Left Unity and the election
Steve Miller from Northampton Left Unity calls for a re-think of the party’s approach to electoral politics.
Let me start this blog by saying well done to everyone that had the courage and nerve to put themselves forward in local or national elections for Left Unity, while the results may have not reflected the hard work and dedication you showed, you deserve praise for having the balls to put your head above the parapet.
This article however is not going to be kind on Left Unity and its involvement in the elections, for they were an absolute disaster. Some of us within the party argue, albiet unsuccessfully at the folly of rushing into national and in some cases local election politics, when so much had yet to be achieved.
I personally argued for a local election focus, as if any network or fight back is going to be waged against this system, it will start at the bottom of communities.
Left Unity however first and foremost sought to be a social movement, it sought to ride the wave or if need be create the wave that would turn the tide in the battle for that which communities the length and breadth of the country hold dear.
Which is why many of us myself included, were distraught at the direction and turn Left Unity had started to take, it changed course dramatically and begun sailing straight towards the rocky waters of electoral politics without a care in the world for the direction of the political winds.
The forces of political nature were therefore harsh and unforgiving as socialists shamed themselves yet again in England in an utter massacre. As we rounded up to take part in our bi-decade self-flegellation that sees us humiliated and shamed.
This experiment has been an expensive failure, and a harsh lesson for Left Unity to learn, with members dropping out and abandoning us because of our performance, or in some cases the despair at not seeing the change and breath of fresh air we had hoped the party to be, materalise in any meaningful way.
What is done cannot be undone and it is how we seek to get out of the hole that we blindly and willingly dug ourselves into that will define the next five years for us.
How long will we keep doing the same old things and expecting fresh and new results? We want to build a successful party, we want to or at least I am fighting to improve communities because I don’t want people to starve, I don’t want people to be forced to live in shame, I don’t want my friends to go cold in the winter.
Yet I am dismayed at the complete and utter disconnect that the left keeps showing with the communities of this land, we keep doing failed and destructive methods and then hope or try to define and exclaim our failures as something else, we pass the buck without examining our own responsibility within those failures: That has to stop now.
I will tell you why we failed, we are not trusted – the people of the country don’t trust us, that can be for a million reasons, of course the mainstream media barrage against our ideas and figures is a major part but we ourselves have done little to earn their trust.
The London activist bubble, and hardened and great comrades up and down the country, many of whom I respect fo their services to the movement have got locked into a paradigm which is no longer beneficial to the left movement, the strategy no longer serves us. This can be seen in our falling power and popularity, and general standing – the trend is not good for the left.
Left Unity a party that is fighting for the many, fighting for the majority yet it is manned by a skeleton crew – why is that? Why are we irrelevant? in an age of such despair, why are we not a beacon of hope? Why are we not cutting through the forces of austerity with our sword of socialism? Why are people up and down the country not singing our praises as we stand shoulder to shoulder with them against the full brunt of this capitalist onslaught?
The common thread of community struggle, the glue that holds society together and creates an effective network for people to organise and resist attempts to attack and destroy the things we hold dear, has been eroded and destroyed over successive generations. Now we must work to rebuild these lost links and remember that which is being forgotten and lost.
Most importantly we have to earn the peoples trust and we are not going to do that with words, only with actions will the people be emboldened to fight, only through actions will people have the courage to stand against austerity and only in the fires of action will the weapons against this system be forged.
Another debate, another protest, another time – these methods do have their place, and must be used, they serve a purpose. We are not however doing what needs to be done around these, we need to get into communities and fight against austerity not with words but deeds!
Starving to death? Well people should know that Left Unity will not let you starve to death, it will feed your family – it will keep you alive. Freezing to death? Well people should know that Left Unity will not let you freeze because of a cold heartless government – it will keep you warm.
All we are hearing is words, we need to change the direction and outlook we have on what political activity means. We talk the talk, we talk tough – yet ultimately it falls on deaf ears because we are not walking their walk. You can talk about austerity from your heated home, your lovely three bedroom house, but to someone who has hunger in their belly, they want more than inspiring words.
Priorities
There is merit in standing in elections, however we invested 18 or so thousands of pounds in our election effort, in a time when people are starving to death, thousands of people dying because of planned austerity measures, planned poverty – this investment should of gone on people, not polls.
We invested so much, for what return? What gain did we get on our investment? Very little. We could of showed solidarity with the people of this country, we could of begun a program to fight austerity in this country, instead we chose the tried and failed route of electoral politics first, and ultimately we are now going to pay the price – I only hope the price is not the most cruellest one to pay, that of our own demise.
Elections have their time and place, they serve a purpose – local elections are cost effective ways of campaigning and highlighting an issue within local communities and building links within local communities. Local must come first if we are to have any hope of achieving anything, it has to start at the bottom – we have to start at the bottom,.
