Part six. The Tories are pushing full steam ahead with many of New Labour's least popular policies. Now it's time to fight back, explains Dave Semple.[This is a guest post]
Prior to the election, I wrote a piece asking people to support TUSC - the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition. In the immediate aftermath of the election, like so many others, I was buoyed by what seemed a shocking victory by Labour - yes the vote had been slashed and the parliamentary majority had been lost, with Labour dropping to second-party status but it didn't quite feel like a defeat.
Despite my previous resignation of Labour membership, despite the constant barrage of attacks by the tabloids and despite Lib-Dem pre-game triumphalism about a drop to third place, Labour defied expectations and I was euphoric. This was supplemented by the electoral annihilation of the BNP across Barking and Dagenham and other areas, whatever our rational selves were saying about the unsustainability of such a rout.
Yet that initial euphoria has since given way, as it would have had Labour stayed in government. Thousands of us watched David Cameron's journey to Buckingham Palace, dejectedly staring at our screens while the Prime Minister to be went inside, and was saluted by the Palace guards as he came out. We felt bitter and angry, for despite everything, led on by Left Lib-Dems, we'd hoped for a Lib-Lab pact.
However unrealistic, these were the hopes of a million people around the country. However much we knew in our hearts that the Libs and Labour would immediately set to writing their own 'austerity' package, something inside us rebelled at the idea of a Conservative government. And the last two months have proved that our hope was the correct one - as the swingeing cuts and millions of projected job losses testify.
The one positive aspect to the situation is a resolute hardening of attitudes against the Liberal Democrats. People who might once have considered voting or even joining them have been pushed away by the Lib-Dem decision to go into government with the Conservatives. The phrase 'the Left', after so many embarrassing urgings to vote Lib-Dem by various bloggers and pundits, can now refer only to a backbench rump in Labour, and the socialists.
What's the next step? We already know that the Tories are pushing full steam ahead with many of New Labour's least popular policies. Except they're going further. So the part-privatisation of Royal Mail is now wholesale privatisation of Royal Mail. The public sector is going to haemorrhage jobs - against which dubious OBR predictions, of economic growth to pick up the slack, will not count for much. Communities and workers are in for a battering.
So the fightback must begin. This week Bob Crow, leader of the Railway, Maritime and Transport union called for a General Strike. The distance between where we are now and the actualisation of such a demand is incalculable. We have the institutional conservatism and bureaucracies of the unions to overcome, we've got some sort of mass political organisation to forge (or reforge, in deference to the Left still in Labour) and we've got millions to mobilise.
All very pie-in-the-sky you might say, and you'd be absolutely right. But the alternative is ensconcing ourselves in comfy armchairs to watch as Labour's 'leadership' attempt the obscene tactic of outmanoeuvering the Tories from the Right.
We must realise that the only thing which will stop the government and its partners in Europe dragging our countries to the right by further destroying the unions and communities through increased casualisation of labour and decreased redistribution of wealth is the solid kick in the groin that simply standing up and refusing to go along with it delivers. So, all out, all out. Or else the next stop, after another 18 years of Thatcherism, is New Labour Mark II.
Dave Semple blogs at Though Cowards Flinch.
27 comments:
Privatisation! Waaaaa!
Let's have a strike, Brothers! The socialist answer to everything.
Two things.
One.
Jackart:
you may want to look beyond your little ideology-ridden back garden and see what things look like from the other side.
I know that to people like yourself privatisation is the remedy to all problems.
Yet may I remind you that even the Tories openly conceded that privatising British Rail during the early 90s had been a bad mistake.
There are area where private enterprise simply don't cut the mustard, Royal Mail being a prime example.
Incidentally, Jackart, you may want to be a little more generous towards British unions. They have been amongst the most disciplined and restrained in the past fifteen years.
Two.
Dave Semple.
I respect you review. I think this is an excellent article. Yet your approach is a classic case-study of the mindset people to the left of Labour often display.
So basically you were campaigning in favour of a pro-TUSC vote (meaning against Labour). Then the moment Labour lose (or dont win, you know what I mean), you "dejectedly stare" at our screens and "feel bitter and angry".
You've got to explain this. Because it makes very little sense. It smacks of masochism.
