Jeremy Corbyn to be elected Labour Leader?
- This topic has 621 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Just been looking at Derek Wall's Twitter conversations about the SPGB. What strikes me is the view that the SPGB do nothing else but have a go at the "left".Seems it's the same old SPGB vs "the left" now on digital social media. Someone once said something about history repeating itself?Seems the battle with the "left" will go on and on, while the "right" laugh their socks off at our futility, all the while continuing getting rich at our expense.Here's an outrageous suggestion, why not leave the "left" alone for a change and conduct a sustained campaign against some "right wing" aspect of capitalism (there's plenty to choose from) and see what response you get. Might get a surprise. Maybe even get a nod from the "left", that in turn might allow possible helpful dialogue to be exchanged.Or continue to lock horns with the "left" as usual.
SocialistPunk wrote:Just been looking at Derek Wall's Twitter conversations about the SPGB. What strikes me is the view that the SPGB do nothing else but have a go at the "left".It didn't strike you that leftist Derek Wall does nothing else but have a go at the SPGB?
Quote:Here's an outrageous suggestion, why not leave the "left" alone for a change and conduct a sustained campaign against some "right wing" aspect of capitalism (there's plenty to choose from) and see what response you get.Here's an outrageous suggestion, why not criticise both leftwing- and rightwing-managed capitalism the way a socialist party should do, until we achieve majority support? Since when has Derek Wall and the Green Party had the right to influence and decide what The Socialist Party does?
Before engaging Derek Wall people should know where he is coming from. As has been pointed out, he spoke at one of our summer schools and knows the party and its position well. Even though he is in the Green Party he stands for socialism/communism in our sense and is well-versed in Marxism. His criticism of us has always been that we don't do anything except engage in so-called "abstract propagandism" for socialism though at one time he was prepared to recognise that this was useful since nobody else was doing it.This time he seems to have gone completely overboard for Jeremy Corbyn:http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-41a3-A-win-for-Jeremy-would-benefit-the-entire-left-not-just-Labour#.VerrD30WNdgSo it looks as if he would still attack us even for simply arguing that Corbyn is a reformist (as he is) without the Marmite pot incident.Incidentally, SP, to be fair our tweets do attack Tories and Ukippers too. See (you don't have to be a signed up as a tweeter to look at it):http://twitter.com/OfficialSPGB
ALB,I know you attack the Tories as well, but I haven't seen anything so sustained as the current anti-Corbyn mania.Where is the sustained attack towards IDS and his welfare policies that have probably led to numerous deaths in Britain. Surely he is worthy of more hostility than Corbyn?I suspect the hostility displayed towards the likes of Brand and Corbyn, is that they've managed to tap into the growing pool of disilusionment with mainstream politics, whereas the SPGB haven't.
MaxBut what we're talking about now is not just criticism, it's a campaign of directed attack against Corbyn, that will likely produce few if any positive results. So what's the point? I've already suggested a couple of simple questions should be asked befroe any sustained campaigning is undertaken. The main one being, what is the aim of the campaign? Or to put it in even simpler terms, what do you hope to achieve? The answer should be, to connect in a positive way with as many people as possible.Such a basic question should lead on to another, who are we more likely to connect with? Is it with, racists, homophobes and all manner of conservative bigots? Or with those who oppose such attitudes, the ones who already share similar outlooks to us? I know that's a tricky one.Whatever it is the SPGB are doing now, it isn't working. It's that simple.The reality is that the likes of Brand and Corbyn are tapping into a growing swell of disillusionment with mainstream politics. It's not about the personalities, it's about those they attract.Think of it this way, if the SPGB can't get the attention of our fellow disilusioned and pissed of workers now, in this current economic environment, just think of what It will be like when capitalism moves into an up phase.
There would be benefits of concentrating our attacks on the horrors of capitalism and its overt supporters Those supporting Corbyn and Brand would be drawn to us instead of being told to piss off cos we are hostile to them.We don't have to support Corbyn and Brand, just concentrate on attacking capitalism; and the mood the working class is in I think we may attract support.The attraction of Brand and Corbyn is that they are attacking 'capitalism'We first need workers to support our attack on capitalism, no one does it better.I can't understand why members cannot see the obvious.
