There has been a lot of talk from new union leaders about reviewing the link with Labour and taking back the Party. Assuming that they are all telling porkies and really just want to keep paying downpayments on their knighthoods with our money, the more disturbing fact is this:
A lot of people I know have also re-joined the Party recently with a view to re-capturing it from the inside. Apart from the fact that some of these people denounced the Militant in the eighties for similar entryism, I wonder what their plan actually is?
From asking some of them, their plan seems to amount to sitting at home and sending money each month to Tony Blair - that will get him shaking in his boots. The question is - Is the Party democratic enough these days for any change in policy or direction to be pulled off internally? Or is the cumulative effect of all those Polciy Forums to ensure that the members are just there for doorstep fodder?
Discuss
Full Version: Taking Back The The Labour Party?
I think it's safe to assume that certain members of the self styled awkward squad will turn out to be nothing more than bags of wind but to their credit they have helped start the debate about "winning back" the Labour Party.
On that point, clearly to win it you need to be in it. Far from finding it "disturbing" that a number of socialists (including some contributors to this forum) have re-joined I think it's quite positive. It shows a willingness to roll up the sleeves and get stuck in. Any individual who goes back to a party they were either expelled from or left on principal isn't doing it to sit on their arse or become doorstep fodder. Surely it's far better that they are doing something rather than nothing?
For the traditional voice to be heard it will take a degree of co-ordination which I think is still possible even in the less than democratic structure the Labour Party has now. The next 18 months or so will give a clear indication of the direction the Labour Party is going to take.
I'm not overly optimistic about our chances though. This debate has come about due to the weakness of the left and not its strength. As discussed elsewhere in this thread there isn't a viable socialist alternative outside the Labour Party.
On that point, clearly to win it you need to be in it. Far from finding it "disturbing" that a number of socialists (including some contributors to this forum) have re-joined I think it's quite positive. It shows a willingness to roll up the sleeves and get stuck in. Any individual who goes back to a party they were either expelled from or left on principal isn't doing it to sit on their arse or become doorstep fodder. Surely it's far better that they are doing something rather than nothing?
For the traditional voice to be heard it will take a degree of co-ordination which I think is still possible even in the less than democratic structure the Labour Party has now. The next 18 months or so will give a clear indication of the direction the Labour Party is going to take.
I'm not overly optimistic about our chances though. This debate has come about due to the weakness of the left and not its strength. As discussed elsewhere in this thread there isn't a viable socialist alternative outside the Labour Party.
Arise ye wimpo's from depression ... (Addressed to me and my moody silence - in case you think I am being rude to my comrades ... )
Just heard a news snippet that St Blair has been exonerated by his nasty Parliamentary Committee over whinging criticisms that he misled our glorious country into a war against the Johnny Foreigners in Iraq. Apparently it was all totally justified. Well, that's ok then!
Yes it is much wind and blowing that keeps the british trade union movement steering it's true course of revolutionary compromise with the ruling class. But and I feel it is a big but, there is a little frigging in the rigging at the moment (which may well be the last choking cries of our dying working class albatross) but these windbags are challenging the public schoolboys who pinched the Labour Party. And they are making threats that may have some clout with some of the boys at the top which may result in a change of direction eventually. (Which true revolutionaries would see as a vehicle to build on ...)
Naw, I don't really think so ... Just look at what they did to the poor buggers in Iraq and you see how huge the task is ... these people will destroy the world before they change direction.
... the change of direction will only come about from us at the bottom sucessfully re-organising our poor debilitated class once more and re creating a political movement that is working class, socialist and revolutionary and willing to fight. Not follow some mish mash petty bourgeoise liberal minded pro capitalist political movement that wrongly believes it can change the world with smart words, a law degree and arsehole crawling policies. By all means we should support a movement, however windy, that is attempting to retake the Labour Party and put it back on the road to Democratic Socialism. But regaining the road to Socialism is not just about changing the political direction of the Labour Party. For instance, who is going to support it if we achieve a change?
Windily pronouncing what we should be doing is what us armchair socialists are good at, but we have to begin taking action if we want to begin the long struggle back to supporting a working class that demands education, healthcare and a safe roof over our heads for all. The depressing portrayal of our British working class as apathetic, scapegoat seeking, illiterate, drug dependent, hedonistic, brutish seekers of pleasure in mediterranean booze resorts is frightening but has more than a grain of truth in it. Capitalist recession, Thatcher and Blair have all contributed to casting us down. How can this once proud class of industrial workers and craftsmen who no longer have an industry or a craft begin to feel pride in themselves and seek progress again?
What action can we take to persuade them that they should?
Just heard a news snippet that St Blair has been exonerated by his nasty Parliamentary Committee over whinging criticisms that he misled our glorious country into a war against the Johnny Foreigners in Iraq. Apparently it was all totally justified. Well, that's ok then!
Yes it is much wind and blowing that keeps the british trade union movement steering it's true course of revolutionary compromise with the ruling class. But and I feel it is a big but, there is a little frigging in the rigging at the moment (which may well be the last choking cries of our dying working class albatross) but these windbags are challenging the public schoolboys who pinched the Labour Party. And they are making threats that may have some clout with some of the boys at the top which may result in a change of direction eventually. (Which true revolutionaries would see as a vehicle to build on ...)
Naw, I don't really think so ... Just look at what they did to the poor buggers in Iraq and you see how huge the task is ... these people will destroy the world before they change direction.
... the change of direction will only come about from us at the bottom sucessfully re-organising our poor debilitated class once more and re creating a political movement that is working class, socialist and revolutionary and willing to fight. Not follow some mish mash petty bourgeoise liberal minded pro capitalist political movement that wrongly believes it can change the world with smart words, a law degree and arsehole crawling policies. By all means we should support a movement, however windy, that is attempting to retake the Labour Party and put it back on the road to Democratic Socialism. But regaining the road to Socialism is not just about changing the political direction of the Labour Party. For instance, who is going to support it if we achieve a change?
Windily pronouncing what we should be doing is what us armchair socialists are good at, but we have to begin taking action if we want to begin the long struggle back to supporting a working class that demands education, healthcare and a safe roof over our heads for all. The depressing portrayal of our British working class as apathetic, scapegoat seeking, illiterate, drug dependent, hedonistic, brutish seekers of pleasure in mediterranean booze resorts is frightening but has more than a grain of truth in it. Capitalist recession, Thatcher and Blair have all contributed to casting us down. How can this once proud class of industrial workers and craftsmen who no longer have an industry or a craft begin to feel pride in themselves and seek progress again?
What action can we take to persuade them that they should?
Yes, agreed, but.......
Has anyone heard what the plan actually is? Good socialists have re-joined the party "to take it back" and are busily engaged doing nothing much as far as I can see - which is a terrible conceit and just looks like defeat dressed up as high principle to me.
This is partly because there is no real way to change policy anymore - with many local parties not taking motions or not sending them on if they are passed. Some have said it is about de-selecting wayward MPs but again there seems to be no co-ordinated plan to do this. It also sems to e to be repeating the old mistakes of thinking that its MPs personalities and not their polictics that count. ie this person is a Brownite not a Blairite therefore they are on "our team" therefore we will support them. But taking back The Labour Party is not a football match.
The biggest political question at the moment is whether the Labour Party is savable or whether we should put our energies into constructing a new Party to offer independent representation for working people. We should possibly hedge our bets and try for both?
Has anyone heard what the plan actually is? Good socialists have re-joined the party "to take it back" and are busily engaged doing nothing much as far as I can see - which is a terrible conceit and just looks like defeat dressed up as high principle to me.
This is partly because there is no real way to change policy anymore - with many local parties not taking motions or not sending them on if they are passed. Some have said it is about de-selecting wayward MPs but again there seems to be no co-ordinated plan to do this. It also sems to e to be repeating the old mistakes of thinking that its MPs personalities and not their polictics that count. ie this person is a Brownite not a Blairite therefore they are on "our team" therefore we will support them. But taking back The Labour Party is not a football match.
The biggest political question at the moment is whether the Labour Party is savable or whether we should put our energies into constructing a new Party to offer independent representation for working people. We should possibly hedge our bets and try for both?
QUOTE(SJPurcell1 @ Jul 7 2003, 07:48 PM)
"The biggest political question at the moment is whether the Labour Party is savable or whether we should put our energies into constructing a new Party to offer independent representation for working people. We should possibly hedge our bets and try for both?"
I think you're starting from the wrong point, comrade. The question is not which party the "activists" can persuade the working class to support (which in my opinion is an arrogant attitude, although I mean no disrepect to you personally here), the main question is who will the working class turn to when they move en-masse on the political front, as they already have started to on the industrial front.
When working class people are forced by the objective economic circumstances of the deepening recession: redundancies, attacks on the welfare state etc. to move into action politically, will they turn to their own political party which they have built for over a hundred years, i.e. the Labour Party or will they turn to one of the tiny "mass" parties on the fringe of the Labour and TU movement.
It's the answer to this question which determines "where" socialists should be. In my opinion we should always be with our class otherwise how can we influence them?