Even if you go down the electoral strategy route, there was no strategic planning in placing candidates all over the place, diffusing our limited resources and isolating our many skirmishes and battles. If elections were a war, we spread our armies too thin and then paid the ultimate price – defeat.
There is hope for the future, there is hope for Left Unity but we have to get our priorities straight, we have to change – the left has to adapt and change to meet the current needs of the people. We need to be backing up our intellect with our actions, one without the other is meaningless.
In the end we need to not only say we want change, we need to display what change means, we need to showcase socialism, we need to put socialism into action, as the saying goes “socialism, the radical idea of sharing” – It is time socialism is taken to the streets!
28 comments
28 responses to “Left Unity and the election”
Left Unity is active in movements and campaigns across the left, working to create an alternative to the main political parties.
About Left Unity
Read our manifesto
Left Unity is a member of the European Left Party. 
Read the European Left Manifesto
ACTIVIST CALENDAR
Events and protests from around the movement, and local Left Unity meetings.
Saturday 21st June: End the Genocide – national march for Palestine
Join us to tell the government to end the genocide; stop arming Israel; and stop starving Gaza!
More details here
Summer University, 11-13 July, in Paris
Peace, planet, people: our common struggle
The EL’s annual summer university is taking place in Paris.
More events »
GET UPDATES
Sign up to the Left Unity email newsletter.
CAMPAIGNING MATERIALS
Get the latest Left Unity resources.
The election campaign was only a failure if people had an electoralist view of it – namely that it was about getting votes. We were never going to get many votes. In Lambeth we took the attitude that we want to use the election campaign to highlight the local issues (demolishing social housing and selling off libraries) and build influence and recruit. We ended up with 10 new members signed up and recruiting an ex Labour councillor who was the only one who opposed cuts locally in 2011. Our branch feels very confident about it – despite the low vote.
I do think there is some point to be said about looking to do some provision of basic services in community areas, but we also have to focus on the fight to save the public sector. In Lambeth should we be doing food banks (which the churches already do better than we could) or campaigning to save the local libraries? We can’t do both, so we have to prioritise.
Membeship has dropped, and our funding is in a shambles. It was a disaster in many ways, not just in votes cast. The election has seriously hampered our effectiveness due to being a massive drain on our limited resources, we could of invested all that money in people and in the party, instead we may as well have put it on a bonfire and burnt it.
And I would go so far as to say one of the biggest mistakes Left Unity has made in its formative and therefore most important years.
It is great that you got a few members from it, well done – Though this is clearly not indictive of the wider party, as we have not broken the 2000 barrier and people seem to be leaving in droves, in part due to our electioneering and the massive failure it was.
I don’t know how anyone can say investing 18k in order to get a handful of new members is either a worthwhile investment, or a success.
So care to explain how exactly it was a success? Because we got a handful of new members? That isn’t something to be proud of. If I was running a business an invested 18k to get a handful of new customers, while losing more of my core customer base, I would be in dire straits.
It was a failure on every single level, this is a war defining battle, and we lost it in every single way. I only hope it was not going to be such a decisive lost as to make us lose the war, and just make Left Unity another one of those failed left projects.
I think the mistake you’re making here is thinking that Left Unity had a pile of money that it decided to spend on the elections, when it could have been spent on something else. But that’s not the case.
The election campaign was paid for with money that people donated specifically for the election campaign. If there was no election campaign then they likely wouldn’t have donated. And if they wanted to donate to something else that has nothing to do with elections, as I’m sure many did, then that was up to them.
We could not have raised much money by saying “we’re not standing in the elections, give us money anyway” in the middle of an election campaign. That wouldn’t make much sense to people. Of course, now the election is over, we don’t have to worry about elections again for a while – but that doesn’t mean we have a load of resources lying around. Whatever we want to do we have to decide and fundraise for specifically.
One more thing – the idea that ‘people are leaving in droves’ is nonsense. Some people left *before* election day, mostly to join the Greens. But since the election membership has actually gone up (though only modestly of course). It’s not the case that people saw the LU election results and walked away – instead the overall election result has galvanised more people to get active against austerity.
Tom, that isn’t true at all – First and foremost we could of stood in local elections, something which is far more cost effective (you do not have to spend £500 to enter, for example).
Furthermore, you are making an assumption, Left Unity could of run a campaign alongside the election campaign, in order to highlight a specific issue and fundraised for that specific issue. It could of been homelessness, for example. A campaign to highlight homelessness in the run up to the election, by providing tents, blankets, etc to those that are being forced to live on the streets due to austerity.
Investing 18k to get such a little return, was and still is a complete and utter waste of money and money isn’t even our greatest resource, peoples time are and god knows how much of that was wasted on a completely and utterly fruitless endeavour.
