Left Unity.org / People’s Assembly
- This topic has 583 replies, 34 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
alanjjohnstone wrote:With 2000 signed up LU members registered, 500 attended their conference as delegates, 1 in 4. That is not bad a turn-out.I await the reports of their conference.
500 attendees at the Conference this past weekend? Looking at the YouTube clips of the Conference, it doesn't even look half that number. Maybe I just picked the wrong clip.
Looks as if the LU has been outmanoeuvred by the Trotskyists behind TUSC:http://www.independentsocialistnetwork.org/resolution-on-electoral-unity-with-tusc-as-agreed-at-lu-november-conference
alanjjohnstone wrote:With 2000 signed up LU members registered, 500 attended their conference as delegates, 1 in 4. That is not bad a turn-out.I await the reports of their conference.I don't know where the figure of 500 came from. According to this report, there were only 250 there and that only on the first day. That's 1 in 8. If we count both delegates and non-delegates we can manage about 1 in 10 at our conferences. But in the other respect we're the same:
Quote:Present: There were around 250 people present, fewer on Day two – predominantly male, white, not generally young.LU is and will always be a left reformist electoral response to the crisis of labourism within capitalist society and a miserable response at that.
Dave59 wrote:LU is and will always be a left reformist electoral response to the crisis of labourism within capitalist society and a miserable response at that.Right wing and lef wing are just two wings of the same bird known as capitalism.
It remains to be seen if the number of votes their dozen candidates get next May merits the term "electoral response" ! The same criticism applies of course to TUSC as well, even more so given their dream of launching a Labour Party Mark 2 and so of repeating in the 21st century the mistake of the 20th century of thinking that a trade-union based workers party could bring "socialism" or even sustain reforms to capitalism.
ALB is I think spot on with regards to Ukip and Tusc (see other thread). Indeed, Ukip have in recent times started to spout some Old Labour rhetoric, so they must realise this too. It seems they're trying to marry up the appeal of both nationalism and socialism. They should have called themselves the National Socialist Party from the off to tap into this historically powerful idea.He misses the mark, though, with his swipes at Left Unity. One may with equal justice sneer at the "World Socialist Movement" or "Socialist Party of Great Britain" for being nothing of the sort. Left Unity is the Ukip of the left in aspiration, not in reality, as everyone in it is only too painfully aware. Though I think you're right in saying that the post is increasingly being filled by the Greens.
Revealing report on the disarray in LU over what candidates to field, who and where in this report:http://www.independentsocialistnetwork.org/the-reality-of-left-unity-4-or-5-general-election-candidates-despite-commitment-from-march-conference-and-two-hours-of-nc-time-spent-debating-whether-to-oppose-the-green-party/Since they both stand for more or less the same thing (although the Green Party thankfully doesn't call itself socialist) it is not surprising that the non-Trots in LU don't want to oppose the Green Party and probably want to vote for it. On the other hand, 2 of their candidates will be standing under the TUSC banner.Note the possibility of an LU candidate in Lambeth (one of our "targets") and the discussion about Brighton (another place we are planning to stand).
Will you, perhaps via the election committee, be informing them we will have a candidate standing in Lambeth and that it has been an ongoing strategy for ourselves to contest this constituency. Perhaps reminding them that if they are contemplating not going up against the Green Party, there is even more reason not to undermine a genuine socialist party's campaign. The LU in Scotland seems even in more disarray than the party nationally.
I think they know full well that we traditionally contest Vauxhall, especially as Workers Power now part of Lambeth LU stood against us in the 2010 general election. Also Lambeth includes, in whole or part, a couple of other constituencies.I noticed too that the LU in Scotland is in disarray with some jumping on the Nationalist bandwagon and others wanting (arguably less stupidly) to vote No.
alanjjohnstone wrote:Will you, perhaps via the election committee, be informing them we will have a candidate standing in Lambeth and that it has been an ongoing strategy for ourselves to contest this constituency. Perhaps reminding them that if they are contemplating not going up against the Green Party, there is even more reason not to undermine a genuine socialist party's campaign.The Media Committee, if it hasn't already done so, should be issuing a news release concerning our intention to stand in 10 constituencies in the 2015 General Election including our commitment to the two Brighton seats. There are those within LU who do think the Green Party should be opposed and if they win the day then presumably Brighton Pavilion, currently held by Caroline Lucas, will almost certainly be one of their targets.
