Left Unity.org / People’s Assembly
- This topic has 583 replies, 34 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
There is nothing new within the reformists, as I said before, left unity, is left disunity. They can adopt different colors like the Chameleon, but in essence they are all the same.I do not understand why some members of the Socialist Party leave in order to join reformists organizations, it is like a step backward
ALB wrote:Anyone know what has happened to Left Unity? They seem to have been and gone, maybe because the Green Party has stolen all their clothes or maybe because they tried to steal that party's clothes and failed.Just wait for the new splits, new churches with new pastors will be formed. It is like DNA replication
Apparently Left Unity have written to Class War to discuss their respective plans for next May's General Election:http://ianbone.wordpress.com/2014/09/22/left-unity-requests-election-talks-with-class-war/I wonder whether we will get one of these letters too.
ALB wrote:Apparently Left Unity have written to Class War to discuss their respective plans for next May's General Election:http://ianbone.wordpress.com/2014/09/22/left-unity-requests-election-talks-with-class-war/I wonder whether we will get one of these letters too.The left wingers have spent many years forming coalitions, and when they get together, most of the time they turn themselves into smaller groups. ( political mitosis ) I know them like the palms of my hands. Do not dream about it, you might have a nightmare
From a report of the recent meeting of LU's national council:
Quote:Election sub-committee report and any related motions. Tom Walker moved the report from the Elections sub-committee. He outlined the 15 responses received so far from branches regarding plans to stand in the General Election. Seats that may be considered included Hackney, Lambeth, West London, Brighton, Stockport and Bristol. He suggested there would be a maximum of 12, and called for fully democratic selections. He added that target seats would enable LU to discuss with others on the left – what he didn’t mention, at any time, was the Conference resolution agreed on LU being part of the largest ever left challenge in the 2015 General Election! During the discussion, Norwich announced they were considering standing in the General Election , and Leicester in the Council elections onlyOnly 12 seats! We could match that but then we're not claiming to be the leftwing equivalent of UKIP.. Further proof that they are in the same league as us (Third Division South by the look of it).Note that their candidates would be up against Socialist opposition in Lambeth and Brighton as we'll be standing there too.
Quote:Apparently Left Unity have written to Class War to discuss their respective plans for next May's General Election:http://ianbone.wordpress.com/2014/09/22/left-unity-requests-election-talks-with-class-war/There's telling them:http://ianbone.wordpress.com/2014/09/26/class-war-rejects-left-unitys-request-for-election-talks/
Couldn't have put it better myself. Wel I could :“They don’t have policies, they are not organised, they cannot imagine a world without the current political system. so they ask us for a truce. Fuck them and pass me a single malt and a Socialist Standard.”
Left Unity have now published the motions for their Conference in November. Those on elections are interesting. 3 call for an alliance with TUSC, one with the National Health Action Party, another says LU should call for a Labour vote where no credible left candidate is standing. Another implies that they should not stand at all. And there's a mad feminist one.http://leftunity.org/motions-for-left-unity-conferenceHere's the one on the NHA party:
Quote:Left Unity shall approach the NHA party (National Health Action Party) to seek an arrangement where members who are both Left Unity and NHA party members can run on a joint election platform as Left Unity – NHA candidates or NHA – Left Unity candidates. Left Unity and the NHA both have strong views to protect the Universal Health system throughout the whole of the UK and should seek to work together and run joint candidates based on these mutual agreements where a person is a member of both parties. This arrangement should not be binding in the same way as Labour – Co-op party relations are, i.e. the Co-op party does not run its own candidates nor operate as an independent party.So, they allow dual membership with the NHA party?And the opening of the one on the Labour Party:
Quote:In the 2015 UK General Election, in every constituency where we do not stand Left Unity candidates, or where there are no explicitly working class and socialist candidates with real roots in local struggles which LU has decided to support, Left Unity will call for a vote for Labour.This is because of the party’s continued connections to the six million-strong trade unions and the organised labour movement in Britain, and the feeling that millions of working class people still hope that by supporting the party they will get a better life and protection from the Tories.We will not call for a vote for capitalist parties like the SNP, or for the middle class Greens, who do not have these structural connections to organised workers.I still think most LU members will vote Green rather than Labour (and logically should since their policies are more or less the same). I don't suppose that their members will be disciplined enough to vote as decided unless, that is, the vote is to give members a free hand to vote for whoever they want.Be interesting to see what they decide.
Plenty of discussion guaranteed over all the propals and reforms by the scope of their agendaI note our ex-comrades call for a Basic/Citizen's Income has been still ignored (except for an aside on some future study of its feasibilty) I also note in regards to another thread and my comment on it about militias, there is a call "for the workers to arm themselves and win over sections of the military forces of the capitalist state… the working class must equip itself with all weaponry necessary to bring about revolution…The people have the right to bear arms and defend themselves."The online discussion and the actual conference debate will be of interesting reaading….hate to say it …but more so than our own rather dull AGM agenda.