Yes I campaigned for a pro-TUSC vote. In the areas where I personally campaigned, the Labour incumbent and Labour candidates were careerist, opportunistic New Labour apparatchiks. Tell me why I shouldn't campaign to vote for someone else? I certainly reject the idea that I should have to campaign for such people.
You imply that there's a contradiction in campaigning for a vote to the Left of Labour, and then feeling angry when Labour lose - you call it masochism. Well, the truth is - as I say in the article - had Labour actually won, once Labour's cuts began to bite, we'd face the same angry situation.
For the record, TUSC also supported a vote for Labour MPs such as Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell. Many of us have been Labour Party members - we just rebel at the lack of internal democracy. We feel a kinship to the Labour Party but practically we recognise that being part of it serves no purpose - and any view of the last twenty five years bears us out.
That's not masochism; if you see a contradiction in our view of Labour, it's because the Labour Party itself is a contradiction. A party with a ruthless anti-welfare, pro-privatisation agenda with a socialist wing and occasional socialist window dressing.
I await the racist's rant to appear here, blaming everything on the blacks and the EU...
Having said that, I'm afraid General Strikes are not only unrealistic but counter productive.
There is also the very real danger that don't do 'owt and actually only make things worse.
Its not actually racist to dislike the EU now is it ? Will it be racist to dislike runny marmalade soon , lets hope so, high time the word was consigned entirely to mockery .
I think this sort of thing is preaching to the choir those who depend on the state giving them money earnt by other people will vote socialist anyway . Socialism is of course , the antithesis of Community, seeking as it does a direct relationship between state and people .It is against plurality and therefore tends to destroy communities . Would you call the Glasgow a model of community for the country ? Not quite
That`s socialism in practice . David Milliband has been quite interesting recently , describing how the left has lost England , misunderstood immigration and has nothing to say to tax payers expect more more more.
To be honest I hope there are Public Sector strikes , then we will see their infant -dummy deals ,publicised and the country will clear out the closet . Every now and then you have to draw a line .I have three boys , believe me I know .Those who we pay to paint faces for community cohesion ands so on are like whiny children .They won’t learn until they are either slapped or have to earn a living in the real World .
Bring it on soft lad
Stan you weren`t around for the shite cabbage soup disaster that was British Rail . Its better now , although you are right obviously that infra structure of all sorts may benefit from National Planning and accountablity , but still ....
Oh God, now the other troll turns up.
To be clear, patriot is a racist not because of his irrational and ignorant loathing of the EU for made up crimes he thinks it has committed and fears of its imaginary infringements upon the UK (which are however, fuelled by xenophobia); he's a racist because in previous comments he's made his support of the BNP very clear and blames everything on Marxists or non-whites.
Your interpretation of what socialism is is just that: your interpretation, as jaundiced as it is with own personal prejudice. Your summation is opinion, with little bearing upon reality.
And like many idiots, you trot out the fiction that until someone has hurt you, you don't really know what it is like and thus your opinion is invalid. Not all of us are as thick, myopic and base as that, although you clearly are.
Bless your poor children.
And your presumption that Stan wasn't around for the old days of British Rail...oh dear, I was and I think you're confusing the advancement in train technology with privatisation.
*I applaude Newmania*
At last someone talking some sense on this so-called blog. I cant believe how you lefties can so casually hurl insults at people and then go mad when we simply disagree with your mad ideas.
I don't like the EU. In fact, I hate it. I hate the way the left and Labour (but also the Tories) shoved it down the country's throat. You can wash that Union Jack paint off your hale and pace, jackart. Your party are as guilty as Labour when it comes to selling out the UK to the European Bundestate. If that makes me a racist, then so be it, I hope you get this message into that skull of yours, Daniel Marxist-Grill.
And, Daniel, before you wash your mouth with the word 'racism', remember the atrocities and the millions of murders committed in the name of your favourite ideologies, Marxism and Communism.
The fact you still defend them says a lot about you.
As for British unions deserving respect, or whatevr bullshit Stan Wetman Moss came up with, you've got to be joking. They are the true fascists in this country. They have no problem bringing disruption and tears to the faces of innocent travellers and people in need of service. Like Newmania said, let them go on strike. They will come unstuck.
Christ!
The racist has dropped the definitive article!
And then he goes and give Newmania the clap! What a love-in of trolls. How sweet.