Quote:A number of delegates outlined why the Greens should be opposed – their councillors supported cuts and attacks on trade union rights, and the Party was not socialist. They would also not stand aside for LU or other left candidates. It was pointed out that Green councillors in Bristol had been supporting austerity measures.alanjjohnstone wrote:Will you, perhaps via the election committee, be informing them we will have a candidate standing in Lambeth and that it has been an ongoing strategy for ourselves to contest this constituency. Perhaps reminding them that if they are contemplating not going up against the Green Party, there is even more reason not to undermine a genuine socialist party's campaign.The LU in Scotland seems even in more disarray than the party nationally.I know this isn't suggesting we alter where we stand but just to point out the election committee (as with the rest of the party) should be acting strictly in accordance with 'That as all political parties are but the expression of class interests, and as the interest of the working class is diametrically opposed to the interests of all sections of the master class, the party seeking working class emancipation must be hostile to every other party'. This includes Left Unity as the following makes clear.'The Companion Parties of the World Socialist Movement, therefore, enter the field of political action determined to wage war against all other political parties, whether alleged labour or avowedly capitalist'It wouldn't be appropriate through a nudge and wink to ask Left Unity not to stand against us.
Weekly Worker report Left Unity executive committee exceeding their jurisdictionhttp://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/1046/a-misjudged-bonapartist-initiative/
Quote:So-called ‘direct democracy’ inevitably relies on and reinforces impoverished thinking and therefore favours demagogues. Not surprisingly then, Marxists have shown a strong aversion to referendums – the favourite device of modern dictators beginning with Louis Bonaparte.8 And it is, of course, not only Marxists who oppose referendums. Even rightwing Labourites have condemned them as alien to the spirit of parliamentary and party politics.9Thankfully, however, there is no provision for Left Unity’s national officers to call an internal membership referendum. Indeed the constitution is perfectly clear. Principles and overall political direction are decided by our annual conference. Between these ‘one member, one vote’ gatherings there is the 70-strong national council. It is vested with the power to decide on policy matters.The much smaller executive committee is expected to provide nothing more than “the day-to-day running of the party” (clause 12a). As for the national officers, they are “responsible for implementing the decisions of national/special conferences and the national council” (clause 12a). No more. No less.Left Unity’s last national conference, in November 2014, not only accepted an amendment which, rightly, rejected calls for closer collaboration with Tusc, but “overwhelmingly rejected” moves to “extend cooperation to the Greens”.10 On each occasion the Communist Platform voted as a bloc for the winning side of the argument. So we remember it well. And, suffice to say, “national conferences of Left Unity are the supreme policy-making body” of the organisation (clause 9a).Under fire from indignant NC members and branches, the officers are citing the September 2014 national council (that is, a meeting which took place two months prior to the “supreme” national conference). However, according to any serious reading, the September 2014 ‘General election strategy’, as agreed by the NC, fails to support the national officers’ ‘Appeal’. Even if it did, the last national conference definitely takes constitutional precedence.Perhaps Stuart W can shed some light?
Hmm, probably not, sorry! I am no longer a member. I think on paper, and in the good intentions of most of the members, LU is as democratic as the SPGB (in the early days, perhaps even more so, since the 'executive' and 'conference' were one and the same and were representative of all members and branches). However, as the SPGB teaches, consciousness is all important. The SP and all its members are thoroughly imbued with a thoroughgoing democratic consciousness – abuses of democracy are more or less unthinkable and quickly stamped out. In LU, this was not operative. Most people wanted a democratic leadership – a body that would take a lead once elected and get things done. Well, that's what they've got. It's one of the reasons my partner and I left.
stuartw2112 wrote:Hmm, probably not, sorry! I am no longer a member. I think on paper, and in the good intentions of most of the members, LU is as democratic as the SPGB (in the early days, perhaps even more so, since the 'executive' and 'conference' were one and the same and were representative of all members and branches). However, as the SPGB teaches, consciousness is all important. The SP and all its members are thoroughly imbued with a thoroughgoing democratic consciousness – abuses of democracy are more or less unthinkable and quickly stamped out. In LU, this was not operative. Most people wanted a democratic leadership – a body that would take a lead once elected and get things done. Well, that's what they've got. It's one of the reasons my partner and I left.I told you several months ago that Left Unity was just the same dog wearing a different collar. I know the left more than the palms of my hands, and also, I have not seen any political organization better than the SPGB/WSM in this planet. You are in a much better position than myself, because you are surrounded by others members of the party, and I am like a lone ranger, and the place where I am living at the present time the workers are in induced political coma
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.