As I said also, even if you go down the election route, our election campaign was so ill fought, that it may as well have not happened. A lack of communication and coordination among our manpower, and furthermore our resources were so diffused that they may as well have been none-existant. If we was going to do it therefore, we should of invested money into 1, 2 or 3 candidates all close to one another, or followed a similar use of our resources. Spreading out our resources so thin, will always be a mistake. When you have such a limited capability it is absolutely imperative that you concentrate them in order to have any sizable impact.
That isn’t true at all Tom, I know quite a few people and have been contacted by others who are either in the process of leaving, or have already left because of it.
It is delusional to think that this was in any way a succesful exercise for Left Unity, and if we cannot face up to the facts and change our strategys and adapt to the material conditions, we are and will continue to fail and fall at every hurdle.
We did stand in local elections. We stood a lot more candidates in the local elections than the general election.
We did highlight the issue of homelessness! We launched our manifesto in a squat specifically to draw attention to that point. Of course there is a place for more direct charity, but there are already lots of charities out there for people to support. What we are doing is trying to raise these issues politically. There’s more to that than standing in elections, of course, but giving away a few blankets is insignificant when you put it next to the massive increase in homelessness that is being caused by austerity. We need to tackle the issue at its political roots.
Yes, some people leave and some people join. What I’m saying to you is that more people have joined since the election than left. That is because people want to organise against austerity, they want an organisation that puts forward a political alternative.
Social solidarity work does need to be part of that – you can see that from Syriza in Greece for example. But this moralism that says every pound we spend is ‘wasted’ unless we give it away as charity is useless. If you believe that then you give up being a political organisation and simply become an NGO.
I think that there are a couple of issues for those of us who saw Left Unity as a movement, which would develop into a party, rather than a party that wants to create a movement.
I don’t think that the article attacks any person who stood for the election, it recognises their efforts; indeed Stephen stood for the local election. However what I understood from the article and what I agree with, is that we could have participated in the electioneering without standing candidates.
I don’t think, Simon that we should start running food banks, and I agree of the importance of highlighting local issues such as library closures. However I don’t think it is one or other, I think that we can participate in practical campaigning that has more substance than just placards.
For example I spoke to a member the other week, who told me of a friend who was selling their clothes in order to be able to live. For that person, the chance of them becoming a member whether they wanted to or not is impossible, they do not have the food to eat let alone money to use to become a party member. Participating in demos, protests etc would not be the priority for them. As we see austerity attack people deeper, then we must be more than policies.
I take Tom’s point that we launched a fund for the purpose of the election, however maybe what we didn’t do is we didn’t set ourselves goals within the process and if individual branches did set themselves goals by which they could judge success they have not been shared within the wider membership. I disagree that we couldn’t have fundraised to have been politically active within the election and I disagree that the limit to elections is standing candidates.
I also think that should we want to stand candidates in 2020, then we must already launch a fighting fund for that every purpose to ensure that our candidates have access to the financial support that will ensure that they are able to make a significant impact.
Maybe the election has re-sparked the passion for doing and fighting against austerity, I am pleased to learn that people have joined. However outside of London and the major cities it has to also be recognised that galvanising people and creating the same momentum takes on different forms.
I will be interested to see how many members we now have. I will be interested to learn how other members view the election process and our role within it. People will remember our words for moments, they will remember our actions for a lifetime.
Also – I think there is a difference between charity and solidarity.
I know we stood in local elections Tom, as I was a local election candidate. However we did not adopt a local election approach to the general election, so I don’t get what you are saying?
Me and others argued prior to the election campaign that we should of focused on local elections, in order to build up local bases within communities, and fight on local issues as this was a cost effective way of doing so.
Launching your manifesto in a squat ok great, who exactly did that help? You are completely missing the point I am trying to make in my comment to you, and the article as a whole.
Also, helping someone out is not charity work, the problems faced by the people are political, and we must provide political solutions to those problems, again – I think you miss the point of this article and the main thrust behind what it is saying i.e that socialism is more than just arguing points, it is actions, it is a way of life – and that way of life ultimately boils down to helping out those that need it with socialist solutions. Without this socialism is meaningless hollow words which serve no one, least of all us and ultimately will always lead to its defeat as an idea, people don’t just want or even need ideas – people need actions.
As Karl Marx says “philosopers have only interpreted the world, the point is to change it”
Futhermore, I find a complete contradiction in what you are saying, somehow launching your manifesto in a squat is helpful, but actually providing practical support to people who are feeling the effects of these policies, is not a political solution? That makes no sense to me what so ever.
I’ll tell what was insiginifcant, our election campaign. Running a practical solidarity campaign up and down the country during the election time, would of got us more support, more members and ultimately achieved far more than what we have done. You only need to look at the success historical and internationally of organisations and groups which carry out these things in order to understand that.
