MAY 1st - HOW TO VOTE
Outside London there are several progressive candidates standing, for a variety of parties and we wish them all well.
In London, vote for Ken Livingstone for Mayor; and George Galloway for the GLA (Respect - 11th on the orange ballot paper)
In City and East constituency in London, vote Hanif Abdulmuhit (Respect - number 1 on the yellow ballot paper)
See also the BBC story: Respect confident of assembly win
George Galloway is confident that by Friday he will hold two posts - MP and London Assembly member.
The Bethnal Green and Bow MP is top of Respect’s list for the London-wide list, which is elected by a form of proportional representation.
He is losing his voice after talking “seven hours a day” from the top of his open-top bus which has been through all corners of London “at least twice”.
He says it is important Respect wins a seat, if Boris Johnson is to be mayor.
The party is fielding 12 candidates and targeting one constituency seat, City and East, and says the response has been “very good”.
Mr Galloway said he was looking forward to a result that will “surprise” the media.
‘Important platform’
“The best result we can contemplate at the moment is winning the City and East constituency which is our heartland, and my election as top of the list,” he said.
But he admits City and East could be difficult to win as it a geographically large seat with a varied electorate - taking in areas like the City of London and Barking and Dagenham - where the BNP hold 12 council seats.
Mr Galloway intends to carry on as MP for Bethnal Green and Bow if he is elected to the assembly: “I would be doing two jobs for one salary, so the London taxpayer will gain from electing me.”
“It’s an important platform and I intend to do my best with it to fight for the interests of the people we represent, the working people, the poorest people, the minority communities who need a big voice in London.”
The party is also fielding candidates in by-elections for Tower Hamlets council, and in councils in Manchester, Wigan, Birmingham, Bradford and Walsall.
BY the way, I just saw Lindsey german’s final CiF article before the election, and it is totally unhelpful and exemplifies what is wrong with the left list’s campaign:
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/lindsey_german/2008/04/turn_left.html
This is what she says:
It goes on to give grudging recommendation to give a second preference to Livingstone. But this nihilistic anti-politics stance is exactly the opposite of what is needed, when there is a vital battle to get the vote out to defend Livingstone’s mayoralty; and to keep out the BNP.
The funny thing is, before the SWP were bitten by the elections bug they would never have made these mistakes.
Comment by Andy Newman — 30 April, 2008 @ 7:52 pm
Can’t wait for these elections to be over and for this blog to stop being the ‘Vote Ken’ blog.
Comment by James N — 30 April, 2008 @ 7:58 pm
Looks like there is some sexual tension between the two
lol just kiddin
It’s so nice to see Ken and George united, they’re both probably the most powerful anti-war, anti racist politicians in Britain today.
Comment by Tabish M — 30 April, 2008 @ 8:03 pm
For Andy, criticising what Tessa Jowell comes out with is now beyond the pale.
Comment by Keith Watermelon — 30 April, 2008 @ 8:06 pm
Can’t wait for these elections to be over and for this blog to stop being the ‘Vote Ken’ blog.
And presumably become the vote Brown blog?
Comment by Keith Watermelon — 30 April, 2008 @ 8:07 pm
No Andy. I can’t imagine a situation where we would ignore a politician boasting about how striking workers didn’t do wellon his watch when arguing that it was still neccessary to kick the Tories out. Thats never been the SWP tradition. Its also just true that people are finding it hard. Thats not nihilism. Thats the truth. And thats why its close. Thats why there has to be an alternative. And thats why it makes sense to vote Lyndsey 1 and Ken 2 for mayo.
Simple and straightfoward and the very opposite of nihilism.
Comment by johng — 30 April, 2008 @ 8:16 pm
i feel sorry for The swp (sorry left list) i doubt they will even get their deposits back. oh well …… their mothers love them.
Comment by leo gray o waggle — 30 April, 2008 @ 8:28 pm
And does it make sense to vote against Galloway for the st, johng?
Also, Andy, could you amend: Hanif Abdulmuhit is number 1 on the yellow ballot paper in East London.
Comment by Nas — 30 April, 2008 @ 8:28 pm
John
To suggest as Lindsey does that there is little to choose between Livingstone and Johnson in terms of policy is ludicrous.
You note that Lindsey German doesn’t even mention that Boris Johnson - who may well win - has promised to introduce a no strike deal on the underground.
There is no sense whatsoever in Lindsey german’s article that she sees herself as part of the same team as the millions of labour voters and thousands of trade union activists working hard to get Livingstone re-elected. And that is a real break from the traditional politics of the SWP.
Comment by Andy Newman — 30 April, 2008 @ 8:32 pm
I would be doing two jobs for one salary
the fifth highest mp’s salary in the country, to be precise. bargain!
Comment by Keith Watermelon — 30 April, 2008 @ 8:32 pm
yeah and worth every penny.
Comment by leo gray o waggle — 30 April, 2008 @ 8:34 pm
#8 whoops good point Nas, done now.
Comment by Andy Newman — 30 April, 2008 @ 8:34 pm
A picture of Ken with his arm round Galloway ??
What the fuck ?
As I’ve said, electoralism taken to it’s most absurd conclusion.
And this from the man who says he thinks Tibet is “better off sticking with China” as if it’s a utilities provider.
Andy, what on earth has happened to your politics over the past 3 months ?
Right down the pan.
Comment by Eddie Truman — 30 April, 2008 @ 8:38 pm
you can delete the last comment all you want, but the bbc still says:
Mr Livingstone intends to carry on as MP for Bethnal Green and Bow if he is elected to the assembly
which is amusing
Comment by Keith Watermelon — 30 April, 2008 @ 8:46 pm
Eddie - the direct relevence of the national question in Tibet to the London election eludes me.
However, while I have always given, and continue to give unconditional support to the Scottish Socialist Party in Scotland, I am always very careful when discussing politics within the UK to limit my remit to England.
In Scotland you are operating in an entirely different political context, and I am sure that the necessaity of both re-electing Livingstone, and also positioning the political left within the broader movement to re-elect Ken Livingstone does not seem so urgent in Edinburgh.
Comment by Andy Newman — 30 April, 2008 @ 8:49 pm
Apparently the City agrees that Londoners should re-elect Livingstone:
“Big business, big developers, see Ken as a relatively safe bet,” said Tony Travers, director of the greater London group at the London School of Economics. “Ken’s vision of urban priorities is in its way Thatcherite – he’s an über-Blairite who believes in London’s rapid development [with] lots of tall buildings, and business success.”
From FT.com - you need to register to read the full article.
Andy wrote: “You note that Lindsey German doesn’t even mention that Boris Johnson - who may well win - has promised to introduce a no strike deal on the underground.”
Lindsey German, paragraph 3: “Boris wants a no-strike deal on the tube - but Livingstone says “I established a rule that if a trade union goes on strike on the Underground they never get anything… Never once has a strike resulted in any benefit to the strikers.”
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/lindsey_german/2008/04/turn_left.html
Comment by redbedhead — 30 April, 2008 @ 8:50 pm
#6 johng Is correct that Livingstone hasn’t much sympathy for strikes. Then again, as he’s their managger, you’d hardly expect him to.
The problem with a syndicalist view of how you characterise everyone politically, you don’t consider how much better off the working conditions are if Ken runs things, rather than someone else - not just Boris, but also government departments under this government.
Ken did not support tube workers strike - and made stupid comments about crossing picket lines. What is forgotten by some is how much he wanted metronet in public ownership. Not everything - if much at all - is achieved by strikes.(Which isn’t of course to say they aren’t necessary) The dividing line is not always for or against a strike.
It is sad that so many on the left cannot see that it is easier to defend working class interests by Ken’s re-election. That is the content of support for him, not issues that no one else out there is talking about.
