SOCIALIST UNITY

13 November, 2009

GLASGOW NORTH EAST BY-ELECTION RESULTS

Filed under: By-election results — admin @ 9:13 am

LAB - 12,231
SNP- 4,120
CON - 1075
BNP - 1013
SOL - 794
LIB-DEM - 474
GREEN - 332
SSP - 152
SLP - 47

TOT VOTES - 20,638

140 Comments »

Hooray!

Comment by mj — 13 November, 2009 @ 9:55 am
The BNP didn’t do as well as they expected thank goodness. Although they still got nearly five percent of the vote. If the left can agree in future to stand one candidate in elections then it may boost our vote. We’re still not winning people to the left electorally despite the crisis and suspicions about the main parties. The important thing is that it was a record low turnout so there must be many people who are abstaining from voting for whatever reason.

Perhaps voters turned out to support Labour in fear of a BNP vote. I’m not sure whether New Labours vote increased since last time or not. Either way, there is an opportunity to build support in the area among those who voted left and some of those who didn’t vote.

Comment by Ray — 13 November, 2009 @ 10:00 am
Wow - what a terrible night for the high profile, supposed champion of the underdog, Sheridan.

Comment by Arnie — 13 November, 2009 @ 10:00 am
Although, it’s a bit remiss not providing all the results such as Colin Campbell, of the Individuals Labour and Tory who came last with 13 votes.

Comment by Ray — 13 November, 2009 @ 10:04 am
“Wow - what a terrible night for the high profile, supposed champion of the underdog, Sheridan.”

It didn’t take long before the sectarian back stabbing got started. What was I saying about the left standing one candidate at elections?

Comment by Ray — 13 November, 2009 @ 10:06 am
Sheridan did about as well (or as badly) as I thought he would. That the BNP candidate got several hundred more votes was not a big surprise.

Comment by Mark Victorystooge — 13 November, 2009 @ 10:14 am
-5 Don’t know what you were saying about that, Ray. Nothing sectarian about dislike for Sheridan if you’re at all interested in reality.

Comment by Arnie — 13 November, 2009 @ 10:20 am
SOL+GREEN+SSP+SLP = 1325 votes. If there was one left candidate more labour voters may well have voted for him/her too.

Comment by paddy garcia — 13 November, 2009 @ 10:21 am
#7 - Well I’d suggest the fact he received more than twice the votes of the other left candidates combined illustrates the fact that the sectarians in the SSP whose entire existence is focused on Sheridan’s downfall have brought shame not only on themselves but on the entire socialist movement.

Comment by Anonymous — 13 November, 2009 @ 10:25 am
I certainly doubt whether another “Solidarity” candidate would have gained as much as 794 votes. On the other hand, the result suggests Sheridan can’t even beat a fascist candidate nowadays.

Comment by Mark Victorystooge — 13 November, 2009 @ 10:28 am
Depends who you blame for the split. That it has done huge harm is indisputable.
I happen to think the 2006 court case itself was folly. Certainly a pre-2006 Sheridan would not have been trailing a BNP candidate.

Comment by Mark Victorystooge — 13 November, 2009 @ 10:40 am
It was folly in light of events, yes.

Comment by Anonymous — 13 November, 2009 @ 10:44 am
-12. therefore it was folly.

Comment by Arnie — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:03 am
I think the SSP made a mistake in not discussing with Solidarity a joint left unity candidate. The SSP claims this is because of the court case: however it would have been entirely possible to have found a candidate not connected to the case that both sides could have united around. At the very least the SSP should have been prepared to try.

One thing about the BNP resuslt; it highlights that Scotland is not immune from the BNP menace-but I can only hope that some on the left keep a sense of perspective.

Comment by Owen — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:04 am
#13 - It was folly given that many so-called socialists decided to line up with the Murdoch Press and thereby bring shame on the socialist movement.

Comment by Anonymous — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:07 am
Ray, the concept of the BNP doing well was introduced into this election by Labour and picked up and disseminated by the UK media. It was never a reality for anyone who knew the area. It was a desperate measure by a desparate party aided by the overwhelmingly Unionist UK Media. There were hundreds of potential BNP voters among the Loyalist minority in the Constituency and this stunt provided the publicity to consolidate that vote. So in a nutshell the BNP were never a real threat in a contituency largely peopled by Scots Catholics of Irish descent.

The real story here is that this was the lowest turn out Scotland has ever seen and that over 6000 postal votes were registered, 1500 of them 3 days before the poll. As I write cops are investigating two cases of electoral fraud. I expect we will be hearing a lot more about this in the coming year.

As to the various parties of the Left who could be suprised at the vote?

Comment by Christy — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:09 am
Surprised John Smeaton didn’t poll higher than he did, the bloke presumably has quite a high profile in Glasgow.

Comment by Duncan — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:13 am
Maybe Sheridan should have known his own party better. I don’t intend to comment on the details of the court case, but I definitely think he showed very poor judgement, and he isn’t the only one paying the price.
For me there are two lessons from the whole fiasco:
1. Bourgeois courts are not natural terrain for socialists
2. Don’t become over-dependent on an individual’s personality.

Comment by Mark Victorystooge — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:16 am
In the 2004 and 1999 Euro elections before the split, the SSP won around 10% of this vote in this constituency (slightly different boundaries).

In the 2001 General Election the SSP won 7.8%, though Martin was speaker then and there were no Tory or Lib Dem candidates. In 2005 the SLP got 14%, though undoubtedly that was because they were the only party with the word “Labour” in their title. The SSP got nearly 5% in that election too.

In the European Elections in June the votes were as follows:
Lab 5,244; SNP 3,177; Green 822; UKIP 618; Tory 561; BNP 545; Lib Dem 533; SLP 446; SSP 287; Christian 179; No2EU 179; Other 47.

Clearly there is a left vote, but no evidence from this by-election that the left is in a good position. Relatively speaking the Greens and SLP have lost significant votes, while Sheridan picked up considerably on a lacklustre vote in June, but to nothing like the pre-split SSP vote.

Comment by Prinkipo Exile — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:19 am
#18

1. A jury in a bourgeois court happened to find in favour of a socialist, despite the efforts of former comrades to try and ensure otherwise.

2. A socialist movement concerned with being relevant to the working class rather than a cult disconnected from reality can only reflect the mass consciousness as it is and not as we’d like it to be in some nebulous socialist utopia. As such, personalities are as much a part of the political process in society as the policies themselves.

Comment by Anonymous — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:24 am
I recall an SSP candidate who was not Sheridan coming third and saving her deposit in the Hamilton by-election, near but not in Glasgow, in 1999.
The far right either did not stand at all or did badly.
Ten years later, it’s all downhill, whoever you choose to blame.

Comment by Mark Victorystooge — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:27 am
Solidarity Election Campaign

‘Solidarity finished their Glasgow North East by-election campaign on high after four packed meetings in the constituency attracted hundreds of people. Tommy Sheridan and George Galloway spoke to packed halls in North Glasgow College, in Sighthill, Royston and Alexandra Parade. During the course of the campaign, Solidarity has been the ONLY party to hold public meetings. In addition to the events on the 10th November, the party held meetings in Springburn, Petershill, Possil Park and Milton.

Solidarity also held a press conference and both George and Tommy were interviewed later in the day. (Press coverage here) George Galloway traveled to Glasgow North east at his own expense to campaign on behalf of his friend and comrade Tommy Sheridan. He said;
“Only by electing Tommy Sheridan do the people of this constituency have a chance for real change.”

Sheridan - Galloway Meeting in Alexandra Parade
Over 120 people crammed into the assembly hall of Alexandra Parade Primary School to hear Tommy Sheridan and George Galloway complete a series of 4 public meetings in the Glasgow North East constituency.

Gary Clark, a striking postal worker informed the meeting of the latest developments in the ongoing dispute between Royal Mail and the CWU.

The meeting was chaired by anti-poverty campaigner and Stop the War Coalition member, Angela McCormick from Possil Park.’

http://www.solidarityscotland.org/

By the time of next year’s general election all left parties - at the very least in the absence of left unity candidates - need to agree on only one left party standing in each seat. For instance to stand aside to let Solidarity stand in Glasgow North East while Solidarity stands aside in another seat.

Comment by Solidarity — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:28 am
The wheels have come off the Scottish independence project (promoted by a section of the scottish establishment) following on from the capitalist world crash. The arc of prosperity is no more. Not even the SNP made any big play on the alleged benefits of scottish independence in this bye election, As for the left nationalists of Solidarity and the SSP they said little on the matter. Last year in Glasgow east by election they based their pitch to the voters on the claim that the english were robbing the scots and other such nationalist poison. Neither the SSP or solidarity said much this time re the benefits of scottish independence. Since the defining feature of the SSP project was its support for scottish independence the fact that they have gone quiet on the matter is another indication that the left nationalist disaster called the SSP is nearing its end. That and the votes achieved by the SSP and Solidarity. The need for a british wide socialist challenge to the attacks of capital should be obvious to all. Scottish separatism is a dead end for socialists. Socialists need to draw the lessons and salvage what we can from the SSP/Solidarity car wreak.
A british wide socialist party is needed if we are to move forward and win the big battles ahead.

sandy

Comment by Anonymous — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:30 am
#23 ‘As for the left nationalists of Solidarity and the SSP they said little on the matter. Last year in Glasgow east by election they based their pitch to the voters on the claim that the english were robbing the scots’

I’m aware of no material from Solidarity that backs up this nonsense.