Yes, they want these things, which is great – yet what are we doing to provide them? What are we doing other than arguing? Basically, what are we doing outside talking about solutions. I don’t want to talk about solutions, I want to provide solutions. Also, you want know the full impact until a month or two after the election date, as people who have left have still got a paid membership (I know of at least ten cases of this).
I don’t think I have said every pound we spent is wasted unless we use it to provide solidarity to others (something which by the way is not charity work, and I find charity quite an offensive and shameful word to use).
Also, why should I give up on a political organisation? These problems are political, and you can talk about the answers to these problems, or you can build organisations and structures to counteract, and showcase other ways of doing things. Left Unity needs to break out of the academic mould, and begin emulating the very successful tactics used by many organistions and initiatives throughout the world to this day, and one that was a great part of our history.
“the problems faced by the people are political, and we must provide political solutions to those problems”
I agree with this, but you contradict it in your article and later in your comment.
Yes, there is a big difference between charity and solidarity, which is at the heart of this discussion. The difference between solidarity and charity is that solidarity is about mutual aid, it’s about building structures for us to help each other. It’s not about taking a pile of cash and using it to give away blankets. That is why I am saying you are advocating charity – as Simon said I see little difference between your approach and that of a church food bank. That approach is like trying to put out a fire with a water pistol. A solidarity approach is different, it’s about developing people’s own capacities and organisation and building mutual aid structures in society.
Your logic is all about ‘wasted’ money on elections. But by that logic the movement as a whole – far beyond Left Unity – ‘wastes’ huge amounts of money every day, on everything from demonstrations to leaflets to books. But I think all these things have an important role to play. Resistance to austerity is measured in much more than how many blankets you give away.
That isn’t true at all Tom, my view is quite clear – that there is more to political activity and building a movement than a protest, or a statement. You have to put socialism into action, if it is to grow and be effective, providing political solutions to the problems people face, not making a statement about them. People do not want words, they hear lies all the time from politics, they want people they can trust, they want things they can believe in – they want proof. Providing a political solution to a problem therefore, is not writing a book, it is not saying this theory or that, it has to be practical.
I agree solidarity is about mutual aid, and that is exactly what we are advocating, i.e building up independent networks, and organisational structures with which to combat and fight austerity, while at the same time spread and grow a movement through the principles and ideals that underpin the socialist movement. It is ironic that the exact thing I’m calling for, you describe, and then say i’ve described it wrongly – which is quite patronising, and a bit rude. I do hope however, you have seen the complete folly of you ways, and will now begin adopting a solidarity approach to LU, instead of this destructive approach which is being carried out.
“Developing alternative forms of organization means building self-help clinics, instead of fights to get one radical on a hospital’s board of directors; it means women’s video groups and newspapers, instead of commercial televsion and newspapers; living collectives, instead of isolated nuclear families; rape crisis centres; food co-ops; parent-controlled day-care centres; free schools, printing co-ops; alternative radio groups, and so on” – Ehrlich
I agree the movement as a whole does waste large and vast sums of money, for very little return on their investment and my “logic” is not just about wasted money at all, wasted manpower hours, and a general wrong direction in our strategic outlook. We have to work at building a wider movement, creating the networks and community structures needed to embolden people to fight – the money wasted on the election could of been used towards those ends, and the time employed around a very crucial time in political calender could of been used more effectively to launch and begin such a thing.
Money is only one side of it, and I also state within the article that protests etc have their role to play – so have you even read the article?
Well I will tell you what the fight back against austerity is measured in, it is measured in blood, not blankets, not protests – each death I hear about, which we could and have done nothing to stop or prevent, is how I measure it. The real human cost, it is not just about blankets, it is about providing support to my friends, brothers and sisters – it is easy to dismiss this kind of shit as charity, when you are not feeling the effects of it, it is easy when it is not your friends going hungry, it is easy when its not your family suffering. Until we actual start a fight back in real terms against this crap, the austerity message, and the general perception of LU will be that of just all the others, because we are doing nothing “new” and we are doing nothing “different” – lets hope however through the grace of God, something is different for us, as that seems to be the approach?
I wish you wouldn’t try to paint anyone who disagrees with you as some kind of patronising do-nothing intellectual, or set up this idea that *your* friends and family are suffering but mine apparently aren’t (or, in the article, that people who disagree with you live in three-bedroom houses). This is all very tedious. Yes, I did read your article and found it deeply moralistic – accusing us of doing nothing to stop austerity, as you do here again (“each death… we could and have done nothing to stop or prevent”).
Yes, people are dying from austerity. That’s why this strategic discussion is important – the question is: how do we stop austerity? You seem to be under the impression that it is possible to fight it case by case, person by person, in effect asking the left to replace the safety net of the welfare state.
Unfortunately, if we had a thousand times the resources, it wouldn’t be enough to even *begin* to provide such a safety net. With the stroke of a pen one afternoon the government can create more victims of austerity than we can ever hope to help directly in that way. That is why we must tackle the problem at its root: the government, the politics. Political pressure that can force a change in policy, even a relatively minor one, can help thousands upon thousands of people all at once.
