Strike!

[articul8]

People want to save the NHS. Aside from a few dozen anarchoid lefts they would also prefer to watch the 100m sprint final than Len and his mates stood round a brazier. This much I know.

 

[butchersapron]

Looking at that, I find it difficult to see what else he could have said in reply. Avoiding the questions would have made him look shit and dishonest.

...and that's the labour parties job.

 

[frogwoman]

a good amount of people who aren't remotely left wing and don't give a fuck about politics don't want the olympics. i like the olympics, and i hope they go well, but saying there should be no strikes ffs. how is that not playing into their hands?

 

[belboid]

People want to save the NHS. Aside from a few dozen anarchoid lefts they would also prefer to watch the 100m sprint final than Len and his mates stood round a brazier. This much I know.

fucks sake, stop copying drivel from the Daily Mail. The stupidity of that post makes me think you've accepted you've lost the argument

 

[butchersapron]

People want to save the NHS. Aside from a few dozen anarchoid lefts they would also prefer to watch the 100m sprint final than Len and his mates stood round a brazier. This much I know.

Then you know very little ( as saying 100m sprint final demonstrates - anyone having a bet on the grand national hunt steeplechase this year?)

 

[Lo Siento.]

Speaking for "most people", eh?

Going on the small sample of people I've actually spoken to (from all points of the compass) about the Olympics, the attitude to both the games and their legacy (such as it is) appears to represent a big "so what?", especially outside of the metropolis. I reckon you're mistaking the fuzzy sensation in the loins of your fellow members of the political classes with actual popular sentiment.

It's yet another case of mistaking the media/political class echo chamber for "public opinion" more generally. Effective trade unionists are never going to be popular with the elite, so they should stop worrying about it and get on with looking after their members.

 

[articul8]

The point was the threat.

You never think something is well timed or well judged because you have an agenda based on the labour parties interests and identifying that with fear of offending the media that you're employed to attack.

On the contrary I think that the anti-workfare protests are very well judged, despite being opposed by the Labour party leadership who stupidly believe that the general public want highly profitable companies to benefit from the unemployed being forced to work for no pay.

 

[articul8]

Then you know very little ( as saying 100m sprint final demonstrates)

why? what's wrong with saying 100m sprint final - I should have added "mens'"?

 

[belboid]

Does a "good way" actually exist?

well, they could try being a principled and effective opposition to the government with a plan for defending peoples living standards, but I guess that's more of a pipe dream than me winning the womens hammer

 

[revol68]

What McLuskey actually said:

Q: One of the comments I got on the blog I posted inviting readers to suggest questions was about strike action during the Olympics. [It was from Imageark.] Is that something you have talked about?
A: Absolutely, yes. The attacks that are being launched on public-sector workers at the moment are so deep and ideological that the idea the world should arrive in London and have these wonderful Olympic Games as though everything is nice and rosy in the garden is unthinkable. Our very way of life is being attacked. By then this crazy Health and Social Care Bill may have been passed. So we are looking at the privatisation of our National Health Service. I believe the unions, and the general community, have got every right to be out protesting. If the Olympics provide us with an opportunity, then that's exactly one that we should be looking at.
Q: Where could your members disrupt the Olympics? Have you got as far as thinking about that?
A: Not in the specifics, although, moving away from the public sector for a moment, our London bus members are desperately engaged in a battle to bring some stability into what is a crucial lifeline within this fantastic capital city of ours and they are not making progress – not being helped, of course, by the mayor, who seems oblivious to the wishes of ordinary working people. So they will be examining what leverage points we have, and the Olympics will clearly come into play.
Now nobody has made any decisions yet and, of course, it would be nice if we were able not to disrupt such a prestigious event as the Olympics. But by the same token. people have to understand that we are fighting for our heritage here. Our parents and our grandparents, having defeated fascism in Europe, came back determined to build a land fit for heroes. They gave us the welfare state, the National Health Service, universal education. All of that is being attacked. I, for one, am not prepared to stand by and have my children or grandchildren say to me: "What did you do when this was being taken away from us?" When you say what can we do, and the likes of the Olympics, I'm calling upon the general public to engage in civil disobedience.
Q: What do you mean by that?
A: All forms of civil disobedience, within the law.
Q: Are you specifically talking about the Olympics? Or are you making a general point?
A: I'm making a general point. But you raise the Olympics because it's a focal point. And if there is a protest, then the purpose of protest is to bring your grievances to the attention of as many people as possible.

Looking at that, I find it difficult to see what else he could have said in reply. Avoiding the questions would have made him look shit and dishonest.

But but but.... won't somebody think of Miliband?!

 

[butchersapron]

On the contrary I think that the anti-workfare protests are very well judged, despite being opposed by the Labour party leadership who stupidly believe that the general public want highly profitable companies to benefit from the unemployed being forced to work for no pay.

But if LM called for disruption during the olympics to bolster the anti-workfare fight he'd be wrong.

 

[butchersapron]

why? what's wrong with saying 100m sprint final - I should have added "mens'"?

No you should have said 100m. It demonstrates that you're not within the culture that you're confidently talking - wrongly in a number of ways - on behalf of.

 

[DotCommunist]

the adnoidal, sacless excuse of a man

 

[chilango]

People want to save the NHS. Aside from a few dozen anarchoid lefts they would also prefer to watch the 100m sprint final than Len and his mates stood round a brazier. This much I know.

 

[Balbi]

It's nice to see that my union's planning to go out in 28 days or so, I just wish they'd told me.

