tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post7718998857927169469..comments2023-10-21T16:25:58.899+01:00Comments on Three Score Years And Ten: Labour : Yesterday, Today and TomorrowHarry Barneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01600933854461096745noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-35683398927739925802016-02-01T20:39:24.527+00:002016-02-01T20:39:24.527+00:00Ernie : We certainly need to find ways to make use...Ernie : We certainly need to find ways to make use of modern technology in politics. The information and misinformation which can be accessed at the click of a button is massive. But we also need to participate in genuine discussions also. Participation is educative and should be a key part of the democratic process. There is a danger if we don't search out each others ideas and arguments in genuine debate that we will just latch onto the ideas that comfort us. We need to be into participatory forms of education for life. Much can be found out via the internet, but ideas can only fully be developed in genuine face to face discourse. Of course, meetings can be used for other purposes. But it is up to us all to encourage genuine debate and democratic decision making - even when Hilary Benn is sitting around the table with us. <br /><br />There is news that an extra 800,000 people are missing from electoral registers due to the new individual registration system. We are slipping back to the days before the Suffragettes and the Chartists. Yet many groups work to obtain fuller registration, including the Labour Party. So we need to do whatever we can on such matters - even blogging. <br /><br />One certainly could not live on Labour Party Branch meetings alone - unless we change them massively, as some of us keep trying to do. In January I also managed a Sheffield Momentum meeting, a Dronfield Discussion meeting, a lively Constituency meeting, a 10am to 4pm event on Labour Past and Present by the Independent Working Class Education Network (which led to me cobbling together the above blog item on this thread) and a meeting of the North Notts and North Derbyshire Derbyshire Labour History Society. <br /><br />When it comes to the Union, I feel that we need bigger Unions not smaller ones. For the power of capital which we need to tackle operates at its most powerful on a multilateral basis. We are probably on a loser, but if we don't mobilise as best we can with others then things are bound to get even worse. If the Westminster bubble is in the way, then we need to seek to burst it. We can reorganise Westminster, get rid of the Lords and other old fashioned activities - and even construct a fresh building away from London.Harry Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01600933854461096745noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-67151357630784973802016-02-01T12:27:06.320+00:002016-02-01T12:27:06.320+00:00Harry
Cannot disagree with the broad thrust of yo...Harry<br /><br />Cannot disagree with the broad thrust of your perspective on Labour’s problems since the general election defeat, change of leadership and the resultant civil war. <br /><br />But of course we do have differences insofar as while I agree that policy making should ideally be done collectively and via discussion meetings I think that, by and large, those days have long gone and that (even in a conservative culture, with a hostile press and big money lobbying) the way forward is via easy electronic voting and more use of social media. <br /><br />In this regard, I have a Facebook account (a bit problematic insofar as this US Company is a serial tax avoider) and with just 59 friends (many of whom are family and ILP colleagues, I cannot say that my influence is that great. But what I am sure is that it is infinitely greater than it would be attending Labour Party branch meetings. People I have never heard of and across the country will often like and comment on my posts (no matter how crude and infantile) and in a way that is inconceivable via traditional means. Of course many will be like-minded people and others will disagree fundamentally with my lefty posts and comments but while newspapers are in steep decline and traditional journalism no longer has the monopoly it once had, social media does give a voice to the plebs. So despite lots of questionable content, this to my mind is no bad thing and is progress. <br /> <br />https://www.facebook.com/IDSout/photos/a.817588894973811.1073741826.334722463260459/817472324985468/?type=3<br /><br />Your emphasis on the union is not something that gives me sleepless nights insofar as I believe that the end of the union would be no great loss if the Scottish people were able to break from the yoke of Westminster, turn their backs on austerity, ditch Trident and nuclear weapons and govern more fairly without their political representatives being corrupted and in the pocket of big money and multi-national corporations. Not that the SNP is pure white in this regard but it is anti-austerity and much more social democratic than Labour, despite the pull of nationalism. That is why Labour got dumped in the general election in its Scottish heartlands.<br /><br />But the point you make about Easington and so many more mining and former industrial areas – even when – represented by good and genuine MP’s, is a real indictment of a Labour Party in government nationally and locally allowing the victims of industrial reorganisation and technological change and their communities to rot and become drug and crime infested hell holes. And that to my mind, along with growing inequality and a casino economy and obscene celebrity culture where the rich get super-rich and the poor get shafted, is the true legacy the Blair and Brown Labour governments.