This is why I don’t agree that the movement as a whole wastes “vast sums of money”. Every act of opposition from the movement is just as “real” as the direct support you are advocating, and far more likely to be effective given the resources we have.
As I said, a social solidarity movement would be important, but you can’t just wish it into being – there is much more to the emergence of such a movement than redirecting existing spending and ‘manpower’ away from elections or other things you see as ‘waste’.
A real social solidarity movement would come from below, and it would take a collective form: collective kitchens, social clinics, and so on. It’s about a movement collectively supporting each other for the long term. Look at the difference between what you quote in your comment (“Developing alternative forms of organization means building self-help…”) and what you advocated in your comment above: “providing tents, blankets, etc to those that are being forced to live on the streets due to austerity.” These are not the same thing.
Again that has to include a political element: if someone is homeless, giving them a tent isn’t very useful, but direct action to force the local council to give them a home is a form of social aid that has a chance of actually working.
Yes, I did read your article and found it deeply moralistic – accusing us of doing nothing to stop austerity, as you do here again (“each death… we could and have done nothing to stop or prevent”).
I’m not trying to paint anyone as anything, you were attempting to patronise me, and shut me down in two ways a) saying my understanding of a concept was wrong, and that yours was better (even though they are the same thing) and b) trying to shut me down. My family, brothers and sisters (not related by the way), and friends are not the only ones suffering from austerity at all, everyones is in some way shape or form, but the way Left Unity is acting, is doing nothing to address the immediate problems. People are dying, people are suffering, people are starving, and we want to hold debates, and meetings – all of which do have their place, but that is not how you build a movement.
My argument is not a moralistic one, it is a strategic one – How do we best use our limited resources? How do we build a coherent fight back against the government and capitalism? How do we advance and grow our ideas? How do we create an organisational structure? How do you build a network? How do you recreate lost senses of community? How does the left adapt and grow? How does the party get anywhere?
You do not do these by simple holding a protest, writing a statement – which are important in the scheme of political activity, but it is not the start nor end of political activity, it is just one expression of politics.
The thing that gets me, is by signing away problems which are very political to the realms of “charity” – it depoliticises the issue. What is the role of a political party? What is politics? How are we doing politics differently? What is a new kind of politics?
There is a massive history and a wealth of theory behind the tactics and methods I am implying Left Unity should adopt. It wasn’t charity work when the panthers rolled out a breakfast program, it isn’t charity work when we send medical supplies to Greece, it wasn’t charity work when socialists fed in the doss houses. It isn’t charity work when you save someone from eviction.
I am not saying we stop it one person at a time, quite the opposite – I’m suggesting we need to build up the networks and organisations needed to counter act it, on the streets – in the moment. Otherwise all the talk in the world is ultimately meaningless because we are not backing it up with any actions. Austerity is bad, ok – so what are you doing about it? Well, we went and held a protest. Great. It is good to mobilise your forces once in a while but what else? That is not enough. LU is making no in roads in the battle, it isn’t mobilising people, or mobilising the public behind it, because ultimately it isn’t fighting that battle with them.
The fact we have limited resources is exactly why it is even more important we get it right, and not waste what we do have – which is what we seem to be doing at the moment. Where are we now? Where were we two years ago. 10000 people signed up to LU, why didn’t they all join?
What policy changes has LU effected? Ultimately to me, political activity and political pressure is from the people, how do we fight and promote the peoples cause? By being embedded in those communities, and sharing in those struggles. Showing people what socialism is actually all about, not in a book, but here in the real world. It is a practical application of our beliefs, beliefs without action are empty words. We need to be applying political pressure through our actions, which is much wider than a protest once evey month.
Of course it is a waste, you cannot win every battle in a war, and in a war of attrition against the government, we will always lose. Which it is very important that we pick our battles carefully, and utilise our potential and capacity to its uttermost. In order to not only be a token opposition, but to create an effective fight back.
I am not trying to wish it into being, I am saying Left Unity needs to begin creating it, because that is how we will do well in elections, that is how we will be effective, and that is how things will change.
Again, I think I say in my article that it must come from the bottom, and be built from the bottom up. I also in my quote to you, mention these kind of things. Providing tents and blankets, would be a step in creating a homelessness action network, it wouldn’t be the beginning nor the end of that specific project. It is building up the network, creating the organisation, while providing practical help and education to an issue which in your eyes belongs to depoliticised charities, which shame people that are vulnerable. This will not do, it is not enough – when peoples first danger is their very survival, when they are that downbeaten and afraid, you cannot just go and ask them to help you, you have to help them, so that they can help themselves. Provide them with a platform, help them find their voice, create an environment they feel that they can express their politics. That is what we need to be doing, and what I’m ultimately advocating.