Comment by Solidarity — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:38 am
The most significant lesson for the left to draw from this result is the extent to which large sections of the working class remain emotionally attached to Labour, this despite the attacks on services, privatisation, and so on.

It’s also an indication that for most people the war in Afghanistan and international issues in general are not a priority at all when it comes to elections. Unless we begin to focus more on domestic bread and butter issues, such as housing, immigration, schools, employment, then we shall remain an irrelevance.

On immigration it is simply not enough to hide behind slogans such as ‘open borders’. We need a comprehensive, economically and intelletually sound politically argument in favour of immigration. We also need to establish roots in working class communities. Parachuting in candidates and activists in the run up to an election doesn’t work. Local work on local issues has to be undertaken on a consistent basis for the left to gain traction.

We also need to understand that the trade union movement no longer has anything like the influence over large swathes of working class people as it once did. The class is atomised to an extent never seen since the Second World War and this has to be factored into our tactics.

Comment by Anonymous — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:47 am
Actually Sandy the SNP increased its vote share by 17% in a traditional Labour stronghold. You might want Scottish Independance to go away but there is no sign so far.

Comment by Christy — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:51 am
-15. Were you at all involved in the split and the court case?

Was it shameful for Alan McCombes to give up his liberty to protect Sheridan’s privacy?

Was it shameful for people to refuse to perjure themselves?

Really, grow up.

Comment by Arnie — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:53 am
#19 Graham Campbell stood as the SSP candidate - getting 1402 votes 4.9% - in the 2005 General Election

‘Sheridan - Galloway Public Meeting in Sighthill
Tommy and George speak at the KATS Centre, Huntingdon Square, Sighthill at 4 pm on Tuesday 10th November. The meeting was chaired by Sighthill Community Activist and Anti-Racist Campaigner Graham Campbell.’

http://www.solidarityscotland.org/

Comment by Solidarity — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:55 am
He just might have a high profile in the left, however that does not cut in vast areas of the communities. I stood in the Glasgow North East, Royston ward for the Glsagow city council local elections in the 70’s and I can assure readers local working class sus out when parachutists drop in on them. I was a local person and I trebled my party’s vote. We had a history of contesting in that area

Solidarity attempted to foist their candidate on the electorate. The electorate do heed the warnings on tins, especially when it cautions against nut content.

Comment by Larry N — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:58 am
* 24

If anything Solidarity were more nationalist in the Glasgow east by election than the SSP. It’s scotland Oil etc. English to blame for welfare reforms etc

some stuff below re this

Following New Labour’s catastrophic by-election defeat, Solidarity
Co-Convenor Tommy Sheridan said;

“This is a historic victory in Glasgow East for the SNP and I
congratulate John Mason. Let us be clear it is a victory for a left of
centre party which carries on Glasgow’s radical tradition.

some of the nationalist rubbish pumped out by the SSP and
Solidarity in the Glasgow East by election would have resulted in
expulsion from the militant if put forward in 1975. “It is Scotlands
Oil” is not even vaguely a socialist position. As to drawing attention
to the claim that more Scots per head are killed in Iraq than soldiers
from the rest of britain as did the Solidarity candidate in Glasgow
East. Derision, scorn and isolation would have faced anyone who
claimed to be a Trotskyist yet came out with such nationalist poison.

Tommy Sheridan was in the metro claiming that Scotland was
the only country in the world to have discovered oil and then got
poorer. Usual nationalist rubbish. Solidarity also held some election
stunt where they ripped up a cheque for £2500 -this cheque being the
money every Scot annually sent to to Westminster in respect of oil
revenue or some such nationalist rubbish. If anything the Solidarity
candidate has pushed the nationalist rhetoric more than the SSP. Why
dont the left nats just join the SNP and be done with it

from the herald at the time of the Glsgow east by election. quote from Tommy Sheridan

“We have got no problem with the SNP winning this election.”

Really sums up the left nats. Growth in support for the anti working
class, pro capitalist and neo liberal SNP is not a problem! What would
be a “problem” for these characters would be the growth of a real
socialist party which would expose the left nats for the fakes that
they are. Unfortunately at the moment the forces of socialism in
Scotland are weak and disorientated by the SSP debacle

sandy

Comment by sandy — 13 November, 2009 @ 12:00 pm
Dear me Sandy that’s a Damascene conversion you have gone from “The wheels have come off the Scottish independence project” to “Growth in support for the anti working
class, pro capitalist and neo liberal SNP is not a problem” in two posts. Is it the best out of three before we know which reality pertains for you?

Comment by Christy — 13 November, 2009 @ 12:14 pm
‘I certainly doubt whether another “Solidarity” candidate would have gained as much as 794 votes. On the other hand, the result suggests Sheridan can’t even beat a fascist candidate nowadays’

Surely question we need to address is not what ‘another Solidarity candidate’ would have gained but what the left could have gained had we run a united campaign?

Comment by paulm — 13 November, 2009 @ 12:16 pm
I think the second comment is the one he attributes to the hated “left nats”. The first is what he himself believes. As for the rest of it, I think he keeps a template of his views on his desktop, and fires them in whenever he feels like it. If the election results had been different he would still have written the same speech.

Comment by Mark Victorystooge — 13 November, 2009 @ 12:17 pm
A united left campaign in Scotland is about as likely as the discovery of a candy floss mountain. The bitterness of some of the comments on this thread illustrate this.

Comment by Mark Victorystooge — 13 November, 2009 @ 12:19 pm
Surely the most shocking stat’ is the fact only 33% voted. This is the lowest turnout for any Scottish byelection since records began.

Is it because MPs to the Westminster Parliament are seen as the poor cousins, compared to the MSPs? Once you take Health, Education, Crime and Social Policy out of the equation, what is the point of turning out to vote?

Comment by TH43 — 13 November, 2009 @ 12:19 pm
#25 “The most significant lesson for the left to draw from this result is the extent to which large sections of the working class remain emotionally attached to Labour, this despite the attacks on services, privatisation, and so on.”

Hooray! After 25 comments, someone has finally noticed the salient feature of the result - that Labour won by a country mile. However, I differ from Anonymous in my interpretation of the result, which you can basically summarise as:

Didn’t vote 40,000
Labour 12,000
Everybody else 8,000

That means that 87% of people in this overwhelmingly working class constituency sent a big loud & clear message to Brown, Mandelson and Labour’s election strategists saying “Please take the working class for granted. Please do anything you want, no matter how outrageous, we will always either vote for you or not at all. You have been right the whole time these last 20 years, it’s only the Mondeo man Labour/Tory swing voter that matters. Don’t worry about us.”

To me a slightly pathetic last message from a constituency that will be rubbed out as one of the first acts of a Cameron government. Cameron will be looking at this result and thinking, fuck me, I could get three terms from more results like this, and those dumb Jocks won’t even quit the union.

Comment by Strategist — 13 November, 2009 @ 12:21 pm
*31
Christy

I thought it was obvious that the quotes above were to do with the Glasgow east by election when the SNP were riding high- eg before the crash. If you cant see that the SNP bandwagon has lost it wheels since their high point in the Glasgow east win you are kidding yourself. The SNP project of independence was based on finance capital using Scotland as a base. The british state now owns RBS and HBOS because they went bust. Look to Ireland and Iceland. how attractive are they to working class voters in Scotland. The arc of prosperity indeed

sandy

Comment by sandy — 13 November, 2009 @ 12:26 pm
#37 Good points, well made, Sandy. But Cameron’s going to take all the money away. So that might change the picture?

Comment by Strategist — 13 November, 2009 @ 12:29 pm
‘Didn’t vote 40,000
Labour 12,000
Everybody else 8,000′

Absolutely Strategist, so how do the left gain the ear of the 48,000 ‘overwhelmingly working class’ voters to whom New Labour offers no anwswers? Because, as sure as eggs is eggs, if we don’t, the BNP and other reactionaries will…

Comment by paulm — 13 November, 2009 @ 12:33 pm
Arnie. I have no position other then wanting to see the strongest united left candidates in Scotland.

You got, by my calculation, 0.75% of the vote and your first thought is to sneer at Sheridan. How do you think your comments look to those of us in neither the SSP or Solidarity but thinking what we might do in the future?

Comment by Mike — 13 November, 2009 @ 12:44 pm
#39 “so how do the left gain the ear of the 48,000 ‘overwhelmingly working class’ voters to whom New Labour offers no anwswers?”