By sense you mean someone who is nearly as mental as you are and who only comes here to disagree, piss, whinge and moan like a tired old hag.
Brilliant!
Your little speech about the EU does my job for me, it is chock full of pure fiction and made-up fears of a bigoted, small-minded goon.
And I hope you get this message into that skull of yours, you racist twat.
Oh and I hate to break it to you, you awful old blog-bore but I'm not a Marxist or a Communist. Ouch, that's got to hurt you, as that seems to be the basis of your entire personal attack shot to flames.
And you lay blame for crimes committed in the name of those two political ideologies with no sense of irony that the litany of dead at the hands of British nationalism eclipses all of that a million times over.
Please go and read some books you pillock.
Good grief man, you're a shambles. Have a lay-down, get a cold flannel on that frazzled and bitter brain of yours and do us all a favour.
Look at the way this bloke gets his undies in a bundle all the time. And you lecture me over havin a lay down? You gotta be joking, Hoffie Boy.
Who are ya?
Yours is an old trick. Denying that you believe in the muderous ideology of communism, socialism and marxism, while you constantly stick up for all of them and buy into each single plank of their political programme.
You said before that you're a socialist so you ain't fooling me, boy.
You go and read a book or two on the noxious effects of the EU and the devastating impact the Euro is having on the Deutschstate and their satellites.
We dont want that here. 90% of the public dont want that either. Just accept it. You bat for the losing side.
PS As for your precious democracy, I'm gonna count the minutes until my comments are taken down by the 'democrats' running this poor blog.
Who's the fascist?
Hello again racist!
Odd how you come here and accuse me of getting my undies in a twist, yet it is you which keeps coming back here to leave comments about how much your undies are in a twist.
How weird is that you daft idiot?
"Who are ya?"
Your superior, you awful shambles of a human.
I also find it odd how you presume to know what political ideology I believe in, so rather than telling me what I believe, you cretin, prove that I'm a Marxist, Communist or Socialist. Quote me bitch.
You also don't seem to understand that the 3 ideologies that you mention are also utterly different, so lumping them together only further exposes your lack of understanding.
Give up.
And like all bigots, you cry about freedom of speech at someone else's blog, when if it was up to you, you'd deny freedom of speech first-up.
You pathetic moron.
Christ alive! This guy is all over the place! Either he's a total nutcase or his messages are a wind-up...just one or the other.
So, glossing over patriot's verbal diarrhea, just a word on the point raised by patriot's mate, Newmania.
British Rail was infinitely cheaper than the current railway system. Privatisation, in case you blinked, meant huge (HUGE) amounts of taxpayer's money poured over private firms to run the railway so that private contractors could pocket the profits. If you're happy with that, then I pity you.
Daniel is right: you're confusing the advancement in train technology with privatisation.
And thats without counting the botched job that came with the regulators, the operators and the infrastructures.
Word verification: "Phingla"
The barefaced ignorance and moronity of Patriot and his little friend Newmania is simply hilarious. Not to mention the always boring Socialist = Communist "argument" that simply boils down to playground chanting.
I'm not a Communist. Yes you are! I'm not a Communist. Yes you are!
Just because that's the only thing these two nitwits have got to go on. I love the fact that these two ratbags throw their toys around whenever their idiotic ideas are criticised and accuse everyone else of 'having a go' at them.
Grow up and as Daniel says, read some bloody books.
Daniel Mothman-Pill says he is my superior!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Joke!!!You can see why he's growing his 'tache then. What does that remind you of? Adolf, I hear you saying?
Tell you what. Nothing ever good in history came from blokes with a 'tache. Nothing. From Adolf all the way to David Seaman and Lawro it was always trouble all the way.
As for Stan Dross and Emma Phlegma, accusing me of being a nutcase and a nitwit, all I can say is: Great, if this shitty blog's got any readers, they'll be able to work out who's being abusive and who isnt. I didnt call you mental or potty or anything. I just said you're a bunch of communists. You didnt deny it. Nuff said.
Hello racist, you're up late? Stormfront got nothing nice on?
So a moustache equals Hitler does it? Wow, that's weak even for you bitch. Is moustache jibes the best you can muster div?
