extremism' are telling you that because they represent the people who are benefiting from those not being the case

It needs to stop waffling on about being 'tough' about benefits and immigration, and stop playing along with the narrative that these are major problems for the nation and economy and start talking about being 'fair'; how we need immigration, especially with an ageing population, and how cuts that hit the most needy hardest simply end up being cruel and expensive because 'your taxes' end up paying more to deal with the costs of extreme deprivation and ill health.

By left here you are really referring to Labour and its centre left sister parties aren't you.

 

[PTK]

Well put.

The thing that amuses me most about the hard left* is firstly the assertion that the whole world is in agreement with them, and secondly their refusal to engage with any electoral process, because six votes is embarrassing.

*As opposed to the nominal left, a la Starmer.

There are still hard left left in the PLP, but to quote Eric Bogle 'Someday no one will march there at all'.

Blair I suppose was the start of the end of what I regarded as 'the left', who would have imagined the left of old introducing tuition charges?

I've always been right of centre, but with some left beliefs, such as social housing and a decent welfare state. It struck me the other day that I'm probably left of Starmer.

Are you confusing the hard left with the far left?

 

[PTK]

By left here you are really referring to Labour and its centre left sister parties aren't you.

The Labour Party is not "centre left" in my view. It contains left, "centre" (if there is such a thing) and right.

 

[redsquirrel]

The Labour Party is not "centre left" in my view. It contains left, "centre" (if there is such a thing) and right.

Well yes I should probably have put centre-left in quote marks.
But the point is that some on the thread are talking about the Labour Party, and others the non-Labour 'left'.

 

[danny la rouge]

Anyone else reading this thread and feeling grateful that Dwyer is on an enforced break?

Hadn’t noticed. Not long after his return I put him straight on ignore. It made every thread infinitely better.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Anyone else reading this thread and feeling grateful that Dwyer is on an enforced break?

Didn't know he was. He's on permanent enforced break from me having to read his shite.

 

[PTK]

Well yes I should probably have put centre-left in quote marks.
But the point is that some on the thread are talking about the Labour Party, and others the non-Labour 'left'.

We all ought to begin at the beginning and define what we mean by "left".

 

[PTK]

Deindustrialisation, legislation, virtualisation and workplace fragmentation have all had a deep impact on the ability to create the sorts of coherent workplace cultures that produced those legendary communist shop stewards – and they were produced by their circumstances. I remember an old Tory I used to work with when I was on my first news desk in the regional press, he was considerably more up for doing things like smashing equipment to win an argument with the bosses than the younger generation coming up, even though most of them considered themselves "left" (or at least liberal). The culture of "make them negotiate" crashed and with it the next generation of socialist troublemakers.

Good post. Objectively, your Tory colleague could be said to be more left-wing than the younger people who considered themselves to be left-wing.

 

[hitmouse]

Has it? Put another way, would we think matters were in a better place if the SP/SWP had 20,000 members and the more niche trot outfits were more visible and pursuing ‘victory to the intifada’ ‘save the NHS’ front campaigns, staging more A to B marches and calling for ‘critical’ votes for Labour?

I mean, I hate to be in the position of defending the trot groupings here, but I suppose a) it's not like those 20,000 people would suddenly appear out of nowhere, their joining said groups would be a reflection of a situation where that many people were already looking for ways to fight capitalism and so on, which would already be a good thing and b) as fun as it is to slag the trot groups off, it's not like everything they do is 100% useless and counterproductive all the time, if 1% of those people then got involved as union reps, or in local tenants associations or whatever, I suspect we'd probably be in a better position than we are now.
Just like how, for how big it was, Corbynism left virtually nothing of value behind, but at the same time, I reckon I probably do know more good union reps who came through Corbynism than I do anarchist ones, or indeed non-anarchist but also non-vanguardist and non-Labourist IWCA-flavoured revolutionary socialist ones or whatever.
On the big question, I think a lot of us are agreed about the diagnosis, so the question is what to do about it I suppose? I feel like successful organising at Amazon, or in the gig economy, wouldn't automatically replicate the 1970s NUM or whatever, but it would be a much better foundation to build a project on than anything we have now. And I reckon housing is also a big area outside of work where there's a lot of potential for class organisation that doesn't have to be built around specific ideological lines.
I dunno, Notes From Below are much too PhDish, and Angry Workers are utterly tiny and don't seem to have got very far compared to where they started out from, but I have to give both of them respect as being groups who at least try to understand the shape of the working class today and use that question as the starting point, rather than preconceived recipes.
I suppose there's some value in that old quote from the Transitional Programme about the crisis mainly being a crisis of leadership, just for how well it sums up a certain approach, which might or might not have had any value in the 1930s, but I think is completely the wrong way to look at things today. I think, instead of "leadership", it might be better to look at it in terms of "confidence", or similar. But then that problem also isn't easy to solve either.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Are you confusing the hard left with the far left?