Having worked in different ays in this election both for Ken and George, the issues raised are about transport and emission charges, occasionally bendy-buses. People who use public transport praised it - including the cost, which shows how out of touch SWP contributors are. Maybe some of us are nearer to receiving the freedom pass than others, I don’t know. Occasionally regurgitating the Standard lies. No one raised the issues the SWP find so important (well OK Lindsey’s against bendy-buses, but I don’t think that’s part of Left List’s main programme) These are the issues - I couldn’t find any of them in classic Marxist texts, try as I did. But these are the day to day issues that matter to working class people and campaigning for Ken is worth it.
Comment by Howard T — 30 April, 2008 @ 8:50 pm
It doesn’t seem anywhere near so urgent in Manchester either. “…and we wish them all well” - is that it for the rest of the country?
Comment by Phil — 30 April, 2008 @ 8:52 pm
Redhead - I stand corrected over the detail of Lindesy’s article, but the political point remains. She uses Livingstone’s quote about strikes in order to minimise the effect of the threat of Johnson wanting a no stike deal.
In my union, when I was at Regional Council a week or so ago, there was a very real disappintment and even anger against Gordon brown, and a very different attaitude to Livingstone. Yet you bundle them all together, ignoring the real debates within the working class movement.
Comment by Andy Newman — 30 April, 2008 @ 8:53 pm
so howard t expects us to believe that nobody has raised housing, the credit crunch and looming recession, the war or rising food and fuel prices?
Comment by Keith Watermelon — 30 April, 2008 @ 8:56 pm
#20
certainly no-one has mentioned the issues you list to me when I have been canvassing in Birmingham, where the key issues have been the Red Route and immigration.
Comment by Andy Newman — 30 April, 2008 @ 9:00 pm
Andy - the point she is making in the article is that people need to know that the reason for opposition to Ken is not that the population has shifted to the right or become apathetic (which is the New Labour lie about why decreasing numbers of people bother to vote). The problem is that Ken has shifted to the right - certainly the City knows it, as indicated in the above quote.
As Lindsey writes: “I’m calling for a second preference for Ken Livingstone because whatever my differences with him I don’t want to see an Eton-educated Tory boy lording it over millions of working Londoners.”
A shift to the Tories by workers is fundamentally about people lowering their horizons and accepting arguments about capitalism - that the market will deliver, etc. etc. If you’re going to pose as an alternative, you have to raise people’s horizons and point to the bigger picture. Panicking and pulling the fire alarm is only so effective - especially when people see what that City dude sees: that Ken accepts the same basic premises as Boris (whom he wants to hire). Ken is triangulating and pulling things to the right. Lindsey is saying that another world is possible.
Comment by redbedhead — 30 April, 2008 @ 9:01 pm
redbedhead #16 (livingstone) believes in London’s rapid development. Shock horror. believes in lots of tall buildings (how are you going to house everyone in London - hotel accommodation?)and ‘business success’ - presumably you’re in favour of business failure, recession and unemployment.
Yes, yes we all know the advantages of a planned economy, but unless you believe in Martin Bright’s caricature of a ‘London Republic’ then whoever is mayor has to attract investment into London - what do you do if the government sets limits?
In the GLC days, Livingstone did try supporting co-operatives. They failed. London economics isn’t just a matter of propaganda with a few experiments.
Comment by Stuart G — 30 April, 2008 @ 9:03 pm
Um… “Ken’s vision of urban priorities is in its way Thatcherite – he’s an über-Blairite”
If that’s your politics too, well, good on ya - but don’t then claim you’re to the left of Labour.
What do you do if the government sets limits? I dunno, you fight them? I suppose you could roll over, accept them, implement them and then tell people on the sharp end that you’re actually feeding them caviar and not horseshit.
Comment by redbedhead — 30 April, 2008 @ 9:05 pm
redbedhead #22 - ‘people need to know that the reason for opposition to Ken is not that the population has shifted to the right”The problem is that Ken has shifted to the right’.
Well, we’ll see. Quite clearly, the London electorate has been hoodwinked by ‘Red Ken’ and now see through it.
Londoners maintain a very principled stance on the left and will be voting in record numbers for parties to the left of Labour, particularly Left List.
I don’t think so.
Comment by Sarah Hart — 30 April, 2008 @ 9:07 pm
redbedhead - ‘What do you do if the government sets limits? I dunno, you fight them?’. Ken has on many an occasion. Single Equality duty, Post Office closures - even things like crossrail. Aftewr 7/7 when he diverted Blair’s intended attack on Muslims into one of defence of multi-culturalism wasn’t unimportant. I wouldn’t pretend that he hasn’t conceded in the end on issues, but you weren’t there fighting on these anyway.
Comment by Howard T — 30 April, 2008 @ 9:13 pm
redbedhead #24 You can’t answer practical questions, can you?
Comment by Stuart G — 30 April, 2008 @ 9:15 pm
Andy: “However, while I have always given, and continue to give unconditional support to the Scottish Socialist Party in Scotland, I am always very careful when discussing politics within the UK to limit my remit to England.”
So what are you saying there then Andy ?
Shut your mouth, you live in Scotland and I have supported the SSP ?
Give me a break, your descent into the most appalling electoralism deserves comment no matter where I happen to live.
You don’t seem to take the same line when it comes to telling the Tibetans they should be thankful for Chinese oppression.
Comment by Eddie Truman — 30 April, 2008 @ 9:19 pm
“the fifth highest mp’s salary in the country, to be precise. bargain!”
Once again the ‘watermelon’ engages in stupid lies. Galloway gets the same salary as every other MP. Six months ago you would have realised this. To be precise? Chance would be a fine thing.
Comment by Clive Searle — 30 April, 2008 @ 9:40 pm
Eddie - You would have to give some examples of what “appalling electoralism” means. It is not as if this blog only talks about the elections.
All the picture does is make quite clear where Respect is positioned with regard to the political task of trying to get Ken Livingstone elected.
there is very clearly a debate in the left in England about the degree to which Livingstone should be supported, my understanding is as much informed by the debates within my union as what it means to London. Anyone in the GMB who argued there was only marginal difference between Livingstone and Johnson would be completely isolated, but arguing that labour could and should be pursuing a more left wing course is a completely open argument at the moment.
And it doesn’t strike me that being critical of the Free Tibet campaigners is the most obvious example of courting electoral popularity at any cost.
Comment by Andy Newman — 30 April, 2008 @ 9:48 pm
“I would be doing two jobs for one salary, so the London taxpayer will gain from electing me.”
Hhhmmmmmm, two jobs? So he’ll be quitting TalkSport, his Sunday Herald column and after-diner speaking then.
I doubt it somehow.
Comment by JM — 30 April, 2008 @ 9:56 pm
Galloway gets the same salary as every other MP
but claims rather more in expenses, and gets a lot more from his other, ahem, ‘interests’.
Comment by Keith Watermelon — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:01 pm
Keith and (heh) “JM” - http://www.hurryupharry.bloghouse.net is now the site for you. Don’t pretend to be on the left anymore.
Comment by tonyc — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:07 pm
Andy
I’m also increasingly befuddled from up here in Scotland as to the trajectory you’ve taken over the course of this London mayoral election campaign.
When does your socialist consciousness kick in with regard to Ken Livingstone and his obvious swing to the right? Never mind his blatant disregard for striking transport workers; never mind his support for vigilantes masquerading as police officers in the judicial murder of Jean Charles De Menezes; never mind that. But surely when he accepts the endorsement of Tony Blair and Alistair Campbell alarm bells should start to ring.
Iraq and Afghanisan. Hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children slaughtered. Imperialist occupation.
Remember that?
All Livingstone is interested in is making London an attractive home for international capital. Watching the recent televised debates, I heard very little by way of policy difference between him and Boris Johnson.
Please explain, and I’m being serious, on what basis socialists should support Ken Livingstone on May 1st? Dialectically (yes, that word again), at least with Johnson there would be clarity among the working class and ethnic minorities with regard to who the enemy is.
Comment by John W — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:11 pm
Only on this site would someone claim it is right-wing to criticise an MP over their inflated expense claims and the fortune they make from their other interests. How much of that do you suppose Galloway has ever donated to Respect? That’s right, fuck all.