As for taches not giving us owt, ouch, you really are an uncultured fool, whether it's the sporting God's of Botham and Gooch and Lamb and Gatting, through to the philosopher kings of Nietzsche, to the overlord of art that is Dali and the man that gave us modern science in Albert Einstein and who could forget Tom Selleck.
You call this blog shitty but frequent it with disturbing regularity, if it's as bad as you say you'd not be here would you, you goon?
And once again you call people Communists when they're not and with no evidence.
And speaking of evidence coward, I'm still waiting for you to show me evidence of my political affiliations.
And your comments haven't been deleted so you were wrong there too.
You are on a roll aren't you?
I'm a communist and fuck anyone who has a problem with that.
Incidentally, how did this argument get sidetracked by Newmania? Are there comments on this thread that were deleted, as it goes from on-topic to off in just one post.
Dave I was on topic, the topic being Labour`s lurch to the left and the possibility of industrial unrest ( which of course will bring a sovereign debt crisis ).
I paused briefly to raise an eyebrow at the use of the term 'racist' to describe Euro-scepticism and ..looking at the result it may have been a mistake. Mr. HG is an eccentric character isn`t he .
The Labour Party in my view has a specific and localised problem . The David Milliband`s who want to compete at the centre want it to be a loose coalition of what he calls “Progressive “opinion so as to re colonise parts of England and recognise that the Conservative Party “Lost “with a million more votes than New labour “won” with at the last election .
The Party itself however never embraced New Labour never mind the end of Socialism . Old Labour was a close relative of Communism as practiced in the Soviet Union . As late as Michael Foot the apologists were many and assertions of equivalence with the USA a commonplace in my youth . Many Union leaders were paid by the KGB ass we now know and clause four specifically stated that the objective of the movement was the end of Private Property . Its removal is very recent and the authoritarian instincts of the Scottish collectivists has been loathsome to behold . Ken Livingstone ,as we know entertained the IRA Chavez and hundreds of jolly cadgers off , at the public’s expense to applaud China even on their handling of Tiananmen square . He is likely to win the nomination to represent Labour in London.
I believe the coalition would welcome industrial unrest , the Polls show the country united against free loaders of all kinds and happy to get a few grievances aired.
My personal wish list is headed by a teachers strike . Oh to hear their hours, performance and security dissected . One`s only fear is that it will take careful timing for anyone to notice there is a strike on at all
Tra La
Stan I think the case on Rail is arguable I have no more ideological objection to Nationally organised infra -structure than I do to a Public Army. If you think BR was a cure all however you are hugely mistaken
Back to the actual topic: this is what I warned about before May 6. The history of Tory government is punctuated with social unrest and massive and painful strikes.
This is a fact, not an opinion.
Statistics are out there if you want them.
It's a typical Tory strategy to egg the unions on and to invite confrontations. Newmania's latest comment is testament to that. The Tories just cherish the opportunity. It didn't gain the Nasty Party reputation for no reason. Just look at today's headlines, with the coalition planning to make it even harder to call a strike.
Labour's history is to seek social stability, consultation and compromise with workers. Obviously that doesn't often work out, but they have always strived to avoid all-out wars with the unions and ordinary workers.
Speaking of eccentric, the Newmania troll sums that term up well by claiming that this topic is about: "Labour`s lurch to the left and the possibility of industrial unrest ( which of course will bring a sovereign debt crisis )."
And that gives you a wee glimpse into the fevered imagination that frames these posts into something they are not so that Newmania can trot our his tired old ideas, that none of us care for because they exist in the a world of fiction and not the reality of actual existence.
I've already dealt with your error Newmania regarding why the racist is one, you ignore it and repeat your false claim. And that sums up how you carry yourself here.
Your assessment of what MIlliand wants, which again has no bearing on reality and is presumptuous to say the least, seems to forget that more people voted for left of centre parties than right of centre.
You then further expose your prejudice, ignorance and idiocy by trying to make out that the Labour Party, pre-Blair, was Communist. You support this with fevered scribblings about the KGB and other such horseshit that exists, once again, only in your own mind: a personal narrative to justify your backward views.
You also seem to confuse people going on strike with freeloaders, your Daily Mail metaphors are getting cross-wired here, you are cut and pasting right-wing slurs.
You then end this with an attack upon the UK's teachers.
Typical idiot.
