Left Unity.org / People’s Assembly
- This topic has 583 replies, 34 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
ALB wrote:It appears that they are going to appear to conform to the ban on factional meetings not open to all LU members, according to a recent circular:
They also have a CPGB-PCC aggregate on February 8 open only to members and invited supporters. One wonders whether Left Unity will be discussed there?
I have never seen a left unity. I have seen many left disunity. Give them a few months, and you will see an stampede and fights for leadership.At the beginning they always raise a bunch of slogans, and later on they never full fill their promises, they are like the bourgeois politiciansI do not understand why some ex-members of the Socialist Party left in order to join that type of organization.
Interesting report here from the Independent Socialist Network site of discussion of Left Unity's electoral strategy at the first meeting of LU's "transitional national council" on 11 January. Note the undisguished hostility to TUSC. Not much "left unity" there (not that I blame them).
Quote:ELECTORAL STRATEGYThe Crouch End motion, deferred from the Founding Conference, was motivated. It called for Left Unity to contest all elections where a political base existed within the community and where sufficient human and financial resources existed. A new proposal from Southwark was taken with it, asking for a decision as to whether or not Left Unity should contest this year’s Euro Elections.The following were amongst points made in a quite lengthy discussion:§ Electoral work must be part of campaigning§ We must not be like TUSC and stand everywhere. TUSC is even opposing Caroline Lucas§ There was a need for a party that doesn’t just get 50 votes as TUSC does.§ It is up to local groups to decide whether to stand locally, and the (T)NC to decide on Parliamentary by-elections§ There’s no deposits for Council elections; they should be utilised by Left Unity to get its name knownThe Crouch End motion was agreed with one abstention. Southwark agreed to remit its motion on the European elections to the next TNC to see if any regions wanted to standPete McLaren moved the Rugby motion calling for unity of the left. The motion began by noting that the agreed aims of Left Unity included uniting the diverse strands of radical and socialist politics in Britain including workers’ organisations – the Rugby motion suggested ways of achieving that by:§ Discussing affiliation§ Opening discussions with other major players on the left including TUSC to avoid electoral clashes§ Aiming for the largest possible left challenge to austerity in the 2015 General Election§ Prioritising initiating a debate about building One Party of the Left.He stressed all of this was exploratory – moves towards uniting the left and the labour movement – with no final decisions. It was attempting to be inclusive as a Party. At the most basic level, Left Unity must avoid clashes – but that wouldn’t just happen without discussion. The first two speakers supported the motion. Sam Williams explained that in Bristol, TUSC had approached the LU branch suggesting a local pact. Terry Stewart from Hackney spoke of the need for unity across the left, and was not sure whether he should stand as TUSC or LU this May. Hackney LU had organised a launch meeting which included other left parties.The response from Left Unity’s leadership, and supporters, was immediate. Tom Walker felt unity with TUSC was not a priority. Left Unity was not trying to get the left together. TUSC stood mostly paper candidates who got low votes. Kate Hudson continued this theme, arguing we had now founded a new party of the left, and we were not about to try and stick together the different groups on the left. Left Unity was the One party of the Left referred to in the motion. In addition, the CPB, named in the motion as party to hold discussions with, were now virtually non-existent. Andrew Burgin agreed we needed to avoid clashes, but, in terms of those it was being suggested we had discussions with, Respect had virtually folded, the AGS and CPB represented next to nothing. TUSC was not a Party, and its component parts could not even agree on Europe. Simon Hardy from Lambeth described how approaches had been made by TUSC in Lambeth asking LU to stand as TUSC to help towards its target of 625 candidates to get guaranteed media coverage – he felt this was an attempted take over by TUSC. Rob Marsden, Leicester, described how TUSC was trying to persuade community based anti cuts campaigners in Birmingham to stand as TUSC, which they shouldn’t be doing. Pete McLaren briefly replied to the debate to describe TUSC’s actual election results, including the average of over 5% in Council by-elections in 2013, winning one seat and coming second or third in others.The motion was defeated by 23 votes to 5 with 2 abstentions. It was separately agreed to feed back talks with TUSC (?) to the March LU Conference, and to discuss any possible pacts at that stage also.The comments are revealing too.
"There was a need for a party that doesn’t just get 50 votes as TUSC does."LU are sooth-sayers too…we shall wait and see just how many votes it attracts when it stands on its own name and programme.
The Luppies make their first demand of capitalism – Take Channel 4's Benefits Street off the air http://21centurymanifesto.wordpress.com/2014/01/25/left-unity-calls-on-channel-4-to-cancel-benefits-street/
alanjjohnstone wrote:The Luppies make their first demand of capitalism – Take Channel 4's Benefits Street off the air http://21centurymanifesto.wordpress.com/2014/01/25/left-unity-calls-on-channel-4-to-cancel-benefits-street/ Typical left wingers: Activism and reformism
jondwhite wrote:Nothing wrong with being active, as long is its not for activity's sake ie. activism.That is all what they do
mcolome1 wrote:jondwhite wrote:Nothing wrong with being active, as long is its not for activity's sake ie. activism.That is all what they do
For an example of that see here: http://climateandcapitalism.com/2014/01/25/towards-european-ecosocialist-action-network/
This report of the meeting last Saturday of Left Unity's transitional national council suggests that this party is reluctant to test what electoral support it might have, especially this
Quote:Policy on the Euro elections would be decided at the policy conference, and a meeting of LU members in the North West region was being organised to decide how best to combat the BNP, which, it was suggested, might entail backing the Green slate led by Peter Cranie.Since their policy conference won't take place until 29 March and nominations to stand in the European elections will open the following week, that's not going to allow them much chance to participate.I don't think they are even registered as a political party yet.
Further confirmation that the new Left Unity party are chickening out of testing how much support they have by putting up candidates. Here's a comment from Simon Hardy (incidentally a prominent member of the "Anti-Capitalist Initiative", a breakaway from "Workers Power" trot group, both of which are boring from with LU) on the Lambeth Left Unity facebook as to why they won't be contesting the Lambeth Borough Council elections in May:
Quote:I think it is unlikely we will stand candidates in this election, we are a very new organisation and only just getting things together so our members felt that it might be a bit premature to stand at this stage and risk getting a poor vote.The fact is that, despite their pretensions of being a "UKIP of the Left", they won't have much more electoral support than we do.As an electoral party LU seems to be dead in the water.
Just seen that too. Also noticed that one of the variants of the party registered as "Left Party" is "Left Unity". Maybe that's what they're planning to do. I suppose that they didn't expect "Left Party" to be rejected as the new party's name at its founding conference.
http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1393844293.htmlIt condemns both nationalisms and any intervention by either sideWasn't sure whether to place this here or on the Ukraine thread but chose this one for the reason that they issued a press statement, have designated spokes-persons for interviews. i don't know whether the EC could have issued a statement on Ukraine on the Ist. We did have a speedy article to compensate if they didn't. But we do suffer from the lack of publicity for it. Although the new kid on the block, LU seem to have media savvy on their side.Sad to see one of the comments to it is that the Left wiing should get behind Russia, but another did say plague on both houses
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.