Friday, February 27, 2009

A Vote against the BNP

Derek Wall writes well (Morning Star, 25th February 2009) about supporting the Green MEP Caroline Lucas in the European Elections in the South East of England this summer.

The same is true of the Green candidate in the North West, Peter Cranie.
Of course, elections are not the be-all and end-all. People on the left know that this bourgeois parliamentary system of "democracy" is not of our choosing. We should not allow it, to divide us, in our other practical actions against war and imperialism, environmental destruction, privatisation and profitable private pensioneering of failed financiers.

But while the mainstream parties have conspired to prop up the free market, with seemingly endlessly doling out "free" money to the banks, the danger has always been that a vacuum is created, and that understandable resentment at the consequences of the crisis of capitalism might lead to the rise of the (far) right.
That is why there is a real question for the left at these European Elections, of how to stop the fascists in their tracks. In the North West there is a real likelihood of the BNP seeking to gain their first Euro victory. The left has to consider a real alternative.

Strategically there are three different strands to this. First is to fight the fascists wherever they appear, on the streets, when they try to hold events or meet in public premises. It is disgraceful to see Labour Ministers minimising the nuisance of the BNP as no more than "thoughtless" in "clashing" with football matches and describing this as merely a question of police resources. Second we must tackle the distortions and lies that the fascists peddle, in the local communities, and work on the ground with local campaigners, to explain that we are also angry with the lack of housing and jobs, but that there is an alternative, which is not to scapegoat other communities. Racism is not the answer to the recession. Third is to consider uniting behind one electoral flag, for this election.

While it is important to get everyone to vote and reduce the proportion of the fascist numbers, it is more convincing to offer people something positive to vote for. Asking everyone to "vote for anyone else" rings hollow if that means voting Labour, in a region which sadly displays Straw, Blears, Purnell..... and Woolas. These are the people who have legitimised much of the BNP agenda, especially regarding immigration. We have to be tough on the causes of the far right as well as on the far right themselves.

So I would add to Derek's tentative plea that the socialist left seriously consider supporting the Greens in this election in the North West. Voting for an avowed anti-fascist, who has been supporting the Palestinian cause in the recent weeks of action, gives a positive (and anti-capitalist) candidate to offer to the electorate. This is better than suggesting the fascist ideology will be stopped by voting for the mainstream parties of (continuing) war and big business. There will also be little likelihood of any serious socialist electoral platform, in this election, in this region, not least because of the prohibitive financial barrier. Our electorate would welcome one left candidate. And arithmetically it is more effective to vote for a fourth party to gain the final seat on the list. Simply speaking, this vaguely proportional system means that it take 4 times as many extra votes for Labour to equal 1 vote for the fascists, when it comes to the 8th seat on the list. But it only takes 1 more Green vote to match any 1 more BNP.

When the Chair of Respect, Kay Phillips, announced at the recent Convention of The Left conference that Respect would be supporting Peter Cranie, in the interests of left unity to defeat the fascists, there was a resounding ovation. The response from the Green Left was that they would be encouraging a reciprocal vote for the Left, at future Westminster elections. These are early days. But unity in practice is worth a million words.

Monday, February 16, 2009

End of New Labour: time for new left

13 years ago Blair announced the abolition of Clause 4 part 4 of Labour’s constitution.

Arthur Scargill formed the Socialist Labour Party – but wouldn’t let Dave Nellist join (Socialist Party / expelled Labour MP), and snubbed Tommy Sheridan and others out right from the start (Scottish Socialist Alliance / Scottish Militant Labour).

Dave Nellist went on to chair the Socialist Alliance in England – joined by almost all the left, including the Socialist Workers Party, and standing over 100 candidates in the 2001 General Election under the banner People Not Profit.

Tommy Sheridan went on to lead the Scottish Socialist Party, whose unity across the Scottish left, including some trade union affiliation, gained them 6 seats in Holyrood and accompanying campaigns against Trident and the council tax and for free school meals and public transport.

But in England the Socialist Party moved out of the Socialist Alliance, in self-fulfilling fear of an SWP take-over, and the SWP duly took it over, closed it down and formed the electoral party, Respect, which gained George Galloway as an MP and a number of councillors notably in East London. The SP started their own Campaign for a New Workers Party and Tommy Sheridan left the SSP, forming his new party, together with the SWP and CWI in Scotland, called Solidarity – and the three way split between the SLP, SSP and Solidarity ensured that almost all the left seats were lost in Scotland in May 2007.

Meanwhile the Greens were themselves reduced to two MSPs in Scotland, though a larger number of councillors in England and Wales; and the left wing presence within the party (including at leadership level) has not prevented the party standing against other left candidates locally.

…………..

The history of the left in this country since Blair became Labour leader and abolished Clause 4 – the only remnant of aspiration to socialism the Party had – makes the Life of Brian look positive.

And while some left trade union leaders have indicated support for left-of-labour alternatives, and indeed the unions are the front line of opposition to privatisation, mostly they have remained loyally wedded to Labour. (This is despite Blair's obvious wish that they should have disappeared from view altogether.)

Now Bush and Blair have gone. (Eventually.) (Though Blair's overpaid and redundant ghost still disgracefully haunts the Middle East - to no practical purpose whatsoever.) His new Clause 4 remains gibberish that no-one could possibly remember from the day of the back of the envelope on which it was drafted. People continue to die in Iraq and Afghanistan and Palestine – and as a result of poverty, war, starvation, disease here and across the world – thanks to Bush and Blair’s greedy widening of the gap between rich and poor.

Brown’s accession may seem to have staunched the flow of “old labour” out of the party (if you forget his responsibility for handing control of the economy to the Bank of England, legalising PFI, providing unlimited war chests for Blair’s imperial adventures).

Some say Labour’s membership is even growing (though any such growth would more likely be due to John McDonnell’s campaign against war and privatisation).

But rank and file action against Brown’s public sector parsimony – including his appalling siding with the bosses against the posties and bringing Mandelson back to continue the process of euro-privatisation – could still lead to a year of discontent before the next Westminster election - after he lost his nerve 18 months ago and didn’t call the snap election (that’s an election where the two main parties get out their policies and go “snap”).

I have argued for left involvement in elections, as a platform for socialist opposition, and as part of campaigning (not a substitute for it). But the ups and downs of the last decade, particularly in Scotland, leave lessons we still need to absorb.

Seeking “power” and building up “leadership”, in a system that is not of our choosing, puts socialists under pressures of the unaccountable mass media and bourgeois parliamentary institutions. Should we stop standing in such elections?

Meanwhile, a broad anti-war movement seems too dilute to form a political party. Should we stop just “stopping the war” – a war we haven’t stopped – when we still face the class war?

These are difficult questions. But it may be time to try to develop an understanding across the left, industrially and electorally, in the interests of the environment and equality, about how we could work together, in and out of elections, against consumer capitalism, inhumane imperialism, and all the warmongers who are still running this country.

It may be time to define for ourselves a new way of working (yes, reclaim that word “new” so discredited by Blair and Brown) – so as to demonstrate unity in action – in campaigns against the war and nuclear proliferation, against racism and deportations, against cuts and privatisation – and so as to develop our arguments through debate – to create a framework of policy and action that is environmentally and socially just, inclusive, peaceful, pluralist, tolerant, and one that does not rely either on “leaders” or small sectarian advantage when there is a far bigger common objective that could be shared between us all.

It matters less what organisation we are in than what we are willing to do – together.