The undemocratic structure of the LP is not fundamentally different to some of the undemocratic structures in some of the unions (look at the eetpu of the 70's and 80's) or the lessons from the Independent Labour Party, but to abandon the union or attempt to set up a new "revolutionary" union as the SWP have done in the past is doomed to failure. The fringe sects just never learn. History seems to be a closed book to them. The Labour Party will not bring about the socialist transformation of society but the battle for the hearts and minds of the British working class will take place inside the Labour Party and all socialists who want to take part in this historic battle to emancipate society need to be in the LP with the working class.
comradely
paul
A bit of a personal one for me then: Is there any point in me re-joining the Labour Party when I don't live in the UK (though I'm still technically a citizen)? What can I do here? I know I'll get to vote on party issues, elect candidates etc. but it's a pretty lonely road, especially when I've felt so disillusioned for such a long time now. An suggestions?
Our struggle is an international one Fred, why not get involved in the country where you live?( Perhaps you already are) I expect the experiences you could share across the national boundaries would be mutually beneficial to you and the workers in the country where you live.
When (if) you return to Britain then you could rejoin the LP. Even an open and honest discussion on the internet about these sorts of tactics is useful both to those of us in Britain and to those in other parts of the world who might have to make similar decisions. We all do what we can and everything helps if we want a world free from war and exploitation for ourselves and our children. One thing is certain socialism won't happen by "accident". Capitalism won't collapse of its own accord. You and I and others like us have to make it happen.
Which country are you in btw?
When (if) you return to Britain then you could rejoin the LP. Even an open and honest discussion on the internet about these sorts of tactics is useful both to those of us in Britain and to those in other parts of the world who might have to make similar decisions. We all do what we can and everything helps if we want a world free from war and exploitation for ourselves and our children. One thing is certain socialism won't happen by "accident". Capitalism won't collapse of its own accord. You and I and others like us have to make it happen.
Which country are you in btw?
Point taken Paulx and you pose the question well. my worry is that everything in the modern political landscape works against the working class moving into the political arena. It is also a highly optmistic reading of recent events in the unions to conclude that the working class have moved to the fore on the industrial front - I do not consider any of the enw leaders to be any different from the old one s except in their anti Blair spin.
My other worry is that where working people have concluded that they need to re-engage in politics some are not actually going to the Party but to the BNP and other fringe parties.
I am also concerned as to whether many working people consider the Labour Party as "theirs" in any way shape or form these days - or know or care that it was built over 100 years. My experience does not support this view.
Im not a supporter of the SWP or any other sectlet - but this question is now becoming relevant well beyond the obscure debates within the Socialist Alliance, AWL etc...
Meanwhile we should focus on the arena where working class progress can be made in concrete terms - the workplace.
Comradely
My other worry is that where working people have concluded that they need to re-engage in politics some are not actually going to the Party but to the BNP and other fringe parties.
I am also concerned as to whether many working people consider the Labour Party as "theirs" in any way shape or form these days - or know or care that it was built over 100 years. My experience does not support this view.
Im not a supporter of the SWP or any other sectlet - but this question is now becoming relevant well beyond the obscure debates within the Socialist Alliance, AWL etc...
Meanwhile we should focus on the arena where working class progress can be made in concrete terms - the workplace.
Comradely
Stop Press!!
There sems to be a plan being put about now - that the unions flood each constituency in the country with 50 members to take over each local party and secure places on the Policy Forums.
Is this credible? Can the unions find 50 willing members for each constituency? Can the unions agree on who wil send how many delegates? Wiil it work?
There sems to be a plan being put about now - that the unions flood each constituency in the country with 50 members to take over each local party and secure places on the Policy Forums.
Is this credible? Can the unions find 50 willing members for each constituency? Can the unions agree on who wil send how many delegates? Wiil it work?
"my worry is that everything in the modern political landscape works against the working class moving into the political arena"
I agree with you here SJ, however as the recession develops and we come under more and more attacks from the ruling class then we will have no option but to fight back on the industrial front initially and then on the political front. All working class action is essentially defensive, we have no choice but to defend ourselves no matter how many legal and political obstacles the bosses but in our way. Tony Blair and the others involved in "the project" to make the Labour party safe for Capitalism have ditched clause 4, altered the conference so that it's become a Democratic Party-style rally rather than a policy making body and they have put in place their stooges at regional level to crush any opposition by closing down any constituency and branch parties that are not "on message". So we have a huge task ahead of us. But I think that the tide of reaction throughout the '90's which enabled these things to take place is turning in our favour. The workers moving into the LP over the coming period will have no choice but to transform again and again the LP and it's these battles on both the industrial and political fronts which will raise the political consciousness of our class, no matter what obstacles are put in our way by the bosses or their stooges in "New Labour".
"It is also a highly optmistic reading of recent events in the unions to conclude that the working class have moved to the fore on the industrial front - I do not consider any of the enw leaders to be any different from the old one s except in their anti Blair spin."
I agree with the first part of your sentence SJ, that's why I said that the workers have only "started to move " on the industrial front. There is a long way to go yet but don't forget it's not long ago that the only choice in union elections was between two right wingers, nowadays you can't even find a candidate who supports Blair and New Labour. As for the second part of your sentence I think you're being a little harsh on some of these brothers and sisters. Some of them will undoubtedly be moving to the left only under pressure from the membership, but there are also one or two of them whose left wing credentials are long standing and I think they deserve our support as long as don't start to drift to the right.
On your other points, although there has been a small increase in fascist activity and support (and we should always vigourously oppose this scum), and a small increase in parts of Britain for fringe parties, I don't think this is a symptom of the working class abandoning Labour, it's more of a protest against, and disillusionment with, Blair and New Labour. Once the left starts to raise its voice I think we'll see support for these fringe parties collapse .
On the question of the working class no longer seeing the LP as "Their" party I think you're wrong there, although I can understand why you see it that way. When I talk to ordinary, non-political, working class people they say things like "Labour's just as bad as the tories were" or "They're all the same, only in it for themselves" etc., etc., It's just about impossible to find a good word. And then strangely enough at election time they go out and vote Labour in their millions. The working class created the trade unions and the trade unions set up the Labour Party. There is an organic link between the three bodies, something the sects on the fringes will never understand: a link that the bosses and Tony Blair (and the sects!) would like to sever.
Your point in your 4th paragraph is spot on. This issue is not becoming just relevant, it could be crucial in the coming period and the severing of the link between the unions and the LP would be an enormous backward step in the struggle for socialism.
I agree with you here SJ, however as the recession develops and we come under more and more attacks from the ruling class then we will have no option but to fight back on the industrial front initially and then on the political front. All working class action is essentially defensive, we have no choice but to defend ourselves no matter how many legal and political obstacles the bosses but in our way. Tony Blair and the others involved in "the project" to make the Labour party safe for Capitalism have ditched clause 4, altered the conference so that it's become a Democratic Party-style rally rather than a policy making body and they have put in place their stooges at regional level to crush any opposition by closing down any constituency and branch parties that are not "on message". So we have a huge task ahead of us. But I think that the tide of reaction throughout the '90's which enabled these things to take place is turning in our favour. The workers moving into the LP over the coming period will have no choice but to transform again and again the LP and it's these battles on both the industrial and political fronts which will raise the political consciousness of our class, no matter what obstacles are put in our way by the bosses or their stooges in "New Labour".
"It is also a highly optmistic reading of recent events in the unions to conclude that the working class have moved to the fore on the industrial front - I do not consider any of the enw leaders to be any different from the old one s except in their anti Blair spin."
I agree with the first part of your sentence SJ, that's why I said that the workers have only "started to move " on the industrial front. There is a long way to go yet but don't forget it's not long ago that the only choice in union elections was between two right wingers, nowadays you can't even find a candidate who supports Blair and New Labour. As for the second part of your sentence I think you're being a little harsh on some of these brothers and sisters. Some of them will undoubtedly be moving to the left only under pressure from the membership, but there are also one or two of them whose left wing credentials are long standing and I think they deserve our support as long as don't start to drift to the right.
On your other points, although there has been a small increase in fascist activity and support (and we should always vigourously oppose this scum), and a small increase in parts of Britain for fringe parties, I don't think this is a symptom of the working class abandoning Labour, it's more of a protest against, and disillusionment with, Blair and New Labour. Once the left starts to raise its voice I think we'll see support for these fringe parties collapse .
On the question of the working class no longer seeing the LP as "Their" party I think you're wrong there, although I can understand why you see it that way. When I talk to ordinary, non-political, working class people they say things like "Labour's just as bad as the tories were" or "They're all the same, only in it for themselves" etc., etc., It's just about impossible to find a good word. And then strangely enough at election time they go out and vote Labour in their millions. The working class created the trade unions and the trade unions set up the Labour Party. There is an organic link between the three bodies, something the sects on the fringes will never understand: a link that the bosses and Tony Blair (and the sects!) would like to sever.
Your point in your 4th paragraph is spot on. This issue is not becoming just relevant, it could be crucial in the coming period and the severing of the link between the unions and the LP would be an enormous backward step in the struggle for socialism.
With the ASLEF result just in and the likes of Barber, Curran and Woodley showing their true colours, it looks like the trend is now towards Balir taking back control of the unions rather than the unions taking back control of the party.
I just rejoined the party.
A letter thanking me for my monthly contribution arrived this morning.
They seem keen on getting my money but what about my views and opinions?
I am relishing sending my letter to Tony about how pleased he was that two men were killed by US troops in a seige at a villa in Iraq.
I'm interested to know how a deeply religious church going Christian can be so happy to learn of the deaths of two human beings.
A letter thanking me for my monthly contribution arrived this morning.
