ALB
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Yes, we do have guest speakers and that talk can even be described as a classic on the subject. But Ed Griffiths knows us well enough to realise that there is no chance of us supporting, campaigning or voting for a united left-of-Labour candidate anywhere. For the reason Imposs1994 mentions.
We are opposed to the Left if only because they don’t stand for socialism as “society where wealth belongs to everybody and wages no longer exist” and if they do have it as a theoretical long-term aim they don’t advocate it but only “fairly modest left-Keynesian” reforms. TUSC, Galloway and Corbyn being prime examples.
Anyway, it’s not going to happen except that most of them might agree to flood Islington North in London to campaign to get Corbyn re-elected. To get above 5 percent of the votes cast (and so save the election deposit of £500) will only be possible in constituencies where Galloway’s party can pull in sufficient Muslim votes. In fact, I would guess that this will happen in some constituencies but of course won’t be votes for the Left, let alone for socialism.
Ed Griffiths himself does not think much of Galloway, even questioning whether he is part of the Left:
“Quite a few on the left have recently been saluting his indefatigability in connection with the Rochdale by-election. That may be wise, or it may not; but any suggestion that patriotic Keynesian social conservatism, fronted by a climate change sceptic who voted Tory only three years ago, represents the future (or even, let’s be honest, a part) of the British far left is for the birds.”
Another contribution to this debate, from Ed Griffiths who we know:
https://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/1481/how-we-should-contest/
He points out correctly that
“When left groups stand candidates, they usually – and quite correctly – issue a manifesto. In many cases that manifesto turns out to consist mostly of policies (often fairly modest left-Keynesian ones)”
But also says:
“The actual goal of the far left is not a wealth tax and a higher minimum wage: it is a society where wealth belongs to everybody and wages no longer exist.”
That’s rather dubious. When it comes down to it they really do stand for a wealth tax, a higher minimum wage and others “fairly modest left-Keynesian” reforms — and don’t get many more votes than us when we stand on straight socialist ticket.
Something to reassure (hopefully not disappoint) TM
https://news.yahoo.com/no-direct-threat-russia-nato-153230479.html
I think there used to be a port in Gaza or a bigger one was being built but that it was destroyed by Israel last time. Of course.
Due to two of the regular leafletters being unavailable, only about 300 leaflets were distributed today around the national demonstration in London.
Despite the extremist claim of the extremism tsar that London was today a no go area for Jews no SA or Black Hundreds or for that matter Ukrainian Banderites were observed roaming the streets. Where did the government find this ignoramus?
https://apnews.com/article/indiana-defining-antisemitism-bill-d2b2b38427df713c355fbeb2f9afe2df
If the bill excludes the 11 examples that the IHRA gave as contemporary examples of antisemitism, then it would seem to be a victory for free speech, at least in Indiana (population 6.8 million).
Most of the examples are not controversial just reflecting what is ordinarily seen as antisemitism but a few were tendentious:
“Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.”
“Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.“
“Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.”
So, in theory, someone in Indiana can now say that the establishment of Israel was “a racist endeavour” and that the state of Israel is currently pursuing a policy of “genocide” without risking losing their job for doing so.
The full list of “illustrations” can be found at the end of this document:
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/Religion/Submissions/JBI-Annex1.pdf
The result of yesterday’s election for mayor of Lewisham can be found here:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayor_of_Lewisham
Hamilton got 5.7 percent of the vote, coming 5th behind the usual suspects (Labour, Green, Liberals, Tories). This is not a bad score for a minor party but will mostly be a personal vote for him as (as can be seen) someone who has stood for mayor 4 times before and getting the same percentage. It can’t really be regarded as a vote for the Workers Party of Britain’s programme but since the Labour share of the vote went down by 6.5 percent he may well have taken some voters from Labour.
The Transform Party seem rather a wishy-washy lot:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transform_(political_party)
It is easy to see how they and the WPB would be incompatible.
I always wondered what happened to Left Unity.
Another report on the meeting yesterday evening:
Clashes between pro-and anti-Galloway protestors at mayoral election rally
Two Socialist Party members went to Lewisham yesterday evening to listen to Galloway speak in favour of Hamilton. There were a hundred or so listeners. He made his usual joke about Labour and the Tories being two cheeks of the same backside (we prefer two wings of the same vulture) and said that Labour was not the lesser evil as both them and the Tories were equally evil, adding that a case could even be made out for saying that Labour was the greater evil for betraying people’s hopes.
The meeting was also addressed by a Hasidic Jew in full 18th century dress. He was inaudible but some of them are anti-Zionist, regarding the establishment of the state of Israel as sacrilege. There was a photo opportunity of Hamilton with them. Not sure if Galloway was in one too.
Also present were the police. A group of three opponents heckling and holding up placards saying :
“Galloway-Hamilton
The Nightmare ticket
Self-promoting
Self-serving
Stalinist
Misogynist
Anti-LGBQT Rights
No place for them in any progressive working-class movement”They were also shouting pro-Ukraine slogans, clue that they might be from either the Trotskyist “Alliance for Workers’ Liberty” or “Socialust Resistance”. That it was the AWL was confirmed when one of them told us he had debated against us in the 1980s on behalf of “Socialist Organiser”.
Apart from them and us the only other group present was SPEW.
Thanks. That gives some clue as to the date and context of that clip. It must be within last 5 or 6 months and addressed to a US audience. Could be one of those money-making videos where the speaker receives an income based on the number of viewers and makes outrageous suggestions to attract more viewers. But, with his MP’s salary he should be alright for money for the next 8 or 9 months.
Another 100 distributed at the outdoor meeting on the steps of the civic centre in Lewisham yesterday evening where George Galloway addressed a group of 100 or so in support of his party’s candidate for mayor there.
He didn’t actually say that. He only wondered if that might be the case. If he had, he should be appealing to Piers not Jeremy Corbyn to be his leader.
When he got sworn in as an MP (and he did so on the bible) he was not allowed to wear a hat as, apparently, these are banned in the chamber. It is easy to understand why he does as, without it, he looks pretty nondescript.
Ps who is Lauren Boebert? Never heard of her.
We may as well keep on recording these threats, even though by now people must be perfectly well aware of what a Labour government will be like.
Here’s one of their future ministers declaring:
“Under our changed Labour party, if you can work there will be no option of a life on benefits.”
She went on to criticise the Tories for not having been tough enough on benefits:
“She took aim at what she described as “Tory claims about being tough on benefits”.”
Talk about “Labour, Tory, Same Old Story”.
