Blog

on 21st July 2010 at 07:17, Marie Lynam said:

Yes, agreed. Lets us meet.
Marie Lynam

on 24th July 2010 at 07:24, Michael Chewter said:

I am hoping that the LRC will take the lead and and publish a statement renouncing New Labour, which all Labour Party members will be invited to sign.We don’t want to end up with a new Labour leader continuing the essential policies of New Labour under another name.

on 25th July 2010 at 12:04, Brian Lynch said:

I support this, and would extend it to the PLP and leadership contenders.
Brian Lynch

on 26th July 2010 at 15:20, Marie Lynam said:

Hello Michael and Brian
My email is (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Marie

on 26th July 2010 at 15:22, Marie Lynam said:

Hello Michael
I cannot see on the blog the original text I had put, to which you send your first reply.
Can you still see it?
What was my title?
Marie

on 27th July 2010 at 15:02, Michael Chewter said:

Hello Marie

I have just got back on this blog after a period in which I was unable to access it.

I can see your original text, but there is no title. You posted under the title of my original blog.

I was hoping that the LRC would take up my idea and post a rejection of the policies of New Labour which all Labour Party members would be invited to sign. However, there appears to be nobody at home.

I fear that Dianne Abbott is very much the outsider in the leadership contest. I will vote for her, but the chances are that a candidate associated with New Labour will win. That will be a problem for me and perhaps for others here. Do we just allow it to happen without protest ?

on 27th July 2010 at 15:33, Marie Lynam said:

Hello Michael and Brian
Are you in London? I would like to meet you when you are in London.
Socialist greetings,
Marie

on 30th July 2010 at 08:17, Michael Chewter said:

This is rather like the Compass forum.There is no feed back.I am not surprised at this lack of response from Compass, given the nature of its politics. I am no longer a member of Compass.I have been a member of the LRC since it started and I am surprised and disappointed at the lack of response to members ideas.

on 30th July 2010 at 16:34, Marie Lynam said:

Hello
First of all, I think we must be firm about being the LRC. Once we are sure of what we are, we can influence other organisations like Compass and others. There are plenty of people on the Left of Labour. They need organising.

What Michael and Brian are posing is important because if the LRC does not organise a campaign for the repudiation of New Labour, its membership may scatter. Eventually, a Miliband will come along, or someone like it, make glorious promises and sweep up the bits and pieces of the left behind himself.

But something interesting is happening. The various local campaigns against the cuts are going to put many Labour councillors and genuine Labour people in front of having to choose: They implement the cuts - or they do not.

If the LRC were now getting ready for this struggle, it could start giving backing to all those who are genuine and courageous enough to stand up and say: No Cuts.

I know that comrades are on holiday. But the cuts are not. However, it is still possible for the LRC to make a balance of New Labour, repudiate it, and start supporting all the anti-cut groups.

I am unsure whether some of this is not happening. It could be that it is, and there is simply no means of knowing.

The job of the LRC is a big one. For instance, the speculation of the banks is not some little game of roulette. It is a predatory activity that hoovers up the wealth of entire areas, sometimes countries like Greece. Speculation against Greece has been speculation against the Euro. Those doing it are Hedge Funds and related sharks, and their activity is imperialist. There is no invasion of Europe by the Dollar, but the result is the same.

This is a war, where Britain has opted to stay on the side of the invadors. The IMF and World Bank, etc. But this has not protected Britain from the Hedge Funds and related sharks. Far from it, through the rating agencies, these hold Cameron (in the way they held Brown and Blair), in a vice: You cut, cut, cut, cut. They probably do not care whether Britain manages to repay its debts. They (the speculators and Cameron himself) want to reverse properly the post-war collective operations of the NHS, School, Transport and partly Housing systems that give people the notion that if they combine together, every member of society can be protected from want. This is what the press calls ‘ideology’, but in depth, it is only the naked face of capitalism.

What the LRC faces is not just the need to support the British masses against the cuts, it is this tsunami of counter revolution. I am not saying that victory would be in sight if the LRC started repudiating New Labour. Because Old Labour did not fare any better. In principle, Old Labour managed the capitalist system, its empire, its wars, its speculation and its exploitation of the working class. What has changed in not the nature of Labour - which as the name says is not Socialist - but a situation that demands socialist measures.

