ALB
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Got that wrong then but I wouldn't call it an "idiots' revolt", more a protest vote by the so-called "white working class" in England and Wales outside London and Liverpool. Had to laugh though at the Tory Brexiters on TV claiming that this group had supported Brexit because they were concerned about governance, sovereignity, the constitution and all that crap, though I'm sure it will have been a protest at the fact that they don't control what happens to them.But we're right on one thing — the change is not going to be as big as both sides were arguing if the vote went for exit. No sooner was it clear that Leave was going to win than its proponents started back-tracking, saying there was no need to rush things. In fact it looks as if the UK is going to remain a member of the EU till at least the end of 2019. So no more immediate money for the NHS from "the £350 million a week sent to Brussels". No reduction of VAT on domestic energy. Not even any stop to migrants from the rest of the EU coming to fill job vacancies in Britain.These will turn out to be the usual empty politicians' promises. So, the "white working class" protest voters are going to be disappointed, "betrayed" yet again, though I don't suppose many had illusions about anything really changing.If I dare stick my neck out again, I still say that the outcome in 2020 is going to be like Norway, i.e not in the EU but with continued access to the single market in return for a payment to Brussels and acceptance of the principle of the free movement of workers looking for jobs.
Your introduction didn't make it clear than this is a plea not to vote Brexit or Lexit. Makes some good points:
Quote:So when we 'take our country back' are we going to take our workplaces back? Control over our own labour back? No one is talking about that.gnome wrote:There's been a last minute revision of the EU Referendum voting paper…This is the ballot paper I'm going to put in the ballot box as well tomorrow (or is it today now?)
Thanks but the other thing you are ignoring is the actual question (see the Zeitgeist voting paper above). It's
Quote:Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?So it's not about what the Leave mob promise or threaten to do if the UK votes to leave. What would happen in that event is an open question, to be decided by negotiations between the UK and the EU. All their promises and plans are so much hot air, even though they have stoked up anti-immigrant and xenophobic prejudices.One outcome would be that the UK ends up like Norway, i.e. with full free access to the single tariff-less market with common standards but still having to pay something to the EU for this access and having to accept the free movement of labour.Given that a majority of the UK capitalist class and of UK MPs are for Remain in order to have access to this market, this could well be the most likely outcome in the event of a Leave vote. Norway, incidentally, has ended up in this position after twice voting in a referendum not to join the EU. Maybe, as the UK has more clout than Norway, it could get a better deal, but basically it would be no change. The only change would be in the institutional arrangements for decision-making.So Keep Calm and Carry On.
No it's not. That doesn't follow. Why is an abstention a vote for one of the two sides and why for Leave and not Remain? From your point of view, Stuart, as you've already acknowledged, it's not a vote for Leave:
stuart2112 wrote:I prefer your abtaining position to that of the dreaming Lexiteers.So, for you, abstaining is the lesser evil !
It probably is but that doesn't mean we should vote for it. Anyway, it looks again that it's not going to happen, so we can all sit back and relax.
Not bad as a blog. That's one of the problems to voting Remain: it also means voting for Cameron to remain as PM. We all know of course that the B in Brexit stands for bigot and the X for xenophobe so there's no problem in not voting for that.
This article, which he had something to with, on "Workers' and Peasants' Collectives in the Spanish Civil War", orginally published in Wildcat in 1986, is also good and relevant to this thread:http://www.af-north.org/Subversion/subversion_18.htmNote the subtle, but revealing, change of title from the original "The End of Anarchism?" to "The End of Anarchist Syndicalism?" Clearly, the AF doesn't like the anarcho-syndicalists.
