Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

SWP expulsions and squabbles

Nigel Irritable said:
As opposed to your superior strategy, which you will no doubt be able to outline and which you are no doubt currently carrying out, right?

This exchange mostly reminds me of the kind of sneering you sometimes hear from the stupider Left Unity partisans. As if Left Unity actually was a "British SYRIZA" or "British Podemos" or British whatever the flavour of the month currently is, rather than 300 grey haired cranks, burn outs and other associated well meaning flotsam.

Of course an organisation like Left Unity with even less of a future than TUSC may not be what you prefer to counterpose to it. You may instead be one of the people who prefer the IWCA, an organisation which ran out of future entirely some years ago. I'm not going to bother insinuating that you might prefer the Labour left as I don't think you are an idiot.

It's easy to sneer at the English left. Any part of it. It's harder to come up with a plan that stands a reasonable chance of seeing that left become less marginal in the nearish future. Mind you the same could have been said about the Scottish left two years ago (and there's every possibility they could squander their lucky break still).

I'm not a particular adherent of TUSC's approach. It isn't what we do over here, though then again we have better options to choose from. But if they see spending money that they are being given for that purpose only on standing very widely and go into that process understanding that they will get a low vote, I don't think it's really something that should attract the outraged sneering of other lefts. Much of it looks like displaced self loathing from people who themselves don't know what to do.
Click to expand...
oh dear Nige, your defensiveness just shows that you know as well as I do that this is a pointless strategy. It's a waste of your small forces' time, trying to stand in far too many seats just to get a badly made PPB. Far more sensible to concentrate on a few seats where you could actually get a half decent result, the alternative is largely just demoralisation or feeding the ego's of a few people. It's also the pretense that TUSC has a future, whereas, really, everyone can see its time is past up.

Sad, but true, We would be far better mostly sitting this election out, with a few candidates in meaningful seats.
 
belboid said:
oh dear Nige, your defensiveness just shows that you know as well as I do that this is a pointless strategy. It's a waste of your small forces' time, trying to stand in far too many seats just to get a badly made PPB. Far more sensible to concentrate on a few seats where you could actually get a half decent result, the alternative is largely just demoralisation or feeding the ego's of a few people. It's also the pretense that TUSC has a future, whereas, really, everyone can see its time is past up.

Sad, but true, We would be far better mostly sitting this election out, with a few candidates in meaningful seats.
Click to expand...

Well really that's just the IWCA strategy all over again.
 
belboid said:
oh dear Nige, your defensiveness just shows that you know as well as I do that this is a pointless strategy. It's a waste of your small forces' time, trying to stand in far too many seats just to get a badly made PPB. Far more sensible to concentrate on a few seats where you could actually get a half decent result, the alternative is largely just demoralisation or feeding the ego's of a few people. It's also the pretense that TUSC has a future, whereas, really, everyone can see its time is past up.

Sad, but true, We would be far better mostly sitting this election out, with a few candidates in meaningful seats.
Click to expand...

I'm not even slightly defensive about it - I have zero input into the English SP's tactical decisions and the longer it's been since I lived in England the less feel for the situation there I have.

My point wasn't really a response to people putting forward reasoned disagreements with TUSC's priorities while admitting they don't have much notion of a better plan themselves. It was a response to the all too common outraged sneering from people who are partisans of even less promising outfits, like Left Unity, or who at the very least seem to lack the self-awareness to realise that they are not in a position to be either outraged or sneering without looking like a fool or a hypocrite.

As for the "concentrate resources" argument, that's pretty much what the SP used to both argue for and do ten or fifteen years ago. I'm not at all sure that a balance sheet of that experience would make for encouraging reading for all that it seems reasonable in theory. It takes phenomenal amounts of work to say for instance, win a few council seats on that basis, than even more to sustain them and even so a slight national swing that you have no control over can wipe you out in a moment. One of the problems with that particular line of argument is that it's generally put forward as timeless "common sense", but is pretty much never grounded in experience. And unlike most of the people who think that this approach is somehow obvious, the SP has actually tried it. But this is an argument reasonable people can have - sneering bluster of the type Tom Walker and co personify in Left Unity is a different issue.
 
belboid said:
Not really. Carry on campaigning in the way you always have, but just in a targeted manner. By scattering your resources so widely, you'll be sacrificing some good(ish) votes for a lot of poor ones.
Click to expand...
I'm torn on the best electoral tactic - widely or concentrate in a few good areas - given the forces available but I'm not so torn as to get my knickers in the major twist you seem to have got yours into about it. Does it matter that much one way or the other?
- And does it matter that we test it out? Personally I'm not so convinced a broadcast is going to make a huge difference - but I guess it could result in an influx. Any electoral strategy would be useful in carrying on and developing existing campaigns outside of the elections - if the right priority is taken to the actual campaigning.