They seem keen on getting my money but what about my views and opinions?
I am relishing sending my letter to Tony about how pleased he was that two men were killed by US troops in a seige at a villa in Iraq.
I'm interested to know how a deeply religious church going Christian can be so happy to learn of the deaths of two human beings.
Good on ya, Martyn. You certainly have a stronger stomach than I but I think what you're doing is great and I wish you luck. If I vote Labour at the next election, I'll do it a bit safer in the knowledge that there are people like you in the party.
Some of you may have seen this already seen this so I apologise for posting something of such length is you have.
To read more about Catalyst - www.catalystforum.org.uk
Dear friends
Catalyst is in the early stages of researching a project on the future organisation of the Labour Party and wants to hear from anyone with relevant ideas, experience or expertise.
We are seeking a full range of views from across the Party and beyond on. What should be the role of a mass membership in a modern political party?
Why is Labour's membership falling? What could revive it?
Is Labour's membership becoming less active, or active in different ways?
How is the composition of Labour's membership changing?
What role should members have in the policymaking process?
What should be the role of the trade unions and other affiliated organisations?
What reforms are needed in the Labour Party's key processes and structures: the National Policy Forum, the NEC, Party Conference, candidate selection, etc?
How should the Party be financed?
How can the need for full and open debate be reconciled with the requirements of modern media and campaign strategies?
How can the need to engage Party members be reconciled with the responsibilities of a party of government?
In responding please provide full contact details and as much relevant information as possible, including are you a Labour Party member? Have you recently left the Labour Party? Are you a CLP or Ward officer, or do you
hold any other Party post or office?
What experiences have led you to your views? Have you debated these issues with others?
Have you written anything at greater length on these issues that you could refer us to?
Are there any useful documents, articles, etc that you can point us to?
Are there other individuals you would recommend we get in touch with?
Your responses will help us shape the research project by building up an overview of the key issues and options for Party members. They will be treated as STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL and not circulated or put to further public
use without your agreement.
Please email futureparty@catalystforum.org.uk or write to Catalyst at 150 The Broadway, London SW19 1RX.
And please do forward this email to others who may be interested.
We look forward to hearing from you.
Martin McIvor
Catalyst Director
To read more about Catalyst - www.catalystforum.org.uk
Dear friends
Catalyst is in the early stages of researching a project on the future organisation of the Labour Party and wants to hear from anyone with relevant ideas, experience or expertise.
We are seeking a full range of views from across the Party and beyond on. What should be the role of a mass membership in a modern political party?
Why is Labour's membership falling? What could revive it?
Is Labour's membership becoming less active, or active in different ways?
How is the composition of Labour's membership changing?
What role should members have in the policymaking process?
What should be the role of the trade unions and other affiliated organisations?
What reforms are needed in the Labour Party's key processes and structures: the National Policy Forum, the NEC, Party Conference, candidate selection, etc?
How should the Party be financed?
How can the need for full and open debate be reconciled with the requirements of modern media and campaign strategies?
How can the need to engage Party members be reconciled with the responsibilities of a party of government?
In responding please provide full contact details and as much relevant information as possible, including are you a Labour Party member? Have you recently left the Labour Party? Are you a CLP or Ward officer, or do you
hold any other Party post or office?
What experiences have led you to your views? Have you debated these issues with others?
Have you written anything at greater length on these issues that you could refer us to?
Are there any useful documents, articles, etc that you can point us to?
Are there other individuals you would recommend we get in touch with?
Your responses will help us shape the research project by building up an overview of the key issues and options for Party members. They will be treated as STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL and not circulated or put to further public
use without your agreement.
Please email futureparty@catalystforum.org.uk or write to Catalyst at 150 The Broadway, London SW19 1RX.
And please do forward this email to others who may be interested.
We look forward to hearing from you.
Martin McIvor
Catalyst Director
Ive been to a couple of catalyst meetings and it seems slighty sinister to me - in terms of the marginal labour movement figures that lie behind it. I wouldn't be giving my details to this outfit. The strong impression I got is that it is also heavily backed by the Blairistas who want to use the data they get to justify their next steps in the project. independent review of the Party this is definitely not.
I wouldn't describe Catalyst as anymore "sinister" than some of the shadowy characters that hang around at Tribune events. It's a rump of the old left, new soft left and various intellectuals.
It's not every ones cup of char, indeed I would need a lot of sugar with mine to drink it with them but in the context of this thread it's perhaps relevant.
There is no coherent strategy for "winning back labour" so I believe that all avenues, even if they eventually prove fruitless, should be explored.
If nothing else it offers an opportunity to vent your spleen in a way more productive than writing to Blair or the NEC.
It's not every ones cup of char, indeed I would need a lot of sugar with mine to drink it with them but in the context of this thread it's perhaps relevant.
There is no coherent strategy for "winning back labour" so I believe that all avenues, even if they eventually prove fruitless, should be explored.
If nothing else it offers an opportunity to vent your spleen in a way more productive than writing to Blair or the NEC.
If Blairites are the force behind Catalyst then perhaps its the perfect forum in which to express the anger and outrage that many of us feel each time we are faced with stuff like this...
==================
Miscarriages of JusticeUK (MOJUK)
mojuk@mojuk.org.uk
http://www.mojuk.org.uk
==================
Justice denied and a system that is fundamentally flawed causes concern
The essence of justice is being undermined through policy changes that will destroy our supposedly impartial judicial process.
Recent changes by the Home Office, have expanded the criteria for those who may sit as a magistrates.
Retired police officers, civilian police staff, their spouses and also serving special constables can be recruited actively as magistrates. A recent advert to this effect was placed in NARPO - magazine of the National Association of Retired Police Officers, August 2003 , issue 35 p16.
This is appalling and undermines the essence of impartiality that should be shown within our courts.
Despite its avowed commitment to the fundamental principle that any accused is to be presumed innocent and the corollary that the burden of proof (beyond reasonable doubt) lies squarely on the prosecution, the English criminal justice system appears altogether too likely to prosecute and to convict the innocent.
Karen Clark Stapleton
Ex Police and Prison Officer
MSc: Criminal Justice Research student
Karen622207855@aol.com
______________________________________________________________
Has anybody heard about these proposals elswhere?
==================
Miscarriages of JusticeUK (MOJUK)
mojuk@mojuk.org.uk
http://www.mojuk.org.uk
==================
Justice denied and a system that is fundamentally flawed causes concern
The essence of justice is being undermined through policy changes that will destroy our supposedly impartial judicial process.
Recent changes by the Home Office, have expanded the criteria for those who may sit as a magistrates.
Retired police officers, civilian police staff, their spouses and also serving special constables can be recruited actively as magistrates. A recent advert to this effect was placed in NARPO - magazine of the National Association of Retired Police Officers, August 2003 , issue 35 p16.
This is appalling and undermines the essence of impartiality that should be shown within our courts.
Despite its avowed commitment to the fundamental principle that any accused is to be presumed innocent and the corollary that the burden of proof (beyond reasonable doubt) lies squarely on the prosecution, the English criminal justice system appears altogether too likely to prosecute and to convict the innocent.
Karen Clark Stapleton
Ex Police and Prison Officer
MSc: Criminal Justice Research student
Karen622207855@aol.com
______________________________________________________________
Has anybody heard about these proposals elswhere?
QUOTE(SJPurcell1 @ Jul 21 2003, 09:13 PM)
With the ASLEF result just in and the likes of Barber, Curran and Woodley showing their true colours, it looks like the trend is now towards Balir taking back control of the unions rather than the unions taking back control of the party.
In every struggle,SJ, there are ebbs and flows. The battle to reclaim the Labour Party will involve set-backs as well as victories. That is why it is important to have a well worked out political perspective, otherwise it's easy to become demoralised with the first defeat or (just as dangerous) euphoric at the first victory. What is most important is the general trend rather than the eddies.
Welcome back to the LP Martyn!
Rather than start a new thread I thought this one would do for a discussion about who the new Labour Leader might be and which direction the party might take following the departure of the warmongering tory creep that hijacked Labour so long ago.
It would appear from this article that a certain Ms H Harmon might, along with others, be hinting that a handover of power to Gordy might not be the best solution. Could this be a hint that Labour might quite soon have a woman as leader?
Methinks that Ms Harmon might have been more vocal in this respect some three years ago, along with senior Labour colleagues and perhaps British troops might not in the position of clearing up the pile of poo left by the US marine corps and US special forces following their own completely unsuccesful efforts to locate Osama Bin Laden, eliminate the Taliban and shut down poppy cultivation.
Harmon has distinctly less blood on her hands than some in the cabinets of recent years, however this sudden plunging of a political knife firmly between the shoulder blades of her illustrious leader smacks of opportunism.
As for Gordy himself:
Translation from the politicospeak: I bloody hope there isn't an election. I've been waiting patiently for this for fucking ages and I don't want it snatched away by some upstart lightweight now.
It would appear from this article that a certain Ms H Harmon might, along with others, be hinting that a handover of power to Gordy might not be the best solution. Could this be a hint that Labour might quite soon have a woman as leader?
QUOTE
Methinks that Ms Harmon might have been more vocal in this respect some three years ago, along with senior Labour colleagues and perhaps British troops might not in the position of clearing up the pile of poo left by the US marine corps and US special forces following their own completely unsuccesful efforts to locate Osama Bin Laden, eliminate the Taliban and shut down poppy cultivation.