Just been listening to a summary of what the papers are saying and am surprised as I didn't think they'd do it. But the Mail on Sunday has reproduced one of her articles urging a Remain vote while Cameron himself has also referred to her pro-Remain stance. It seems to be having an effect:http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jo-coxs-death-sparks-eu-8226820#rlabs=2%20rt$category%20p$1On the other hand, one far right group is urging a Leave vote so that Mair's sacrifice will not be in vain:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3648446/Don-t-let-man-s-sacrifice-vain-Swastika-covered-vote-Leave-activist-shocking-support-Jo-Cox-s-alleged-killer-calls-MP-s-death-unfortunate-says-shouldn-t-stop-Britons-voting-out.html
Interesting couuple of hours in Kingston earlier today. Despite the announced suspension of campaigning until Monday, the Leave people were out leafletting as "Veterans for Britain" defending the British Army from being incorporated into a European one. The Remain people were about but not leafletting. The Leave people told us that the Remainers had threatened to take photos of them and send them to the Guardian (I'm sure that had them trembling in their boots). Those who discussed the referendum with us were evenly divided between Remain and Leave. Those for Remain argued that as "we" were in, "we" might as well stay, though one made the point that if the Brexiters were right and the economy boomed after Brexit more workers would be needed, from abroad of course. Those for Leave were divided. One said she was against the EU because it was "Marxist" (a new one on us). Another was a leftist who told us that Boris and Farage were "wankers". He was still going to vote with them though. Some people had already voted by post.We also discussed socialism with others and even sold three pamphlets.In the Druid's Head pub after we overheard a discussion about whether booze cruises to Calais to buy beer, cigarettes and wine would continue (the answer is no, unless Britain stays in the single market; otherwise it would be back to the old duty-free limits). Actually, this discussion was of more relevance to the working class than the other stuff the media and the politicians have been going on about.We are going to have to distribute the remaining few hundred leaflets door to door in some of the areas we distributed our GLA election leaflets.
Clearly a Brexiter then and done to help further Brexit. I can't see how they can wriggle out of this one. No wonder they've suspended their campaigning.
stuartw2112 wrote:Is this the place to discuss the In/Out referendum? If so, I must say I think the party's stand on this is wrong and shameful, even from its own point of view. One of the key issues in this referendum is workers rights at work. The EU guarantees basic protections; the Outers promise to tear them up. Hence there is a clear working class interest in the poll (and that's not even to go into all the other issues, where working class interests are also at stake). In calling for abstention, the SPGB is going against its own declared position on supporting reforms in the working class interest. I hope all members will consider rebelling against the party and voting for Remain.I don't think "workers rights at work" (ir anywhere else) is a key issue. They're basically nothing to do with the EU but with what workers in their unions can stop employers getting away with. Certainly, the EU doesn't seem to be effective in preserving workers rights in France. No, the only two arguable reasons for voting Remain are the two that have been aired here: (1) to maintain the free movement of labour and (2) to protest against the xenophobia behind the Leave case. People will make up their own mind how much weight to attach to these. I'd just point out that, even in the event of a Leave win, the free movement of labour stands a good chance of staying. British capitalism needs free access to the single market and there's no chance they are going to get this unless they agree to the free movement of workers.There are of course no reasons for voting Leave, as you also point out:
stuartw2112 wrote:Perhaps in the debate generally but not (I don't think, unless I slippery slipped up myself) from myself. What will inevitably result from Brexit is uncertainty – uncertainty we could well do without, a gamble for (as you say) the airy utopian dreams of the petit bourgeoisie. In this debate, give me the Big Bourgeoisie (and the labour movement) anyday.Actually, the capitalists financing the Leave campaign are not "petty bourgeois" but mainly filthy rich financiers who don't want their activities to be regulated by the EU. They are regulation dodgers. Workers would be complete mugs to pull the chestnuts out of the fire for them.
I don't think she was murdered because she was Labour. I thought it was clear that it was because she supported remaining in the EU and was prominent in the campaign for this not just locally but nationally (she was, for instance, in a boat on the Thames opposing Farage and the trawler owners). This will be why they've suspended campaigning, especially the Leave mob as they stand to lose by this becoming too well known. And all the Remain mob have to do is sit back and hope for the sympathy vote. This could be the incident that swings things in their favour. Serve the Leave mob right for stirring up xenophobia.