Well, Paul, this is difficult for me, because in effect I’m admitting I’ve been pursuing the wrong approach for several years.

Unlike some other people on here, I think Tommy Sheridan is about as good a candidate as the left is likely to get, and he got fuck all votes.

So the answer to your question is, to get the ear of the working class, the left have to go back inside the Labour Party and wrest control of it from New Labour (or at least restore free speech & democracy inside the party).

Frankly I’d rather drop out of politics than do that right now, but that’s me - dilettante and unsufficiently committed.

Comment by Strategist — 13 November, 2009 @ 12:52 pm
Depressing result

Firstly, can we stop going off into a parallell universe where we add up the various left votes and add the greens, and pretend we therefore beat the fascists. There was no left unity candidate, the Greens are not going to stand aside in a city where they have 5 councillors. The chances of left unity before the general election, or before Sheridan goes down for perjury, are nil

The BNP vote was just 60 votes away from a breakthrough vote of beating the tories,and 17 from saving their deposit. And their vote here was a result of their activism (by a Glasgow BNP branch with no more than half a dozen activists) and the word on the street that they might beat the tories getting spun by them for all it was worth. They earned their vote

Comment by JimPage — 13 November, 2009 @ 12:57 pm
#41 “the left have to go back inside the Labour Party and wrest control of it from New Labour”

I should add: which will be a replay of 1979-1983, and no more successful. The right will then have to wrest control of the party back from the left to win a FPTP election, which will be a replay of 1983-97. Then they’ll be shit in government, which will be a replay of 1997-2010.

Without proportional representation, left politics is a big waste of fucking time.

Comment by Strategist — 13 November, 2009 @ 12:58 pm
-40. I got no votes. I didn’t stand.
Nor am I member (or supporter) of the SSP or Solidarity.

Comment by Arnie — 13 November, 2009 @ 1:19 pm
my thoughts here http://another-green-world.blogspot.com/2009/11/glasgow-north-east-it-was-sun-wot-won_13.html

Comment by Derek Wall — 13 November, 2009 @ 1:21 pm
This is not the end of the world everyone is lets get a grap ,firstly it was a low turnout ,secondly The bnp come 4th (with all the press there got you would tougth it would be more)
3th there was a left split .
This is the time to come up with new ways of doing thing personly there is a lot that @25 i go along with and if the torys do get in then will open a door for a real left wing party to be seen as a force.
Lets get the thinking heads on and get to work

Comment by steelcityred — 13 November, 2009 @ 1:38 pm
Great result for Labour.

Holding their vote in the heart lands is absolutely crucial for defeating the Tories at the next general election.

Scottish elections over the last 12 years have shown a pattern, particularly in Glasgow, where there seesm to be a floating 10% of voters who are progresive tactical voters.

In this election they have gone to Labour, which is an important indictaor for the General election.

Comment by Andy Newman — 13 November, 2009 @ 1:38 pm
Sandy, I think you are reading too much into a by election on a low turnout. Try not to draw too many conclusions about the ‘independence’ question which you seem obsessed by. Or at least that’s the impression you give

Comment by Owen — 13 November, 2009 @ 1:38 pm
“The bnp come 4th (with all the press there got you would tougth it would be more)

3th there was a left split .

Comment by steelcityred — 13 November, 2009 @ 1:38 pm”

The fact that the BNP are up to 4.9% in a part of Glasgow, which is probably the hardest city for them to make progress anywhere in Britain, is very worrying. Most of the press has been negative to them and will not have helped them

And yes, there is a left split, which is not going to be magicked away until the Sheridan trial is resolved.

Comment by JimPage — 13 November, 2009 @ 1:44 pm
48

It is not simply this result but the fact that the SNP itself is downplaying the call for independence. And of course the left Nat groups themselves are downplaying the “struggle for national liberation” In this regard there is a big contrast between the glasgow east by election and the glasgow north east by election. In the later the SSP and solidarity said little about the fight for independence. Why the change? The crisis and the bursting of the banks have made scottish independence less attractive to both the Scottish establishment and to Scottish workers. Last year T Sheridan was giving it big licks re scotland’s fight for freedom. This year he is quiet and has his election rallies with Galloway who is publically opposed to Scottish independence. And Tommy Sheridan is a good populist- he can recognized the main chance.

If you dont understand that scottish independence has been the key political question on the left in Scotland over the last decade you don’t understand Scottish politics.

sandy

Comment by sandy — 13 November, 2009 @ 1:56 pm
@49
point takin

Comment by steelcityred — 13 November, 2009 @ 2:37 pm
“The fact that the BNP are up to 4.9% in a part of Glasgow, which is probably the hardest city for them to make progress anywhere in Britain, is very worrying.”

Same with the Tories. When the Tories start making third place again in Scotland, that’s the time when they are sweeping every seat in the South of England.

Comment by Strategist — 13 November, 2009 @ 2:43 pm
It is a great result for labour.

The fact that Gordon Brown came to the constituency to help the campaign displays that he isn’t the electoral liability that many have said him to be.

At best this result shows that many people are seeing through Camerons lies and it is the first step to electing a labour government next year.

At worst however, the terrible turnout displays that apathy beat every candidate, the fascists got a very good result on the basis of their campaigning. The less said about the number of socialist candidates, the better.

Still, a good result for Labour

Comment by George W — 13 November, 2009 @ 2:49 pm
I actually think London as a whole is the worst place for the BNP, not Scotland. This doesn’t preclude them having pockets of support inside Greater London like Dagenham, but London has large numbers of people who have most to lose if the BNP win.
When/if the BNP start doing well in a place like Hackney, then there really will be a danger of a Fourth Reich.

Comment by Mark Victorystooge — 13 November, 2009 @ 3:18 pm
And the Grauniad’s take:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/nov/13/glasgow-far-right-rally-byelection

Comment by Mark Victorystooge — 13 November, 2009 @ 4:08 pm
the election of a very right wing tory govt in westminister - based largely on the voters of voters in england - will give added impetus to moves for scottish independence! There is no evidence whatsoever that the SNP is backtracking on the independence question.

If the referendum does not go ahead in the lifetime of the current scottish parliament it will most certainly go ahead during the next scottish parliament…..when the snp majority is likley to be even larger once cameron and co get stuck into the working class. Obviously ‘unionists’ like sandy will be lining up with the orange order, the bnp and the remnants of the scottish tories in urging a no vote and for the scottish people to remain subjects of the rotten house of windsor. I think he will be very lonely!

There is no prospect whatsoever of a ‘britsh’ socialist project getting off the ground in post devolution scotland and wales! Such calls will be treated with the derision and contempt they deserve by socialists in wales and scotland. The reality is there is every likelehood that the britsh state - one of the most reactionary and imperialist creations in world history - will cease to exist within a few years………..and good riddance to the butcher’s apron and all that goes with it!

’sandys’ time would be more productively spent ironing his fathers sash than trying to revive the long dead parrot that was ‘british’ socialism

Comment by leigh — 13 November, 2009 @ 6:16 pm
The period where small parties on the left are able to make are dent looks to be well and truly over. Wasn’t it Karl Marx who said:` ‘Communists do not form a separate party opposed to other working class parties.They do not set up any sectarian principles of their own, by which to shape and mould the proletarian movement.’

Labour, according to the vast majority of working class voters in Glasgow North East, remains the party of the working class.

Comment by John — 13 November, 2009 @ 6:22 pm
Considering the low turnout, the working class seem to have been singularly uninspired by the party of the working class.

Comment by Mark Victorystooge — 13 November, 2009 @ 6:26 pm
Sorry John, the overwhelming majority of working class voters in Glasgow NE couldnae be bothered voting at all!

Comment by Jim — 13 November, 2009 @ 6:27 pm
Another great result for British democracy indeed.

A constituency left without a Westminster MP for 6 months, and New Labour apparatchiks only turned up when they needed something from one of the poorest areas of Britian and Western Europe.

30% turnout, the lowest ever for a Scottish Westminster by-election.

Wonderful.

My commiserations to the Scottish Greens, Solidarity, the Scottish Socialist Party and the SNP.

My apologies to Andy Newman, and the rest of the gang, but I can’t sympathise with Labour - although I do know how important Labour is in England as they represent the least worst politics out of an horrificly bad bunch of mainstream parties.

ps
Indygal was at the count last night and here is some light relief with her and the great Tommy Sheridan -
Bizarre moment at the by-election count
Indygal Goes to Holyrood
13 Nov 2009

Comment by joe90 kane — 13 November, 2009 @ 6:28 pm
Joe90

“Another great result for British democracy indeed.”

Again , I agree with you Joe. The people voted. Your lot lost. Add up all three left wing candidates and you get about the same as the evil BNP. The smile is wiped from Salmond’s face. It was indeed a great day. I’m so glad we agree.

PS How did the SPSC court case go?