Those that have actually incurred pain upon our nation you leave well alone, those whose power, reach and influence makes them harder targets.
No, best for a coward like you to pick on imagined freeloaders and teachers, deserving targets for a weak mind.
Nice to see you retreat on your lies about British Rail, even if only partially.
In summary, you don't engage with the topic it all, you duck points that are inconvenient to your narrative and you then you use it as a springboard to opine, to whinge and whine, to bash out your half-ideas and errors and share them with us all.
Makes you feel whole no doubt but it is a most unedifying spectacle for the rest of us.
Stan I have no idea whether in fact were are more strikes under Conservatives Governments but given that the Labour Party is funded almost entirely by the Unions its not all that a “consensus” is reached servant to master so to speak
More seriously think you are using an awfully broad brush . The Labour Party throughout the 20th century was genuine mass m movement in away the Conservatives Party never has been .For most of the time the vast majority considered themselves working class and belonged to a Union . Few would deny the contributions mad by this at times heroic struggle , thats the past.
Right now 80% of us have no Union most think of themselves as middling and Unions are represented only in heavily subsidised and Public Sector employment . Under Labour Public Sector wages have risen at multiples of the rate of private sector Pensions been retained and work security is absolute.This privileged sectional interest has made its gains directly at the expense of ordinary hard working families especially in the South outside London where Labour have four seats and are deader than Conservatives in Scotland .Surely you can see that the subject of fairness is a little more nuanced that your sepia tinted dream , not that fairness is the only consideration . Freedom and prosperity also count no ?
Daniel I am only going on what David Milliband has been saying in the Guardian and the New Statesman , as well as in his leadership send off speech . Otherwise I found your comment enjoyable and invigorating, well done .
An Introduction to Industrial Relations by Michael Peart Jackson documents the sheer volume of strikes under the Tories, compare that to contemporary data on strikes under Labour (The Economist has a nice database but is subscribers only) which was indeed far less under the Labour Party.
So Newmania was wrong but in prep for that he then covers himself by saying that as the Labour Party and unions are connected and it was an insider deal.
What nonsense, what reduced the volume of strikes was what Stan alluded to and also a more stable economic environment, so people had less to strike about.
It's that simple.
You speak of wild generalisations and then go and make wild generalisations about the make-up of the Labour party, pure personal opinion and hypothesis littered with personal prejudice.
Facts do not this way lay.
Same goes for your presumptions about union membership, you speak with the ignorance of someone who has no idea of that side of life, because you don't do it you presume no one does and that it is archaic.
You foolishly attempt to make out that public sector workers have it easy, forgetting that their renumeration is far below the private sector and their work more essential. You talk of public sector pensions forgetting they've been crippled and will be cut further. Absolute job security? Are you kidding me? You've never worked in the public sector have you, you speak with pure ignorance based on cut and paste right-wing soundbites.
Tired and worn out.
"has made its gains directly at the expense of ordinary hard working families especially in the South outside London"
Evidence for that please, otherwise stop just dropping your ridiculous opinions and pretending they are in anyway connected to fact.
Your partizan, black and white, non-evidence opinion is tedious, all hot air and no substance.
I have read those same articles and seen the same speeches and what you raw from it is not what I draw from it. You see what you want no doubt.
Try factual approaches rather than Radio Five Live phone in bluster.
Cheers.
Speaking of facts Newmanis bitch, I note how you keep ducking points you've failed on and just insert new ones.
Trolling at its worst, it has to be more than opinion you know?
When I hear or read ill-informed people mouthing off about the unions being "middling" and "antiquated" and "representing privilege" and all that crap, I see red.
It generally comes from people who -luckily for them- have never had to ask for a pay rise or to defend their basic rights at work. How's that about "privilege", eh?
One anecdote from my time at my previous workplace. When I signed up for my Union membership, there was a certain chap in his late-20s who kept sneering at the idea. I remember his words exactly: "to me unions are a bunch of cantankerous old men constantly moaning and not getting on with their job".
A few months later, this same guy got into some trouble at work and had to go through a disciplinary process over some really serious stuff. Sure enough, he asked me what he had to do in order to join our Union. He needed free legal advice, you see. Funny how, suddenly, the cantankerous old men were now prized material.
To me that was a textbook example of the ingrained selfishness that reigns supreme amongst some of us, especially if exposed to extensive Daily Mail or Sun-based diets.