The two are not counterposed to one another what so ever, providing a network for homeless people so that they can deal with their immediate problem, is the first step – it isn’t the end of the process, it is part of a process, part of a strategy, one that can embolden and invigorate them. It is an educational process, just as well as solidarity action. Ultimately if we did give every homeless person a tent, had a chat with them and created that network, we would have got a message out to a fuck load of people, provided them the support they needed at that time, and in so doing, have more support among them in that fight. Which makes the movement stronger, makes the fight back against say homelessness more effective, more widespread and more powerful.
Left Unity is not doing politics differently, it is not doing a new kind of politics – it is doing more of the same, and it needs to break out of the mould fast, it needs to adapt and change. The success of parties on the contintent who have learnt this, should be an indicator to us, but there is a rich history of the effectiveness of it. If we do not change, we will not survive.
I doubt if anyone in Left Unity disagrees with the idea that to build a solid radical Left political party for the long term we have to build at local level around and with a wide range of local issues and campaigns. This is one of the big differences between the approach of Left Unity and the ” episodic pop up from nowhere electoral front” approach of TUSC for instance.
Left Unity was never set up to just be a localist campaigning movement though. The original Ken Loach proposal was to create a mass radical Left party – “to the Left of New Labour” – to create a national and local (and EU) political vehicle for radical change – utilising the opportunities presented by the democratic process. You sound as if you are simply tired an and demoralised from your electoral campaigning , for such small voting gain, Stephen. Understandable – but there will have to be a lot of , in the short and medium term, unrewarding slogging away on the vital electoral front (and the trades union and local activist campaigning fronts) yet, before Left Unity can expect to make significant progress.
To suggest that because our first attempt at electoral work didn’t gain many votes Left Unity should become a (critical and radical) part of the Tory “Big Society” strategy – by filling through “volunteering” the gaps in the shrinking state provision by tying our tiny membership down indefinitely running soup kitchens or volunteer libraries, or other palliative liberal charitable activism – is to recommend the dissolution of our political party into the charitable sector. A complete political dead end.
In my view the growth of Left Unity is being held back by some very banal but powerful factors : eg,
1. The existence of a now large , but actually completely pseudo -radical, Green Party – to offer a believable protest vote option to people seeking a “left, anti Austerity” alternative to voting Labour. and the SNP fulfilling the same “sidetracking into a political cul-de-sac” function in Scotland. The fake radicalism of these parties will be fully exposed over the next few years of ever deepening capitalist crisis.
2. The difficulty any brand new radical party , without mass media support, has in inserting itself into popular consciousness as a believable alternative.
and Unfortunately –
3. Our young party is still ridden with all the special language codes and political priorities and factionalism from the tiny “Far Left Bubble”. Our party and its local branches are simply not yet a welcoming environment for masses of ordinary left-leaning working class ex Labour voters. Our recent Left Unity General Election Manifesto was a vivid example of this – being in parts quite superb – but elsewhere full of policies and proposals which simply met the kneejerk assumptions of the ultraleft and Far Left – with no possible connectivity to the priorities and concerns of ordinary Left leaning voters. A classic example being our inclusion of a policy on Israel/Palestine – undoubtedly of perennial interest to us few thousand Far Lefties – but an issue of no interest whatsoever to most of our target voter “market”. Similarly in our “economic” policy section our Manifesto simply ignored our agreed Left Unity policy that there will be , for a foreseeable future, a continuing role for the private sector in a future Left Unity organised economy – in favour of the usual ultraleft, maximalist, “all the means of production must be in public ownership” nonsense. Clause 4 was always superior to that “Stalinist Command Economy” stuff for goodness sakes.
We need to avoid getting sidetracked into a “helping to mitigate the worst features of the shrinkage of the social services” via the dead end of running soup kitchens , etc., as a reaction to getting a poor vote in our very first electoral outing. But we also need to take a hard look at just what it is about our “policy offer” , and political focus and methodologies, which is so far failing to engage with the large mass of left leaning workers outside of our tiny Far Left Bubble.
John
While I am enjoying the debate around the general issues raised in this thread (and am as yet undecided, which is a nice change!), I feel I have to take you up on another one of your passing, dismissive asides regarding Palestine.
Are you saying that all foreign policy issues are irrelevant to those that form our target audience for recruitment to Left Unity? If so, that would be very patronising. Millions of people turned out for the Stop the War demonstrations. Surely some of those might. tbe tempted to join us.
Or are you saying that the issue of “Israel/Palestine” is specifically irrelevant? If so, how can you sustain that view when over the summer hundreds of thousands of people marched in protest at the assault on Gaaza by the state of Israel. Many people were recruited to LU because of our active presence on those demonstrations and I have recruited to Left Unity though my regular activity around Palestine.