Comment by Keith Watermelon — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:12 pm
The wtermelon is caught out lying about the ‘the fifth highest mp’s salary in the country’ so then starts guff about expenses (none of which are in any way outwith the normal expenses of an MP) and other ‘interests’ - which involve being paid for writing a newspaper column and hosting a radio show. All of which bring a left-wing socialist view to hundreds of thousands of people. But in the warped world of SWP bloggers this is now a problem.
Are you suggesting that Galloway should do the show and write the column for free or not do the show and write the column at all?
This would would be funny if it wasn’t so pathetic.
Comment by Clive Searle — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:21 pm
Both Harry’s place and lenin’s tomb are unable to post for technical reasons - in the last few days before an election.
Only Socialist Unity is working fine.
Hmmm.
Comment by Ed D — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:22 pm
“Expense claims” - now you’re lower than the gutter. Even the right wing don’t make that stuff up. This is what happens with sectarianism, it rots the brain.
Comment by Nas — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:24 pm
Are you suggesting that Galloway should do the show and write the column for free or not do the show and write the column at all?
i’m suggesting he should hand it over to respect, stw etc, all of whom need it far more than he does.
and nas, galloway has the highest expense claims of any mp outside of the cabinet. that is outrageous for someone you would have us believe is a socialist.
Comment by Keith Watermelon — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:27 pm
All of which bring a left-wing socialist view
about kylie’s arse?
Comment by Keith Watermelon — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:28 pm
Keith - hush up, don’t you know tonyc has banned you from the left?
It is shocking that people who want to build a left alternative to Labour will attack anyone who criticizes Ken by claiming that they are playing into Tory hands. This is a regression into stereotypical Labourite behaviour to defend the left flank. What’s more stunning is that people who even recently were in the SWP are arguing this. The slogan was always “vote Labour without illusions” - which meant exposing the failures and limitations of Labour in and out of government. This only changed insofar as the disintegration of Labour’s base proceeded (because of disillusionment & betrayal) and because the rise of first the anti-capitalist and then anti-war movements opened up the possibility to build the beginnings of an alternative to Labour. Then the slogan became about voting for a left alternative AND voting for Labour when it made sense tactically (because there was no left alternative, because of proportional rep, etc.). But it was still without illusions. The formula of the united front that the SWP has always used and which they took from Trotsky was “march separately, strike together”. This was the expression of that in the electoral field.
The claim that this is new stands completely at odds with history. But it does fit with this newfound formula of being the “relevant left of the mainstream” (or close to that), which in fact means campaigning for Ken and pulling the left into line behind the left-wing of New Labour. And as Ken cozies up to Blair and Campbell, Galloway now cozies up to Ken. It all smells of the trajectory of Rifondazione - only first time as tragedy, second time as farce.
Comment by redbedhead — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:36 pm
way back up in the thread … “The problem with a syndicalist view”
– better a syndicalist than a scab!
Any road up…
On the GMB one offers:
1 Remploy (http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=14350)
2 how should one put it, the loss (sic) of £15,000 to Peter Hain
3 The threat in the last fortnight to stop funding labour over the change of rules of over donations (so getting Jack Straw to back down over the issue)
It strikes me that even in as loyal a labour union as the GMB there is a debate to be had but i doubt that project is moved forward in any shape or form by “we love ken cos he isn’t Boris” ( i merely adopt the caricature of the other sides argument that seems to be vogue on this thread)
And finally …”vital battle to get the vote out to defend Livingstone’s mayoralty”
If it’s that vital stop faffing around with the others and get out for ken tomorrow. But you’re not doing that. You’re not actually campaigning for ken are you? How many vote ken leaflets have you given out?
(as an aside if eddie as a scot is barred from an opinion, is it the case that you live in London Andy?)
Comment by byssshe — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:36 pm
Keep digging, melon. Your bile is a joy to behold. One lie exposed so quick change the subject!
Never mind. There’s already a queue of Islamophobes, imperialists, warmongers, racists, media tycoons, Tories, Zionists and various assorted right-wingers lined up to attack Galloway - the SWP will just have to take their place at the back of the queue. But please try to come up with something original, rather than just copy the tired old recipe from your new friends in anti-Galloway camp.
Comment by Clive Searle — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:41 pm
good lord - clive searle’s become a stalinist
Comment by Keith Watermelon — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:43 pm
I wonder where the swp (sorry left list) money goes, maybe on john reeses clothes, maybe on his bit on the side.
Comment by leo gray o waggle — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:44 pm
#17 “Not everything - if much at all - is achieved by strikes.”
what a statement from a RR member.. and no one in RR here responds. No wonder it is so easy to support KL with such uncritical gusto with views like these. I wonder if this was the message u gave to workers on their picket lines last week picture it.. I bring u solidarity from RR… but umm I wouldn’t bother fighting back if I was u.. all u need to do is vote for New Labour.. its so easy.. oh and Galloway as well…
KL is loved by the city.. thats the big financial institutions who partly run the international capitalist system.. you know the ones whcih we have wars and famine and poverty for.. I know for Howard T its all a bit old fashioned but I am so pleased Lindsey challenged KL pro market neo liberal agenda.. oh yes and was the only mayoral candidate to visit a picket line.
Comment by jj — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:45 pm
#46.. perhaps GG next fundraiser.. george burns night yawn !!! could raise funds for Tariq Aziz.. u know the friendly despot he had christmas with a few years back. Or perhaps chums in bejing… or his villa in portugal.. or the mercedes he drives.. or the £400 suits no one else can afford.. or the 1st class air tickets.. ah but GG cannot be criticised he is untouchable.
Comment by jj — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:48 pm
Clive
Can u show me a critical statement of KL by GG over the last week.. perhaps one which highlights KL bold statement that he makes sure he never gives in to strikers..or his failure to support last weeks public sector strikes.. or his getting Alistair Campbell on board and taking advice from Blair.. perhaps his statement that he woudl criticise Brown.. I mean any of these can do.. Thewre was a time Clive when u understood that uyou can support a labour candidate without dropping your uindependent position. If Lindsey didn’t raise these fundamental issues no one would.. would that be good for building a left of labour alternative?
Comment by jj — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:51 pm
of course his statement that he wouldn’t criticse Brown is what I should have said. Apperantly according to Andy in Birmingham no one was worried aboput the 10p tax issue or the looming world recession but elsewhere this may have a certain resonance and therefore KL shutting his mouth is in fact backing Brown over these issues.
Comment by jj — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:53 pm
Clive
Is it the RR position that nothing is achieved by strikes? or is Howard T (A key RR activist) speaking bull about the capacity of ordainary people to change their situation?
Comment by jj — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:55 pm
“good lord - clive searle’s become a stalinist”
Not much evidence supplied for that inciteful comment Mr Melon.
(I’ve deleted my own next comment in advance so Andy doesn’t have to)
As for jj, it must be such a relief to be able to speak your mind after four years of imposed silence of GG’s income. Did you all used to sit around in darkened rooms cmutttering about house prices in Portugal and cost of Cuban cigars? How did you manage to stay quiet in all those conferences when you wanted to leap for joy at their speeches and vote alongside the CPGB?
Comment by Clive Searle — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:57 pm
let the public decide who they like better swp/ leftlist or respect, i think we all know where the public vote will be going…
Comment by leo gray o waggle — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:57 pm
Not much evidence supplied for that inciteful comment
the cult of personality, the leaders who are beyond criticism, i could go on…
Comment by Keith Watermelon — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:00 pm
George Galloways earnings 2007/8
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/george_galloway/bethnal_green_and_bow#expenses
Not including MPs salary
“2. Remunerated employment, office, profession etc
Advance on ‘I’m not the only one’, published by Penguin. (£25,001-£30,000)
Advance on the Fidel Castro Handbook from MQ publishers. (Up to £5,000)
Advance on ‘Mr Galloway goes to Washington’ from The New Press.
