Respect - structurally unsound - 3 comments
Via Bob from Brockley, the Socialist Party's latest article, which calls for the establishment of a real new mass party, laments past failures: firstly, Arthur Scargill's pathetic Socialist Labour Party (whoever thought that would fail?), then the Socialist Alliance, and now 'Respect' (their quotes) has been added to the list.
Could it be for supporting a crooked demagogue, for replacing a peaceful campaign for working-class empowerment and democracy - and a return to the economic policies of the 1960s and guaranteed economic meltdown - with one of hatred, anti-Semitism, and Islamic extremism? No, there's something far more important:
Our suggestion, shared by others, for the setting up of a loose federal structure that would allow discussion, debate and action was rejected by Respect. In particular, at the national conference of Respect a proposal to allow 'platforms', as is the case in the Scottish Socialist Party, was also refused when it was suggested by some lefts who looked towards Respect initially.In this ever-changing world its strangely comforting to find that these left-wing fringe groups remain consistent in their inability to recognise the appalling nature of the people they're prepared to sleep with to win votes and gain influence.
These are amongst the reasons why Respect is unlikely to make a significant breakthrough amongst broader layers of the working class.
![[Valid Atom]](http://www.bloggers4labour.org/images/valid-atom.png "Validate my Atom feed")
3 comments so far...
its strangely comforting to find that these left-wing fringe groups remain consistent in their inability to recognise the appalling nature of the people they're prepared to sleep with to win votes and gain influence.
One could readily apply the same argument to the 'Bloggers4Likud' faction.
The whole this getting really tired - We've Galloway on one side fetishizing the last stinking remnants of the Soviet Unions old allies in the Arab world and the war party on t'other now so far up Bush's arse they'll able to clean his tonsils and too dumb to tell the difference between genuine multilateral interventionism and US Neocon unilateralism.
Better to leave them to their mutual obsession with each and get back to the real business of building a new and genuine centre-left ideology which put social justice and a fair market economy at the centre of out platform for the future.
Stuff the lot of 'em, if the SWP and the Likudniks want to fight it out, let 'em get on with it - its just boring.
OK, the last paragraph was pompous.
I think "building a new and genuine centre-left ideology which put social justice and a fair market economy at the centre of out platform for the future" is as good a statement of aim for B4L as any I've seen. Articles of that nature would be shoo-ins for this site, if only I could find them. Perhaps B4L needs a wider imagination and range of writing?
Going after false prophets is also part of the whole - the intention is that any lashing-out be in both directions, though it's hard to stay entirely neutral.
That last paragraph may be a touch pompous but I stand by the basic sentiment - the whole bunker mentality that some have adopted on Iraq is boring - watching the two sides going at it is like watching an old school far-left pub debate, you know the kind which consists of nothing but people throwing quotes backward and forwards:
"But Lenin said...."
"Yet but Trotsky said..."
"Ah, but then Gramsci argued..."
If all you've got left to vindicate your position is the goal of trying to prove that Galloway's a twat then you really are in trouble.
The damage is already done - Blair's lost the public trust on anything which involves relations with the US and the Bush regime - the whole case for war was predicated on a series of lies and hlaf-truths and misdirections and no amount of shifting positions and pretending that there was other motives at work is going to change that - fixing the mess we've made in Iraq is the right thing to do, the only thing to do, but succeeding in that will not add a dignity to the government's motives after the fact that wasn't there when we kicked it all off by following Bush's lead.
It's all very well arguing the case for humanitarian intervention but by going into Iraq without UN backing we've set back our argument so badly that it's difficult to see how we can restore any confidence in it all. We've created the wrong association in people's minds - intervention no longer means taking a multilateral stand on protecting citizens from oppressive states it now means following Bush and the neocons on their damn fool adventures to 'Americanise' the world where it suits them - we've frittered away all the positives we gained from our actions in Kosovo.
The price we've paid for power has been our principles, in government we've become bureaucrats and managers and ceased to be politicians. We've stopped giving people something to believe in, which is why membership is falling and people are disengaging from democracy and political culture - we no longer give people a reason to care other than the old Tory staple of naked self-interest.
Education isn't about choice its about giving everyone access to a good local school.
Improving healthcare isn't about giving people a choice of hospitals to go to, its about ensuring they can get the care they need, when they need it and free at the point of delivery at their local hospital.
Tackling crime isn't about treating the symptoms with ASBOs, ID cards and loading the justice system in favour of the Police, its about tacking its root cause and renewing our most central commitment of all - to eradicate poverty, and that means getting back to the position where the economy is treated as the servant of society and not its master.
Thatcher gave ideology a bad name which Blair has done nothing to challenge - we need to get back to being ideological, redefine and revitalism socialism to fit the needs of a modern post-industrial society and give people something they can beleive in and that's worth beliving in.
Post a Comment
<< Home