<br /><br />So a new, more efficient, modern and fairer voting system together with a realignment of the progressive left and an end to two party (Bugins –turn) and plutocratic government would be no bad thing. In the meantime I would prefer to see Corbyn and Momentum move away from blind party tribalism and work with other party’s on progressive policies and to oppose the Tory government root and branch. Getting rid of Trident and nuclear weapons and using the money more productively and fairly is, to my mind, more important than keeping Hilary Benn sweet. In any event the way the Parliamentary party is behaving, a spilt seems inevitable.<br /><br />Plenty to disagree about there but surely we can agree that the status-quo is not only corrupt, it is busted and that some in the Parliamentary Labour Party are delusional and just don’t get it.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17418284619910629989noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-16999943691640901492016-01-29T19:55:11.735+00:002016-01-29T19:55:11.735+00:00(Part 2) I am all for democracy within the Labour ...(Part 2) I am all for democracy within the Labour Party also. But I am not for the main emphasis being placed on a form of press button democracy. That places power in the hands of those who decide what questions are being asked and what are given as the options. It is a bit like "Strictly Come Dancing" with none of us having decided who the dancers will be. We need certain decisions to be made via avenues of partipatory democracy in which Party members are encouraged to attend meetings to shape the options - via genuine debate and discussion. Mandated conference delegates can then vote on the options if the system is not fiddled by the high and mighty. The problem at the moment is that few Labour Party members attend meetings and the bulk of meetings which are held are not user friendly. So that needs working upon also. Of course, areas of push button democracy could still be used. But it should supplement participatory democracy and not manipulate it. <br /><br />But I don't think that there are any easy avenues for advancing overall electoral or internal Labour Party democracy. Only eternal vigilence. At the moment this still seems to me to be worth the effort of pushing.<br /><br />I doubt whether I will get to Kirkcaldy, but I am used to something of what you describe in the former mainly mining Constituency at Easington in the North East - where I originate from. Yet it has a good solid Labour MP who matches the best of any Labour MPs on local commitments.<br /><br />From my point of view the SNP's problems is that it wishes to end the Union. What of pressing for a federated structure, with the Labour Party committed to an overall anti-austerity and an anti-Trident stances? For myself I am not, however, sure that Trident should be the current stricking point. At the moment its retention is part of Labour's agreed policy, although our adoption of that line was made without a full and fearless discussion amongst the membership. What if a Nye Bevan style approach could use Trident's removal as part of a bargain to obtain wider nuclear de-esculation? I offer the thought even though I am a former Aldermaston marcher. Things are not as clearcut today as they were then.<br /><br />(End)Harry Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01600933854461096745noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-11724576226210123172016-01-29T19:51:13.001+00:002016-01-29T19:51:13.001+00:00Ernie (This response is in two or more parts for t...Ernie (This response is in two or more parts for technical reasons): What we do is, of course, influenced by our immediate environment. The fact that I live less then half a mile from the Dronfield Contact Club and have attended Labour Movement activities there for almost half a century and still have friends who attend from the early days, deeply shapes my Labour Movement activities. We even had a local ILP branch operating at the Club once (it also operated in Chesterfield).You addressed us once, although we had alternating ILP and Fabian meetings at the time.But it was the same people attending.<br /><br />The positive avenues you stress which appeal to me are efforts to democratise both the Labour Party and electoral politics generally. You strees specific avenues such as Momentum, the York People's Assembly and (in general terms) Jeremy Corbyn's lead. I am on Sheffield Momentum's email list and have attended one of their open meetings. I will now also look at the work of the Sheffield People's Assembly with a view to getting one of their speakers to address a discussion meeting. Unfortunately, I sometimes miss out on Sheffield developments. For although it is only a mile to my north, we are in different Labour Party Regions and County/Town structures. <br /><br />There are other matters you stress which I have both sympathies with and possible reservations about over details. Especially around the problem of democracy.