Series of 15 events organised by Clive Conway Ltd. (£10,001-£15,000)
Fees for hosting a radio show every Friday, Saturday and Sunday night on Talk Sport Radio. (£100,001-£105,000)
Fee for appearing on ITV’s ‘Don’t Call Me Stupid’. (£10,001-£15,000) (Registered 26 June 2007)
Fee for presenting Big Brother’s Big Mouth on C4. (£35,001-£40,000) (Registered 26 June 2007)
Weekly column in Scottish Daily Record (from 25 June 2007) (£25,001-£30,000)
6. Overseas visits”
Comment by bill j — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:01 pm
and the point is ………
Comment by leo gray o waggle — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:02 pm
leo: that is so much sense. We’ll see come Friday. The SWP always has a bolthole - it can go paper selling and strategising about strikes.
Comment by Nas — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:03 pm
GG gets double what i earn for “Hosting” big brother big mouth.. how the other half live…!!!!!
But Clive do u at least agree that Howard T from RR is right on saying workers get nothing from fighting back or is he is talking right wing new labour drivel? I wonder if Howard T had a placard outside Grangemouth with this devestating arguement, perhaps he went to the NUT rally and told the teachers not to be so stupid and get back to work, or when he goes to the underground and talk to staff does he say u are wrong to strike and KL knows best….
Comment by jj — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:06 pm
#54.Obviously Mr Melonhead, prehaps you could point out the moment of my brother’s conversion to stalinism, it must have passed me by.
and before you get yourself worked up into some kind of manic frenzy of self righteous indignation, JJ, don’t bother. We neither care or bother what you think, no really, we don’t.
Comment by Richard Searle — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:08 pm
I suppose if New Labour get more votes than GG that makes them better … doh what a vision. Yes what ever the result the SWP will be looking to building solidarity with strikes, protesters, anti racists, anti war movements… I am so sorry.. meanwhile RR member will be listening to talksport and trying to work oput how Ovenden, Ger, Hoveman all said the radio show attracted 800,000 listeners and that thye all loved GG and loved him so much he was bound to get their votes ………
Comment by jj — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:09 pm
Thanks for that info Bill. I think I posted it myself a few months back. As you can see GG does quite a lot of media work and get’s paid media industry sized wages for that work. Now if this was a thread about the inflated wages of the media industry we could have a rational discussion. Sadly this is really just about some rather silly left-posturing from some people who six months ago thought something different but are having trouble adjusting.
As for melon, “the cult of personality, the leaders who are beyond criticism, i could go on…” if that’s the best you can do then please don’t ‘go on’. Go to bed instead.
Comment by Clive Searle — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:09 pm
Richard.
Come on Howard T arguement was that workers shouldn’t go on strike.. he is a leading RR member.. all aboard the bus and all that.. do u think he is talking sense or right wing (As in new labour) bull…. really just tell us.
Comment by jj — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:11 pm
ok clive……..what are your criticism of Galloway?
Comment by jj — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:11 pm
so the position on here is that it’s fine for a workers’ representative to walk off with hundreds of thousands of pounds a year.
it’s renewal’s position that we must get out and campaign for new labour.
one prominent renewal member on here believes that strikes achieve little or nothing.
there was no left-right split though.
Comment by Keith Watermelon — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:12 pm
clive clearly thinks there is no problem with the MP earning mega bucks….come on it is a problem. I understand the need to let this happen in RR as he would walk away if the policy is changed and that is the fact.. he would rather have the money than build a left organisation .. none the less it is a problem.. can’t u see that?
Comment by jj — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:13 pm
the shift to the right in RR is astounding over the last few weeks… scratch to gangerene and all that lol
Comment by jj — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:14 pm
building solidarity! dont make me laugh,the swp has been doing that for years and got zip….step into the future, embrace it.
Comment by leo gray o waggle — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:15 pm
#61. This nicholas anon leet fle a fart, As greet as it had been a thonder-dent. that with the strook he was almost yblent; and he was ready with his iron hoot, and nicholas amidde the ers he smoot.
The Millers tale. by geoffery chaucer
read and weep !
Comment by Richard Searle — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:17 pm
The left faces a major challenge - in Italy it has suffered a very big defeat - and there are profound questions to be answered. And from jj, who seems to represent a significant strand in the SWP, we get juvenile patter.
Let’s see what Friday brings.
Comment by Nas — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:23 pm
On the question of monet, perhaps the SWP-apologists would like to move on to the wealth - often inherited - of their party’s paymasters. Shall we start with the bourgeois ones and move down?
It’d be silly, wouldn’t it? So try sticking to the politics.
Comment by Nas — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:29 pm
Richard
That is the most sensiable thing you come up with in a long while…. I salute you….anyway best not diagree with Mr Hoard “Strikes are no good” T because he is a RR man…………jeeez its like Democratic centralism gone mad……..
Comment by jj — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:31 pm
Nas……..really. so u think Victoria Britten is just a poor unfortunate soul.. yes u are right its pathetic
Comment by jj — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:31 pm
As someone from a working class London family, I won’t be voting for anyone in the elections, as no one has anything to offer me. When I first came across this blog, I expected from its name to find politics that addressed how we could do do something to turn the tide of right wing politics from Labour, Tories and Lib Dems. All I’ve seen is pointless sectarian infighting. Is it any wonder no-one votes for any of you?
I think it’s probably time you changed the name of the blog Andy, to something more appropriate - how about lefty squabling?
Comment by Tricksy Mix — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:38 pm
What on earth are you talki about, jj? And how’s Birmingham SWP or Manchester or Newcastle, Leeds, Bristol, etc. You should focus close to home.
Comment by Nas — 30 April, 2008 @ 11:39 pm
If GG predictions are correct and that RR win 2 seats then Linda Smith will be the assembly member, her reward for being a wicked careerist cunning, great plot of hers. You would have thought it would go to a muslim RR reflecting the East London make up.
Comment by josie — 1 May, 2008 @ 12:00 am
Posts 73 and 74 prove my point about this blog’s sectarianism. DRB’s comment that ‘Respect was, is and will be a broad based party’, sums up everything that is wrong with the left. I don’t want to be in a broad-based party. I want to be in one that starts and ends with the working class, whatever it’s colour or religion, one that fights to make a difference to our lives.
Comment by Tricksy Mix — 1 May, 2008 @ 12:02 am
Tricksy Mix you seem somewhat confused (and how nice to be SO ‘pure’ untainted by the real world of politics and real life).
You state “I want to be in one (Party) that starts and ends with the working class, whatever it’s colour or religion, one that fights to make a difference to our lives”. That Party IS Respect and I would suggest you consider voting Respect (George Galloway ) for the GLA tomorrow in London.
Comment by Red — 1 May, 2008 @ 12:27 am
Oh don’t worry, Tricksy, RR isn’t a remotely ‘broad-based’ party. As is clear in East London, it is defining itself in increasingly narrow terms as little more than the GG show, and is making fewer and fewer efforts to reach beyond the electoral base Respect had. I simply do not believe that a radio show is any substitute for the hard task of party-building and developing roots. To a certain extent, it is even a barrier - GG is by now too much of a maverick ‘personality’ to assemble a viable political coalition, as he helped do in 2005.
That’s something missed by those running this blog - the split in Tower Hamlets, at least, didn’t come out of nowhere, but reflected very real tensions - not least between GG and those who voted for him. It is truly extraordinary how quickly GG trashed the goodwill and political capital built up over 2005, destroying the great coalition of the working class that got him elected.
Comment by Swamp Thing — 1 May, 2008 @ 12:37 am
George and ken don’t look too Comfortable together do they?
“i feel sorry for The swp (sorry left list) i doubt they will even get their deposits back. oh well …… their mothers love them.”
Just like all of your comments this is an insult to everyone who has been out campaigning for the Left List and is the worst kind of patronising drivel that I have come to expect from renewal supporters.
The Left List will do a lot better than you think.
Comment by Redsheehan(proud left list member and voter) — 1 May, 2008 @ 12:42 am
One other, related point: it is hard not to consider that GG’s incresingly erratic behaviour during this campaign - the fights, the hurled abuse - is evidence of just how far he is now adrift from the project of building the viable, mass non-Labour Left that Respect was intended to become.