Quote:SP "Here's an outrageous suggestion, why not leave the "left" alone"Not so outrageous, SP because i have already raised this option that we ignore Corbyn completely and concentrate upon what i consider the 2 most important issues facing workers world wide – the environment and nationalism (including migration)
Quote:Message #320 The other strategy to employ is to place Corbyn in the context of the Big Picture, and say its all a side-show, not worthy of engaging in and right now the two most pressing issues for the working class and socialists are environment and nationalism, neither of which Corbyn can do much about particularly the former and can influence the latter marginally, and focus our attention on those. We can relegate Corbyn to non-importance and defend that attitude from the Big Scheme of things in the world going on.Such an attitude would still not satisfy those who want to get engaging in the day-to-day political fighting of reformism such as Derek Wall who will continue to accuse us of doing nothing…as if all his political activities have changed things fundamentally…We cannot simply yield our principles for popularity…But we could concentrate our energy and time on what i have said…offering socialist analyse of those two problems but pushing the gear up to actually participating in the protests and demonsrations…even if it is simply being present clutching our copies of th Socialist Standard and to hand out leaflets. The other group who engages on the Left but still get called sectarian from its rivals for not always toeing the popular line is the CPGB. The latest issue of Weekly Worker also criticise Clause 4 Worshippers …
Quote:clause four was mainly for show. A red ribbon around what was the standing programme of social liberalism. Yet, even if it had been put into effect, clause four socialism would remain statist, elitist and antithetical to working class self-liberation. Capitalism without capitalists does not count amongst our goals.And they too share our scepticism of Corbyn
Quote:Real Marxists, not fake Marxists, have never talked of reclaiming Labour. It has never been ours in the sense of being a “political weapon for the workers’ movement”…The CPGB moreorless see Corbyn as a catalyst for political in-fighting for the control of the Labour Party and not as someone who will usher in any socialistic UK but declare that the situation and circumstances may well drive Corbyn even more leftwards…Our view is different in that we might not all dispute CPGB scenario "the right will resort to unconstitutional methods in an attempt to undermine, discredit, isolate and then finally oust Corbyn. In this it will be aided and abetted not only by the City, the military-industrial complex and the capitalist press and media. Special branch, MI5 and their American cousins will provide information, advisors and coordination." We already knew from Peter Wright's autobiography that there was a dirty campaign against Harold Wilson and he was prime minister at the time…But our campaign is one of raising consciousness and self-organisation, and that does make us different from those seeking political power for a political party to run capitalism and hope their failure will create socialists…More can be said on this and i haven't completely presented a full argument…but it is vital that we hold a special gathering to design and devise an approach for ourselves, rather different from the 1904 one we gave ourselves,when we were optimistically thinking we would be the banner workers and other socialist would quickly muster under…it ain't so… so we need to start once more from the beginning and see what we can build upon from what we have so far achieve.We have to discuss and debate amongst ourselves or we will continually run into this obstacle we facing now on the thread misunderstanding and opposing other party members and comrades…Perhaps Derek Wall is right….and that we are do nothing and think nothing Party and change is our enemy..think upon that, comrades and reflect on the progress of the Party and wonder why that is… If he is wrong, then lets take some steps to prove him wrong…
"Derek Wall @Anothergreen 4m4 minutes ago@vinnie_singer @OfficialSPGB ok that's great, thanks for clarification." Sorted He is now following me on twitter
This from a thread publicising a meeting in Brighton on 15 September:
gnome wrote:In addition, the tactics of the likes of Naomi Klein, Caroline Lucas and Derek Wall, along with special reference to the present Corbynmania phenomenon, will be ruthlessly exposed and dissected…Why, Gnome, up the ante in the discussion here by introducing your approach into publicity for a public meeting? What you say here is going to happen at the meeting doesn't seem the best way to win over people in an area which has Britain's only Green Party MP. Much better to concede that the likes of Klein and Lucas are asking the right questions but providing the wrong answers or even that they are making some good proposals but that these won't be able to be implemented unless we get socialism (the approach we took towards the Green candidate in Oxford West in the general election) than to "ruthlessly expose" them in an in-your-face confrontational way.. That type of aggressive, macho approach won't go down in Green circles (and, presumably, the hope is that some people who may well have voted Green will turn up). It will just put people off.Incidentally, we will know by then whether or not Corbyn has been elected Leader of the Labour Party which, if he has, will have interesting political implications which will inevitably come up at the meeting.
alanjjohnston wrote:i have already raised this option that we ignore Corbyn completely ….I'm sure nobody in the jungles of Thailand has heard of or cares about Corbyn but it's not an option here in Britain and shouldn't be. In fact, can't be. Even usually non-political people here are talking about him.