Probably. By 'hard left' I mean people like Corbyn and McDonnell.

 

[PTK]

Probably. By 'hard left' I mean people like Corbyn and McDonnell.

You claim that people to the left of the Labour Party receive only a handful of votes in elections, but the Communist League received seven votes in Islington North in 2017. That's more than the number of digits on one hand.

 

[PTK]

.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

You claim that people to the left of the Labour Party receive only a handful of votes in elections, but the Communist League received seven votes in Islington North in 2017. That's more than the number of digits on one hand.

I think this might be the first time in Urban history that the most Pickman's-y post on the boards hasn't actually been by the man himself.

 

[Sasaferrato]

I mean, I hate to be in the position of defending the trot groupings here, but I suppose a) it's not like those 20,000 people would suddenly appear out of nowhere, their joining said groups would be a reflection of a situation where that many people were already looking for ways to fight capitalism and so on, which would already be a good thing and b) as fun as it is to slag the trot groups off, it's not like everything they do is 100% useless and counterproductive all the time, if 1% of those people then got involved as union reps, or in local tenants associations or whatever, I suspect we'd probably be in a better position than we are now.
Just like how, for how big it was, Corbynism left virtually nothing of value behind, but at the same time, I reckon I probably do know more good union reps who came through Corbynism than I do anarchist ones, or indeed non-anarchist but also non-vanguardist and non-Labourist IWCA-flavoured revolutionary socialist ones or whatever.
On the big question, I think a lot of us are agreed about the diagnosis, so the question is what to do about it I suppose? I feel like successful organising at Amazon, or in the gig economy, wouldn't automatically replicate the 1970s NUM or whatever, but it would be a much better foundation to build a project on than anything we have now. And I reckon housing is also a big area outside of work where there's a lot of potential for class organisation that doesn't have to be built around specific ideological lines.
I dunno, Notes From Below are much too PhDish, and Angry Workers are utterly tiny and don't seem to have got very far compared to where they started out from, but I have to give both of them respect as being groups who at least try to understand the shape of the working class today and use that question as the starting point, rather than preconceived recipes.
I suppose there's some value in that old quote from the Transitional Programme about the crisis mainly being a crisis of leadership, just for how well it sums up a certain approach, which might or might not have had any value in the 1930s, but I think is completely the wrong way to look at things today. I think, instead of "leadership", it might be better to look at it in terms of "confidence", or similar. But then that problem also isn't easy to solve either.

I was a PCS rep for about seven years. My political stance at the time was 'non aligned'.

As far as I was concerned it was 'us against them' and 'they' were brutal and incompetent in equal measure. I took great pleasure in winning, my speciality was asking questions along the lines of 'didn't you read the guidance?', 'These are your rules, why didn't you follow them?'. My greatest moment was 'Did you act in what was essentially an illegal manner due to malice, incompetence or stupidity?'. I had an interview with the site lea over that one, after he stopped laughing he said, 'Jim, we all know he's a thick cunt, but there are rules', he then dissolved into laughter again.

 

[Sasaferrato]

I think this might be the first time in Urban history that the most Pickman's-y post on the boards hasn't actually been by the man himself.

He's obviously a good teacher.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Genuine question.

Why do people like the Communist League etc bother? Do they genuinely think that their support will rise, or is it just to get them out of the house?

 

[The39thStep]

By left here you are really referring to Labour and its centre left sister parties aren't you.

Who are of course the very people who when it suits them will talk left to the working class but in reality tolerate any old shite providing they get elected and parrot a couple of Blairite/Thatcherite slogans about reforming this or modernising this. Normally chat about defending democracy and western values but never own their own history of genocide and plunder and end up supporting or installing any old regime that benefits their trade or tailing Israel, the USA and the EU.

 

[ouirdeaux]

That's more than the number of digits on one hand.

Not in Norfolk.

 

[Serge Forward]

The Labour Party is not "centre left" in my view. It contains left, "centre" (if there is such a thing) and right.

It may have been "leftish" at various times in the past, but these days it's clearly another right wing party that one or two leftists still happen to cling to.

As for earlier posts, yes, the terms left and right are a bit unhelpful, probably outdated and tend to refer to left and right wings of capital. That said, I'm not mithered if someone says I'm left because they don't happen to know about the anarcho-communist, council communist, left communist interpretation of "left" (and I expect very few people to be aware of that).

Those who claim to be on the right are always cunts. Those who claim to be on the left, it depends. Those who claim to be neither are often fash cunts but some will be anarcho/left communist types trying to distance themselves from all the usual leftist crap.