 

[articul8]

But if LM called for disruption during the olympics to bolster the anti-workfare fight he'd be wrong.

if he said it now, yes. Why bring that in at this stage? It's like him saying he's in favour of decapitating the Queen. Am I opposed on a philosophical level? No. Do I think it's a tactically savvy move. No.

 

[ViolentPanda]

It's yet another case of mistaking the media/political class echo chamber for "public opinion" more generally. Effective trade unionists are never going to be popular with the elite, so they should stop worrying about it and get on with looking after their members.

Abso-fucking-lutely. Activism isn't about feather-bedding the position of such people, it's about seeking (and hopefully finding) a better deal, and maybe a better ideal. The media and the political classes only matter insofar as we wish or want them to matter, otherwise they can get away to fuck.

 

[articul8]

No you should have said 100m. It demonstrates that you're not within the culture that you're confidently talking - wrongly in a number of ways - on behalf of.

No it shows you're being a pedantic cunt.

 

[belboid]

if he said it now, yes. Why bring that in at this stage? It's like him saying he's in favour of decapitating the Queen. Am I opposed on a philosophical level? No. Do I think it's a tactically savvy move. No.

Why bring it in? Because, in an interview with questions set by members of the public, he was asked the question. What, specifically are you disagreeing with in his above answers? Not in the DM version of them, not the tory headlines, but with what he actually said?

 

[ViolentPanda]

well, they could try being a principled and effective opposition to the government with a plan for defending peoples living standards, but I guess that's more of a pipe dream than me winning the womens hammer

It's a pipe dream alright, and not from a tobacco pipe, either.

 

[butchersapron]

if he said it now, yes. Why bring that in at this stage? It's like him saying he's in favour of decapitating the Queen. Am I opposed on a philosophical level? No. Do I think it's a tactically savvy move. No.

It's not like that in the slightest. So you'd support his calls for action during the olympics that were in support of anti-workfare actions (a move similar to calling decapitating the queen apparently) but not a call for action in support of his members, their pensions or the NHS. You are, as ever when real politics rears its head, all over the shop.

 

[articul8]

a good amount of people who aren't remotely left wing and don't give a fuck about politics don't want the olympics. i like the olympics, and i hope they go well, but saying there should be no strikes ffs. how is that not playing into their hands?

I haven't said that. I haven't said Len Mc should have said that. I've said in answering like that *at this stage* he's let Cameron of the hook - he'd have been better to stick to skewering them on the Health Bill or Workfare, and left open the question of what might or might not be decided months hence.

 

[ViolentPanda]

But but but.... won't somebody think of Miliband?!

I just did, while I was taking a shit.

 

[belboid]

I haven't said that. I haven't said Len Mc should have said that. I've said in answering like that *at this stage* he's let Cameron of the hook - he'd have been better to stick to skewering them on the Health Bill or Workfare, and left open the question of what might or might not be decided months hence.

well, if he does actually want a strike during the Olympics, he better start talking about it now or it will fall foul of balloting laws!

 

[articul8]

It's not like that in the slightest. So you'd support his calls for action during the olympics that were in support of anti-workfare actions (a move similar to calling decapitating the queen apparently) but not a call for action in support of his members, their pensions or the NHS. You are, as ever when real politics rears its head, all over the shop.

No, I'd support him calling for civil disobedience around workfare right now. Why bring the fucking Olympics into it at this stage? - (I can see why Cameron and the bourgeois media would want to - but union leaders shouldn't get into that game until they're seriously trying to mobilise for that. It's empty self-defeating posturing.)

 

[butchersapron]

I haven't said that. I haven't said Len Mc should have said that. I've said in answering like that *at this stage* he's let Cameron of the hook - he'd have been better to stick to skewering them on the Health Bill or Workfare, and left open the question of what might or might not be decided months hence.

Why? I asked you why earlier after you offered some fantasy about militants and soppies going their separate ways as a result of the SHOCKING tory reaction to a union leaders interview. No answer yet.

 

[butchersapron]

No, I'd support him calling for civil disobedience around workfare right now. Why bring the fucking Olympics into it at that stage - I can see why Cameron and the bourgeois media would want to - but union leaders shouldn't get into that game until they're seriously trying to mobilise for that. It's empty self-defeating posturing,

He didn't - have you still not read the interview? belboid even posted up the relevant parts to make it easy for you.

And of course there's posturing - posturing is a weapon btw - but that's not your grounds for disagreeing with him.

 

[revol68]

I haven't said that. I haven't said Len Mc should have said that. I've said in answering like that *at this stage* he's let Cameron of the hook - he'd have been better to stick to skewering them on the Health Bill or Workfare, and left open the question of what might or might not be decided months hence.

so your problem is that he directly answered a question put to him?

you really have been hanging round with a bad crowd.

my problem is that I think it's posturing, that it's a hollow threat.

 

[Balbi]

Why? I asked you why earlier after you offered some fantasy about militants and soppies going their separate ways as a result of the SHOCKING tory reaction to a union leaders interview. No answer yet.

That was me wasn't it? And I said it was just speculation, so yeah - a potentially negative scenario. I save my fantasies for lamp posts and Employment Ministers.

 

[articul8]

Why? I asked you why earlier after you offered some fantasy about militants and soppies going their separate ways as a result of the SHOCKING tory reaction to a union leaders interview. No answer yet.

Are you seriously telling me that there aren't any people who think the NHS should be saved but are actually quite looking forward to the Olympics and don't think the two things are, or ought to be, related to each other?