Harmon has distinctly less blood on her hands than some in the cabinets of recent years, however this sudden plunging of a political knife firmly between the shoulder blades of her illustrious leader smacks of opportunism.
As for Gordy himself:
QUOTE
I am happy for there to be a leadership contest - I think there should be
Translation from the politicospeak: I bloody hope there isn't an election. I've been waiting patiently for this for fucking ages and I don't want it snatched away by some upstart lightweight now.
Taking back the Labour party and making them unelectable again.The long term aim of the Left.A group who always feel far more comfortable in opposition,than they do actually having to make tough decisions.
QUOTE(Martyn @ Sep 10 2006, 08:10 AM) 
Rather than start a new thread I thought this one would do for a discussion about who the new Labour Leader might be and which direction the party might take following the departure of the warmongering tory creep that hijacked Labour so long ago.
It would appear from this article that a certain Ms H Harmon might, along with others, be hinting that a handover of power to Gordy might not be the best solution. Could this be a hint that Labour might quite soon have a woman as leader?
QUOTE
Methinks that Ms Harmon might have been more vocal in this respect some three years ago, along with senior Labour colleagues and perhaps British troops might not in the position of clearing up the pile of poo left by the US marine corps and US special forces following their own completely unsuccesful efforts to locate Osama Bin Laden, eliminate the Taliban and shut down poppy cultivation.
Harmon has distinctly less blood on her hands than some in the cabinets of recent years, however this sudden plunging of a political knife firmly between the shoulder blades of her illustrious leader smacks of opportunism.
As for Gordy himself:
QUOTE
I am happy for there to be a leadership contest - I think there should be
Translation from the politicospeak: I bloody hope there isn't an election. I've been waiting patiently for this for fucking ages and I don't want it snatched away by some upstart lightweight now.
Actually I think Brown needs an election for the leadership. preferably with candidates from both the Left and the Blairite faction standing against him. He can then be seen as to offer a break with Blair's legacy without scaring Middle England by appearing too Left-wing.
And that's not a bad thing for the party either inasmuch as it offers the prospect of a genuine debate rather than a coronation or a contest entirely shaped by personal differences.
In practice, I think he'll win: the question is whether he will edge Labour to the Left, or carry on as before.
It never fails to amaze how short a memory some of the so called "natural" Labour supporters have. Didnt 20 years in opposition learn them anything. The world has moved on, the British public will not elect a far left party EVER.
If these morons of the far left try to take over the party from withn then expect another 20 years in opposition.
Tony Blair made the party electable again, he appealed to the middle classes, the vote every party needs to gain power. Talking radical bullshit and remaining in opposition changes nothing. Being in power is what counts and only then can you change things. It seems to me the thing that pisses a lot of the left off is the fact Blair comes from a fairly privilaged background (major crime in some eyes).
The guy has been an excellent leader and history will prove that, more money pumped into education and health care, a minimum wage, tax credits, new start, more police, the introduction of ASBOS and a dertermination to carry on the fight against anti social behaviour, better paternaty and maternaty rights, high employment, low inflation the list goes on.
Some of you have one thing and one thing only against Blair and thats Iraq, all the good he has done you ignore.
I hope to god the loony left dont squirm there way back into New Labour and i will fight all i can to stop them.
If these morons of the far left try to take over the party from withn then expect another 20 years in opposition.
Tony Blair made the party electable again, he appealed to the middle classes, the vote every party needs to gain power. Talking radical bullshit and remaining in opposition changes nothing. Being in power is what counts and only then can you change things. It seems to me the thing that pisses a lot of the left off is the fact Blair comes from a fairly privilaged background (major crime in some eyes).
The guy has been an excellent leader and history will prove that, more money pumped into education and health care, a minimum wage, tax credits, new start, more police, the introduction of ASBOS and a dertermination to carry on the fight against anti social behaviour, better paternaty and maternaty rights, high employment, low inflation the list goes on.
Some of you have one thing and one thing only against Blair and thats Iraq, all the good he has done you ignore.
I hope to god the loony left dont squirm there way back into New Labour and i will fight all i can to stop them.
hav'nt voted labour since 1997, can't see me ever doing so again.
won't vote labour while blair is there.
i find it hard not to support labour, in the 80's i was a trade union rep and we had huge problems with trotskys.
the labour movement is no-more, people are far too happy with their wide screen tellys and 4 by 4's.
the bottom line is that not enough people care about their fellow human beings, they only care about looking after themselves.
liberal party anyone ?
won't vote labour while blair is there.
i find it hard not to support labour, in the 80's i was a trade union rep and we had huge problems with trotskys.
the labour movement is no-more, people are far too happy with their wide screen tellys and 4 by 4's.
the bottom line is that not enough people care about their fellow human beings, they only care about looking after themselves.
liberal party anyone ?
Did anyone else read Nick Cohen?
"Socialism, which provided the definition of what it meant to be on the left from the 1880s to the 1980s, is gone. Disgraced by the communists' atrocities and floored by the success of market-based economies, it no longer exists as a coherent programme for government. Even the modest and humane social democratic systems of Europe are under strain and look dreadfully vulnerable."
Strong stuff. Is it correct? Are we running scared? Has the left gone berserk? I think that Cohen's assertions are partial. They overlook the imperialism of the USA in attempting to characterise Saddam Hussein's regime as Fascistic. They overlook the lies told by Bush and Blair about reasons for invading Iraq. They overlook the role played by the UN and the defiant posture taken by Bush in particular and by Blair.
The problem for the left regarding Iraq and the middle east in general is in defining the politics of the area. Governments there tend to be reactinary in nature but there seems to be a failure of the left in getting to grips with explaining what goes on there. Since the collapse of the Soviet bloc, the genocide in the Balkans and the disruption of what went on between east and west, and the success of the capitalist economy (which is easy to explain if you know your Marxist economics) in former 'communist' states, Marxism and socialism has been discredited. Socialists and Marxists have reeled from the shock of the new. Capitalists and liberal democrats have not. They have failed to account for or explain the success of the religious right or Islamic extremism but have seen it as just that.
But extreme Islam is not what it says on the tin. They are extreme right wing states which violently subdue democracy, debate, opposition, progress, the intellectual development of women, homosexuality and so on - just like the Nazi and fascist regimes did in the 1920s and 30s. It is on these grounds that the Taliban and Saddam Hussein needed to be overthrown. It is on these grounds that extreme Islamic fundamentalism needs to be tackled. It is also on these grounds that we need to oppose Bush and Blair. We need to forget the misguided notion that Bush is somehow stupid - he and his cronies are far from that. They have a serious set of policies and an ideology that is very dangerous for the world. Just like we opposed Thatcher, we need to oppose him with ideological debate, sound political strategy and the mobilisation of those who oppose him. The same goes for Blair. He has simply carried on Thatcher's economic strategy with a different face.
It's time for the left to move on now. Forget the wall and the collapse of 'communism.' It's time to stand up for the principles of socialism, to argue in the face of the yah boo sucks gainsaying of the right and to tell it like it is. Of course we should oppose extreme Islam. Of course Saddam had to go, not simply because he was dangerous but because of his politics.
"Socialism, which provided the definition of what it meant to be on the left from the 1880s to the 1980s, is gone. Disgraced by the communists' atrocities and floored by the success of market-based economies, it no longer exists as a coherent programme for government. Even the modest and humane social democratic systems of Europe are under strain and look dreadfully vulnerable."
Strong stuff. Is it correct? Are we running scared? Has the left gone berserk? I think that Cohen's assertions are partial. They overlook the imperialism of the USA in attempting to characterise Saddam Hussein's regime as Fascistic. They overlook the lies told by Bush and Blair about reasons for invading Iraq. They overlook the role played by the UN and the defiant posture taken by Bush in particular and by Blair.
The problem for the left regarding Iraq and the middle east in general is in defining the politics of the area. Governments there tend to be reactinary in nature but there seems to be a failure of the left in getting to grips with explaining what goes on there. Since the collapse of the Soviet bloc, the genocide in the Balkans and the disruption of what went on between east and west, and the success of the capitalist economy (which is easy to explain if you know your Marxist economics) in former 'communist' states, Marxism and socialism has been discredited. Socialists and Marxists have reeled from the shock of the new. Capitalists and liberal democrats have not. They have failed to account for or explain the success of the religious right or Islamic extremism but have seen it as just that.
But extreme Islam is not what it says on the tin. They are extreme right wing states which violently subdue democracy, debate, opposition, progress, the intellectual development of women, homosexuality and so on - just like the Nazi and fascist regimes did in the 1920s and 30s. It is on these grounds that the Taliban and Saddam Hussein needed to be overthrown. It is on these grounds that extreme Islamic fundamentalism needs to be tackled. It is also on these grounds that we need to oppose Bush and Blair. We need to forget the misguided notion that Bush is somehow stupid - he and his cronies are far from that. They have a serious set of policies and an ideology that is very dangerous for the world. Just like we opposed Thatcher, we need to oppose him with ideological debate, sound political strategy and the mobilisation of those who oppose him. The same goes for Blair. He has simply carried on Thatcher's economic strategy with a different face.
It's time for the left to move on now. Forget the wall and the collapse of 'communism.' It's time to stand up for the principles of socialism, to argue in the face of the yah boo sucks gainsaying of the right and to tell it like it is. Of course we should oppose extreme Islam. Of course Saddam had to go, not simply because he was dangerous but because of his politics.