Comment by Swamp Thing — 1 May, 2008 @ 12:51 am
I guess after reading here, any Left Lister will be pleased if we get more than 20 or 30 votes across London - so in that sense, you’ve done us a favour, in lowering expectations.
I’m not one for predictions, they have a habit of making one look foolish. Just ask Kevin “the dogs in the street know what’s happening…Lindsey German isn’t going to stand for London mayor” Ovenden, for starters. In truth, none of us has any idea how the elections will turn out. I think the Galloway’s London election campaign has been awful, but that doesn’t mean he won’t get some votes. It seems that some of the Galloway supporters here think our campaign has been awful - and the same applies. We’ll see on Friday.
Andy’s post on what constitutes a good result for various parties was an interesting one, and made a welcome change from the usual. More of that, and less “The SWP ate my hamster” would make for an interesting blog.
Anyway, to all those out and about tomorrow, enjoy yourselves if nothing else. And wear a rainjacket.
Comment by KrisS — 1 May, 2008 @ 1:02 am
Red, I may be 51 but I’m not confused at all. Galloway is an opportunist politician who has never pursued anything but his own personal agenda which starts and stops with him.
To provide political balance, Lindsey German is also an opportunist politician who has never pursued anything but the political agenda of her own small sect. I’ve never met Galloway but I have met German a few times, despite our differences.
My view is that neither of them, nor their ‘parties’ has ever shown a remote interest in working class people. This isn’t about being “pure’ untainted by the real world of politics and real life)” but quite the opposite - I come up against real life everday as do the people I work with. As it happens, a few of us were talking about the GLA elections today, as our workplace is closed tomorrow because it’s a polling station, and no-one said they would be voting. Without disagreement, the consensus was they’re all in it for themselves. By the way, for those who are interested, this included Afro-caribbeans, Muslims, white people and a born again Christian.
Comment by Tricksy Mix — 1 May, 2008 @ 1:04 am
It speaks volumes about the narrowness of some of the contributors above and their inability to grasp any real political reality. (By the way I am not a prominent RR person, by any stretch of the information - which shows how you believe your own rhetoric about Respect having few people out there).
I never said I am against strikes, I question the fetishisation of the syndicalist approach that believes that it is only by strikes, we get anything.
Today’s election is not about for or against strikes, but whether you support a GLA budget that is in favour of the working class or one that is against the interests of the working class. As some of the contributors cannot tell the difference between a left budget as is Livingstone’s and Darling’s or the Tories, perhaps it’s not surprising that you get bogged down with 5th rate questions such as George’s style. Personally, I consider that well known politicians opposing the war on Iraq and islamaphobia is slightly more important than his bank balance.
Comment by Howard T — 1 May, 2008 @ 6:06 am
As many of the bloggers here suggest I am against strikes why don’t you actually quote from what I wrote - instead of your hopelessly narrow focus on political activity:
(#17)’Ken did not support tube workers strike - and made stupid comments about crossing picket lines. What is forgotten by some is how much he wanted metronet in public ownership. Not everything - if much at all - is achieved by strikes.(Which isn’t of course to say they aren’t necessary) The dividing line is not always for or against a strike.
It is sad that so many on the left cannot see that it is easier to defend working class interests by Ken’s re-election. That is the content of support for him, not issues that no one else out there is talking about’.
Since when has it been a sin (except in the syndicalist handbook) to suggest that politics is more than strikes? Mass political activity is much more, perhaps explaining the ultra-leftist nonsense we hear endlessly from some of you.
Comment by Howard T — 1 May, 2008 @ 6:16 am
Sorry Howard, did you mean to say that a Darling budget is “a left budget”? Or have I misread you there?
Comment by KrisS — 1 May, 2008 @ 6:22 am
It would appear that he thinks Darling’s budgets are “left”. ’nuff said, really. I look forward to Howard’s socialist defence of last year’s PBR inheritance tax changes. Or indeed the removal of the 10p tax.
And Ken may want Metronet in public ownership. But what about the East London Line?
Got to give him the second preferences, though.
Comment by Swamp Thing — 1 May, 2008 @ 6:36 am
Sorry - I can see the ambiguity. I am contrasting Livingstone with either Darling or the Tories.
As you do not attack Livingstone’s budget and his spending plans, I assume that you can pick up the difference. If the Tories do set a budget at City Hall, you will certainly see the difference.
Which is perhaps why I am of the view that it is easier to defend working class interests by voting for Ken today than any amount of propaganda.
Or may be it doesn’t matter? We can always strike against Boris.
Comment by Howard T — 1 May, 2008 @ 7:42 am
swamp thing #86 ‘Got to give him the second preferences, though’. Why? Not a single thing coming from Left List over 6 weeks or so has suggested a single reason.
You make no distinction between left-social democracy or the Tories. This is your ‘politics of the last analysis’ at work - social democracy betrays.
So for what concrete reasons can you support Livingstone?
Comment by Howard T — 1 May, 2008 @ 7:45 am
Left list may do better than we think only because there’s still confusion out there on the split.. and those who voted for Lindsey German back in 2004 may aswell vote for her now.. but it’s almost garunteed that Left List wont be getting any votes in the Assembly, i’m 100% sure Respect and GG will be making headlines on Saturday!
Comment by Tabish M — 1 May, 2008 @ 8:02 am
Interesting discussion! Does anyone know if there are any other elections taking place in England and Wales today?
Comment by Phil — 1 May, 2008 @ 8:14 am
Re: comment 45: leo gray o waggle — 30 April, 2008 @ 10:44 pm
That’s the 2nd time in recent months that someone on this blog has attempted to smear a leading member of the SWP with allegations about their sex lives.
Let’s see if that post stands after ‘moderators’ have had the opportunity to reflect upon it.
An Amateur Anthropologist
Comment by An Amateur Anthropologist — 1 May, 2008 @ 8:21 am
My Lord, I’m glad I went to bed at #60.
Still we’ve been up early this morning with ken Loach and our Respect candidate, Kay Phillips, joining the picket line with striking Shelter workers in Manchester.
Have a nice day.
Comment by Clive Searle — 1 May, 2008 @ 8:44 am
Just looking at some of the confusing stuff above. jj#61 suggests that Howard argued workers shouldn’t go on strike. He actually said ‘ Not everything - if much at all - is achieved by strikes.(Which isn’t of course to say they aren’t necessary)’ if you read carefully.That is not the same thing as jj is suggesting.
Is it wrong for workers and anyone else to try to achieve progress without strikes? Even elections? Protests? Boycotts? Rallies? Marches? Forming political alliances?
Comment by sarah hart — 1 May, 2008 @ 9:25 am
“Not everything - if much at all - is achieved by strikes.(Which isn’t of course to say they aren’t necessary) The dividing line is not always for or against a strike”
Howard T for goodness sake. Having read some of what you have written over the last month and found it reasonable, I would imagine you would never, ever say something like this if you were’nt involved in a silly argument trying to say that the Left List are ultraleft. Its not that you mean that strikes are bad, but Livingstone DOES. Its a very good indication of why we made the decision to stand. We didn’t want to end up getting dragged into defending this kind of thing. And you don’t have to to back Livingstone against Boris: its not even helpful to do so. If the left is going to take part in elections, whether standing themselves, or backing another candidate, the aim isn’t this level of political confusion. Much better not to try and finesse Livingstone’s anti-left social democratic trajectory and just harness the anti-Boris mood. This is what Socialists have always done when confronting situations like this and this is what they should continue to do. We are now however, because of the national situation, able to combine this with presenting a left wing alternative. Its why Respect was set up in the first place. Not to cover up for a politician who used to be broadly identified with the left but has over the last few years shed much of that. Its interesting that for many people wavering in the unfortunate split that happened, these arguments were pretty decisive. Pictures suggesting a close political partnership with Livingstone may in the short-term win a few extra votes (making you like a player etc) although I think this is overstated, but in the long term politically will prove terribly damaging. You don’t have to cuddle up (in this case literally) to Ken, not to be ultraleft.