Then it is our task to get those people discussing issues that they should be getting involved with and participating in…the survival of the planet and the end to claiming bits of the planet as your own.And that does not necessarily mean including Corbyn in the message. Or does Derek Wall think one person is so crucial and must be elected to an opposition party so we can reverse global warming and climate change? If so, then he indeed believes in a saviour of the human species….very unmarxian, if you are asking me.
ALB wrote:This from a thread publicising a meeting in Brighton on 15 September:gnome wrote:In addition, the tactics of the likes of Naomi Klein, Caroline Lucas and Derek Wall, along with special reference to the present Corbynmania phenomenon, will be ruthlessly exposed and dissected…Why, Gnome, up the ante in the discussion here by introducing your approach into publicity for a public meeting? What you say here is going to happen at the meeting doesn't seem the best way to win over people in an area which has Britain's only Green Party MP. Much better to concede that the likes of Klein and Lucas are asking the right questions but providing the wrong answers or even that they are making some good proposals but that these won't be able to be implemented unless we get socialism (the approach we took towards the Green candidate in Oxford West in the general election) than to "ruthlessly expose" them in an in-your-face confrontational way.. That type of aggressive, macho approach won't go down in Green circles (and, presumably, the hope is that some people who may well have voted Green will turn up). It will just put people off.
We in Kent & Sussex aren't renowned for making concessions, but I thought you knew that. We invariably don't go in for a mealy-mouthed, namby-pamby, wishy-washy, dyed-in-the-wool, softly, softly, catchee monkey approach so favoured by some contributors to this forum. We tell it as it is and, surprising as may seem to you, the majority of workers we encounter at our street stalls and elsewhere tend to respect this straight-talking modus operandi. It might even partly explain why the branch has increased its membership by 50% in the past year and currently have 120 contacts on our mailing list. Which other branch can claim that? In any event "that type of aggressive, macho approach" as you so quaintly put it, certainly hasn't done us any apparent harm.
Noone is denegrating the hard work carried out by yourself and cdes in K &S, especially not me, but it does not make it the right approachWe need 180,000 Form As a month or 180,000 extra votes every month in order to achieve a simple majority for socialism in 10 years.We will not achieve that with flyers and public meetings.We need a radical rethink to say the least.We need to get workers 'support' by concentrating on an attack on the horrors of capitalism and its overt supporters. We will not gain support from workers by waging war on them.I use the term 'support' in that they may not yet support our solution but support our criticism.
Reminder: 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.
Let us not overlook what our election candidate for Brighton said on the Andrew Neil programme…i'm paraphrasing but the jist was….we welcome the presence of those other parties that call themselves socialist because it brings the topic of what socialism is into the debate…and by implication that means we very much welcome Corbyn's bid for the leadership of the Labour Party and it has already been pointed out, it has instigated political discussions once again on what is socialism.We cannot advocate our interpretation of socialism without upsetting those who believe their version is the right one or a step towards it.It can be done, however, by a complete absence of personalities and concentrate purely on a historical and theoretical basis. People can draw their own conclusion in regards how that effects Corbyn's position. As i said previously, John Bisset's Clause 4 article, i think, was an example of this approach. Someone mentioned if Corbyn wins we should publish a fresh Labour Party pamphlet, another way of delivering the message without personalising it. But at one point or another, Corbyn's policies must be attacked as against working class and socialist interests and his defenders will care little for our objectiveness. We will also be criticised about merely talking about socialist future and nothing else and certainly not the here and now. I recall during the Scottish Referendum, left nationalists simply dismissed our opposition alongside the unionist Tory and Labour No vote, and as part of the evidence they cited our party name…Socialist Party of GREAT BRITAIN. I will remind the thread that out of millions who voted…near on 90% of those eligible…3,000 spoiled their ballots and we can be pretty sure most of those didn't do that because of our counsel. Our socialism is still as much impossiblism as it as in 1904…perhaps even more so…Back to the beginning, comrades, and look at ourselves with a bit of self-critical self-examination.I'm a part of the confusion of this thread because i simply don't know what direction to take. But i do think we are travelling up the wrong track and scared to either change direct or turn back. I don't find anybody has the full answer … Once more i suggest we ourselves get together and re-fashion our politics…ADM/Conference isn't the forum for this re-shaping of the Party. i think we should dedicate a process to explore new paths forward and re-set our compass.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.