Permanent Revolution

Mark P on Fri 21, November 2008 @ 16:01

Mark P — 2008-11-21 16:01:04

Smells like a bit of a pointless talking shop, doesn't it?

Everyone sits around and waffles about how much we all have in common but there are no serious proposals for common action and discussion of one of the main areas of disagreement - work through New Labour or build a new party of the working class - is ruled out of order. The whole thing strikes me as basically harmless but also something of a waste of energy and resources.

susan press on Sat 22, November 2008 @ 12:38

susan press — 2008-11-22 12:38:34

The LRC does not work through "New Labour" nor is it in favour of a new political party. I really cannot face trotting through the same old arguments we hear time after time on that one but it is wrong to say the COL is just a "talking shop." It is a real opportunity for left groups to work together on campaigns outside the electoral arena where much can be achieved.

From Northern Rock repossessions to opposition to the third runway at Heathrow ( which is gathering all-party support after intense pressure from the climate change lobby and MPs like John McDonnell) the left can unite.

I'll swap those kinds of achievements any day for "Life Of Brian" wrangling, splits and schisms which is what you get when you go down the new worker's party road. Apart, of course, from very few votes at election time.In my view, that really is an utter waste of time

Mark P on Sat 22, November 2008 @ 16:56

Mark P — 2008-11-22 16:56:51

You can't face trotting through the same old arguments, but that apparently doesn't stop you from trotting out a particularly dismal brand of the usual rump Labour left guff yourself.

Now getting back to the point, can anyone point towards anything concrete that has come from the Convention of the Left? Anything that indicates that there is more to it than a talking shop?

bill j on Sat 22, November 2008 @ 17:24

bill j — 2008-11-22 17:24:40

But "building a new party of the working class" is an empty phrase unless you say or initiate action around what such a "new party" should do.

Until now the practice of the CNWP has been to harp on about disaffiliation - asserting falsely that it is the Labour link which prevents affiliated unions from fighting for their members interests - and then claiming that until people accept the "need" for a "new party", then we cannot go forward.

The CNWP is in that sense purely a talking shop and small and shrinking one at that.

The COTL in contrast wants to develop joint action now, without setting down as a pre condition that people need to agree on the "new party" question. Given that the experience of recent years is that attempts to promote such agreement have been a striking failure, it is an important step forward.

How far it gets, depends on what happens next.

Mark P on Sat 22, November 2008 @ 20:42

Mark P — 2008-11-22 20:42:10

I'll take that as a no then.

Wladek Flakin on Sat 22, November 2008 @ 21:49

Wladek Flakin — 2008-11-22 21:49:22

Don't you want to unfurl your colours, Mark? A CNWP man?

bill j on Sun 23, November 2008 @ 18:12

bill j — 2008-11-23 18:12:27

You'll take what as a no?