Comment by Boab — 13 November, 2009 @ 6:42 pm
post 60. Maybe that bit you linked to on indygirls blog might become my ‘take home’ political memory of this period - of 12 years of our trying and failing to build a popular left opposition to a right wing new labour government.

SNP MSP hanging out with socialist firebrand Tommy:

“One of the strangest moments last night at the by-election count was when I was chatting to Tommy Sheridan and we both expressed our relief that the Tories had come third! That was a pretty surreal moment and one I don’t expect will be repeated. We’d been passing the time and Tommy was saying how sickened and upset he was that the fascists (the real ones, the BNP) were in 3rd place. I told him the Tories had insisted on a recount and it looked like they were, in fact, third. It was quite funny to see the look of relief on Tommy’s face as we said “thank goodness” (or words to that effect) in unison. Of course I’m sure we’d all prefer the BNP got no votes but the irony of Tommy and myself (of all people) almost celebrating a 3rd place for the Conservative & Unionist Party was not lost on either of us!”

Says it all really.

But rather than beat ourselves up about it overmuch, in retrospect we have one excuse: The working class has not recovered from its decades long spiral of defeats and decomposition, and never went onto the offensive in the class struggle. All we had was a brief anti-war upsurge, a few strikes, the odd ‘ant-capitalist’ stunt of a few thousand kids - and the rise of an imperialism fueled wave of anti-muslim bigotry cheered on by the media.

The seeds of the Labour Party itself was built out of the great struggles of the new unionism in the 1890’s following the victory of the great dock strike in 1889 and the capitalist counter-offensives. The modern Labour Party set up was then crystallized in 1918 in the aftermath of the Russian revolution’s reshaping of world politics.

So what could we have built in these circumstances?

Of course we could have done better, if we could overcome our sectarian political culture, if we could disagree without splitting. And perhaps with this more robust political culture and organisation maybe we could have held onto our few electable celebrity socialist firebrands without getting our fingers burnt… Maybe if we were ‘better’ we could now have a small popular left party with a smattering of elected representatives at various levels, a base in the unions, a toehold in public political life and the media, had we not been made by history, scarred by defeats, and struggling to survive even as sects. Life as ‘could have’ …

But in the long run, maybe we will write the history of this period thus - you cannot build a new electable socialist political party out of one anti-war movement, and mere atomised bitterness at class society. We would need a recovery in the workers half of the class struggle. Only this can bring class identity into the foreground of political focus in the lived experience of millions. Of course, I might correct my moment of one sided cliffite economism (or more accurately ’sociologicalism’) with the counter-balance: that a working class fightback needs ideas and organisation, it does not come from nowhere. And of now and next? of the post strike, and the current struggle, … we can say we have seen worse…

Comment by Barry Kade — 13 November, 2009 @ 7:40 pm
Or, in other words, socialism or barbarism. With barbarism holding all the cards at the moment.

Comment by Mark Victorystooge — 13 November, 2009 @ 7:49 pm
#62
Says it all really.
- That neither SNP MSP IndyGal nor Tommy Sheridan are racist islamophobes (nor supporters of British war crimes, nor Trident, nor nuclear power etc etc) is actually saying quite a lot these days especially when compared to Westminster British politics.

Comment by joe90 kane — 13 November, 2009 @ 8:02 pm
True, especially bearing in mind that even some of the “Marxist left” are pro-Israel and/or unable to condemn British imperialism’s foreign adventures.
But it has come to something when it is a matter of relief when a Tory comes third, as opposed to a fascist.

Comment by Mark Victorystooge — 13 November, 2009 @ 8:10 pm
63: Or, in other words, socialism or barbarism. With barbarism holding all the cards at the moment.

What an incredibly silly thing to say. Yes there is extreme poverty in this country-you only have to walk round some parts of Glasgow East to see that. But there has also been prosperity for many working class people-owning their own homes, travelling abroad, the rise of consumer culture (nice cars, techinical gadgets, private gym membership), increase in higher education and a degree of upward mobility. We need to move on from the romanticised image of the downtrodden working class living in squalor waiting on the moment to revolt.

The last two decades have been uneven. Some have been winners some losers-and thats from within the working class. So please spare me the socialism or barbarism crap

Comment by Owen — 13 November, 2009 @ 8:17 pm
The majority of voters didn’t vote and those who did voted New Labour. The low turn out reflects the lack of faith in the main parties. The vote for NL could be a response to the scaremongering about the BNP rather than support for Brown. If someone was hoping to keep the BNP out then perhaps they’d vote for the most likely candidate to win, in this case NL.

The danger is that the left outside of NL start to view electoral results as the main or only measure of resistance. I think the good turn out for meetings held by Solidarity are important. By ongoing activity in the area, including involvement in local campaigns and industrial action, the left can build up its support at election time. Relying on a by election result to measure the state of the left or the mood of workers and the local community doesn’t reveal what’s really happening on the ground.

Comment by Ray — 13 November, 2009 @ 8:19 pm
#65
But it has come to something when it is a matter of relief when a Tory comes third, as opposed to a fascist.
- An excellent observation Mark V,
given there is a rally of British fascism tomorrow in Glasgow as well.

Some fascists are pro-Israeli just like some of Labour’s zionist supporters are, such as the racist sewer of ‘Harry’s Place’ blog for instance.

See -
Anti-fascist protests set for Glasgow and Wigan this Saturday 14 November
United Against Fascism
13 Nov 2009

Scotland United

all the best

Comment by joe90 kane — 13 November, 2009 @ 8:26 pm
Yes, I was thinking about tomorrow. Best wishes for tomorrow, I would turn up but I don’t live anywhere near Glasgow (or Wigan).

Comment by Mark Victorystooge — 13 November, 2009 @ 8:31 pm
Ray: of course elections are but field of battle. But they are extremely important. And it’s not as if the trade union/industrial front paints a different picture. The left is weak and class struggle low. Those observations should inform how we analyse the situation and which tactics we adopt.

Comment by Nas — 13 November, 2009 @ 8:36 pm
Strategist 43# “which will be a replay of 1979-1983, and no more successful. The right will then have to wrest control of the party back from the left to win a FPTP election, which will be a replay of 1983-97. Then they’ll be shit in government, which will be a replay of 1997-2010.”

Your strategic thinking has not taken into account the boom of the last 18 years which gave credence in the eyes of workers to New Labour and the current development of the biggest crisis in world capitalism since the Wall Street crash of 1929. The tactic of entrism was always meant as a means of gaining the ear of Working Class activists entering into political activity through their traditional organisationsin in a period of political crisis. As you correctly point out “to get the ear of the working class, the left have to go back inside the Labour Party”, which is after all a position that was vacated by Sheridan, Fox etc prior to their failed adventures.

Comment by Anonymous — 13 November, 2009 @ 8:41 pm
Ray@no.66: “The danger is that the left outside of NL start to view electoral results as the main or only measure of resistance”.

Election results are not the only measure of resistance - agreed. An even if we were winning more votes, that should itself only be another a bridge to the active participation of significant number of working class people in left wing political life and the fightback.

But to unpack you phrase a little: how and when did we ’start seeing’ election results as important? The truth is that you, me, most of us here held the ambition of building a small but credible left of labour force that could win some elected representation out of the experience of labour government betrayal. The main reason we didnt were objective factors - especially the lack of mass scale working class active resistance through strikes, etc. (But of course there were also some other ’subjective’ factors).
And therefore the truth is we may have to scale back our ambition of a few years back, in terms of an electoral offensive (although lets not forget Birmingham and East London). Retrench and organise in the struggles around us and ahead of us.

And Yes, Ray, - agreed - it is good to get hundreds to local meetings, like in Glasgow. We should all do that where we live. It would be a great start. (By the way - today saw the first student protest in years in Lancaster - against rising tuition fees. )

Comment by Barry Kade — 13 November, 2009 @ 8:45 pm
oh, and to add; as well as mentioning Respect’s chances in B’ham and East London, I must also plug the possibilities in Brighton with Caroline Lucas and some other places, etc (speaking in my current incarnation as a GPEW member).

Comment by Barry Kade — 13 November, 2009 @ 8:57 pm
#67 UAF states on the linked site that its event is a counter-demonstration to the “Scottish Defence League”. This is a lie, the Scotland United event has been deliberately called for 12 noon, after the SDL are expected to have had their protest, in a deliberate attempt to prevent a counter-demonstration. There will be a genuine counter-demonstration at 10am at St Enoch Square. It is to be hoped that UAF’s sabotage does not endanger the safety of anti-fascist demonstrators.

Comment by Tim Vanhoof — 13 November, 2009 @ 10:05 pm
“Some fascists are pro-Israeli just like some of Labour’s zionist supporters are, such as the racist sewer of ‘Harry’s Place’ blog for instance.”

Care to mention any examples of racism at Harry’s Place?

BTW Did you know that some Socialists are pro-Israeli as well?