 

[Dom Traynor]

One thing I always thought Ian Bone got dead on - no-one respects powerless whinging. Everybody knows working people are being screwed over, all going on about The Victims and "demanding" things does, in the absence of leverage to impose consequences, is highlight is your own weakness. People don't ignore the left because it's wrong or making bad arguments, they ignore it because it's ineffective. Corbynism is an example of what happens when people think there's an actual chance of something happening - mass, immediate uptake.

It's about effectiveness. Ideological position is basically irrelevant.

This is absolutely bang on. Endless A to Bism achieves very little and certainly doesn't build power. Workplace and community organising on the other hand can. Even single issue organising can.

 

[hitmouse]

It may have been "leftish" at various times in the past, but these days it's clearly another right wing party that one or two leftists still happen to cling to.

As for earlier posts, yes, the terms left and right are a bit unhelpful, probably outdated and tend to refer to left and right wings of capital. That said, I'm not mithered if someone says I'm left because they don't happen to know about the anarcho-communist, council communist, left communist interpretation of "left" (and I expect very few people to be aware of that).

And tbf the term the left communists use for themselves illustrates how messy the whole thing of trying to distance oneself from the left can be.

 

[YouSir]

This is absolutely bang on. Endless A to Bism achieves very little and certainly doesn't build power. Workplace and community organising on the other hand can. Even single issue organising can.

A to B stuff serves a purpose, especially when it's one of the very few ways to engender a culture of dissent in an environment that's relentlessly hostile to it. It doesn't represent power in and of itself but without drawing people to and highlighting attitudes of resistance as routine parts of their day to day life very little else can happen.

That aside though, do think the 'organised' Left is really bad at workplace and community organising in general. Plenty of good and active individuals but there's a lot of vague declarations about how organising will fix things without any real awareness of where people actually are and how that organising can be factored into their lived experience. Or even awareness of where people are already offering levels of casual resistance which could be supported and further mobilised, a drive to get people to undertake action a when they're already doing action b without any formal awareness of it, just as a daily reaction to experiences in the workplace.

 

[YouSir]

For me the lefts problem is that it will tolerate/embrace pretty much any old shit as long as the speaker/writer parrots - regardless of the dishonesty or cognitive disconnect involved - a couple of 70/80's slogans amongst the imperialism, anti-Semitism, and support for unutterably vile groups/regimes.

That you can call for and support the eradication of a culture, language and polity of 40m people at the hands of a murderous, fabulously corrupt, homophobic, racist dictatorship - but if you also think the trains should be nationalised, the 'left' will can you Comrade.

Just, the fuck?

Always think this is the obsession with emulation coming out, the pointless desire to have a voice in the media because the Right already has a load of them. Means anyone can get elevated to prominence, no matter how venal and self serving, because 'look, they're on telly/YouTube saying the thing'. Something which trad. media has always loved because it means they can distill any movement, no matter how dynamic, down to a Owen Jones, or a George Galloway, or a Ash Sarkar who can be promoted and dismissed as a set narrative dictates. Self-defeating for the Left too, as a whole it contains huge amounts of lived, educated and practical experience which could be manifested as a widespread, open form of information creation and dissemination. But instead there's Novara News where the people may (or may not) be likeable but they're also entirely subject to an industry which is inherently hostile.

 

[Cloo]

By left here you are really referring to Labour and its centre left sister parties aren't you.

You have a point, I am and they're not the left!

 

[PTK]

For me the lefts problem is that it will tolerate/embrace pretty much any old shit as long as the speaker/writer parrots - regardless of the dishonesty or cognitive disconnect involved - a couple of 70/80's slogans amongst the imperialism, anti-Semitism, and support for unutterably vile groups/regimes.

That you can call for and support the eradication of a culture, language and polity of 40m people at the hands of a murderous, fabulously corrupt, homophobic, racist dictatorship - but if you also think the trains should be nationalised, the 'left' will can you Comrade.

Just, the fuck?

"That you can call for and support the eradication of a culture, language and polity of 40m people". Can you quote a source for this?

 

[RD2003]

It's necessary, when talking about workplace organising, to remember just how hard it is nowadays, especially in the private sector. For example, Mrs RD has worked for years, on the admin side, for a firm which has the right to join a trade union written into everybody's employment contract, while refusing to recognise unions in practice. Everybody moans about conditions on a daily basis, especially those who work in the warehouse, but whenever a dispute arises none of them will stick their necks out. She doesn't blame them as she understands their predicament. These are people who have to bring up families, run a car, pay for holidays etc etc on a wage way below what the national average is said to be, with new starters and temporary workers paid little more than the minimum wage. And even jobs like that aren't plentiful in the area, especially for somebody who might have been sacked from their previous one for being 'a troublemaker.'