Comment by johng — 1 May, 2008 @ 9:55 am
Sorry to drag things back to Tibet again, but I notice in the print edition of The Economist a letter from a Lawrence Ren calling for massive Han Chinese immigration into Tibet so that in 20 years time they can reject independence in a way that will satisfy international standards of democracy. I was hoping it was a spoof, but it seems right out of the playbook of the Moroccan crushing of the Sahrawis national aspirations.
I got to wondering about the contributors here who oppose Tibetan national aspirations: is it China’s position vis-a-vis the West that is crucial to you or the facts on the ground in Tibet? Say there was a US-friendly regime change in China, would you then start supporting the Tibetans?
I note with sadness the passing of Albert Hoffman, the discoverer of LSD, at the age of 102. Andy Newman and his Prohibitionist Confederates might want to note that massive ingestion of hallucinogenic chemicals isn’t an automatic route to early dissolution. I believe that Dr.Hoffman was opposed to his invention’s escape from from medical supervision, but I was thinking about a programme I saw on TV putting forward the hypothesis that those doing cave paintings in the Stone age were taking similar mind-altering substances; whether the claim is true or not iit could not have arisen were it not for the massive expansion in choice of recreational drugs in the last half century. You may think working out what happened in the Stoned Age is not vital to the future prospects of working-class revolution (or getting slightly progressive politicians elected to public office); I thought paleontologists were mere bone counters until I started reading the books of Stephen Jay Gould.
Comment by skidmarx — 1 May, 2008 @ 10:05 am
“Is it wrong for workers and anyone else to try to achieve progress without strikes? Even elections? Protests? Boycotts? Rallies? Marches? Forming political alliances?”
Of course not, but please don’t confuse “mass political activity” with Ken Livingstone. I’ve only ever been on strike once in my life but have spent 25 years engaging in wider political activity.
What is absolutely unforgivable is to brag about how you’ve faced down workers who’ve had to resort to strikes and how you’ve rendered that weapon impotent. Who gains confidence from that. Our side or theirs?
Words really do fail me in response to being called ultra-left for supporting strikes by tube workers.
Comment by M — 1 May, 2008 @ 10:18 am
I am grateful to johng #94 for actually entering into rational debate and bothering to quote me accurately and then disagree with me. I do understand your political point, but we need to clear things up. Livingstone opposes strikes - especially when they are against his management. He is a left social democrat. As you also bothered to quote my other bit - the election is not for or against strikes, I will stand by that.
People are not going to vote today because of their view on strikes, but because of which agenda they support for London. I happen to believe that Livingstone’s package is worth asking the working class to vote for.
Unlike many, I recall the GLC days and would re-iterate that Ken didn’t support strikes then. (He supported the miners, but so did all Labour). Some contributors mix up reformists with socialists in the labour party. In the GLC days it was easier to run services directly (London Transport was run by GLC). Ken wants services to be run publicly, but as they are not, he gets on with it.
This means engaging himself in getting capital to invest. This is not different from Ken in GLC days. I think people look back at those days through rose tinted spectacles.
My view is that this is the same left Labour Ken.
I think building to the left of Labour is a different question. I happen to support Respect. I don’t think either side of the split are better off as a result, but I also consider that Left List / SWP will find it more difficult in the period ahead than they imagine, especially if the formulation is to be a ‘united front of a special kind’. Whether George and Ken and the Green Party establish anything on the left involving left Labour and left of Labour depends on the electoral outcome. That’s best scenario. There are other outcomes as a result of today’s election.
Whatever happens, there is clearly mayhem on the left. However, as is the nature of things, the struggle will sort things out. I usually end up after about 5 years or so in tactical agreement with SWP! (That’s in five years time - not now)
Comment by Howard T — 1 May, 2008 @ 10:27 am
#96 M ‘What is absolutely unforgivable is to brag about how you’ve faced down workers who’ve had to resort to strikes and how you’ve rendered that weapon impotent. Who gains confidence from that. Our side or theirs?’
I agree - however it is also true that GLA workers - I’m talking about ordinary staff and anyone with contracts with GLA have to have acceptable working conditions and pay. Ken also insists on union recognition. This does not excuse his comments opposing strikes, even if he considered they weren’t necessary.
Comment by Howard T — 1 May, 2008 @ 10:33 am
In the decor of the spectacle, the eye meets only things and their prices.
Commute, work, commute, sleep . . .
Meanwhile everyone wants to breathe and nobody can and many say, “We will breathe later.”
And most of them don’t die because they are already dead.
Boredom is counterrevolutionary.
We don’t want a world where the guarantee of not dying of starvation brings the risk of dying of boredom.
We want to live.
Don’t beg for the right to live — take it. I
n a society that has abolished every kind of adventure the only adventure that remains is to abolish the society.
The liberation of humanity is all or nothing.
Those who make revolutions half way only dig their own graves.
No replastering, the structure is rotten.
Masochism today takes the form of reformism.
Reform my ass.
The revolution is incredible because it’s really happening.
I came, I saw, I was won over.
Run, comrade, the old world is behind you!
Quick! If we only have enough time . . . In any case, no regrets!
Already ten days of happiness.
Live in the moment.
Comrades, if everyone did like us . . .
We will ask nothing. We will demand nothing. We will take, occupy.
Down with the state.
When the National Assembly becomes a bourgeois theater, all the bourgeois theaters should be turned into national assemblies.[Written above the entrance of the occupied Odéon Theater] Referendum: whether we vote yes or no, it turns us into suckers.
It’s painful to submit to our bosses; it’s even more stupid to choose them.
Let’s not change bosses, let’s change life.
Don’t liberate me — I’ll take care of that.
I’m not a servant of the people (much less of their self-appointed leaders).
Let the people serve themselves.
Abolish class society.
Nature created neither servants nor masters.
I want neither to rule nor to be ruled.
We will have good masters as soon as everyone is their own.
“In revolution there are two types of people: those who make it and those who profit from it.” (Napoleon)
Warning: ambitious careerists may now be disguised as “progressives.”
Don’t be taken in by the politicos and their filthy demagogy.
We must rely on ourselves.
Socialism without freedom is a barracks.
All power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
We want structures that serve people, not people serving structures.
The revolution doesn’t belong to the committees, it’s yours.
Politics is in the streets.
Barricades close the streets but open the way.
Our hope can come only from the hopeless.
A proletarian is someone who has no power over his life and knows it.
Never work.
People who work get bored when they don’t work. People who don’t work never get bored. Workers of all countries, enjoy!
Since 1936 I have fought for wage increases. My father before me fought for wage increases. Now I have a TV, a fridge, a Volkswagen. Yet my whole life has been a drag.
Don’t negotiate with the bosses. Abolish them.
The boss needs you, you don’t need the boss.
By stopping our machines together we will demonstrate their weakness.
Occupy the factories.
Power to the workers councils. (an enragé) Power to the enragés councils. (a worker)
Worker: You may be only 25 years old, but your union dates from the last century.
Labor unions are whorehouses.
Comrades, let’s lynch Séguy! [Georges Séguy: head bureaucrat of the Communist Party-dominated labor union]
Please leave the Communist Party as clean on leaving it as you would like to find it on entering. Stalinists, your children are with us!
Man is neither Rousseau’s noble savage nor the Church’s or La Rochefoucauld’s depraved sinner. He is violent when oppressed, gentle when free. Conflict is the origin of everything. (Heraclitus) If we have to resort to force, don’t sit on the fence.
Be cruel.
Humanity won’t be happy till the last capitalist is hung with the guts of the last bureaucrat. When the last sociologist has been hung with the guts of the last bureaucrat, will we still have “problems”?
The passion of destruction is a creative joy. (Bakunin)
A single nonrevolutionary weekend is infinitely more bloody than a month of total revolution. The tears of philistines are the nectar of the gods.