Comment by Mick — 13 November, 2009 @ 10:36 pm
Racism at Harry’s Place - well there are quite a few posters like Morgoth, Nearly Oxfordian etc….

Comment by ECOLEFTY — 13 November, 2009 @ 10:39 pm
I don’t idolise Rosa Luxemburg, but her “socialism or barbarism” dichotomy was relevant in Germany, and long-term, it’s relevant now, and not just there. Here too. I wish it was “crap”, as Owen claims, because then the situation won’t be so bad. Perhaps he lives in some plush neighbourhood where everyone is UK-born and white. But I live in a part of London which is both impoverished and has many foreign-born people, many Muslims, and people suffering in the economic climate. I see little sign of class consciousness developing, but there is a lot of xenophobia and racism about.
For me, the only solution, only decent way of life is socialism. The other way is capitalism, with its attendant inequality and resort to wars and xenophobia in its crisis. In other words, barbarism.
I think there have been more losers than winners, within the working class. But the fallback under capitalism is to divert anger to scapegoats - refugees, asylum seekers, benefit claimants, Muslims.

Comment by Mark Victorystooge — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:07 pm
#75
BTW Did you know that some Socialists are pro-Israeli as well?
- Yes, only the national socialist variety though.

Comment by joe90 kane — 13 November, 2009 @ 11:32 pm
Mark-you seem to think in terms of absolutes which means you are destined to be unhappy. I don’t live in some plush neighbourhood which even if I did is not the point.

To suggest that Britain is on the brink of barbarism because some people are racist and dont like immigrants is just absurd. It’s this kind of systemic pesimissism and gloom about society and people which puts so many people off the left.

Comment by Owen — 14 November, 2009 @ 12:28 am
What an incredibly depressing by-election result for us on the non-Labour left.
Three fucking socialist candidates standing on identical platforms and we make ourselves look like an absolute fucking joke!!
Stupid, stupid stupid fucking wankers! What the fuck do we think we’re doing?
Why the fuck do we think we can afford such un-fucking-believable self-indulgence?
For fuck’s sake, the fucking BNP is knocking on the fucking door and we’re still playing these disgraceful, infantile sectarian games.
We got to get a fucking grip on reality.

Comment by Karl Stewart — 14 November, 2009 @ 3:08 am
I would have thought the left’s taste for infighting (obvious in Glasgow) would be more off-putting than displays of somewhat obvious pessimism. Especially since the pessimism is well grounded in reality and, judging from other posts, not limited to me.
The left in Britain has been consistently failing for years. The far right is growing but in any case, barbarism isn’t limited to it - the far right’s agenda is spreading to the mainstream parties, much like in Austria, where the pattern is more advanced than the UK.
As to absolutes - that is just the way I am. It explains why I am on the left at all, as opposed to thinking that a New Labour that sounds and acts like the Tories is the way to go.

Comment by Mark Victorystooge — 14 November, 2009 @ 5:21 am
80# karl, totally agree with you. Even after being ignored by the electorate they still carry on with their sectarianism adventurism.

Scotland United have UAF as one of their supporters for the march and demo in Glasgow today yet they seem to want to grab the focus and headlines from Scotland United by doing their own thing. Its bonkers stuff from the SWP members based in Glasgow

Comment by Larry N — 14 November, 2009 @ 5:44 am
There seems to be something of an outbreak of mass hysteria over the Glasgow North East result.
I don’t share in the pessimism over this result.
Those who argued that the Labour Party has been completely transformed into a bourgeois party, are now in deep despair because it won comfortably.
But all the indications are that this was a working class vote.

Furthermore, the BNP lost their deposit and in fact, as interviews with their candidate on election night made clear, did not stand as a fascist party.
They’ve been forced into a series of retreats because of the widespread opposition they’ve received.
The only real casualties of Glasgow NE have been the SNP and the remnants of the SSP.

The collapse of the SSP vote is partly due to its vicious public split.
But even if it hadn’t split, it probably wouldn only be doing marginally better.
The recession has changed the political equation and unrealistic perspectives are being exposed by it.

Comment by prianikoff — 14 November, 2009 @ 8:53 am
While we have our disagreements, Karl is spot on there (#80).

Comment by KrisS — 14 November, 2009 @ 9:20 am
Even a united left candidate would have got nowhere. The simple truth is that for most working class voters, esp in the wake of the recession, the only options are either Labour or a non vote.

The continued efforts to create a left of labour alternative have failed completely. This is an objective fact. Now the left finds itself increasingly disconnected from the working class that it purports to represent. There is neither the activist base required to establish roots in communities nor the cohesion required to organise a national electoral alternative. The splits have destroyed any last shred of credibility the left may have had with working class voters and the results are there for all to see.

Independence in Scotland has been overtaken by the global recession, with this result a massive setback for the SNP.

The only small party to have made any headway since the recession began has been the BNP.

The role now for the left would seem to me to be in organising against the BNP on the ground as well as providing support and solidarity with the wave of trade union struggles that are happening and will happen with increasing regularity in advance of the general election. The days of trying to cobble together electoral pacts out of thin air, of ever diminishing left formations deluding themselves, surely those days are over.

Comment by John — 14 November, 2009 @ 9:30 am
What are you on about Larry? UAF is backing the Scotland United demo and not “doing their own thing”.

Comment by Mike — 14 November, 2009 @ 9:31 am
Without proportional representation, left politics is a big waste of fucking time.

Only if you’re daft enough to see elections as the be-all-and-end-all of politics. when in fact they’re a minor facet of it.

Comment by Keith Watermelon — 14 November, 2009 @ 10:02 am
What are you on about Larry? UAF is backing the Scotland United demo and not “doing their own thing”.

Ignore him, Mike. Larry ‘Ted’ Nugent is barking mad.

Comment by Keith Watermelon — 14 November, 2009 @ 10:13 am
88# other socialist posts on this thread say different. Pay attention!

Comment by Larry N — 14 November, 2009 @ 10:20 am
#80 - >

That just about sums up the self-indulgent vanity projects and profiles of Sheridan & Scargill

Comment by scarlet fenian — 14 November, 2009 @ 10:47 am
The quote from #80 was missing in previous post -

“Stupid, stupid stupid fucking wankers!”

- just to repeat………sums up self-indulgent vanity projects and profiles of Scargill & Sheridan

Comment by scarlet fenian — 14 November, 2009 @ 10:52 am
#91

Of course, the deluded sect that is the SSP are blameless. Yes, that’s why they managed an impressive 152 votes.

It should be recalled that Sheridan and Solidarity had in fact attempted to put forward a unity candidate supported by the unions.

Didn’t happen. Wonder why?

Comment by Anonymous — 14 November, 2009 @ 10:57 am
90#

Talisman politics is the only project they can offer the electorate. We need a history of leadership and work in our communities, not fake suntanned and tainted cave dwellers like Sheridan, parachuted into nearly every contest to prop his flagging reputation.

Comment by Larry N — 14 November, 2009 @ 11:09 am
#93

This is wrong. Yes, work in the communities, but to attempt to paint the parlous state of the left as solely the result of subjective factors is to demonstrate a lack of understanding of the role that class struggle plays in determining the state of the left.

The splits in both the SSP and Respect each reflect the degeneration within the class itself. This idea that the working class is just waiting for the right electoral pact or combination of parties and sects to come along and show them the true way is ludicrous.

The class struggle drives the fortunes of the left, which then mobilises to guide that struggle. Substituting ourselves for the working class is a one way ticket to defeat and demoralisation.

Comment by John — 14 November, 2009 @ 11:18 am
94#

You are correct to point out the degeneration in unity and partnership between the small forces of the left in Scotland. But you are deluding yourself if you dismiss the oneupmanship factor that drives Solidarity. It is certainly subjective and certainly not class struggle politics.

Solidarity blame the SSP for refusing to support a left trade unionist candidate that would bring about coalition. If it was crucial for unity of purpose, why did not Solidarity demonstrate to all naming such an unaligned candidate that they could stand behind. Its a bit John Rees/SWP and the Reespect Coalition debacle to all of us seeking proper class struggle?

BTW who was the inspiring and laudable left trade unionist candidate. We are still waiting to know his/her name. It is very subjective of Solidarity and nothing to do with class struggle. Bringing George Galloway to boost their profile indicates such. Personality politics, especially when their co-convenors are tainted is an abuse of clas action and leadership

Comment by Larry N — 14 November, 2009 @ 12:42 pm
John we will never know how well a united left candidate would have done in Glasgow. The truth of the matter is that both Solidarity and the SSP have been damaged by the split. But there is still the space to build a genuine left of centre party to the pro-big business parties of the SNP and New Labour.

As for your statement on independence it sounds like its been lifted from a Labour press release.

I’m not sure what evidence you can site for the assertion that the BNP is the only small party to make any serious headway-yes they have had a large media profile, but I dont think at this stage you should draw too many conclusions from the Euro election results or a one off by election in Glasgow, which is the only real empirical data we have. as I said before the left needs to keep the BNP in perspective.