QUOTE(poguemahone @ Nov 25 2006, 04:25 PM)
hav'nt voted labour since 1997, can't see me ever doing so again.
won't vote labour while blair is there.
i find it hard not to support labour, in the 80's i was a trade union rep and we had huge problems with trotskys.
the labour movement is no-more, people are far too happy with their wide screen tellys and 4 by 4's.
the bottom line is that not enough people care about their fellow human beings, they only care about looking after themselves.
liberal party anyone ?
Well bully for you, Kissmyarse. What a negative and unproductive attitude. I'm totally pissed off with that kind of whinging. "Huge problems with trotskys" (I think the term you want is Trotskyites) - why? What did they do? As I recall, it was a huge backlash in the face of a right wing press campaign to keep the Tories in power. That's also why they got rid of Clause 4.
There is no doubt that the capitalist economy has had some successes but don't under-estimate the strength of the labour movement in the Far East or South America. Or simply take a look at the burgeoning ecological movement. Who do you think is behind that? Cameron the Toff? The Liberals? New (same old) Labour? Do me a favour.
Stick to sitting on your own in front of your wide screen and decide who should win Big Brother.
QUOTE(Andy Larter @ Jan 29 2007, 09:58 AM)
Did anyone else read Nick Cohen?
"Socialism, which provided the definition of what it meant to be on the left from the 1880s to the 1980s, is gone. Disgraced by the communists' atrocities and floored by the success of market-based economies, it no longer exists as a coherent programme for government. Even the modest and humane social democratic systems of Europe are under strain and look dreadfully vulnerable."
It's time for the left to move on now. Forget the wall and the collapse of 'communism.' It's time to stand up for the principles of socialism, to argue in the face of the yah boo sucks gainsaying of the right and to tell it like it is. Of course we should oppose extreme Islam. Of course Saddam had to go, not simply because he was dangerous but because of his politics.
I think that the crux for the Left is the question of the "coherent programme for government" and the "principles of socialism" in the domestic context; the situation in the Middle East is important, but I don't believe that it is ultimately very relevant to the tasks that Socialists need to engage with.
We need to be developing a coherent economic programme that acknowledges the way that globalisation has changed the world; we need to be arguing that continuing mass unemployment, increasing inequality and the scandal of low wages undermine the claim that the British economy is "doing well". And we need to revisit the question of how the state manages the economy and its role in industry.
Paradoxically, as a Labour Party member, I can live with the foreign policy that the Blair government has followed; what appalls me is that the government hails the building of a super casino in Blackpool as a success and that the fact that the prospects of children born into the lower socio-economic classes are worse now than at any time since the war seems to cause no concern within my party.
The Hard Left inside the Labour Party cannot get on the ballot for leader or deputy leader they are marginalised, we cannot go back to a unilateralist/longest suicide note in history politics it will betray the people that the minimum wage/surestart/new deal/working families tax credits was designed to help,record spending on education and health including excellent pay rises in health and 500,000 extra public servants since 1997 have all been designed to help Labours core support.
We now live in a society were absolute poverty has all but vanished, when we talk about gaps between the social classes we are really talking about relative poverty. I am going to sound all monty python but my dad (not grandad) washed in a tin bath and shared a bed with his three brothers and only got his first pair of long trousers at 15 and an outside toilet. Needless to say while I am skint my house has two showers and toilets and my sons have their own rooms and more pairs of jeans than they can really wear.
Thanks to comprehensive education and the enabling state my family has had pensions they could live on comfortably and I went to university (the first ever in my extended family) all this good news from Labour and opposed by the Tories.
Oh and lower interest rates than the Tories/lower unemployment than the Tories and lower inflation than Thatcher. I'm voting Labour because they don't need reclaiming but renewal in goverment will do
We now live in a society were absolute poverty has all but vanished, when we talk about gaps between the social classes we are really talking about relative poverty. I am going to sound all monty python but my dad (not grandad) washed in a tin bath and shared a bed with his three brothers and only got his first pair of long trousers at 15 and an outside toilet. Needless to say while I am skint my house has two showers and toilets and my sons have their own rooms and more pairs of jeans than they can really wear.
Thanks to comprehensive education and the enabling state my family has had pensions they could live on comfortably and I went to university (the first ever in my extended family) all this good news from Labour and opposed by the Tories.
Oh and lower interest rates than the Tories/lower unemployment than the Tories and lower inflation than Thatcher. I'm voting Labour because they don't need reclaiming but renewal in goverment will do
QUOTE(Mick H @ Jan 30 2007, 09:43 AM)
The Hard Left inside the Labour Party cannot get on the ballot for leader or deputy leader they are marginalised, we cannot go back to a unilateralist/longest suicide note in history politics it will betray the people that the minimum wage/surestart/new deal/working families tax credits was designed to help,record spending on education and health including excellent pay rises in health and 500,000 extra public servants since 1997 have all been designed to help Labours core support.
We now live in a society were absolute poverty has all but vanished, when we talk about gaps between the social classes we are really talking about relative poverty. I am going to sound all monty python but my dad (not grandad) washed in a tin bath and shared a bed with his three brothers and only got his first pair of long trousers at 15 and an outside toilet. Needless to say while I am skint my house has two showers and toilets and my sons have their own rooms and more pairs of jeans than they can really wear.
Thanks to comprehensive education and the enabling state my family has had pensions they could live on comfortably and I went to university (the first ever in my extended family) all this good news from Labour and opposed by the Tories.
Oh and lower interest rates than the Tories/lower unemployment than the Tories and lower inflation than Thatcher. I'm voting Labour because they don't need reclaiming but renewal in goverment will do
I agree about the Hard Left and about the achievements of the Labour party both historically and under Blair.
However, there are a number of things that justify criticism: the increase in inequality actually means that the experience of those of us who went to university from families that had never been able to hope for that previously is less likely to be repeated. Our kids may do OK, but those born into deprived communities now have prospects that are worse than those we could look forward to. Labour's uncritical response to globalisation concerns me, as does the decline of British manufacturing and the level of insecurity many of us now face.
New Labour has achieved significantly through its social policy and investment in Health and Education, but those achievements are fragile.
My worry is that those of us born in the 50s, 60s and 70s may prove to be the lucky generation who benefited from Socialism; I'm not sure that those who follow us will enjoy what we have done. And whilst I think Brown has managed the economy well, I worry that he has not achieved the kind of lasting change that is needed to secure its long-term prosperity.
QUOTE(JBoyd @ Feb 1 2007, 10:55 PM)
And whilst I think Brown has managed the economy well, I worry that he has not achieved the kind of lasting change that is needed to secure its long-term prosperity.
I wonder how long this myth will continue. Whilst there is much good that has come from Gordon Brown's tenure at number 11, there is little that the Chancellor can do to manage the economy. New Labour has benefited from benign economic circustances - the causes of which are mainly global - not least of which has been the economic rise of China.
Record and ever increasing personal debt is a huge problem that New Labour have simply ignored; there could be very trying times ahead.
Anyway, taking back the Labour Party? Won't happen.
Vote Green
QUOTE(barmyrob @ Feb 1 2007, 11:07 PM)
QUOTE(JBoyd @ Feb 1 2007, 10:55 PM)
And whilst I think Brown has managed the economy well, I worry that he has not achieved the kind of lasting change that is needed to secure its long-term prosperity.
I wonder how long this myth will continue. Whilst there is much good that has come from Gordon Brown's tenure at number 11, there is little that the Chancellor can do to manage the economy. New Labour has benefited from benign economic circustances - the causes of which are mainly global - not least of which has been the economic rise of China.
Record and ever increasing personal debt is a huge problem that New Labour have simply ignored; there could be very trying times ahead.
Anyway, taking back the Labour Party? Won't happen.
Vote Green
No. Not yet. Unlike in Germany where a green vote can count, in UK elections, it's a Tory vote because inevitably a green vote is against Labour. Put pressure on the government to do something about green and electoral issues.
I voted green at the last general election, because I wasn't going to vote for the war, and I just fancied going up to the voting booth and having a look around. I've only ever voted once before, (for labour, when Major beat Kinnock), so I guess that's bad. 
It makes me feel a bit smug though, about never having voted for Blair. (I hope he gets his collar felt good and propper, and is forced to resign.)
As for taking back the Labour party, I'd wonder where it would be taken back to? This whole generation of labour leaders are a rather dour and unattractive lot. (Think of the cabinet).
It makes me feel a bit smug though, about never having voted for Blair. (I hope he gets his collar felt good and propper, and is forced to resign.)As for taking back the Labour party, I'd wonder where it would be taken back to? This whole generation of labour leaders are a rather dour and unattractive lot. (Think of the cabinet).
QUOTE(Andy Larter @ Feb 2 2007, 09:28 AM)
QUOTE(barmyrob @ Feb 1 2007, 11:07 PM)
QUOTE(JBoyd @ Feb 1 2007, 10:55 PM)
And whilst I think Brown has managed the economy well, I worry that he has not achieved the kind of lasting change that is needed to secure its long-term prosperity.
I wonder how long this myth will continue. Whilst there is much good that has come from Gordon Brown's tenure at number 11, there is little that the Chancellor can do to manage the economy. New Labour has benefited from benign economic circustances - the causes of which are mainly global - not least of which has been the economic rise of China.
