What is the best way to combat a populist right victory in next GE?

[littlebabyjesus]

Actually FPTP is a weakness for the establishment. With turnouts plummeting and a lot of places where the majority of people feel betrayed by the established parties it is far easier to win surprise election results with "maverick candidates" than it would be with any form of PR. The important thing is to just have one left anti-establishment candidate in each seat. Of course that may not be possible. In some places we managed it at the last general election, but in many others we very much didn't.

Nah I don't see that. The UK system gives big majorities to parties with barely 1/3 of the vote. Historically, since the uk has had universal suffrage, the only two national parties to consistently take more seats than their vote share have been the Tories and Labour. Regional parties and the occasional individuals have won, but that duopoly has never been seriously challenged.

Doesn't mean it can't ever be challenged, but history is not on our side.

The last election saw one single issue - gaza - cost Labour a few seats. But it was marginal, and even there, if you add up the votes for explicitly pro-palestine candidates, you will probably see an under-representation.

 

[emanymton]

I think one of the good things about the broader radical left being in such a weak position currently is that much of what we need to do is pretty much the same no matter our broader position on elections/the end goals/etc. And that is to build class and community power where we live and work, and that will take slightly different forms depending on where we are.

TBH I think arguably the logical and understandable position is to give up and turn into some kind of prepper, or maybe to work for very limited goals (wilderness defence, worker/housing rights) will no hope or goal of wider change.

Thing is, I'm not sure how much of the radical left really recognises that weakness.

But limited goals really is what we need right now. If things are going to shift big it will happen on its own, the left cannot and never could make it happen.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

I think one of the good things about the broader radical left being in such a weak position currently is that much of what we need to do is pretty much the same no matter our broader position on elections/the end goals/etc. And that is to build class and community power where we live and work, and that will take slightly different forms depending on where we are.

I know you know this LDC, but - given the balance of forces, the saturation of neo-liberalism into every sphere and facet of life, the concomitant collapse of social solidarity and community, the death throes of trade unionism outside of the public sector and in the new precarious economy etc etc - this has been the task, the only real task, for the left for the last 30 years.

It is a task, which on any metric, that the left has failed spectacularly. The failure has certainly been due a spectacular lack of effort generally speaking, but it's also due to a lack of focus and (off the top of the head) some/most of the left instead being focused at one point or another on Labourism/Corbynism, fighting culture wars, "stopping" wars and a general shift away from the shop floor/street towards online activism.

In some cases, the failure isn’t due to laziness or diversion into other activity but due to actual hostility to the idea of shop floor/community work. For example, some of us involved in and supporting work to build community power 20 years ago were attacked by some on own side and subject to sneers about providing "running clubs".

I hope that you are right. That the inevitable ascent of right populism is a 'ground zero' moment that produces a new focus and agglomeration of resources on where we live and work, on the basis that at that point these are the places where we can have the greatest influence and where we offer some resource to allow workers and communities to think about how they can protect themselves and assert demands on the bosses/the local authority/the state/whatever.

However, speaking from personal experience this won't be achieved through an 'Enough is Enough' style top-down movement. Its also not going to emerge from what passes from the left merging/collaborating because we all know what happened the last million times this was tried. Maybe we have reached the point where we have to recognise that it can only happen if it happens organically, in a genuinely bottom up way, or not at all?

TBH I think arguably the logical and understandable position is to give up and turn into some kind of prepper, or maybe to work for very limited goals (wilderness defence, worker/housing rights) will no hope or goal of wider change.

Agree with all of that. But, being honest, I'll be pleased if there is a focus on those type of limited goals - because in some cases they'll produce better, more tangible, results than more macro interventions and campaigns that merely further reveal weakneses and incoherence.

 

[Pickman's model]

tbh the greatest failing of the left is the desire of some larger organisations on the left to identify the entire wing with them, and their failings then go on to tar the entire movement. i've never really seen the same thing on the right - even in their 2000s heyday the bnp never said they were the right to the extent the swp have sought to project themselves as the left. and the political communication of many left groups makes it appear that jamie reid's sex pistols artwork remains the political standard, as though 47 years hadn't passed and it remained new and fresh.

islamists and fascists have done rather more and rather better with the internet than left-wing organisations.

 

[hitmouse]

And elections are the time when the majority of people consciously engage with politics it is a mistake to disengage at that point.

I mean, this is a bit of a cliched anarchism 101 point, but I think the definition of "politics" here is an important question, I feel like the more we see "politics" as being about elections and not about how much people get paid, how much they pay in rent, how much they pay for groceries and bills, etc etc etc, the more we're likely to keep losing.

 

[emanymton]

I mean, this is a bit of a cliched anarchism 101 point, but I think the definition of "politics" here is an important question, I feel like the more we see "politics" as being about elections and not about how much people get paid, how much they pay in rent, how much they pay for groceries and bills, etc etc etc, the more we're likely to keep losing.

Which is what I meant by consciously engage, those are political issues but there are not perceived as such in people's day to day life's.

 

[inva]

I mean, this is a bit of a cliched anarchism 101 point, but I think the definition of "politics" here is an important question, I feel like the more we see "politics" as being about elections and not about how much people get paid, how much they pay in rent, how much they pay for groceries and bills, etc etc etc, the more we're likely to keep losing.

Don't know if I'd be consulting anarchism 101 for winning strategies mind you.

 

[Eivets Rednow]

tbh the greatest failing of the left is the desire of some larger organisations on the left to identify the entire wing with them, and their failings then go on to tar the entire movement. i've never really seen the same thing on the right - even in their 2000s heyday the bnp never said they were the right to the extent the swp have sought to project themselves as the left. and the political communication of many left groups makes it appear that jamie reid's sex pistols artwork remains the political standard, as though 47 years hadn't passed and it remained new and fresh.

islamists and fascists have done rather more and rather better with the internet than left-wing organisations.

I’ve been following internet news channels as they offer insightful conversations about topics that relate to my life and interests and have noticed their branding has certainly moved on from what you describe, and these news channels are certainly left. So, I think things may be moving on. I perceive this as a recent development.

 

[LDC]

However, speaking from personal experience this won't be achieved through an 'Enough is Enough' style top-down movement. Its also not going to emerge from what passes from the left merging/collaborating because we all know what happened the last million times this was tried. Maybe we have reached the point where we have to recognise that it can only happen if it happens organically, in a genuinely bottom up way, or not at all?

I think there's some interesting and potentially useful stuff around this 'bottom-up/grassroots' dynamic (I'm quite wary of those terms though...) to do with what has happened in parts of Turkey and NE Syria. The movement around TevDem/KCK/PYD in Syria etc. had a plan (from what I understand) that didn't prioritise 'bottom-up' organising as such, but accepted there were some political militants, and started with them working in 'the middle' (as it were) establishing committees, neighbourhoods, etc. with a broader political outlook and goals, and then worked 'down' towards smaller areas/workplaces and 'up' towards more regional/national structures. It avoided the problem of getting stuck in very localised issues with no power to fix them beyond appeals to those in power. They were also very clear of having the power (militarily in this case) to defend any gains made as a primary step, and without that they were doomed to fail.

(I mean there's a complicated dynamic that what held/holds lots of that together was varieties of Kurdish nationalism, despite attempts to move beyond that, and that the Syrian uprisings & civil war gave them the space to enact much more than they would be have been able to otherwise.)