<br /><br />As my above blog item indicates, we now have an electoral system that is not fit for purpose. It worked reasonably in the period of two party politics. This was even helpful to us at one time. When Tory v Labour dominated it showed something of a (sometimes weak) class division - most people were stuck within the two camps in the 1951 election, which I covered in my above item. But now we have moved into an entirely different ball game. If we take into account disillusioned non-voters and those who have not even registered to vote (which will get worse under individual registration), then a figure as low as only 36% may have voted for the two "major" parties at the last General Election. Less than around a sixth of the possible voters bothering to opt for Labour. And some of those who voted for us did so out of habit, rather than conviction. <br /><br />We should not, however, chuck the baby out with the bathwater in correcting the situation. In a limited number of cases, a good relationship exists between MPs and their constituents. This seems to operate in Jeremy Cortyn's case - although it is helped by the fact that his seat is in London. Then (unless things have changed) the Irish and the Germans have interesting electoral systems which are worth examining. The Irish have a single-transferable vote in multi-member constituencies. Although this produces large constituencies it also produces a much more proportionate result. Thus elected MPs in a multi-member seat are in competition to serve their constituents. And constituents can turn to the one they prefer. In Germany there is a two ballot system. With one vote they elect constituency MPs for half of the seats. The other vote is used for top-up arrangements which operate in such a way that it finally produces a proportionate overall result. This works within federal units, so that even the top-up candidates are not likely to be too far away from their voters. We could also insist that candidates only qualify who have lived in the relevant electoral area for a given period.Harry Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01600933854461096745noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-358754194700134942016-01-28T21:36:37.299+00:002016-01-28T21:36:37.299+00:00Harry
I have been on the wrong side of history al...Harry<br /><br />I have been on the wrong side of history all of my political life although I do admire and respect the politics of the ILP and many other decent and honourable people I have met in the Labour Party and trade unions. <br /><br />It’s just that I have become ultra-cynical and upset that we seem to live in a plutocracy where Westminster politicians (of all persuasions) seem to go native and end up in the pockets of corporate Britain and big money. And let face it without structural change, an end to FPTP and the Westminster gravy train, with more devolution and electronic voting, nothing much is going to change anytime soon no matter who leads the Labour Party.<br /><br />If you ask me what we can do? - well not much – save support Jeremy Corbyn (when he’s not in stupid mode like sailing trident nuclear subs around the world without war heads) and treating all in Labour's broad church members with respect even when we disagree, providing policy is decided not by machine politics or second guessing focus groups but by a proper one-member-one vote voting system. I personally would opt of a PR electoral system and voting by e-mail both during elections and within party politics. In a conservative culture that is no panacea but anything that shifts power away from party machines, corporate lobby groups and the corrosive effect of big money would be an improvement on the status quo.<br /><br />That is a very personal perspective and I suspect few in the ILP would support me. But at the end of the day my loyalty is to policy not to some tribe called the Labour Party. <br /><br />Had I lived in Scotland during the referendum campaign I would have voted SNP with my son and daughter-in-law who in their mid 30’s voted for the very first time ever and not Labour. And they did so not because the SNP is a nationalist party, but because, with all its faults, it is anti-austerity and against Trident and nuclear weapons and because Labour in its Fife heartlands (Gordon Brown’s Kirkcaldy) was a complete waste of space. Harry go and visit Kirkcaldy sometime, it’s a shit hole where there has been no investment or community regeneration in decades and where unemployment and poverty is palpable. So while Brown & Darling would talk laud (at election time) about their socialist roots and Labour values, the people they were supposed to represent got shafted and the spivs and crooks in the city whose greed caused the financial crash, were lauded, given gongs and oceans of printed money via Quantitative Easing. that is not fair, it is naked cowardice and stupidy<br /><br />So from here in North Yorkshire, for what it’s worth, my policy via social media and via my involvement with the York Peoples Assembly and friends and neighbours is to support Jeremy Corbyn, promote ILP policy and values as best I can and hope against hope that Momentum and Corbyn’s Westminster supporters can turn the tide and make Labour a pro austerity, anti-trident, membership party that resonates with the people and can defeat the Tories at the next election. An Impossible Dream, me thinks.