Record and ever increasing personal debt is a huge problem that New Labour have simply ignored; there could be very trying times ahead.
Anyway, taking back the Labour Party? Won't happen.
Vote Green
No. Not yet. Unlike in Germany where a green vote can count, in UK elections, it's a Tory vote because inevitably a green vote is against Labour. Put pressure on the government to do something about green and electoral issues.
New Labour have had 10 years to prove their green credentials and they are failing miserably - they are enthralled by big business and that isn't about to change soon.
I don't care if the Tories are elected - they are no different. The middle ground is very crowded and frankly the differences between the parties aree minimal.
This will be the Green century - although it is probably already too late. I will be voting Green in the future no matter what Labour do. They have disgusted me over the last 10 years - from war in Iraq to tuition fees to the release of Pinochet.
Cash for Honours will be the death of them - and frankly - good riddance. And if that means a Tory government - so be it. I won't be blackmailed into voting Labour - we live in a democracy and I will vote for who I want to vote for.
Personel debt is not the Govts responsibility. I stick to my budget, I feel hard up at times but I don't ever put it on the credit card.
Don't be blackmailed but when it turns out that a Tory government still has plenty of Thatcherites left in it then don't be surprised when some of us say I told you so.
Don't be blackmailed but when it turns out that a Tory government still has plenty of Thatcherites left in it then don't be surprised when some of us say I told you so.
QUOTE(Mick H @ Feb 2 2007, 12:26 PM)
Don't be blackmailed but when it turns out that a Tory government still has plenty of Thatcherites left in it then don't be surprised when some of us say I told you so.
Oh purlease.
And I'm sorry but credit is regulated - it is a government responsibility.
i usually switch off when i hear tony on the radio but i couldn't resist listening to him this morning. He has lost it! weird.
i felt incredibly sad to say i told you so, about the fact that he is a total phony. He has robbed the left of a political party and we will never get that ground back again.
i felt incredibly sad to say i told you so, about the fact that he is a total phony. He has robbed the left of a political party and we will never get that ground back again.
Just on Nick Cohen. He's recently written a book I believe. I haven't read it, but this is what someone I think highly of has said of it.
''Nick Cohen's book takes its place with the autobiographies of Robert Kilroy Silk and Dereck Hatton, as one of the worst books I have ever been asked to review. He shares most obviously their combination of self-reguard and lack of self-awareness, but also their limited historical and limited perview. Like them, too, his relationship with the left seems to have been a historical accident.''.
I'll have to have a look at Cohen's book to see if this other chap had a point. (I'm glad to see that there is still a bit of needle in political debate).
''Nick Cohen's book takes its place with the autobiographies of Robert Kilroy Silk and Dereck Hatton, as one of the worst books I have ever been asked to review. He shares most obviously their combination of self-reguard and lack of self-awareness, but also their limited historical and limited perview. Like them, too, his relationship with the left seems to have been a historical accident.''.
I'll have to have a look at Cohen's book to see if this other chap had a point. (I'm glad to see that there is still a bit of needle in political debate).
I know where you're coming from and I share your disgust at New Labour. My only concern - and I'm not trying to blackmail you into voting anything here - is that I think the tories will have even less incentive to change the voting system than Tony. If Labour are reelected it will be with quite a small majority and that may give the Lib Dems more say. In which case they could push for a change in the voting system, meaning that every vote would count - even a vote for the Greens (who I have a lot of time for and would probably vote for).
On the other hand, I could just apply for Danish citizenship and get to vote on principle [insert smug smiley here]. Right now, I can only vote in EU elections. I can vote in the UK if I remember to register in time (it's quite a palarvar) but I sometimes wonder what the point of voting in the UK when I don't live there.
On the other hand, I could just apply for Danish citizenship and get to vote on principle [insert smug smiley here]. Right now, I can only vote in EU elections. I can vote in the UK if I remember to register in time (it's quite a palarvar) but I sometimes wonder what the point of voting in the UK when I don't live there.
QUOTE(barmyrob @ Feb 1 2007, 11:07 PM)
QUOTE(JBoyd @ Feb 1 2007, 10:55 PM)
And whilst I think Brown has managed the economy well, I worry that he has not achieved the kind of lasting change that is needed to secure its long-term prosperity.
I wonder how long this myth will continue. Whilst there is much good that has come from Gordon Brown's tenure at number 11, there is little that the Chancellor can do to manage the economy. New Labour has benefited from benign economic circustances - the causes of which are mainly global - not least of which has been the economic rise of China.
Record and ever increasing personal debt is a huge problem that New Labour have simply ignored; there could be very trying times ahead.
Anyway, taking back the Labour Party? Won't happen.
Vote Green
I agree about personal debt; it could and should be more tightly regulated, though that would be very difficult to get through politically. And you are probably right that times will get tough over the next decade. I also think that the environment and, in particular, global warming is the greatest challenge in politics. However, even if PR was brought in (and I oppose it by the way) the Green Party is sadly always going to be irrelevant as an electoral force.
People on the Left have been giving up on the Labour Party periodically for decades: they did it in the 20s when Ramsay MacDonald sold out; they did it during the Wilson era and when Militant were expelled. But the Labour Party is the only serious political option for the Left in Britain and always will be.
What we make of that is up to us.
QUOTE(Beryl the Peril @ Feb 2 2007, 01:28 PM)
i usually switch off when i hear tony on the radio but i couldn't resist listening to him this morning. He has lost it! weird.
i felt incredibly sad to say i told you so, about the fact that he is a total phony. He has robbed the left of a political party and we will never get that ground back again.
QUOTE(JBoyd @ Feb 2 2007, 11:24 PM)
People on the Left have been giving up on the Labour Party periodically for decades: they did it in the 20s when Ramsay MacDonald sold out; they did it during the Wilson era and when Militant were expelled. But the Labour Party is the only serious political option for the Left in Britain and always will be.
What we make of that is up to us.
1. The Labour Party has a history of selling out. It is most certainly not the only serious political option for the left. There are plenty of ways of expressing your political views - environmental issues, marching against the war, joining a union, taking part in industrial action - that are not about putting a cross in a box. There was a time when various political cadres joined the Labour Party - Militant, IMG - but found they were stultified by rules and bureaucracy that lead to either expulsion or depression. Mind you, all they really wanted to do was sell papers so they could convert a couple of LP members here and there.
I vote Labour but that's all. I have not had faith in them since I can't remember when. They will never support working class struggles beyond a certain point. Have you noticed that they haven't repealed Trade Union legislation? If I lived in Scotland, I would vote SNP, in Wales Plaid Cymru, in Ireland, Sinn Fein. They are the progressive parties of those areas, not Labour.
2. As for Gordon Brown - well, I think he's a decent bloke which is more than I can say for Blair. I was a member of the LP for a short while but his election as leader after the death of John Smith made my decision for me - I left with no regrets. The major difference (pardon the pun) between Brown and Blair as I see it as that Brown wants to manage capitalism while Blair is a capitalist. Blair is not a socialist and probably never was. He is a christian before he's a politician, which for me is grounds enough for contempt. But he only leads the party, he is not the party itself. There are ways of taking back the Labour Party, if you have the energy or the inclination. I have neither. NHS and Education would probably do better under Brown. Still don't have a lot of faith though.
[quote name='Andy Larter' date='Feb 3 2007, 09:01 AM' post='204305']
i felt incredibly sad to say i told you so, about the fact that he is a total phony. He has robbed the left of a political party and we will never get that ground back again.
[/quote]
[quote name='JBoyd' post='204292' date='Feb 2 2007, 11:24 PM']
People on the Left have been giving up on the Labour Party periodically for decades: they did it in the 20s when Ramsay MacDonald sold out; they did it during the Wilson era and when Militant were expelled. But the Labour Party is the only serious political option for the Left in Britain and always will be.
What we make of that is up to us.
[/quote]
1. The Labour Party has a history of selling out. It is most certainly not the only serious political option for the left. There are plenty of ways of expressing your political views - environmental issues, marching against the war, joining a union, taking part in industrial action - that are not about putting a cross in a box. There was a time when various political cadres joined the Labour Party - Militant, IMG - but found they were stultified by rules and bureaucracy that lead to either expulsion or depression. Mind you, all they really wanted to do was sell papers so they could convert a couple of LP members here and there.
I vote Labour but that's all. I have not had faith in them since I can't remember when. They will never support working class struggles beyond a certain point. Have you noticed that they haven't repealed Trade Union legislation? If I lived in Scotland, I would vote SNP, in Wales Plaid Cymru, in Ireland, Sinn Fein. They are the progressive parties of those areas, not Labour.
2. As for Gordon Brown - well, I think he's a decent bloke which is more than I can say for Blair. I was a member of the LP for a short while but his election as leader after the death of John Smith made my decision for me - I left with no regrets. The major difference (pardon the pun) between Brown and Blair as I see it as that Brown wants to manage capitalism while Blair is a capitalist. Blair is not a socialist and probably never was. He is a christian before he's a politician, which for me is grounds enough for contempt. But he only leads the party, he is not the party itself. There are ways of taking back the Labour Party, if you have the energy or the inclination. I have neither. NHS and Education would probably do better under Brown. Still don't have a lot of faith though.
[/quote]
Of course there are other ways of campaigning besides party politics - but I don't think that they have the potential to achieve change that involvement in the Labour Party offers.