Comment by Owen — 14 November, 2009 @ 12:54 pm
It’s a good thing that workers and voters aren’t influenced by some of the pessimistic pronouncements in this thread.

As has been pointed out numerous times on SU there is a lot more going on than a Glasgow by election. The fact that depite an appearance on national TV the BNP got less than 5% of the vote and a socialist candidate with absolutely no publicity got close to their vote demonstrates that there is everything to play for. It’s much better odds than the national lottery where millions waste their money on a pipe dream.

The only outcome of the left turning on itself is further demoralisation. Isn’t it about time that the left ditched the miserablists and the naysayers and had a more positive attitude about working together? Some of the posts in this thread come across as revelling in the past and the failure of the left to work together. Why would anyone support such pessimism in a sea of pessimistic politics? The left needs to offer an alternative that actually motivates people. That’s why I think the meetings held by Solidarity and the invitation to Galloway were a really positive step. That’s why Solidarity did better than the other left candidates. We need more local campaigning on a regular basis not more hand wringing and sectarian infighting.

As for the attack on UAF in Scotland that is a desperate attempt to sow disunity in the anti-nazi movement and should be ignored.

Comment by Ray — 14 November, 2009 @ 1:08 pm
just like dodgy cheques and barring George Galloway from the UAR platform in Oxford sowed disunity. We will never trust your views on unity.

Comment by Larry N — 14 November, 2009 @ 1:17 pm
Come off it Ray (96), that’s got to be one of the most dishonest contributions you’ve ever made.

It’s one thing to try to be positive, but it’s quite another to simply refuse to live in the real world and pretend everything’s fine when it so obviously isn’t.

You don’t deal with real problems just by wishing them away and the fact is this by-election showed up some very real problems that must be confronted and dealt with honestly.

Just a few years ago, the BNP was virtually non-existent in Scottish politics, while the SSP had six MEPs and was a shining example to all of us down here in England of how the left could make progress through unity.

Please Ray, don’t try to tell us now that the most high-profile figure on the Scottish left losing to the BNP by several hundred votes is anything other than an utter disaster for the left.

And how can you posibly claim that that Mr Sheridan has had “absolutely no publicity”? That’s utterly delusional!

Even down here in England he’s one of the best-known political figures - in Scotland he’s probably the best-known.

And please don’t try to tell us that those who decided to leave the SSP to set up a separate and competing party with identical policies are not even partly responsible for the criminal sectarianism that seems to exist on the Scottish left today.

Andy Newman’s right to say this was a very good result for Labour. It was also a good result for the BNP and a disastrous result for the non-Labour left.

Comment by Karl Stewart — 14 November, 2009 @ 1:52 pm
I’m unconvinced that it’s a great result for Labour, though of course they will spin it that way. It’s just not a bad result for them, and currently, anything that happens to them that isn’t awful is painted as wonderful. The expectations are so low.

Everyone on the left has some responsibility for the condition of the left. In Scotland, it’s very difficult to suggest a realistic course of action from here, isn’t it?

Comment by KrisS — 14 November, 2009 @ 1:59 pm
Is it not the case that there has always been the potential for significant support for BNP type politics in parts of Glasgow, because of Loyalist/ religious sectarian connection?

Btw I’m not suggesting that all Rangers fans are fascists before anyone gets the wrong idea!

Comment by Armchair — 14 November, 2009 @ 2:06 pm
loonies nut cases idiots !you rant rave about fascist racist!what has a persons opinion or politics got to do with you! You should be attacking the people who bombed the SERBs killing 2000 women children and men,or the gov that led us into an illegal mass murder in Iraq of some 32000 men women and children,also they hung the leader and some other politicians of the legal gov; or the murder of thousands of Afghanistan to date, and the death and mutilation of hundreds of British men and women in the army who are ditched when they return home to live in cardboard boxes! or the gov who admits to flooding the country with bogus asylum seekers! the list of corruption is endless.Yet you fools Pratt on about racism fascism ! I pity you

Comment by terence oakes — 14 November, 2009 @ 2:10 pm
There has always been potential. It just took till 2009 for potential to become reality. How much of the BNP vote on Thursday was Loyalist, I don’t know.
Unfortunately, fascism has potential even among working-class people, in conditions of economic crisis and with a weak political left. Sort of like now.

Comment by Mark Victorystooge — 14 November, 2009 @ 2:14 pm
I think there needs to be some kind of dialectical synthesis between Ray’s points and:

80.What an incredibly depressing by-election result for us on the non-Labour left.
“Three fucking socialist candidates standing on identical platforms and we make ourselves look like an absolute fucking joke!!
Stupid, stupid stupid fucking wankers! What the fuck do we think we’re doing?
Why the fuck do we think we can afford such un-fucking-believable self-indulgence?
For fuck’s sake, the fucking BNP is knocking on the fucking door and we’re still playing these disgraceful, infantile sectarian games.
We got to get a fucking grip on reality”

And I agree its not for those of us on the English left to comment on the problems of the Scottish left. I rather take the above point as an entirely fair criticism if transposed to those of us on the English left.

“We got to get a fucking grip on reality” is a good slogan, as is the campaign to “ensure the left is less fucked in six months”.

Comment by johng — 14 November, 2009 @ 2:15 pm
#100
Is it not the case that there has always been the potential for significant support for BNP type politics in parts of Glasgow, because of Loyalist/ religious sectarian connection?
- Just to say Armchair,
the BNP only managed to get 0.1% of the total vote in a by-election where, traditionally, much more party resources are spent that can be deployed in general elections.
By-elections are also traditionally associated with protest voting.
The turn-out was appallingly low, a Scottish record in fact, which should have favoured fringe loony-bins like the BNP.
I know you know all that, but just to put the BNP into a bit of perspective.

#100
Btw I’m not suggesting that all Rangers fans are fascists before anyone gets the wrong idea!
- Osama Saeed of the SNP will be relieved to know that Armchair.
Poor guy can’t do anything right it seems - that’s what he gets for being a blue-nose though.

Rolled-up Trousers
Osama Saeed putting a bit of stick about

all the best

Comment by joe90 kane — 14 November, 2009 @ 2:20 pm
Too many swear words for my taste, but he posted at three in the morning, clearly frustrated with the situation. Not surprisingly.

Comment by Mark Victorystooge — 14 November, 2009 @ 2:21 pm
johng
my apologies for claiming (on Lenin’s Tomb a wee while ago) Neil Davidson was disdainful about Scotland. He might be disdainful of the SNP and what-not, but not Scotland. Sorry for bringing the good name of this excellent scholar and good socialist into disrepute.

all the best

Comment by joe90 kane — 14 November, 2009 @ 2:23 pm
An interesting comment by wardog on the by-election voters -

It would be interesting to see the demographic of those that voted in Glasgow NE, Glasgow City Council reported over 6000 registered postal votes, which accounts for 30% of votes cast, surely some kind of record in there too. Equally chilling is the revelation that over 4000 extra voters have been added to the electoral register in the last month, accounting for 25% of those that voted.

No once was it mentioned in the BBC’s coverage of a historically low turnout.

See -
Show Scotland is United against fascism this Saturday
Go Lassie Go blog
11 Nov 2009

Comment by joe90 kane — 14 November, 2009 @ 2:46 pm
hey joe90 apologies unneccessary. victory stooge yeah a bit sweary but, as you say, I think the frustration is understandable, and I suspect its a frustration shared way beyond those of us involved or writing on blogs. And again, to emphasis, I was’nt stressing on the particular problems of the scottish left. That kind of frustration needs to be answered here as well. A long cataloguing of the dreadful sins of the ‘other lot’ probably not being a satisfactory response.

Comment by johng — 14 November, 2009 @ 3:16 pm
A set-back for working people - more Hard Labour.

Comment by Anonymous — 14 November, 2009 @ 4:09 pm
#43 Without proportional representation, left politics is a big waste of fucking time.

#87 “Only if you’re daft enough to see elections as the be-all-and-end-all of politics. when in fact they’re a minor facet of it.”

Fair point up to a point. I was going to go back & qualify my comment with “electoral politics”, happy to do that now.

But I think your term “minor facet” is quite telling. I suppose one could dream a situation of mass strikes or mass insurrection where the fact that you were getting no votes might be considered a minor facet of the total situation. But that’s hardly the case is it?

Getting no votes doesn’t prove that one’s arguments are wrong but it is pretty clear evidence of failing to connect with people.

Comment by Strategist — 14 November, 2009 @ 5:08 pm
Comment 96 -”a socialist candidate with absolutely no publicity”. I would question that. For example, on Nov 9 the Daily Record organised a debate between the “5 main candidates” in the by-election. The 4 main parties and Tommy Sheridan. If you were to Google “Tommy Sheridan” and “by-election” then you would see that he received reasonable publicity re his campaign.