The underlying strategy - it seems to me - is that that the farce that passes for traditional establishment electoral 'politics' is being increasingly bought into question. Thats reflected in the disenfranchisment of the majority. It is likely to result in some wild swings in a short space of time. Even in the UK - as it already has across europe. To new parties and initiatives - left, right and just plain weird. Look at the situation in Scotland for instance despite the failure of the Yes vote - maybe because of that failure. So putting a possible future left alternative - we argue TUSC - on the map must be one consideration when looking at the tactics.

The level of your bile, belboid - over the last few posts on this thread in your response to the very mention of the word TUSC seems to reflect your dislike of and/or lack of confidence in - rather than any alternative - but it is really directed at the source of our collective problems. You don't half tend to throw your toys out of the pram on occasion fella. There's no need for quite that level of anger - you will give yourself high blood preasure :)

(you try working in farage land where the joke ex-swp left bumble about cheerleading wet liberal politics, shouting 'wacist' and licking the backside of sort of wet labour career candidate who has allow the neundertals to hookwink us - its a feckin shambles and i can feel my blood vessels bursting as i type this :) )
 
Last edited:
J Ed said:
Isn't this the same behaviour (informing on people to the police, violent threats) that the UAF used against leftists in the anti-edl demo in Newcastle in 2013?
Click to expand...

I don't know.

Were those "leftists" organising a demo outside the US embassy without informing the police?

Did the UAF offer them a joint platform and when that was rejected still let them use the UAF PA system?

It seems to me that's what was happening here with SUTR. I could be wrong, maybe LBR will post the correspondence they mention and we can all draw our own conclusions.
 
I went to the Embassy /Ferguson demo at 7pm ish- it was big (considering the short notice), mixed, young and loud - very good all round. In fairness to SUTR and the SWP, they clearly had mobilised people for the demo, and had, as they say, brought the PA, and I think it was pretty much down to them that there was support from some of the Labour figures and I think they helped get some of the other speakers there (I'm saying that because it really annoys me when some of the Labour Party people who wouldn't dream of helping this protest are excited about the criticism of the SWP). However, it also seems to me that, judging on the times people turned up, London Black Revolutionaries had mobilised probably more people : That the SUTR and SWP people do need to be a bit less the "Big I Am" about this kind of event.
 
Scribbling S said:
I went to the Embassy /Ferguson demo at 7pm ish- it was big (considering the short notice), mixed, young and loud - very good all round. In fairness to SUTR and the SWP, they clearly had mobilised people for the demo, and had, as they say, brought the PA, and I think it was pretty much down to them that there was support from some of the Labour figures and I think they helped get some of the other speakers there (I'm saying that because it really annoys me when some of the Labour Party people who wouldn't dream of helping this protest are excited about the criticism of the SWP). However, it also seems to me that, judging on the times people turned up, London Black Revolutionaries had mobilised probably more people : That the SUTR and SWP people do need to be a bit less the "Big I Am" about this kind of event.
Click to expand...
It's typical swappie behaviour, they pulled the same trick on black revs, LAF, D161 and SLAF, over the marksfield park demo, now of course they have every right to call a demo whenever they want, but blatently on these occasions it's to get the drop on a more militant mobilisation, actually last EDL tower hamlets demo they pulled the same shit, although I'll give em the benifit of the doubt that the assembly point was the most logical one in the area, but again they liased with police and announced their demo was to take place at the same time and place as a planned militant demo not liasing with the shades, so make of that what you will!
 
