The mystery of the vanishing Conservative party, up til the mid 1990s the most successful party of all time, is a riddle that will take some answering a century from now.
It becomes clear (to me at least) that the Tories made their fundamental blunder in attacking the working class quite so ruthlessly; in so doing, they actually destroyed their own foundation -stone of conventionality. History shows that the British proletariat showed no particular interest in socialism (of any kind) so long as they were allowed to enjoy a fragment of the profits of imperialism. but now, with the workers dismayed and defeated, the Establishment needs an entirely different approach: it needs a party which can hold together the fragments of British society in order to exploit them still; hence all the Labour blabber about working together, partnerships, and in one case a "synthetic society" . Quasi- totalitarian imagery in being used ever more, and one feels not in the satirical way it used to be. Blair is trying to create a "mass nation", not in the style of the USSR or NSDAP, but perhaps in the Asiatic mode.
The "twilight" feel of Blairs regime is palpable: the grotesque college dispute in Epsom gives a good example: can it really be the whole nation is trembling in dread of one student who it seems has performed the modern digital equivalent of sticking a drawing-pin on Teeches seat ? Unions, Party, people and business all united against the menace of one wayward student...
The enforced synthetic holding together of contemporary society cannot last forever: unfortunately we have no way of knowing how long it could last: the Vichy regime lasted 5 years, the Weimar republic 12 years, Kerensky less than one; Stalins legacy held for 60 years, Hitler held power for 12, Mussolini 20 and Franco for 30.
Until the facade begins to crack, Maintain your autonomy and independence at all times ! Whether you subscribe to Marxist or Anarchist ideology, the important thing is to stay aloof from the Labour party and all those who believe in her to any extent (such as the SWP). Value theoretical study: it strikes me that many of those who subscribe to the Labour project have no real understanding at all of what going on, and many of the alternative groups are still fairly rudimentary in their analysis. Stay ahead of events and ahead of the crowd. Dont let yourself be surrounded by either !

Well said. True revolutionaries like us are the elite, above and separate from the stupid rabble. Idiots like the SWP insist on trying to build 'mass movements', as though the masses have anything to offer or any role to play.

When capitalism collapses (any day now!) it will be us, the new righteous pure elite who will inherit the earth and rule for A THOUSAND YEARS!!!

A Nonny Mouse gives away his / her own elitism here, I think ! Marx always emphasised that the proletariat had to be the creators of the new society, not a function of some other politico- theory !
A N Mouse would now like the 'masses' (a dubious concept, rarely taken up by Marx) to be part of her / his elite plan, the concept of the mass party !. The Bolsheviks were NOT a mass party by any means: they were rather aloof and through rigorous ideology, did not admit the 'masses' until after power was achieved. Lenin pointed out that joining the party was an act of vocation, and members ceased to be proletariat per se.
AN Mouse addresses none of the serious criticisms of Labourism above: unfortunately, there is very little to be done until the British masses start to make their OWN moves towards intellectual liberation, that is start to lose their OWN chains. As long as they remain committed to Commonwealth foreign policy, there is no chance of a mass movement, of the socialist kind anyway.
The greatest danger is of a mass movement of some other kind: the 20th century is of course littered with these disasters, and note they usually flirt with the word 'socialism' too, sometimes throwing on red shirts or flying red flags. You must know to what I refer.