I was in the Labour Party in the 80s when the Militant Tendency were at their height: some of their adherents were good people, but as an organisation, they were anti-democratic and intolerant and used the bureaucracy of the party with great skill to take control in certain constituencies. They alienated many (even on the far Left) because of their tactics and their approach on questions such as Feminism, Black Sections and Northern Ireland. And that was before the Liverpool debacle.
If the Militant strategy had worked, they would have formed a successful mass party of the working class after their expulsion; they didn't, because their influence was disproportionate to their membership within Labour exactly because they were so adept at manipulation.
The nationalist parties you mention seem to me to have all the faults of the Labour Party with the additional weakness that many of their members are interested in independence rather than socialism, but since I'm English and live in England, they are not that relevant to me personally.
It seems to me that the Labour Party has always been a "broad church" to use the old description, including Fabians, Marxists, Christian Socialists, Social Democrats and Left Liberals; that in many ways has been its strength. It is not going to abolish capitalism, if for no other reason than the fact that the desire to abolish capitalism has never been strong enough in the country as a whole. However, it has been successful at delivering social progress and equality of opportunity within a capitalist context, and that, in the absence of an upsurge of support for revolutionary socialism seems to me to be the best that can be hoped for.
I don't think that Blair and Brown differ very much ideologically to be honest; but I think that after Blair we have a window in which we can shift the party significantly to the Left - not far enough for the Marxist Left, but at least in the right direction.
i felt incredibly sad to say i told you so, about the fact that he is a total phony. He has robbed the left of a political party and we will never get that ground back again.
[/quote]
[quote name='JBoyd' post='204292' date='Feb 2 2007, 11:24 PM']
People on the Left have been giving up on the Labour Party periodically for decades: they did it in the 20s when Ramsay MacDonald sold out; they did it during the Wilson era and when Militant were expelled. But the Labour Party is the only serious political option for the Left in Britain and always will be.
What we make of that is up to us.
[/quote]
1. The Labour Party has a history of selling out. It is most certainly not the only serious political option for the left. There are plenty of ways of expressing your political views - environmental issues, marching against the war, joining a union, taking part in industrial action - that are not about putting a cross in a box. There was a time when various political cadres joined the Labour Party - Militant, IMG - but found they were stultified by rules and bureaucracy that lead to either expulsion or depression. Mind you, all they really wanted to do was sell papers so they could convert a couple of LP members here and there.
I vote Labour but that's all. I have not had faith in them since I can't remember when. They will never support working class struggles beyond a certain point. Have you noticed that they haven't repealed Trade Union legislation? If I lived in Scotland, I would vote SNP, in Wales Plaid Cymru, in Ireland, Sinn Fein. They are the progressive parties of those areas, not Labour.
2. As for Gordon Brown - well, I think he's a decent bloke which is more than I can say for Blair. I was a member of the LP for a short while but his election as leader after the death of John Smith made my decision for me - I left with no regrets. The major difference (pardon the pun) between Brown and Blair as I see it as that Brown wants to manage capitalism while Blair is a capitalist. Blair is not a socialist and probably never was. He is a christian before he's a politician, which for me is grounds enough for contempt. But he only leads the party, he is not the party itself. There are ways of taking back the Labour Party, if you have the energy or the inclination. I have neither. NHS and Education would probably do better under Brown. Still don't have a lot of faith though.
[/quote]
Of course there are other ways of campaigning besides party politics - but I don't think that they have the potential to achieve change that involvement in the Labour Party offers.
I was in the Labour Party in the 80s when the Militant Tendency were at their height: some of their adherents were good people, but as an organisation, they were anti-democratic and intolerant and used the bureaucracy of the party with great skill to take control in certain constituencies. They alienated many (even on the far Left) because of their tactics and their approach on questions such as Feminism, Black Sections and Northern Ireland. And that was before the Liverpool debacle.
If the Militant strategy had worked, they would have formed a successful mass party of the working class after their expulsion; they didn't, because their influence was disproportionate to their membership within Labour exactly because they were so adept at manipulation.
The nationalist parties you mention seem to me to have all the faults of the Labour Party with the additional weakness that many of their members are interested in independence rather than socialism, but since I'm English and live in England, they are not that relevant to me personally.
It seems to me that the Labour Party has always been a "broad church" to use the old description, including Fabians, Marxists, Christian Socialists, Social Democrats and Left Liberals; that in many ways has been its strength. It is not going to abolish capitalism, if for no other reason than the fact that the desire to abolish capitalism has never been strong enough in the country as a whole. However, it has been successful at delivering social progress and equality of opportunity within a capitalist context, and that, in the absence of an upsurge of support for revolutionary socialism seems to me to be the best that can be hoped for.
I don't think that Blair and Brown differ very much ideologically to be honest; but I think that after Blair we have a window in which we can shift the party significantly to the Left - not far enough for the Marxist Left, but at least in the right direction.
QUOTE(JBoyd @ Feb 3 2007, 09:20 PM)
It seems to me that the Labour Party has always been a "broad church" to use the old description, including Fabians, Marxists, Christian Socialists, Social Democrats and Left Liberals; that in many ways has been its strength. It is not going to abolish capitalism, if for no other reason than the fact that the desire to abolish capitalism has never been strong enough in the country as a whole. However, it has been successful at delivering social progress and equality of opportunity within a capitalist context, and that, in the absence of an upsurge of support for revolutionary socialism seems to me to be the best that can be hoped for.
I don't think that Blair and Brown differ very much ideologically to be honest; but I think that after Blair we have a window in which we can shift the party significantly to the Left - not far enough for the Marxist Left, but at least in the right direction.
I think you are absolutely right. Unfortunately, the 'broad church' thing is also Labour's weakness. I would also suggest that having no left leaning daily newspaper, with the exception of The Grauniad, is also a weakness. For my money, the reason for the rise of Blair was initially a response to the Tory press's crowing about successive shitbag electoral victories. I well remember good friends, good socialists going on about electoral victory at any price. Hence, the 'modernising' movement of Blair and his cronies. Of course, the political mood of UK is such that a genuinely socialist party would not win a game of dominoes let alone an election. Unfortunately, we still inhabit the reality of Thatcher's Britain with all the selfishness, materialism and insular xenophobia that she and her cronies promoted.
I have enjoyed the work of Erich Fromm for many years. Here's something he wrote:
"While the having persons rely on what they have, the being persons rely on the fact that they are, that they are alive and that something new will be born if only they have the courage to let go and respond. They become fully alive in the conversation because they do not stifle themselves by anxious concern with what they have. Their own aliveness is infectious and often helps the other person to transcend his or her egocentricity. Thus the conversation ceases to be an exchange of commodities (information, knowledge, status) and becomes a dialogue in which it does not matter any more who is right." (Fromm 1979)
I wish I could live like that. And I wish the Labour Party was like that too.
QUOTE(Andy Larter @ Feb 4 2007, 01:33 PM)
QUOTE(JBoyd @ Feb 3 2007, 09:20 PM)
It seems to me that the Labour Party has always been a "broad church" to use the old description, including Fabians, Marxists, Christian Socialists, Social Democrats and Left Liberals; that in many ways has been its strength. It is not going to abolish capitalism, if for no other reason than the fact that the desire to abolish capitalism has never been strong enough in the country as a whole. However, it has been successful at delivering social progress and equality of opportunity within a capitalist context, and that, in the absence of an upsurge of support for revolutionary socialism seems to me to be the best that can be hoped for.
I don't think that Blair and Brown differ very much ideologically to be honest; but I think that after Blair we have a window in which we can shift the party significantly to the Left - not far enough for the Marxist Left, but at least in the right direction.
I think you are absolutely right. Unfortunately, the 'broad church' thing is also Labour's weakness. I would also suggest that having no left leaning daily newspaper, with the exception of The Grauniad, is also a weakness. For my money, the reason for the rise of Blair was initially a response to the Tory press's crowing about successive shitbag electoral victories. I well remember good friends, good socialists going on about electoral victory at any price. Hence, the 'modernising' movement of Blair and his cronies. Of course, the political mood of UK is such that a genuinely socialist party would not win a game of dominoes let alone an election. Unfortunately, we still inhabit the reality of Thatcher's Britain with all the selfishness, materialism and insular xenophobia that she and her cronies promoted.
I have enjoyed the work of Erich Fromm for many years. Here's something he wrote:
"While the having persons rely on what they have, the being persons rely on the fact that they are, that they are alive and that something new will be born if only they have the courage to let go and respond. They become fully alive in the conversation because they do not stifle themselves by anxious concern with what they have. Their own aliveness is infectious and often helps the other person to transcend his or her egocentricity. Thus the conversation ceases to be an exchange of commodities (information, knowledge, status) and becomes a dialogue in which it does not matter any more who is right." (Fromm 1979)
I wish I could live like that. And I wish the Labour Party was like that too.
Yes, I agree entirely; but I think we have an opportunity to make the Labour Party more democratic - to ensure that members determine policy rather than Trade Union Block votes and backroom horse-trading, or at least that we have real influence over it.
It is not going to be easy, but it is possible, and it is worth fighting for.
QUOTE(JBoyd @ Feb 4 2007, 10:10 PM)
I think we have an opportunity to make the Labour Party more democratic - to ensure that members determine policy rather than Trade Union Block votes and backroom horse-trading, or at least that we have real influence over it.