dennisr said:
I'm torn on the best electoral tactic - widely or concentrate in a few good areas - given the forces available but I'm not so torn as to get my knickers in the major twist you seem to have got yours into about it. Does it matter that much one way or the other?
- And does it matter that we test it out? Personally I'm not so convinced a broadcast is going to make a huge difference - but I guess it could result in an influx. Any electoral strategy would be useful in carrying on and developing existing campaigns outside of the elections - if the right priority is taken to the actual campaigning.
Click to expand...

an influx into what? As TUSC doesnt have individual membership (or has that changed?). The whole stand lots and lots of candidates seems to be a simple 'do something' response. Give members something to keep them busy rather than being a serious strategy. Much better to concentrate on things you can actually influence, and can deliver on - which aint electoral politics this time around. What was the average vote for the 500 local election candidates? Under 80 iirr. Depressing shit.
 
on another note...

I saw over the weekend allegations of a complaint of rape being made within Bambery's little lot, that they refused to investigate. Anyone know any more?
 
Spanky Longhorn said:
I don't think anyone is saying it is. I was asking spacklefrog what the strategy behind TUSC is
Click to expand...

Sorry, not been ignoring you, just been very busy. Basically the strategy is "Shit, we need to lay the groundwork for what happens after the election and we need to make sure we we're just about important/known enough that if/when the unions pull support for Labour they can't ignore us if/when they decide to look at an alternative". What we want to do is not necessarily secure decent votes but build some kind of name recognition by meeting the fair coverage threshold, getting on tv and radio as much as we can and making sure people know that when the Labour party lets them down, it was us that said they would.

I never said it was a brilliant strategy - but I do think its the best we can hope to do. Otherwise we'd just be abandoning the elections to the likes of Labour, the Greens and UKIP.
 
belboid said:
wooh yeah! Piss a load more money away for no votes and then wind the useless organisation up! Cracking strategy.

Fucking swappies have promised that they'll stand in my seat, despite their moron of a candidates vote collapsing at the last local election. Hopefully their conference will decide its time to pull out.
Click to expand...

And do what instead? You know they'll just revert to "Vote for anyone to keep out UKIP".

They actually might do this - part of me hopes they will.
 
frogwoman said:
To be honest I am not sure that having a majority female leadership can safeguard against such practices either tbh. Women can be just as invested in covering up for the party as men
Click to expand...
Yep, in the original SWP case the majority of the Disputes committee where women.
 
Good piece from Ian Birchall. Haven't finished all 12,000 words yet, but there are some very interesting points made - not least that SW has not made a single solitary mention of the Ched Evans case. nor of the Pistorius trial. Almost as if they were afraid of something.
 
belboid said:
Good piece from Ian Birchall. Haven't finished all 12,000 words yet, but there are some very interesting points made - not least that SW has not made a single solitary mention of the Ched Evans case. nor of the Pistorius trial. Almost as if they were afraid of something.
Click to expand...
This lept out at me whilst skimming:

It is a statement [from 1972 he think - ba] that has always stayed with me and helped me not to identify the long-term struggle too closely with any particular organisational manifestation.
Click to expand...

That's simply not true of your behaviour pre-2013 Ian - in fact for for the 4 decades from 72 on.
 
"Charlie disagreed with others on the left who wanted to stand everywhere. “Votes do matter,” he said."

But then goes to support TUSC, who.....want to stand everywhere. And get hardly any votes.
 
belboid said:
"Charlie disagreed with others on the left who wanted to stand everywhere. “Votes do matter,” he said."

But then goes to support TUSC, who.....want to stand everywhere. And get hardly any votes.
Click to expand...

What they mean is they won't stand widely.

Incidentally Belboid, did you know the CPB are standing in Central.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ElizabethofYork
Men’s violence against women and girls is a national emergency
34 35 36 37 38
Replies
1K
Views
44K
The39thStep
The39thStep
Smokeandsteam
Facebook: Australia content ban, SWP removal and related news
2 3 4
Replies
115
Views
8K
NoXion
NoXion
S
Tory songs and bands
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
210
Views
10K
Wilf
Wilf
W
all these “So and so’s time is up” threads.
2 3
Replies
89
Views
4K
wow
W
J
To save the UK economy this is what Sunak and Hunt should be doing
Replies
18
Views
1K
bimble
bimble
Back
Top Bottom