This concerns everyone.
We are all German Jews.
We refuse to be highrised, diplomaed, licensed, inventoried, registered, indoctrinated, suburbanized, sermonized, beaten, telemanipulated, gassed, booked.
We are all “undesirables.”
We must remain “unadapted.”
The forest precedes man, the desert follows him.
Under the paving stones, the beach.
Concrete breeds apathy.
Coming soon to this location: charming ruins.
Beautiful, maybe not, but O how charming: life versus survival.
“My aim is to agitate and disturb people. I’m not selling bread, I’m selling yeast.” (Unamuno) Conservatism is a synonym for rottenness and ugliness. You are hollow. You will end up dying of comfort. Hide yourself, object!
No to coat-and-tie revolution.
A revolution that requires us to sacrifice ourselves for it is Papa’s revolution.
Revolution ceases to be the moment it calls for self-sacrifice.
The prospect of finding pleasure tomorrow will never compensate for today’s boredom.
When people notice they are bored, they stop being bored.
Happiness is a new idea.
Live without dead time.
Those who talk about revolution and class struggle without referringto everyday reality have a corpse in their mouth.
Culture is an inversion of life.
Poetry is in the streets.
The most beautiful sculpture is a paving stone thrown at a cop’s head. A
rt is dead, don’t consume its corpse.
Art is dead, let’s liberate our everyday life.
Art is dead, Godard can’t change that.
Godard: the supreme Swiss Maoist jerk.
Permanent cultural vibration.
We want a wild and ephemeral music.
We propose a fundamental regeneration: concert strikes, sound gatherings with collective investigation.
Abolish copyrights: sound structures belong to everyone.
Anarchy is me.
Revolution, I love you.
Down with the abstract, long live the ephemeral.
(Marxist-Pessimist Youth) Don’t consume Marx, live him. I’m a Groucho Marxist.
I take my desires for reality because I believe in the reality of my desires.
Desiring reality is great! Realizing your desires is even better!
Practice wishful thinking.
I declare a permanent state of happiness.
Be realistic, demand the impossible.
Power to the imagination. T
hose who lack imagination cannot imagine what is lacking.
Imagination is not a gift, it must be conquered. (Breton)
Action must not be a reaction, but a creation.
Action enables us to overcome divisions and find solutions.
Exaggeration is the beginning of invention.
The enemy of movement is skepticism.
Everything that has been realized comes from dynamism, which comes from spontaneity. Here, we spontane.
“You must bear a chaos inside you to give birth to a dancing star.” (Nietzsche)
Chance must be systematically explored. A
lcohol kills. Take LSD. Unbutton your mind as often as your fly.
“Every view of things that is not strange is false.” (Valéry)
Life is elsewhere.
Forget everything you’ve been taught.
Start by dreaming.
Form dream committees.
Dare! This word contains all the politics of the present moment. (Saint-Just)
Arise, ye wretched of the university.
Students are jerks.
The student’s susceptibility to recruitment as a militant for any cause is a sufficient demonstration of his real impotence. (enragé women)
Professors, you make us grow old.
Terminate the university.
Rape your Alma Mater.
What if we burned the Sorbonne?
Professors, you are as senile as your culture, your modernism is nothing but the modernization of the police.
We refuse the role assigned to us: we will not be trained as police dogs.
We don’t want to be the watchdogs or servants of capitalism.
Exams = servility, social promotion, hierarchical society.
When examined, answer with questions.
Insolence is the new revolutionary weapon.
Every teacher is taught, everyone taught teaches.
The Old Mole of history seems to be splendidly undermining the Sorbonne. (telegram from Marx, 13 May 1968)
Thought that stagnates rots.
To call in question the society you “live” in, you must first be capable of calling yourself in question.
Take revolution seriously, but don’t take yourself seriously.
The walls have ears. Your ears have walls.
Making revolution also means breaking our internal chains.
A cop sleeps inside each one of us. We must kill him. Drive the cop out of your head.
Religion is the ultimate con.
Neither God nor master.
I suspect God of being a leftist intellectual.
The bourgeoisie has no other pleasure than to degrade all pleasures.
Going through the motions kills the emotions. S
truggle against the emotional fixations that paralyze our potentials. (Committee of Women on the Path of Liberation)
The more I make love, the more I want to make revolution. The more I make revolution, the more I want to make love.
SEX: It’s okay, says Mao, as long as you don’t do it too often.
Comrades, 5 hours of sleep a day is indispensable: we need you for the revolution.
Embrace your love without dropping your guard.
I love you!!! Oh, say it with paving stones!!!
I’m coming in the paving stones.
Total orgasm.
Revolutionary women are more beautiful.
Zelda, I love you! Down with work!
The young make love, the old make obscene gestures.
Make love, not war.
Whoever speaks of love destroys love.
Down with consumer society.
The more you consume, the less you live.
Commodities are the opium of the people.
Burn commodities. Y
ou can’t buy happiness. Steal it.
See Nanterre and live. Die in Naples with Club Med.
Are you a consumer or a participant?
To be free in 1968 means to participate. I participate. You participate. He participates. We participate. They profit. T
he golden age was the age when gold didn’t reign.
“The cause of all wars, riots and injustices is the existence of property.” (St. Augustine) Happiness is hanging your landlord.
Millionaires of the world unite.
The wind is turning. The economy is wounded — I hope it dies!
How sad to love money.
You too can steal.
I don’t like to write on walls. Write everywhere. Before writing, learn to think. I don’t know how to write but I would like to say beautiful things and I don’t know how. I don’t have time to write!!!
I have something to say but I don’t know what.
Speechmaking is counterrevolutionary.
Comrades, stop applauding, the spectacle is everywhere.
Don’t get caught up in the spectacle of opposition. Oppose the spectacle. Down with spectacle-commodity society. Down with journalists and those who cater to them. Only the truth is revolutionary.
It is forbidden to forbid.
To hell with boundaries.
You can no longer sleep quietly once you’ve suddenly opened your eyes.
The future will only contain what we put into it now.
Comment by Adamski AKA WE ARE ALL JOHN G! — 1 May, 2008 @ 11:06 am
Tricksy Mix post 82 “My view is that neither of them, nor their ‘parties’ has ever shown a remote interest in working class people”.
Yes Tricksy you ARE vey confused. This is neither true of Respect (George Galloway) or Left List.
“the consensus was they’re all in it for themselves” an apathy brought on by years of betrayal of New Labour and Tory/Liberal politics - but dont worry with views like that from your work mates you coud wake up on May 2nd with the Tories in control of London I just hope there are 10,000’s of others who relise the danger of the Tories both in London and outside.
Comment by Red — 1 May, 2008 @ 11:19 am
Just a few facts to spread through the sectarian muck from the SWP very sad apologists.
Betfair now have George Galloway to win a seat in the London Assembly ay 1/11 on, ie you have to bet £11 to win £1. That’s what you call a massive odds on favourite. But what do the bookies know, when you have the wisdom of the SWP?
George Galloway has the lowest, not the highest, expenses of any MP, because he does not claim the expenses most other MPs do and which have become such a subject of controversy.
To those SWP sectarian muckrakers now putting about the right wing argument that George is never in his constituency and does not represent his constituents, he raises more enquiries on behalf of his constituents with the council than any Tower Hamlets councillor or Jim Fitzpatrick, Tower Hamlets other MP.
The only moving right show in this election so far has been the moving right show from the three Left List councillors who wrote to the Guardian demanding the government exercise even more draconian powers against the fundamentalists and extremists. They were answered from the left by George Galloway.
The SWP proved in their campaign of smears, vilification and manipulation over a period of almost two years in Tower Hamlets that they cannot work in a party they don’t control and which has brought into activity many who were previously alienated from politics. The tiny rump of SWP members left running the Left List have no base, just like the rest of the SWP across London, which is why I confidently predict a poor result for their miserable sectarian adventure, however many leaflets the poor rank and file SWP members have had to distribute and doors they have had to knock on.