It is not going to be easy, but it is possible, and it is worth fighting for.
Well, after my experiences over the years, I'll leave it to you.
You're not any relation to Boyd in "Waking The Dead" are you?
QUOTE(Andy Larter @ Feb 5 2007, 07:41 PM)
QUOTE(JBoyd @ Feb 4 2007, 10:10 PM)
I think we have an opportunity to make the Labour Party more democratic - to ensure that members determine policy rather than Trade Union Block votes and backroom horse-trading, or at least that we have real influence over it.
It is not going to be easy, but it is possible, and it is worth fighting for.
Well, after my experiences over the years, I'll leave it to you.
You're not any relation to Boyd in "Waking The Dead" are you?
Yes, I'm his Dad....
In which case, look after him. He is clearly in need of psychiatric treatment.
This should perhaps be in the 'listen again' thread, but that chap Andy Larter mentioned, Nick Cohen, has written his book called ''What's left?: How the liberals lost their way'' and he was in the studio discussing it with Robert Elms on BBC London radio. It's just a 20 minute conversation, and they talk about Billy Bragg for a few moments.
I dont know what to think of Cohen. I'll have to read some reviews, and take a look at the book.
If you click on todays Robert Elms show (wednesday) and click foreward 2 and a half hours, it comes on after that song.
I dont know what to think of Cohen. I'll have to read some reviews, and take a look at the book.
If you click on todays Robert Elms show (wednesday) and click foreward 2 and a half hours, it comes on after that song.
QUOTE(damon @ Feb 7 2007, 03:39 PM)
This should perhaps be in the 'listen again' thread, but that chap Andy Larter mentioned, Nick Cohen, has written his book called ''What's left?: How the liberals lost their way'' and he was in the studio discussing it with Robert Elms on BBC London radio. It's just a 20 minute conversation, and they talk about Billy Bragg for a few moments.
I dont know what to think of Cohen. I'll have to read some reviews, and take a look at the book.
If you click on todays Robert Elms show (wednesday) and click foreward 2 and a half hours, it comes on after that song.
I'm not sure either. Sometimes he seems to be trying to make a name for himself rather than do some journalism. The stuff from the book that I've read is certainly challenging. However, he seems to overlook the way the invasion took place and who did it.
Aint gonna pretend ive read the whole thread cos i aint but a few thoughts.
God help the Labour party if the militants try to get a foothold again. What is it with some of you on here. Youo seem determined to bring the Labour party down, have you actually thought what the alternative is???? Do you realy want a Cameron lead tory party in power????
Being in government was never gonna be the easy peice of cake some of you dreamers seem to think it would be, being in power means making tough decisions and sometimes not popular ones. What exactly did you expect the Labour party to do in power.
They have done wonders and still you aint satisfied. Some of you lot wont be happy till your in opposition again.
You change fuck all in opposition though people.
Lets look at some of Labours major achievements.
1. Lowest inflation since the 60s
2. Lowest mortgage rates for 40 years
3. Introduced the National Minimum Wage
4. Record police numbers in England and Wales
5. Cut overall crime by 30 per cent
6. Record levels of literacy and numeracy in schools
7. Best-ever primary school results
8. Funding for every pupil in England to double (since 1997) by 2007-08
9. Lowest unemployment for 29 years
10. Written off up to 100 per cent of debt owed by poorest counties
11. 77,500 more nurses
12. 19,300 more doctors
13. Brought back matrons to hospital wards
14. Devolved power to the Scottish Parliament
15. Devolved power to Welsh Assembly
16. Banned anti-personnel mines
17. NHS Direct offering free convenient patient advice at any time
18. New Deal - helped over a million people into work
19. Local government funding has increased by a third in real terms
20. Equalised the age of consent for gay men
21. Free entry to all national museums and galleries
22. Overseas aid budget more than doubled
23. Restored city-wide government to London
24. Child benefit up 25 per cent since 1997
25. Created Sure Start to help children from low income households
26. Introduced the Disability Rights Commission
27. £200 winter fuel payment to pensioners & extra £100 for over-80s
28. The biggest rolling stock replacement programme ever seen on our railways
29. Negotiated the historic Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland
30. Over 28,000 more teachers in England schools
31. Implemented the Freedom of Information Act
32. All workers now have a right to 4 weeks’ paid holiday
33. Record rises in the state pension
34. 600,000 children lifted out of relative poverty
35. Introduced child tax credit giving more money to parents
36. Banned handguns
37. Cut long-term youth unemployment by 75 per cent
38. Free nursery places for three and four-year-olds in England, Scotland and Wales
39. Free fruit for all four to six-year-olds at school
40. Free school milk for five, six and seven-year-olds in Wales
41. Record police numbers in Scotland
42. Implemented the Human Rights Act
43. Cleanest rivers, beaches, drinking water and air since the industrial revolution
44. Free TV licences for over-75s
45. Banned fur farming and the testing of cosmetics on animals
46. Halved maximum waiting times for NHS operations
47. Free local bus travel for the over-60s and the disabled in Wales and Scotland
48. Record number of students in higher education
49. Extended the Race Relations Act so that all public bodies and functions now have a duty to promote race equality
50. Five, six and seven-year-olds in class sizes of 30 or less
Some of you wanna remember this instead of fucking moaning all the time.
I thank you
God help the Labour party if the militants try to get a foothold again. What is it with some of you on here. Youo seem determined to bring the Labour party down, have you actually thought what the alternative is???? Do you realy want a Cameron lead tory party in power????
Being in government was never gonna be the easy peice of cake some of you dreamers seem to think it would be, being in power means making tough decisions and sometimes not popular ones. What exactly did you expect the Labour party to do in power.
They have done wonders and still you aint satisfied. Some of you lot wont be happy till your in opposition again.
You change fuck all in opposition though people.
Lets look at some of Labours major achievements.
1. Lowest inflation since the 60s
2. Lowest mortgage rates for 40 years
3. Introduced the National Minimum Wage
4. Record police numbers in England and Wales
5. Cut overall crime by 30 per cent
6. Record levels of literacy and numeracy in schools
7. Best-ever primary school results
8. Funding for every pupil in England to double (since 1997) by 2007-08
9. Lowest unemployment for 29 years
10. Written off up to 100 per cent of debt owed by poorest counties
11. 77,500 more nurses
12. 19,300 more doctors
13. Brought back matrons to hospital wards
14. Devolved power to the Scottish Parliament
15. Devolved power to Welsh Assembly
16. Banned anti-personnel mines
17. NHS Direct offering free convenient patient advice at any time
18. New Deal - helped over a million people into work
19. Local government funding has increased by a third in real terms
20. Equalised the age of consent for gay men
21. Free entry to all national museums and galleries
22. Overseas aid budget more than doubled
23. Restored city-wide government to London
24. Child benefit up 25 per cent since 1997
25. Created Sure Start to help children from low income households
26. Introduced the Disability Rights Commission
27. £200 winter fuel payment to pensioners & extra £100 for over-80s
28. The biggest rolling stock replacement programme ever seen on our railways
29. Negotiated the historic Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland
30. Over 28,000 more teachers in England schools
31. Implemented the Freedom of Information Act
32. All workers now have a right to 4 weeks’ paid holiday
33. Record rises in the state pension
34. 600,000 children lifted out of relative poverty
35. Introduced child tax credit giving more money to parents
36. Banned handguns
37. Cut long-term youth unemployment by 75 per cent
38. Free nursery places for three and four-year-olds in England, Scotland and Wales
39. Free fruit for all four to six-year-olds at school
40. Free school milk for five, six and seven-year-olds in Wales
41. Record police numbers in Scotland
42. Implemented the Human Rights Act
43. Cleanest rivers, beaches, drinking water and air since the industrial revolution
44. Free TV licences for over-75s
45. Banned fur farming and the testing of cosmetics on animals
46. Halved maximum waiting times for NHS operations
47. Free local bus travel for the over-60s and the disabled in Wales and Scotland
48. Record number of students in higher education
49. Extended the Race Relations Act so that all public bodies and functions now have a duty to promote race equality
50. Five, six and seven-year-olds in class sizes of 30 or less
Some of you wanna remember this instead of fucking moaning all the time.
I thank you
QUOTE
Aint gonna pretend ive read the whole thread cos i aint but a few thoughts.
Always a good start.
As for your illustrious list...........If the NHS, schools and Police are now so wonderful (15 out your 50 points) why are you constantly complaining about them ?
QUOTE(aquaman @ Feb 10 2007, 01:10 AM)
QUOTE
Aint gonna pretend ive read the whole thread cos i aint but a few thoughts.
Always a good start.
As for your illustrious list...........If the NHS, schools and Police are now so wonderful (15 out your 50 points) why are you constantly complaining about them ?
Always a good start, well i read through quite a lot of posts to get the feel of whats been said, is that okay or do you read through every post when youve not bothered for a while?
As for me slagging off the police?????? not me my friend im very supportive of the police and the job they do in very difficult circumstances - especialy when the likes of a lot on boards like this are only too eager to have a dig at them given the slightest opportunaty.
NHS, again very pro the NHS, it has its problems as does any big organisation but its better than it ever was under the tories. Now what about my other 48 points are you gonna add to the debate and knock them????
Not being funny here, but i cant believe anyone can keep on knocking the labour party given the facts of what they have done.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.