Getting publicity is not a problem for Tommy Sheridan. Unfortunately, the publicity he and his erstwhile comrades in the SSP have received (and will continue to receive next year) will not be the type they will appreciate.

Comment by John Rogan — 14 November, 2009 @ 5:33 pm
‘GLASGOW NORTH EAST POSTSCRIPT : GLASS HALF FULL OR HALF EMPTY

by Tommy Sheridan

Is the glass half full or half empty? From Solidarity’s point of view we entered the Glasgow North-East by election contest under our own banner reluctantly and late. We first attempted to avoid various socialist parties competing for the same constituency of voters. Our open letter to SSP and SLP seeking unity around a left trade union backed candidate for this contest was well meaning and a product of talks with non-aligned left trade unionists who had expressed an interest in such a unity project. These efforts were sadly dismissed by the SSP who proceeded to select their candidate regardless.

We were left with the choice of dipping our banner and letting the SSP and SLP battle it out for socialist votes or enter with a view to proving yet again our position as the primary socialist party in Scotland, a position secured in 2007 when we collected three times the vote of the SSP in Scotland overall and four times their vote in Glasgow. In Glasgow North-East our status as the leading socialist party was further enhanced. Despite never having stood before our vote was over five times greater than the SSP who had stood in the area previously in 2001 and 2005 and greater than all the Green, SSP and SLP votes put together.

Thus the Solidarity party can legitimately lay claim to the mantle of Scotland’s primary socialist party once again but the overall result and outcome of last night’s contest was still disappointing. The turnout marked a new low in Scottish by-election history. The previous low of 36% was surpassed. For the first time 2 out of every 3 voters decided to ignore the election and stay at home in protest at the sorry state politics has been dragged down to by a New Labour government in particular whose members have gorged themselves with illegitimate expense clams while lying to justify wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and presiding over an obscene growth in inequality across society.

Sure they won the election comfortably but thousands of previous core voters deserted them and factors like the proximity to a general election and the fear of a brutal Tory government being elected, the eve of the election attempt by the scab Sun to use a grieving mother cynically to undermine Brown further and the Labour candidate continually distancing himself from New Labour failures on minimum wage inadequacy, pension levels and the posties dispute played in their favour in the face of a very limp SNP campaign. Always remember the lowest turnouts in British general election and by-election history have came under New Labour and a Nazi party like the BNP won two Euro seats for the first time under their watch.

The BNP vote in Glasgow was poor by comparison to their exploits in England. To fail to keep their deposit in a seat were immigration issues probably rank higher than any other part of Scotland and after getting massive TV and press exposure on the back of Griffin’s Question Time appearance and his visits to Glasgow was a serious setback. They thought they would keep their deposit for the first time ever and they failed. The methods used to expose these fascists further and the racial poison and division they preach should be debated on the left in the near future. Leaving the main-stream numpties to expose their cynical lies in the media may no longer be sufficient. It is the collective failure of those numpties to tackle poverty, low pay, unemployment and quality housing provision that is after all at the root of these modern day Nazi’s superficial attraction to some of the most dispossessed.

All in all Solidarity can be proud of it’s campaign. Our material was good in quality and content and our contact with the public was constant. Our nine public meetings were successful in different ways and the meetings alongside George Galloway were outstanding. The saddest and proudest moment for me was when 6 young men in their mid to late twenties entered Royston primary school to cast their first ever votes for me and Solidarity. I was proud they made the effort to vote but sad that only one of the 6 emerged having cast a vote as the others were all absent from the register. A job on voter registration has to be done.

With a general election only 6 months away however we and the other left forces have to devise a method to prevent competing in the same seats for the same votes. Whether through electoral agreements or temporary alliances we owe it to the class we aim to represent to get our act together and offer a more united and therefore viable and potentially powerful electoral alternative. The glass half empty or half full? Well the BNP lost their deposit and we secured a clear mandate as the socialist party of choice in Glasgow. However the terrible turnout and the fact the BNP came close to keeping their deposit makes it a half empty glass experience overall.’

Comment by Anonymous — 14 November, 2009 @ 7:08 pm
“Come off it Ray (96), that’s got to be one of the most dishonest contributions you’ve ever made.”

Who is pretending everything is fine? If you want to add your own spin to my posts then go right ahead but claiming that the socialist candidates got the same level of publicity as the BNP pre election is “delusional” (to emulate your rude and unfraternal debating style.)

If it was the case that the BNP weren’t being promoted by the media and the major parties as a threat then why all the publicity for them then? And a

Comment by Ray — 14 November, 2009 @ 7:17 pm
My comment got cut of for some reason.

…And a less than 5% vote after two elected MEP’s, a national Question Time appearance and loads of pre-election publicity is, quite frankly, shit.

By stating the obvious about the waning influence of the left in Scotland compared to a few years ago you are dwelling on the past. Everyone knows what’s happened post split and it doesn’t get you brownie points claiming I’ve ignored this problem. Nor have I blamed anyone by pointing out that Solidarity organised successful meetings in the area. What isn’t helpful are the comments on here from those who claim they are on the left but take every opportunity to shit on even the small signs of good work in the community. Try directing your antagonism towards them for a change.

Comment by Ray — 14 November, 2009 @ 7:21 pm
PS the bloody whingers are moaning about the successful anti-nazi/SDL on another thread. There’s no pleasing some on the left who have to find fault with every intervention. This over exaggerated pessimism is what I’m criticising Karl.

Comment by Ray — 14 November, 2009 @ 7:33 pm
#88 the reports on another thread bears out my views on UAF. However, my real concern about your appellation of me needs to be addressed.

In previous threads on SU i have declared my unwellness or mental health impairment along with severe physical disabilities. I have worked through it and I am now an ex- mental health service user. I advocate in a rural area for people with acute mental health impairment and I do peer support.
I am surprised, if not shocked about your bottom of the barrel remark. Its water down your back to resort to this. You know fine well my background. I do not mind the Ted Nugent line I do find it funny However, the barking mad slight is unacceptable by me, my family, comrades and friends. I ask you to politely refrain.

One of the definition of bonkers is “unsound” and I used it in that context to describe the SWP member’s idealogy and dogma and not against Mike.

Comment by Larry N — 14 November, 2009 @ 8:07 pm
so much for a new workers party

tested in Scotland
failed in Scotland

tested in England
failed in England

just never going to happen comrades

fringe local party with a few councillors and the odd expelled MP maybe but never ever mainstream

Comment by Sean — 15 November, 2009 @ 12:25 am
Sean, “Pessimism of the mind, and optimism of the will, is the yardstick that ,I apply in my life. I will not see socialism but I can, in this life contribute towards that goal.

Soldarity is nothing more than a bolt hole or a hole in the wall for the SWP in Scotland when they engineered the split from the SSP. They would have been of no political relevance if Sheridan had retired to spend more time with his family. It is a party within a party and only time will tell if they can maintain unity of purpose within.
Anyone looking in will see that they have no established links with the STUC, the labour movement and more importantly with communities struggling with recession and global capitalism. They have been tested and abysmally failed in Scotland.
Respect, of which I am a member is nearly totally an SWP free zone. There are some misguided members, including George Galloway think they can work on some issues with the SWP. That is delusional and I was shocked to see him proping up the last bastion of the SWP splitters.
My first contact with George goes back 30 years and always greet him as comrade and friend. However in the case of Sheridan and cronies, he is wrong. Like him, I do not like anyone going to jail, but Sheridan has totally brought this on himself. Its more about Tommy’s crushed ego than class politics.
If Respect carry on with their work both locally and nationally they will be a fair proposition to future voters seeking a way out of this economic mess and its social ills. If Respect do not get rid of the SWP baggage, it will go down as you say tested and failed. Smash the SWP carpetbaggers.

Comment by Larry N — 15 November, 2009 @ 7:50 am
BTW, Tommy is not stupid. There must be some horse trading between Respect and Solidarity, especially if Tommy wins his case. So in that way the SWP will have no political base even on the margins to disrupt the unity of the left.

Comment by Larry N — 15 November, 2009 @ 8:04 am
I did not mean to imply that the Labour win was down solely to the independence
bandwagon losing its wheels. But that is a very important change in Scottish
politics. Two years ago the call for an independent capitalist Scotland was
picking up support within the Scottish establishment. The independence forces
were on a roll. After the economic crash the independence project is viewed much
more skeptically by both the scottish establishment and by the mass of the
population- in particular the working class. Remember the independence project
was premised on Scotland being used as competitive and low tax base for finance
capital. It had the support of key players in Scottish finance Capital. Then the
crash- when RBS and HBOS went bust and were put into intensive care- now being
effectively owned by the british state.Salmonds arc of prosperity is no more and
Ireland and Iceland are warnings rather than adverts. The Celtic Tiger model is
dead and discredited.