If the growing anti-cut campaigns up and down the country do not start making a difference in Labour, they will follow the lead of organisations that try to replace Labour. Perhaps this competition is motivated by impatience and a lack of historic vision of the role of Labour in Britain. This creates delays. It causes organisations to seek to withdraw within themselves instead of helping to build the Labour/Socialist currents and tendencies to displace the Milebands and company.

The result of the lack of LRC functioning is that organisations look inwards. They feel justified in their defensive and anti-Labour stances. This dispersion gives more time for the capitalists to launch attacks. An example is the way the Academies Bill was railroaded through Parliament before anyone had time to take a breath. Let alone before the LRC took a breath.

If none of this has an immediate solution, at least it can be defied by using a bit of concertation, consultation, communication, intelligence and audacity in the LRC and the Labour Left.

Marie Lynam

on 5th August 2010 at 14:07, Derek Bunce said:

I think comrades contributing to this stream have made a number of valuable points. One of my greatest concerns (coming from the Midlands) is that any activity should not be London-based - why should you have all the fun?

Seriously, I live in an area that has seen the Party and socialism decline to near death and it is imperative we rebuild the left in this and other areas. Whilst the leadership campaign has been interesting, it will simply create a forum for the right-wing and centrists to put forward their views. Diane may be good, but is she ‘good enough’? in my opinion, I am not so sure. So, it remains fairly academic for us, as socialists as to who wins - it is almost certainly going to be Tweedle Dum or Tweedle Dee.

Naturally I (probably like many LRC members) will vote for Diane, because that is pretty much all we have. But, maybe because at my age I have become more of a realist, it seems reasoable to surmise that Diane will be defeated. So, LRC needs to look beyond the leadership election and take up campaigns like “Right to Work”, “Hope not Hate” and the “People’s Charter”. More importantly, we, the members, need to keep this website active so visitors can see the left is active and engaged in debate.

At the same time as being seen to be active in the virtual world, we need to start building groups and branches outside London - preferably at constituency level, but if necessary at region.

This is not going to be an easy or painless process. We are going to experience many more defeats, so it is critical we start talking to each other and combine. There is nothing more demoralising than being a lone socialist amongst right-wingers and social democrats. We need to remember that as we organise for the future.

on 5th August 2010 at 14:38, Michael Chewter said:

My concern is that there will be no explicit break with New Labour. There will merely be a continuation.Only names and style will change, but the fundamental policies will remain the same. Even when attacking the coalition for its neoliberal economics the Labour Party will remain a neoliberal party itself,with all that implies. Our foreign policy will continue to follow the USA, regardless of where it goes. That is why I am asking for a clear declaration from the Labour Left that we oppose these policies. It isn’t coming though, why is that ?

Michael
Labour Party socialist living in Yorkshire.

on 7th August 2010 at 08:41, Marie Lynam said:

Michael, Brian, Derek
I believe what you say is correct.
It is a complex issue that involves the role of the Trade Unions, the role of the various constituencies, the role of the left in both these places, the question of Diane Abbot, the relationship between the LRC membership and its leadership, the relationship between the LRC and other Left organisations like Tribune, Compass and others, and then, the relationship of the Left with the Labour Party itself.

Hence, I believe some comrades do not write because they are uncertain.

About Diane, I would like to propose a few things. First, there is no reason why she should be expected to be ‘good’, ‘good enough’ or anything else. Since she is the only one on the ground, we have no choice.

The important thing is to be centralised. This is a crossroad. Anyone going for any of the other four (Milebands, Balls and Burham) will end up in the bourgeois structure of Labour that has no intention of making any principled self-criticism.

Those who choose the path of Diane do not have to depend on her.

One of the sicknesses of the power relations between base and leadership in bourgeois society is dependency. The members are supposed to be led, and the top people are supposed to lead. Jerry Hicks put that right in one of his speeches. He said, let the leaders lead and the people control.

Ah, but for that, any organisation with Diane as its public figure has to have a political life. If not, some comrades will analyse every word of Diane, either critising them antagonistically or accepting them thoughtlessly. The key to solve this particular enigma of bourgeois political relations is to have a political life of one’s own. Starting with a political life in the LRC.

The other point about LondonCentrism. Indeed.
Michael, Brian and Derek, my email is
(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Make suggestions as to how we can overcome this particular hurdle.

Socialist greetings, Marie