Percentages are for the top candidate in each party.

The total number of votes is divided by 3 before calculating the percentage result to give an indication of likely percentage if it had been a single seat election.

The Independent Working Class Association won 3 seats on Oxford City Council, taking one off the Labour Mayor by over 100 votes.

The recent string of elections have a clear message. The rise of the Conservative Party, the end of New Labour and further years in the wilderness for the Left.

The Respect coalition had a unique opportunity to present left of centre views to a receptive voter and yet they were rejected, a million on the streets objecting to the Iraq war with further millions in support and yet Respect could not turn this to election advantage.

The Conservatives supported the war but cleverly adopted the "maybe we were wrong here, let us look again" approach and it paid off.

The next government of this country will now be Conservative, Blair will go before the end of the year to the World Bank with Bush's backing. Brown will take over and then lose the election to Howard. The Lib Dems will be much as they are now.

The opportunity to have a Leftist government has gone, wasted with the usual internal fights and splits.

How do you know Respect haven't done well?

They didn't stand any councillors, and the European Elections results aren't out until Sunday?

..in the local elections in some areas. In Manchester three candidates stood and got a respectable (sorry) vote. In Cheetham, KA Phillips with 519 votes beat the Tory candidate. The other two got 351 and 262 votes in their wards.

In answer to the question concerning the RESPECT group I would say the previous contributor saw the same exit poll I did on the ITN News earlier today. This showed RESPECT had received less that 1% of the vote and were even behind the BNP.

This poll was quite accurate with the Labour / Tory / Liberal numbers in the coucil elections so it will probably be about right for the EU seats as well.

Respect got a decent vote in the local elections in Preston, standing in several wards. Looks like they got about 30% of the vote, and came second in several wards.

Before this thread degenerates into the usual RESPECT vs non-respect tangental rants, he're a quote that I hope those with faith in RESPECT to offer an alternative to unnaccountable politicos will deeply consider. Don't shoot the messenger.


"in poor third world countries like Pakistan, politics is too important to be left to petty squabbling politicians. Pakistan is always on the brink of breaking apart into its widely disparate components. Only the armed forces can really be counted on to hold such a country together ... Democracy is a means, not an end in itself."

That last sentence is the killer.

That quote is from medialens, by johann hari (twat), but apparently legit.

 http://www.medialens.org/alerts/2003/031203_Johann_Hari_1.HTM

Once again in Liverpool, certain seats were effectively handed to the Lib Dems thanks to the effect of the far left parties.

Walking around that hall in Wavertree listening to so-called "left wing" candidates revelling in the fact that they have dented Labour turns the stomach. At one point there was a slanging match in Kensington ward where Mr Lane said he would do anything to damage Labour, even help a right-wing Lib Dem administration!! I am assuming it was him as he had a cflat cap on (I'm led to believe it is his trademark) but then I also saw him cosying up to Mr Storey!

Then you have the Greens revelling in the fact that they may have damaged Labour's vote in pther areas and that Labour councillors were losing seats. (Though, that is if the Greens consider themselves on the left)

Mr Anderson, for all his supposed support in Norris Green was actually trounced by the BNP!!

The earlier commentator was right, the far left bickers and bites at each pther and especially Labour, meaning that the right rises again. Makes you sick and proves that the majority of far left candidates are no more than publicity-seeking jokes.

The anti-war party, RESPECT, has won 30% across inner city Preston in its first test of strength at the polls. It is now the main challenger to Labour in these inner city areas and traditional Labour heartlands. RESPECT stood candidates across the five inner Preston wards in the council elections gaining over 2,400 votes and 30% of the poll.

Only because u appeal to muslim voters. Why not engage with people on class rather than religous lines? Get out of the mosque and onto the estates!

It does, as Lavalette said in Preston - "Our votes came from the Asian and working class communities that dominate this area and have traditionally been the bedrock of Labour support"

Do you support the Labour Party that is in government? So what gives you the "right" to the only chance to stand? That Greens or socialists "dare" stand and take away Labour's "right" to these voters must be very difficult for you. Get used to it.

The Greens are your worst nightmare and the socialists are a vital part of any challenge on New Labour. The Greens can appeal to middle class voters (just like New Labour), but also retain the credibility that comes from believing in your cause. They have a social justice programme far to the "left" of Labour and put forward progressive motions on local councils to cap council tax rises for pensioners (which are then voted down by Labour, Lib Dems and Tories alike). They will also get suspended without any expenses to release information in the public interest (Gina Dowding exposed BNFL's failure to pay business rates and the council colluding with this).