Of course that Scottish nationalist movement is not finished. It has plenty of
money and many careers dependent upon its continued existence, It will continue
to pump out its anti working class divisive poison and there will still be those
on the left who will try to sugar coat this poison by claiming that an
independent Scottish capitalist state would be a step forward for workers
because it would be a “blow against imperialism” and other ridiculous, stupid
and dishonest arguments only fit for servile charlatans who to try to masquerade
as rebels.

The SNP are down but not out. They are useful to the scottish establishment and
Capital so they wont disappear this side of a socialist revolution. But the
illusion among some workers that Scottish independence offered them the
possibility of a better life is fading. This makes the job of socialists a bit
easier. The case for a united working class fightback throughout Britain against
the attacks by the capitalist class on our living standards is starkly posed.
And the need for a united british wide socialist organization to pursue that
struggle is obvious

sandy

Comment by sandy — 15 November, 2009 @ 10:16 am
Sandy,

I believe a socialist party that organises on a British level and would agree with your analysis on Independence stood in this election.

Remind us what the SLP vote was again?

Comment by Anonymous — 15 November, 2009 @ 10:21 am
I was in the SLP in the mid 90s when it was not a sick joke. It position on the scottish question was to campaign for a scottish parliament with full powers. Little difference between that and the call for scottish independence. I opposed the SLP position. Dont know its position now but i am not really that interested since the SLP is a tiny Stalinist remnant with no future. The fact that their vote was tiny says nothing much about anything other than they are joke

The position I hold in opposing the campaign for an independent Scottish capitalist state and instead calling for the anti capitalist unity of the working class in Britain was the dominant position on the far left in Scotland in the 60s 70s and 80s in fact until the careerist turn around T Sheridan in the late 90s.

It is only very recently that the SWP decided to actively support Scottish independence. Amusing that they done so just as the wheels have come off the nationalist bandwagon

sandy

Comment by sandy — 15 November, 2009 @ 10:44 am
I wasn’t aware ‘that the SWP decided to actively support Scottish independence’.

Can you point me in the direction of some evidence of this?

Comment by anon — 15 November, 2009 @ 1:25 pm
http://www.democraticgreensocialist.org/archive8/independ.htm

Independence Progress

A wee birdie tells DGS that the Socialist Workers Party in Scotland, at an all members aggregate meeting recently, voted to campaign for a Yes vote in any future referendum on Scottish Independence. Given the view taken my many commentators on left politics in Scotland that the SWP were, at best, ‘lukewarm’ towards independence, this is surely a very welcome development. Apart from a handful of individuals – a few Old Labourite and CP sympathising revenants – the overwhelming majority of the Scottish left and certainly all of its most active groupings and threads are now committed to campaigning for a yes vote in any future referendum.

Well done, comrades. We look forward to campaigning side by side with you to bring an end to the existing British state, and achieve the full national and democratic liberation of the Scottish people and, ultimately, the other peoples of these islands.

Comment by Anonymous — 15 November, 2009 @ 1:34 pm
So the ‘evidence’ ‘that the SWP decided to actively support Scottish independence’ is a rumour on what I assume is a pro independence blog.

You will appreciate that my initial surprise has morphed into scepticism.

Comment by anon — 15 November, 2009 @ 1:55 pm
Sandy,

Many comrades in both Solidarity and The SSP see progress towards an Independent Scotland as a democratic advance and a defeat for British Imperialism. They are not the tartan caricatures, chancers and “servile charlatans” that you refer to in almost all of your insulting posts.

Those same comrades DO support workers who orgainse together whether it is a workplace, a city, in Scotland, across the UK across Europe or across the world. That’s what socialists do. (Solidarity, whilst still advocating Scottish Independence joined No2EU in an attempt to organise on a UK basis against a bosses Europe.)

You are clearly an intelligent and articulate individual – however, your increasingly tiresome rantings make you look like a bitter little keyboard warrior. Where are the forces that back your idea for a British based fight back against capitalism? Where are the socialists in Scotland who back your analysis? Have they all been conned by opportunists and careerists? Did they all fall for the “left nat” nonsense with only you as the champion of the one true way forward? How many socialists in The SSP did you convince to back your views? Where are the meetings, the campaigns and the activities organised by you and the others who share your vision for a British socialism? During the recent campaign in Glasgow NE, one of the most deprived areas of Western Europe, what did you do to try and advance the socialist cause and combat the forces of New Labour Imperialism and BNP racism? (Other than sit behind a keyboard criticising everybody else’s efforts.)

Comment by Anonymous — 15 November, 2009 @ 6:34 pm
#125 A wee birdie tells DGS that the Socialist Workers Party in Scotland, at an all members aggregate meeting recently, voted to campaign for a Yes vote in any future referendum on Scottish Independence.

There was no all members aggregate. There was a well attended - around 70 - SWP Day School in July in Edinburgh.

Comment by Anonymous — 15 November, 2009 @ 7:11 pm
How very, very depressing that the SSP should come to this. 1. Getting 152 votes. 2. Standing against Solidarity.

Comment by D_D — 15 November, 2009 @ 10:19 pm
126*

DGS is not a blog but a magazine published by Solidarity members. It has not published any correction re its report of the decision by the SWP to now campaign for an independent scottish capitalist state. I take it that the report is therefore correct and your skepticism misplaced

sandy

Comment by sandy — 16 November, 2009 @ 9:55 am
#130 Sandy

#128 suggests otherwise.

Comment by anon — 16 November, 2009 @ 10:02 am
131*

Now you are relying on a Anonymous posting on this blog for your facts re the SWP’s position on Scottish independence!

A new issue of DGS is out now-
http://www.democraticgreensocialist.org/

I dont see any correction re their report in their previous issue on the SWP deciding to campaign to support an independent capitalist state in Scotland. I have only quickly scanned through it but no sign. However there is an article from a leading SWP member in this new issue so we can assume that the SWP dont feel they have been defamed by DGS.

As for *128 he/she does not deny the report in DGS but simply that it was a day school and not an aggregate

I am of course open to hear any correction from SWP members re the DGS report and the decision of the SWP to now support the Scottish peoples fight for national freedom

sandy

Comment by sandy — 16 November, 2009 @ 10:33 am
There was a SWP Day School on Nationalism. A day school is not a forum to decide policy.

Comment by Anonymous — 16 November, 2009 @ 11:33 am
133* so are the DGS wrong to say that the SWP has decided to campaign in support of independence or are they right?

a straight answer would be useful

sandy

Comment by sandy — 16 November, 2009 @ 12:40 pm
115 …”And a less than 5% vote after two elected MEP’s, a national Question Time appearance and loads of pre-election publicity is, quite frankly, shit”.

Dont agree- from a voting base of tiny proportions - this is by far and away their best scottish result. They beat the liberals for first time and came within a whisker of doing same to tories

Comment by JimPage — 16 November, 2009 @ 2:02 pm
#132
‘Now you are relying on a Anonymous posting on this blog for your facts re the SWP’s position on Scottish independence!’

The only fact I’m aware of is the SWP’s long held and well reasoned opposition to seperatism. In the absence of any definitive statement that they have changed their position I’ll maintain my scepticism.

In any case there’s no prospect of a referendum being held any time soon.

Comment by anon — 16 November, 2009 @ 2:47 pm
“…this is by far and away their best scottish result.”

That’s not very difficult though is it? While I’m not arguing for complacency regarding the BNP in any election campaign is that the best they can do after 2 MEP’s and reams of publicity nationally and locally? It somewhat contradicts what their own candidate was predicting about the result:

http://lancasteruaf.blogspot.com/2009/11/glasgow-north-east-by-election-bnp-man.html

The point I’m making is that anti-nazis and the left can and did affect their vote. This is very important when it comes to motivating activists to campaign against the BNP and in influencing voters. The BNP rely on publicity and rhetoric to promote themselves whereas the left can organise meetings locally and address issues affecting people by organising against job cuts and housing shortages etc.

If the left can offer an electoral alternative to Labour rather than just campaigning against the BNP then there is the potential to grow.

Comment by Ray — 16 November, 2009 @ 3:35 pm
136*

From the SWP discussion bulletin via weekly worker

Graham contends: “It is time for the SWP in Scotland to have become a fully-fledged party within the IST.” This would, after all, be the natural corollary of the outcome of the Scottish day school on the national question, held during the summer, where the SWP in Scotland “overwhelmingly endorsed voting ‘yes’ in an independence referendum”

Do you still claim that DGS was mistaken when they said that the SWP in Scotland had decided to change positions and now support and campaign for the call for an independent Scottish capitalist state?

sandy

Comment by sandy — 26 November, 2009 @ 1:51 pm
#138 Yes.

Comment by Anonymous — 26 November, 2009 @ 6:07 pm
well maybe an swp member could confirm if indeed they now support the call for scottish independence. A straight answer should not be difficult

sandy

Comment by Anonymous — 26 November, 2009 @ 8:28 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

13 November, 2009

GLASGOW NORTH EAST BY-ELECTION RESULTS

140 Comments »

Leave a comment