<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17418284619910629989noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-70022532304397145772016-01-28T18:50:03.229+00:002016-01-28T18:50:03.229+00:00It matters what everyone thinks, especially people...It matters what everyone thinks, especially people with strong political feelings such as yourself. You have expressed highly critical views of what you see as strong elements in the Parliamentary Labour Party who are careerists and firmly in the the Blairite tradition. You feel that these are finally destroying the Labour Party as any feasible avenue for any form of democratic socialism.<br /><br />So where does that lead us ? Do we work to smash their influence within the Labour Party? If so, what avenues should we try ?<br /><br />Or is that just a waste of time and effort? So should we look elsewhere? The only recent alternative you seem to have favoured is the SNP. Is this still the case ? Would you like to see an English supporters group backing them ? And should we have an English eqivalent of the SNP - such as a left-wing English National Party ? Could it be for democratic socialists?<br /><br />I know that we can't just dream things up, but in what directions should we look ?<br /><br />Another option, of course, is to say that the position is beyond redemption. So what about support for alternative worthwhile social groups ? This could be a fruitful add on to warning us about the failings of the parliamentary option. <br /><br />Your approach could be the correct one. Why not try to get the scales to fall from the eyes of people like myself.Harry Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01600933854461096745noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-89347562039079141232016-01-28T17:53:23.280+00:002016-01-28T17:53:23.280+00:00Well Harry it really doesn’t matter what I think. ...Well Harry it really doesn’t matter what I think. <br /><br />Watching Labour’s rebellious MP,s and grandees brief against and undermine Jeremy Corbyn, the membership choice, day in day out is as unedifying as it is, distasteful, disrespectful and undemocratic. An exercise in disunity which is bound to play poorly with the public, voting numbers and the concept of a Labour Party broad church And from the perspective of many party members and most social democrats and socialist, it will end badly. <br /><br />The likely outcome being a coup d'état by the Blairite group of MP,s supported by those whose primary focus is themselves and their careers. But if that happens, Westminster Labour will have achieved a pyrrhic-victory and the further fragmentation of the Labour Party.<br /><br />But as I said, Harry, watching this saga play out is a bit like watching a storm cloud on the North Yorkshire moors, hoping it will pass without getting a soaking but being powerless to do anything about it. <br /><br />And if Labour cannot or won’t change direction, then from my perspective (I’m not a tribal person) it will be good riddance to bad rubbish, accept that the Tory rubbish will have free reign until the economy goes bottom up and/or an anti-austerity coalition can replace Labour’s neoliberal rump. <br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17418284619910629989noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-2684675689784551752016-01-28T12:35:26.012+00:002016-01-28T12:35:26.012+00:00If Labour fragments, then is there a likely fragme...If Labour fragments, then is there a likely fragment for democratic socialists to link with? Are there alternative avenues for activists anywhere else in my above list from (b) to (e) ? <br /><br />Momentum in Sheffield have set up an organisational meeting and state "Please note that this meeting is for Labour Party members, affiliates,and supporters and those who agree with Labour values and don't support rival parties that stand against Labour." Apart from the problem of sorting out what Labour's values are, would you recommend that these categories of people should seek to get involved ?" Are there better options?<br /><br />As you "know what you think", just let us have your advice.Harry Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01600933854461096745noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31588679.post-57392525795054653612016-01-28T11:11:52.144+00:002016-01-28T11:11:52.144+00:00New Labour and the neoliberal horror story with it...New Labour and the neoliberal horror story with its trickle-down economics (con trick) is dead and hopefully there is no going back. So the delusional Blairites and Labour grandees like Kinnock, Mandelson, et al should shut up and go to sleep in the Westminster museum they now call home.<br /><br />Question is, can a broad church Labour Party with so many rebellious and malcontent MP,s, many desperate to join the Westminster gravy train and follow in the wake of Tony Blair, Jack Straw, Gordon Brown (now with US investment bank Pimcoa and no doubt inculcating his famous socialist /Labour values to the super-rich) Alistair Darling (employed by finance crooks Morgan Stanley) and uncle Tom Cobley and all -----------Survive? Or is it about to implode and go the way of all flesh.<br /> <br />Because if the Labour Party cannot or will not change direction or even admit that it got many things wrong, that light touch regulation was a disaster and that along with the Tories it has rewarded the super-rich, hedge fund traders and corporate crooks at the expense of our public services, the welfare state and our most poor and vulnerable citizens, --------------- then does it matter whether it fragments or not?<br /><br />I know what I think!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17418284619910629989noreply@blogger.com