Or are you really saying that YOU find it irrelevant because you actually don’t like our simple policy of solidarity with the Palestinian people as they resist on-going ethnic cleansing? If so, you really come out and say so and not hide behind alleged target audience members who might be put off. You remind me a little of Militant full-timers back in my youth who were adamant that THEY had no trouble with homosexuals but, you see, the workers might be confused and put off.
Creating an election Manifesto and a political “offer” which is going to build a large scale “political beachhead” out in the political mainstream for the radical core of the Left’s analysis and offered policy solutions to the current capitalist crisis and its bogus hegemonic “Austerity solution” requires that we try to reach out to the millions of working people well beyond our Far/radical Left assumptions and priorities comfort zone .
Some of our 2015 Manifesto did/does exactly that, superbly . Other offerings – our simplistic economic offer for example, and in my personal opinion our obsession with a rather over Green Party derived environmental agenda – not so much. We on the Far Left just can’t resist chucking in policy issues at every opportunity which are simply a distraction from our current need to build ourselves primarily as THE key political vehicle for the anti austerity struggle .
On your specific query, Ray, I have stated before, and I restate it now, I have every sympathy with the struggle of the Palestinian People for national determination, and their resistance to Israeli aggression. I support the campaign to secure a boycott of Israeli goods , and disinvestment , for as long as Israel continues to seize Palestinian land, ignores innumerable UN resolutions to return to pre 1967 boundaries. However there are a lot of other very bad things happening all over our capitalist world with its various imperialisms and tyrannies. A very current example being the mass murder and forced expulsion of the Muslim Rohingya minority in Myanmar (ex-Burma). For our electoral purposes we don’t need to be specific in this huge policy area. All that we need is a very general statement of support for the millions of people all over our troubled world subjected to poverty, oppression , and discrimination. We don’t need to “tick the kneejerk right-on policy box” on the Far Left by singling out the Israel/Palestine issue. You may claim rightly , Ray, that solidarity work around this issue, and solidarity with the Kurds, does help recruit the odd few people. But it is just the odd handful of people – despite the odd large demo – NOT the numbers needed to build a mass party of the radical socialist Left
Unfortunately the vast mass of our millions strong “target electoral market” the left leaning ex Labour voting working class person , particularly the overwhelmingly white working class , simply is not mobilised/enthused by a number of our Far Left “shibbolith issues, which includes the perennial Israel/Palestine tragedy. So who are we trying to impress by our selection of a number of these Far Left “must have” policy statements ? Ourselves and our immediate Far Left rivals, well within the tiny Left Bubble, that’s who.
We will have to be a lot more politically acute and capable of orienting our propaganda and associated “policy offer” in a tightly focussed way to the needs of building what Ken Loach rightly described as a new mass Party to the Left of Labour (not yet another lash up coalition of the usual suspect Far Left grouplets, a la Respect or the Socialist Coalition) if we are to have any chance at all of becoming a vehicle for major political realignment on the Left. This is particularly so given the existence of the bogus, but widely believed, “anti austerity” populist parties of the Greens and the SNP in their differing versions of petty bourgeois opportunism ( and there I myself go expressing myself in what is completely opaque political terminology outside of our tiny Left bubble !).
I stood in the local election in Norwich but I don’t see the general election policy as a folly, it is part of what has to be done. We should have had more candidates. Most got 0.4% of the votes but why is that humiliating? While I canvassed, most had never heard of Left Unity, now they do and I’m sure this must be the same all over Britain. Left Unity was never mentioned by the media, it was not a real contender but some of the candidates could have (not ‘of’) taken votes from other parties, which is obviously good. How do we stop someone starving to death? There are people suffering but it’s not easy to find them, at least in Norwich. Everyone I spoke to seemed to have problems with the speed or the grass verges, even though there are people on sanctions. I don’t agree that the elections were a defeat. Members are leaving, we have had a lot but not because of the election campaign or results. Members leave for personal reasons and because they have ideas, when they don’t materialise they feel frustrated. Stephen how do you know the general election was ‘ill fought’ considering the communication could have been better. I wrote to other members but got no reply. I agree with Bianca, if we’re going to fight 2020 we need to begin now.
Personally, I agree with Steve Miller. LU must be at the heart of the anti-austerity fightback. If LU is not doing that, then what is the point of it?
The agreement with TUSC was not as many members would have wanted. We may have had an agreement with TUSC but they didn’t have an agreement with us. They supported candidates from other parties against LU candidates. – Inexcusable.
Also I feel cheated with the way that Left Unity is evolving. I joined LU as a new exciting party to replace Labour. Yet now it is just an umbrella group that makes pacts with other factions like the Greens which can be argued are not a party of the Left. Saying that a party is anti austerity is not enough. Factions within LU have far too much power. The object should be to win power not to merely enjoy the politics and campaigning of opposition. We did too much of that in the Thatcher years.
