The Slow Fix - IWCA on the rise of UKIP and decline of the left...

[mk12]

Maybe you should just face up to the logic of your apparent reactionery politics and join UKIP, mate .They also I believe have a "refreshing" take on issues like immigration, multiculturalism, Muslims, and a host of other issues the IWCA was also concerned about. And they seem to be mining the ignorance and prejudice widespread amongst the capitalist media indoctrinated "ordinary folk" very successfully at the moment - unlike the completely failed IWCA project.

This is a very interesting, and telling, post. It sums up a lot of the far-left's assumptions of "ordinary working people's views". The reactionary, backwards working class who are "indoctrinated" by the media whose ideas are far behind those of the advanced socialists, like yourself.

This is what the IWCA are against and which, in my opinion, should be commended for.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

1/ whichever the bosses choose to implement at the moment is for THEIR benefit.

2/ come the day we have enough power/influence to decide border and immigration policy we'll have enough power/influence to make it irrelevant.

Therefor there is absolutely no fucking need and no fucking point in advocating or opposing either at this point.

What we should be doing is constantly pointing out how the bosses are using this and undercutting their divide and rule by fighting for jobs, wages and working conditions...and keeping the debate there. Dragging it back every time immigration s flaunted as an easy target.

True that, it's like lefties on the internet 'debating' what the best solution to Palestine/Israel is: one state or two!!1!

 

[Red Storm]

I'm sure No2EU advocated a immigration limit. Immigration to be controlled by trade unions was how one SP Manchester full timer explained it to me.

I think it's a shame that all issues can not be discussed without a knee-jerk, Laurie Penny-esque reaction of "racist".

The traditional far-left has stuck to the same old tired slogans and its not done them much good. At least the IWCA has the balls to re-think, in class terms, these ideas and put them in the modern world. Instead the SP, SWP and the rest are doing what they've been doing for the past 50 years and are controlled by the same clique of dinosaurs; no wonder they've never changed their methods.

I do agree the IWCA is too localist for my liking but at least it's bring class politics to ordinary working class people and dealing with every day problems of these people. Rather than demanding they buy a paper and overthrow international capitalism before leaving never to be seen again (or until the next local election). The IWCA has put in the graft (apparently a bad thing according to some) and put down the roots. In doing so it's achieved real mateial benefit to the lives of working clas people.

This is the pure basics of class politics. And I think we're at this stage in the UK. Instead the traditional far-left are still parading around like its 1969 or 1984. The far left needs to make its self relevant and it's programme relevant to the lies of working class people.

Back to basics!

Regarding the article. I am myself dubious of UKIPs foreseen success. I don't think it adds up on the ground. And on the IWCA's recent decline I think a candid article would befit the organisation. Although I find it laughable that others call for it without calling for a report on the SWPs decline or the SPs from Militant.

On the IWCAs name, at least it has two words people can relate to instantly: working class. Although I think Working Class Action would be better . I believe former Red Action members used this name in Dublin for a time, where one is now a councillor.

 

[DotCommunist]

True that, it's like lefties on the internet 'debating' what the best solution to Palestine/Israel is: one state or two!!1!

its two

 

[The39thStep]

Illustrative of why the left can only speak to the left.

 

[belboid]

Illustrative of why the left can only speak to the left.

sadly, i think it's illustrative of what happens when you try and play clever buggers with policies on immigration - you rapidly get yourself tied up in knots.

Anyway, I have pasta to make. A much more productive way to spend the rest of the afternoon

 

[Jeff Robinson]

its two

ziyonist!!!1!

 

[sihhi]

Therefor there is absolutely no fucking need and no fucking point in advocating or opposing either at this point.

I agree with you, but the far-right, normal right and centre left are going to attack the far left on it whether the far left likes it or not.
I still don't know how to defuse the issue - once you are being pressed if you stick to 'no position' then that is imposed into your being open borders - whether desired or not.
Rock and a hard place.

 

[chilango]

I agree with you, but the far-right, normal right and centre left are going to attack the far left on it whether the far left likes it or not.
I still don't know how to defuse the issue - once you are being pressed if you stick to 'no position' then that is imposed into your being open borders - whether desired or not.
Rock and a hard place.

Yup, that's why we've got to keep trying to shift the emphasis of the debate. Little by little.

 

[framed]

I've just re-read through all your posts on this thread, and no you haven't.

It's been answered. Perhaps not in the way you would like, but I reject the simplistic parameters of your either/or question.

 

[cesare]

I agree with you, but the far-right, normal right and centre left are going to attack the far left on it whether the far left likes it or not.
I still don't know how to defuse the issue - once you are being pressed if you stick to 'no position' then that is imposed into your being open borders - whether desired or not.
Rock and a hard place.

There's a normal left too, I guess? Which of the political groupings are most representative of that, in your opinion?
Edit, or is that what you mean by centre left?

 

[sihhi]

There's a normal left too, I guess? Which of the political groupings are most representative of that, in your opinion?

meaning the acceptable left: Labour and Greens who work around an explicitly national perspective.