By the way, what are the odds at the bookies on the great Lindsey German getting elected? Or indeed anyone from the Left List anywhere getting elected?
See you Friday about 8.30pm.
Comment by sergo — 1 May, 2008 @ 11:51 am
Could I ask that the potentially libellous statement at #45 be deleted?
I’m no friend of the SWP by the way…but we should be aware that enemies of the left can freely access this site.
Thanks
Comment by Cameron Russell — 1 May, 2008 @ 12:21 pm
Hope its less then five years this time round Howard T. The real mayhem is likely to be in society. Its a good description of the state of things on the left if these other bad tempered exchanges were all we had to go on. Thankfully I don’t think this is true.
Comment by johng — 1 May, 2008 @ 12:31 pm
Oh I’d just add Howard T, that I don’t think its true that left social democrats oppose strikes as a rule, nor do I think its true that many left social democrats are not socialists. its one reason why I think this is an inaccurate epithet with which to describe Ken (there is a bit of a danger of lowering the bar of definitions in response to the shift to the right of many who used to be left social democrats). Ken pioneered a new brand of municipal politics in the 1980s with which he is still associated. This form of leftism was, in relationship to industrial struggle, considerably to the right of more mainstream left social democracy, whilst at the same time often more radical in relationship to issues surrounding race and gender. The combination of these two was always a bit unhappy and was in the end a gift to the right. More then this, as in other areas of policy, whilst real things were achieved, this fundemental disconnect in the end led to a blunting of radicalism even in these areas. Towards the end of the GLC this eventually led to even the basic bread and butter issues deteriating massively. As stated a gift to the right.
Today the precise quality of redness involved in this style of politics is not even at issue. Ken is very much a changed man, and the Labour Party along with him. He is not a racist, he believes in multi-culturalism, and opposed the war. This makes him much preferable to that neanderthal Johnson, but you also have to say that in practice if not on paper, on each of these issues he’s tended to adopt completely unexceptional and unradical versions of such positions.
If the left collapsing into this operation was damaging last time round, it will be more so today. With a real threat from the BNP in the wings (and possibly on top of us), with serious economic troubles round the corner, and a Labour government in a state of free fall, it is neccessary for all of us to the left of Labour to take our own role in the wider crisis a little more seriously (hard as that is to do sometimes!). Arguments about an alternative to New Labour no longer function as educational propaganda, they provide the proper starting point for any assessment of what we should do. Here I think the Left List has got it right and RR have got it wrong. The position you’ve argued for will not, I think, lead to a strengthening of the argument for a left alternative inside the class long term, and therefore I think its the wrong position to take. If we don’t succed in doing this the right will continue to advance. Left advance and building an alternative to New Labour are today symmetrical and joined projects. I think there is an element in your position and some of the formulations put foward by Renewal folk that are returning to seperating these positions out. The attempt to describe the simple truth of Lyndsey’s position, that many people are having hard time deciding how to vote because of the rotteness of all the established parties as ‘nihilism’ by Andy Newman, are to me an example of this.
Comment by johng — 1 May, 2008 @ 12:50 pm
#103 johng - I think its both - after all the left sometimes seems to be on a different planet,but we’re part of it all.
I do think SWP have made huge errors - I am not a social democrat, but at the same time think it wrong to distance yourself from whatever left social democracy is engaged in, despite your points which I take on board. I cannot line up with those who think that SWP are finished or even approaching degeneration.
One thing I do know about splits, especially needless ones, is that you have to keep channels open. You’ve done a great job in that regard and I hope those on our side respect that.
Good luck today - prove me wrong and I’ll buy you a pint.
Comment by Howard T — 1 May, 2008 @ 12:55 pm
johng #104 The need for an alternative to Labour has always been a concern for the working class, ever since the Labour Party was born rotten in 1900 (it never degenerated like European Social democracy)
Left social democrats and Socialists within the Labour Party have the illusion that the labour Party can be a vehicle for socialism, rather than reform. I personally was only in the Labour Party in as much that it was possible to link up with others who would struggle, despite their illusions (eg anti-war, support for the miners 84-5, action against apartheid etc.) Because that is irrelevant now, there isn’t much point being in the Labour Party.
In my view, it would be a mistake to think that because Blair /Brown have shat on the working class, that the bureaucracy won’t manouvre in opposition and regain the support from the working class. In the 80s this happened and battles did take place in the Labour Party. To what extent this will happen leaves open the extent to which a party with mass support of the sort that Respect enjoyed in Tower Hamlets, Newham and Birmingham before the split can develop.
Realistic assessment is needed, because we are also talking about the organic break up of Labour. Some TUI leaders might wish to build a party to the left, but their membership isn’t. If PCS, RMT and FBU were in a position of being prepared to establish such a party and also the likelihood of other unions following, there’s no other palce for socialists - that would resolve that one. However, is that going to happen?
This is an important discussion which will continue. At least here in a comradely fashion.
Comment by Howard T — 1 May, 2008 @ 1:11 pm
I’m always open for pints Howard.
Comment by johng — 1 May, 2008 @ 1:28 pm
Cameron Russell:
> could I ask that the potentially libellous statement at #45 be deleted?
To the moderator (Andy Newman).
Could this list please have a response to this request?
An Amateur Anthropologist
Comment by An Amateur Anthropologist — 1 May, 2008 @ 4:33 pm
this is libellous? “I wonder where the swp (sorry left list) money goes, maybe on john reeses clothes, maybe on his bit on the side.”
good question though. after all those paper sales, all you can rustle up is 1,139 members to sign the most crucial Respect Appeal. where is the cash? show me the money!!
Comment by hokey — 1 May, 2008 @ 5:12 pm
sergo will tell you. He knows everything about the SWP.
Comment by anticapitalista — 1 May, 2008 @ 5:15 pm
Nas, why bother, its nearly over for them. As i have said they will be scapegoting again, again . and again. The SWP cc are pathetic and a miserable motley crew
“And just before the dawning, Its over, Its over !s Over!!!!!!!!!! “FuckOff, fuck off the lot of you!!!!!!
Comment by optimistic Larry Nugent — 1 May, 2008 @ 6:02 pm
sergo comment 101.
Best current odds available (Oddschecker.com):
Next Mayor of London - Next Mayor
Johnson 4/11 !!
Livingstone 9/4 (been getting worse every day this week)
Paddick 100/1
Berry 220/1
Others 779/1! (Left List not even mentioned!)
NOW LOOK AT THIS (its hard to believe but true)!
London Assembly Elections - Respect To Win A Seat
No (1/9), Yes (2/17)!!!!!
They think George will win a seat on the GLA (for every £8.50 you get £1 back - down from 2/1 yesterday!)
Any bets please think about a donation to a good charity.
Comment by Red — 1 May, 2008 @ 6:06 pm
Hope the bookies are wrong on the Mayor. Hope the bookies are correct On RR. I am optimistic about George and Hanif
Comment by optimistic Larry Nugent — 1 May, 2008 @ 6:34 pm
I think that this thread will collapse in on itself at the end of voting tonight, and become an infinitely dense sectarian singularity. Even looking at it around that time will destroy your brain, and cause you to chew your own legs off.
You have been warned…
Comment by Muon — 1 May, 2008 @ 6:46 pm
a sectarian singularity? thats great Muon. The implications…
Comment by johng — 1 May, 2008 @ 6:53 pm
Research at the bleeding edge would simply have it re-expand into an alternate universe in which the laws of physics (and therefore politics) may not look anything like our own…
Imagine, the SWP in the White House. Chairmain Mao with his own blog castigating the uppity Welsh. JohnG running London on a joint slate with Larry Nugent and with Galloway as his PA.
Here’s hoping RR and LL do well and the BNP doesn’t, all the best for May Day.
Comment by BatterseaPowerStation — 1 May, 2008 @ 8:20 pm
check out this rather hilarious bus in southall campaigning for ken & gla candidate.. who needs routemasters? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iH631Zjcs7s
Comment by Tabish M — 1 May, 2008 @ 10:53 pm