Tony Free, what are you referring to when you say ‘TUSC supported candidates from other parties against LU candidates’? I know of no such example. I do know there was excellent joint work in many areas. Here in Coventry, TUSC always stands in every council and parliamentary election. This year Coventry LU was asked if they would like to put up candidates in any area, in which case TUSC would stand aside there. But LU had no-one willing to stand. This was just in Cov, but is representative of the efforts TUSC has made to work together with LU from Day One.
On Steve Miller’s original point, I would say it’s wrong to counterpose standing in elections to other forms of campaigning. Where there are opportunities for community campaigning we should seize them. But also, at election times, most folks’ awareness of politics is raised, and some are now looking for alternatives to the traditional parties. Because of our electoral system, media bias and so forth, this doesn’t translate into big votes as yet. It is hard work. But everything we can do contributes to the overall goal of building membership, participation and credibility. I would love us to be able to feed the hungry and house the homeless but that is a task out of all proportion to our numbers and resources.
In response to some of the discussion above, when looking at some of the immediate actions that Stephen is talking about, we could relate that to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Meaning that before we go to the council about housing issues, we have to make sure people are housed in any shape that might take, even tents are better than the raw elements. Providing people with hope engages them in the wider political debate, and the longer term strategy.
I do not see it being an either or situation, I think there is room for us all to utilise the skills that we bring with us to Left Unity. The challenge is to enable that to happen.
The Politics of Hope is what Left Unity should be about, providing a positive, practical and credible vision within a democratic and collective structure and organisation.
Vision is vitally important as well as political strategy and creating a tolerant and stimulating culture whereby a broad range of views can be discussed and listened to….
Being responsive to Politically imaginative, creative and artistic ideas through a growing and vibrant political culture.
I would like to see LU developing and exploring a number of different, new and innovative ways of operating which can be complementary of each other, as long as we are realistic about our present size and limits in terms of resources, human and emotional as well as financial but learn to do what we do well.
If some people have moved to the Greens that is fine, we are a party in early stages and there will be a state of flux in terms of membership and active membership for quite a while.
We can and do work together and overlap with the Greens (as with other groups) in a number of areas such as Fracking and Climate change and that is as it should be, that we work for Left Unity within the LU as well as outside , working with others to develop radical progressive Left politics,COMUNITY organisations, progressive individuals and groups, Left groups /parties and social , political and movements such as the movement for justice and democracy,Anti nuclear movement, cooperative movement,the Women’s movement, Save the NHS movement,LGBT movement, the anti fascist anti racist movement,the Peace movement, Anti war movement, the anti Austerity movements well as within the trade union and Labour movement.
Internationalism is crucially important building and strengthening solidarity links with SYRIZA ,PODEMOS,Front de Gauche, Die Linke, Dutch Left, Danish red green network Venezuela, Cuba, Bolivia, Nicaragua,Ecuador, El Salvador,The New Left in South Africa
The important thing is building a solid foundation for a confident and successful broad dynamic creative radical democratic,participative and participatory Left party
UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL !
or rather COMM …UNITY
Like others, I don’t see participating in elections, campaigning and offering practical assistance as mutually incompatible. But Bianca made the point earlier, “those of us who saw Left Unity as a movement, which would develop into a party, rather than a party that wants to create a movement”. Moving on from this, do we need to be a political party – another Socialist political party – yet? Is the developing of a detailed set of policies of our own actually counter-productive in trying to establish meaningful Unity on the Left? Or is it necessary to establish our credentials?
John Boadle. In Bristol West TUSC withdrew support from The Left Unity Candidate and pledged support for the Green candidate. TUSC took the decision when RMT changed their minds and supported the Green candidate. Shameful in my opinion.
I agree with Stephen – LU is becoming clichéd left wing rubbish that turned me away from SWP/SP/TUSC in the first place. It appears the ‘older heads’ who remember well the post-war and 1970’s are still influential, but a lot (not all) still refuse to budge and accept the 21st century for how it is. The manifesto was a prime example – excellent in parts, but pathetic in others, referring to hardline Marxist dogma on the economy and totally open borders, refusing to analyse this in any detail. For example, open borders but poorly funded public services and infrastructure…what comes first? I could go on. The left in this country needs to lean a shitload from abroad because the entire movement for all my years on earth has been an irrelevant laughing stock and a declining one at that too. And now LU is in danger of joining the club along with the CPGB/SWP/SP/RESPECT/CP/TUSC etc etc squabbling over total state control of the economy and what Karl Marx and Engels said whilst the everyday folk outside the party still get fucked over by the government. The disconnect is huge. Most left members are white, middle class, male and reasonably wealthy and wouldn’t know a struggle if bit their face off.
The time is now to change radically or risk falling apart. the left need to unite under a new party, and if that serves the greater good then I shan’t be getting sentimental over the loss of LU and the other minor parties.