 

[cesare]

meaning the acceptable left: Labour and Greens who work around an explicitly national perspective.

Ah, ok gotcha. I've given up thinking that Labour are left of centre though, and the Greens are a bit like Occupy in that they're a natural arbour (did you see what I did there) for some very right wing environmentalists. It was an aside anyway, sorry for derail.

 

[belboid]

I reject the simplistic parameters of your either/or question.

Wow. Just, wow. I bet that goes down well on the doorstep

 

[framed]

Wow. Just, wow. I bet that goes down well on the doorstep

You spent the afternoon attempting to elicit a response from me that would allow you to shout 'RACIST!'

You failed. Time well spent?

Happy door knocking.

 

[belboid]

You spent the afternoon attempting to elicit a response from me that would allow you to shout 'RACIST!'

You failed. Time well spent?

Happy door knocking.

I haven't made any attempt to trap you into anything. I've tried to get you to state your opinions openly, opinions which may (or may not) be reactionary but not racist. Sadly, you always ran away, refused to answer, and refused to draw the conclusions that follow from the partial views you could bring yourself to state.

Good luck with talking shite on the internet.

 

[framed]

I haven't made any attempt to trap you into anything. I've tried to get you to state your opinions openly, opinions which may (or may not) be reactionary but not racist. Sadly, you always ran away, refused to answer, and refused to draw the conclusions that follow from the partial views you could bring yourself to state.

Good luck with talking shite on the internet.

'REACTIONARY', 'RACIST'... yeah, whatever.

You've played the same hand all day. Try a new deck of cards.

I'll leave the distinction of 'talking shite on the internet' to you Mr Transparently Obvious.

Toodle Pip... Bellend.

 

[belboid]

At least I played a hand, you've hidden yours.

Good luck in the playground tomorrow.

 

[framed]

At least I played a hand, you've hidden yours.

Good luck in the playground tomorrow.

 

[sunnysidedown]

Quite right.

Quite right? if anything that post you quoted points out the simplicity and futility of your binary trot bollocks.

 

[cogg]

Quite right? if anything that post you quoted points out the simplicity and futility of your binary trot bollocks.

''binary trot bollocks". I like that phrase. Nice summing up of their politics.

 

[belboid]

It's meaningless shite coggster, sounds good, says nothing.

Come omn tho, at least you might be able to do a decent job of defending this rather poor IWCA article, not like those couple of useless tossers and their 'simplistic parameters'

 

[framed]

It's meaningless shite coggster, sounds good, says nothing.

Come omn tho, at least you might be able to do a decent job of defending this rather poor IWCA article, not like those couple of useless tossers and their 'simplistic parameters'

The author of the article is on Urban, if he sees the need to defend his article from your incisive political criticism (aka 'shite) I'm sure he will rise to the challenge.

Haven't you got a pasta thread to contribute your 'shite' to?

You're still the only Trot tossing yourself off here today Bellend.

Which particular political outfit is it that you're a member of again? Please remind us...

<image snipped - ffs - FM>

Bellend - "Useless Tosser"

 

[Joe Reilly]

It's meaningless shite coggster, sounds good, says nothing.

Come omn tho, at least you might be able to do a decent job of defending this rather poor IWCA article, not like those couple of useless tossers and their 'simplistic parameters'

Why qualify it with a 'rather'? When 'piss poor' has a far better ring to it. Or better still 'piss poor Strasserite' is even more affirmative.
Why hold back.
Go for it!

 

[belboid]

framed I was trying to engage with the grown up on the thread. you shot your load last night, no need to keep on at it, failure.

 

[belboid]

Why qualify it with a 'rather'? When 'piss poor' has a far better ring to it. Or better still 'piss poor Strasserite' is even more affirmative.
Why hold back.
Go for it!

cos it makes a couple of good, if belated, points on the fall of the BNP. Its not complete rubbish by any means, but its: mainly old, and grossly overestimates the influence of UKIP amongst the working class.

 

[articul8]

I'm glad I'm not at work given the above

 

[framed]

framed I was trying to engage with the grown up on the thread. you shot your load last night, no need to keep on at it, failure.

The failure was in your pathetic attempts to label people as racists and reactionaries.

The author of the article is on Urban, if he sees the need to defend his article from your incisive political criticism (aka 'shite) I'm sure he will rise to the challenge.

 

[belboid]

The failure was in your pathetic attempts to label people as racists and reactionaries.

The author of the article is on Urban, if he sees the need to defend his article from your incisive political criticism (aka 'shite) I'm sure he will rise to the challenge.

I haven't tried to label anyone a racist, do try to stop making things up.

And I imagine and hope that Joe will do a rather better job of it than you managed, tho that wouldnt be difficult.

 

[Joe Reilly]

cos it makes a couple of good, if belated, points on the fall of the BNP. Its not complete rubbish by any means, but its: mainly old, and grossly overestimates the influence of UKIP amongst the working class.

'belated', 'mainly old' - compared to?

As for 'gross over estimates' - surely that point is yet to proved one way or the other?