Now, Newmania. I know you don't do facts. But a) It's not 80%, but 72% who have no Union affiliation. But what is an extra 700,000 people, really, eh?
b) If figures are down compared to pre-1979 days, it's because of the nature of the labour market. This is undisputable. Mainly due to the galloping rise of casual, temping and agency work. That means, automatically, millions of people who will never be in a position to organise and fight for their rights. Also, the declining numbers in manufacturing played a massive part too.
c) Nevertheless in recent years, unlike many EU countries, Unions in the UK have been fighting tooth and nail to introduce basic rights for agency and casual workers (therefore hardly in the "privileged" public sector).
I actually find it disgusting how you keep going on about "hard working families", as if the steelworkers at Corus, the assembly line ones at Cadburys, the nurses and the teachers and the rubbish collector etc etc don't work their arse off !!!
Just put down that copy of the Daily Mail. You may learn that public sector wages (this the Mail will never print) went up in recent years purely because throughout the 1980s and the 1990s their levels had fallen behind dramatically. You may remember chrnic inability to recruit both nurses and teachers around 1995-2000 until something was done about it.
But hey, Newmania, you're probably obsessing over the salaries paid to the Director General at the BBC or some Council Bigwigs and, of course, the bigger picture can go fuck itself.
public sector workers.....their work more essential.
Thats like saying the girls who strung beads and painted the cave were more essential than the bearded chaps who went out and killed the woolly mammoth so the tribe got to eat. No problem guessing which lot you are in HG, happy painting .
Claude .Why do you think when it snowed the Public Sector took the days off and the Private Sector did not ? For most people that’s a simple one .What I am saying is that the people whose children you want to impoverish so teachers can do eight hours teaching per week for two thirds of the year are ordinary working people not aliens
Shortages ? Yes of maths and Science teachers but to get a handful, of them we have had to Nationally over reward tribes of Drama students with worthless degrees to slob out at the expense of working people , National pay rates innit , Unions .
Why should the majority with no pension spend the first couple of hours of the day paying for the feather bedded Public Sectors .Thats not fair and as for obsessing about a few with silly salaries that is the whole dishonest case for socialism . Truth , spending is paid for by ordinary people and even the top rate of 50p loses revenue
Anyway you sing your 20th century boy song .The fact is that New labour is dead in the tax exporting regions of the country, dead to home owners and dead to those who perceive themselves tax payers , a growing majority . Unless you have something to say that makes sense outside the land of the hand out you might just as well continue sixth from debates - because you are not achieving much else
Troll:
Aside from all the points you've again ducked...
Your own words do the best damage to your ideology, you dismiss the police, firemen, nurses, doctors, teachers, care workers, social workers, youth workers and all of those that keep our very society together by their good work.
You even make your ridiculous point with a tired sexist analogy...seriously, what decade are you from? Worn out old clap-trap from a fringe human, dear me, is this all you've got to make you feel whole?
With regards to your pathetic snow "point" do you have any proof with regards to the differences in public/private sector attendance?
These ordinary working people you falsely speak of are also made up of the public sector workers you denigrate. You really are making an ass of yourself with this incoherence and bile.
"Why should the majority with no pension spend the first couple of hours of the day paying for the feather bedded Public Sectors ."
I hate to keep doing this but this doesn't make any sense and once again has no basis in reality, it is a vulgar generalisation littered with falsehoods and no facts.
Your opinion, I'm sorry to say, is worthless.
Stop confusing your sexual fantasies of the death of Labour with the reality of it and I love how you speak for people you don't even know. Amazing levels of delusion with regards to your intelligence and knowledge of the UK.
Seriously, go away now, your fevered musings are not welcome here.
I note that the Newmania troll has much in common with the racist, in that both attack this blog as awful but keep frequenting it to give their backward, useless ideas an airing.
It makes them feel a bit more worthwhile no doubt, you give them a purpose Claude.
Well I can honestly say that this debate has cheered me up no end. I'm abroad at the moment for work and blog time is limited. Nonetheless this blog is good; I'll happily admit that I enjoy it even though I don't always share the author's opinions. It might be better if people who disagreed with Claude et al simply didn't flame the place up but it sure makes for interesting reading.
Post a Comment