Nobody has ever tried to get colleagues unionised in all the time she's been there. One young woman who got into a dispute with management was a very rare example of somebody who was actually in a union as an individual member, but it counted for nothing in the end and they got rid of her. This is what happens up and down the country now.

When people mention workplace organising these days they're basically talking about the public sector.

 

[Dom Traynor]

It's necessary, when talking about workplace organising, to remember just how hard it is nowadays, especially in the private sector. For example, Mrs RD has worked for years, on the admin side, for a firm which has the right to join a trade union written into everybody's employment contract, while refusing to recognise unions in practice. Everybody moans about conditions on a daily basis, especially those who work in the warehouse, but whenever a dispute arises none of them will stick their necks out. She doesn't blame them as she understands their predicament. These are people who have to bring up families, run a car, pay for holidays etc etc on a wage way below what the national average is said to be, with new starters and temporary workers paid little more than the minimum wage. And even jobs like that aren't plentiful in the area, especially for somebody who might have been sacked from their previous one for being 'a troublemaker.'

Nobody has ever tried to get colleagues unionised in all the time she's been there. One young woman who got into a dispute with management was a very rare example of somebody who was actually in a union as an individual member, but it counted for nothing in the end and they got rid of her. This is what happens up and down the country now.

When people mention workplace organising these days they're basically talking about the public sector.

I predominantly organise in the private sector and it's certainly doable but in this country (not the UK) it's 10% organised so yes it's difficult but there are no short cuts.

 

[Rimbaud]

It's necessary, when talking about workplace organising, to remember just how hard it is nowadays, especially in the private sector. For example, Mrs RD has worked for years, on the admin side, for a firm which has the right to join a trade union written into everybody's employment contract, while refusing to recognise unions in practice. Everybody moans about conditions on a daily basis, especially those who work in the warehouse, but whenever a dispute arises none of them will stick their necks out. She doesn't blame them as she understands their predicament. These are people who have to bring up families, run a car, pay for holidays etc etc on a wage way below what the national average is said to be, with new starters and temporary workers paid little more than the minimum wage. And even jobs like that aren't plentiful in the area, especially for somebody who might have been sacked from their previous one for being 'a troublemaker.'

Nobody has ever tried to get colleagues unionised in all the time she's been there. One young woman who got into a dispute with management was a very rare example of somebody who was actually in a union as an individual member, but it counted for nothing in the end and they got rid of her. This is what happens up and down the country now.

When people mention workplace organising these days they're basically talking about the public sector.

This is the core of it. If by the left we mean socialist, working class politics, then the sad fact is it has been killed off by the decline of organised labour, which has been caused by globalisation. If off-shoring to India is a card that the boss has to play then there is always the possibility that successful organising could simply result in everyone losing their jobs. The threat of capital flight also means that any left government elected has to tread lightly.

 

[hitmouse]

It's necessary, when talking about workplace organising, to remember just how hard it is nowadays, especially in the private sector. For example, Mrs RD has worked for years, on the admin side, for a firm which has the right to join a trade union written into everybody's employment contract, while refusing to recognise unions in practice. Everybody moans about conditions on a daily basis, especially those who work in the warehouse, but whenever a dispute arises none of them will stick their necks out. She doesn't blame them as she understands their predicament. These are people who have to bring up families, run a car, pay for holidays etc etc on a wage way below what the national average is said to be, with new starters and temporary workers paid little more than the minimum wage. And even jobs like that aren't plentiful in the area, especially for somebody who might have been sacked from their previous one for being 'a troublemaker.'

Nobody has ever tried to get colleagues unionised in all the time she's been there. One young woman who got into a dispute with management was a very rare example of somebody who was actually in a union as an individual member, but it counted for nothing in the end and they got rid of her. This is what happens up and down the country now.

When people mention workplace organising these days they're basically talking about the public sector.

Oh yeah, as someone who's spent a fair bit of time working in those kinds of jobs I'm very much aware of that - I think trying to keep union organisation going in the places where it's still recognised is worthwhile, it's what most of my energy goes into, but I'm very aware that it's not what most of the economy looks like. When working at those sorts of places I always had vague dreams/aspirations of getting something going but it turns out that whatever set of skills and traits you need to start organising from scratch in a totally unorganised workplace seems to be beyond me.
But that is also why I think the counter-examples are so important, things like the organising that went on at Deliveroo, the construction rank-and-file, and any attempts at organising at places like Amazon - it's going to be extremely hard and an uphill struggle, but it needs to happen. And without wanting to be too Pollyanna (I suppose someone needs to be the Spongebob to your Squidward?) there's strikes organised through the GMB at both Amazon and Asda sites this month, so there is stuff happening somewhere.