This article on the LU website has a very jaundiced and probably accurate view of the Green Partyhttp://leftunity.org/whats-wrong-with-the-greens-a-response-from-the-left/
Quote:When the Greens let people down, Left Unity should stand against them if the local branch have the resources to do so. We should be aware that should the Greens continue to gain support from those disillusioned by mainstream politicians, eventually genuine socialists will end up on a collision course with them as they subsequently repeat the betrayals seen in Brighton, Bristol and Leeds. Additionally whenever Green Party members act in unacceptable ways by espousing reactionary attitudes or sharing a platform with reactionary organisations they need to be called on it – and should their local Green Party branch not take appropriate action they too should be criticised. This is why we need to continue to work to make Left Unity a genuine party of the left, and not rely on the Greens or any of the mainstream parties to oppose austerity and the erosion of workers’ rights. In the long term we need to make sure that should Left Unity come anywhere near controlling a council that we avoid the pitfalls the Brighton Greens were all too eager to sleepwalk into, and when the Greens prove they are no better than any of the other mainstream parties, all bets are off. Left Unity’s rallying cry should be that when we say we stand for the people, we mean it.Just remembered. Isn't the Richard Brenner who moved the resolution on voting Labour a member/leader of the Workers Power/Fifth International group? Or was? Seems the Trots of various hues have well entried LU.
The Unitarians are having their conference this weekend, there's a live feed and everything! I for one, am all agog awaiting for the discussion on the Middle east, which has broken with similar such events in introducing a new element to the table usually overfill with ritualistic denounciation of Israel. A new dawn for socialism is being born! In the ninth century!We reject the abstract and Eurocentric call for the building of a socialist and democratic society in Iraq and Syria, partly because these states, their borders and their in-built divisions, exist to facilitate imperialism and partly because socialism and democracy are simply nowhere near the agenda of any social forces in Iraq or Syria; socialism and secular nationalism, just like political islam, have been undermined there by late 20th century historical developments, leaving the current stark choice between, on the one hand, a Caliphate, based initially on salafist jihadist ideology and Sunni exclusionism, but which would break the imperialist settlement of Versailles and threaten western control of oil, and, on the other, the continuation of western domination through nation states based on religious and ethnic division. ‘Criticisms of the call for the Caliphate must be countered by knowledge and understanding. Painting it as inseparable from violence or empire building is a false association that lacks historical, political and intellectual credibility. The Caliphate represents an alternative political vision that is gathering support amongst Muslims across the Muslim world because, for its adherents, like Hizb ut-Tahrir, it stands for replacing the brutal regimes in which they live with a political system based on Islam that sets up an accountable executive, an organised judiciary, representative consultation, the rule of law and citizenship; such a state could only be a stabilising force for the region and the European Left has to acknowledge and accept the widespread call for a Caliphate among Muslims as valid and an authentic expression of their emancipatory, anti-imperialist aspirations. The call for the Caliphate, however vague and malleable the concept is, reflects a strong internationalism among Muslims, reinforced and reproduced for hundreds of millions each year by the Haj (Pilgrimage to Mecca), which breaks down and demotes any attachments to nation states of origin.At bottom the caliphate means one government for all Muslims, in which non-Muslims who accept its authority are also welcome. The idea of the caliphate has evolved throughout history but its political content has remained vague. There is no ‘correct’ interpretation of the Caliphate; the lowest common denominator among its Muslim adherents is that a representative and deliberative body – the Shura – should appoint the Caliph, or political executive, and, in so doing, be mindful of the need to represent the peoples’ interests.However, although the Islamic State’s announcement is the first serious attempt at re-establishing the caliphate since the institution was abolished in 1924 by the Turkish republic, it has divided rather than united Islamist groups and the broader Muslim community and escalated the conflict and mistrust between Sunnis and Shiites. IS’ call for a Caliphate is partly tactical; a means to win Muslims all over the world to supporting, but IS’ jihad is also aimed at overturning the existing imperialist order and enabling the expansion of the boundaries of the caliphate to encompass all territory where Muslims live. It has, however, backfired, dividing political Islamists, many of whom have made it clear that a Caliphate cannot be accomplished, as IS are purporting to, through blood, charges of apostasy and explosions’. ‘To show solidarity with the people of the Middle East by supporting the end of the structure of the divided nation states imposed by the Versailles settlement and their replacement by a Caliphate-type polity in which diversity and autonomy are protected and nurtured and the mass of people can effectively control executive authority’. Call Jean Luc, we're gonna need a bigger face palm.
I see what you mean. For a moment I thought you were talking about the Unitarian christians (the last step before atheism) but couldn't understand that they had suddenly gone crazy.It seems as if Left Unity is trying to live up to Cameron's description of UKIP as "fruitcakes and loonies" .More on this here:http://shirazsocialist.wordpress.com/2014/11/12/beyond-belief-left-unity-to-debate-pro-isis-motion/But then the SWP too was always soft on Islamism. I can remember when IS meant the "International Socialism" Group from which the SWP emerged. Perhaps the fact that now "IS" means "Islamic State" is poetic justice or something.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.