Socialist parties are fed up of backing a party that gives them very little back. You can't live on the kudos of the minimum wage forever. It is a good policy. Well done. Now let's deal with things like bringing public transport back into public control and then tell the next US President who wants to invade a sovereign state that you will oppose them not back them. In some areas this can translate into seats (IWCA in Oxford well done and also note there are 7 Green councillors there after today). Even if it doesn't translate into seats, socialist votes can weaken Labour. Nobody is suggesting we let the Tories benefit, but don't be surprised to see pro-war Labour MPs getting targeted by the Greens / socialist in the general election, if it is the Lib Dems that stand to benefit.

Labour has no one to blame but themselves. Those of us who came over and campaigned in 1997 to help you get in are perfectly in our rights to campaign to get you out again until you can come up with something better. It's just a shame that in Liverpool we don't have any alternative other than the Liberal parties yet... Greens got 18.2% in one ward though and have beaten Labour in another. Maybe the alternatives will be there in 2006 if the Greens/left get our act together.

Finally, it's very easy to blame everyone else for your own failings. Why are you still with the Labour party? What binds you? My grandfather was a coal miner and he didn't work down the pit for his whole life so that Blair and co could contract out the country to private operators. Just because your ancestors backed real Labour doesn't mean you have to back New Labour.

What can I say about 257 votes? I know it isn't many but I think it was the highest socialist votes in Liverpool? OK, fair enough 257 votes are not a great deal to shout about but it was enough to stop the scurrilous double dealing Labour Party from getting one of their councillors into the town hall.

This is how it panned out:

F Doran (Lib Dem) 1528
J Kendrick (Lib Dem) 1321
R Marbrow (Lib Dem) 1346

M Fox (Lab) 1155
J Noaks (Lab) 1082
F Steer (Lab) 1022

Mike Lane (SoLab) 257

Others 3 Libs 1 Con 703

As you can see from the above votes had I not ran for the SLP in the Kensington Fairfield ward Labour’s Mike Fox could have got in. This is why the Labour guy was shouting abuse at me at the count. Even the leader of the Liverpool Labour group Joe Anderson pulled me. Yes I did shake Mike Story’s hand in full view of the Labour Party wanna bee’s and Jane Kennedy to anger them even more. I was wearing my working class flat cap, because I am working class and proud of it. And I’ve got no love for the Lib Dems nor their politics, but I’d sooner see the Lib Dems get elected before I would Labour because the Labour Party are now the same as the Tory’s. The Kensington Fairfield ward was very important to the Labour Party, they spent thousands of pounds on their campaign and pulled every dirty trick they could to try and get one of their guys into the town hall. They left no stone unturned as they levelled scurrilous allegations against Richard Marbrow. Again I’m no lover of Richard Marrow, but I would not have stooped to the level the Labour Party did. I don’t think there is one Labour Party councillor now left in Jane Kennedy’s parliamentary constituency. No wonder they wanted to get one of their guys into the Kenny Fairfield ward. But you see they did not count on the fact that I would help to stop them.

Why don’t you Labour guys just except the fact that you are never going to get any of your guys into the Kensington Fairfield ward while I’m still alive, Ha Ha Ha. Arthur Scargill forever!

"Arthur Scargill forever!"

...which sums up nicely the main problem with the SLP; it's a Scargill-worshipping personality cult. And RESPECT could easily degenerate into the George Galloway variety.

Electoral politics may be worth a dabble, but the real changes are made in the street.
www.dontjustvote.com

I just say, well done for damaging labour, everyone who stood, whether it was RESPECT, SLP, Green. That comment about turning against labour and splitting the vote meaning the rise of the right is bullshit. Labour are themselves responsible for the rise of the right, and deserve everything they got. This defeat would never have happened if Labour were truly a left-wing party. I'm glad to see them shat upon well and truly.

However, this division in the true left, and arguing between different parties, is not helpful. You know, during the seventies, the establishment used to put people into the movement to stir up trouble, and bring about inter-factional division.
People fall into this trap when they aren't doing enough themselves, and lose sight of the goal. There are parties whose Modus Operandi I don't agree with, but it is better to rationally criticise rather than simply fall into name-calling and an unconstructive use of energy.

"in poor third world countries like Pakistan, politics is too important to be left to petty squabbling politicians. Pakistan is always on the brink of breaking apart into its widely disparate components. Only the armed forces can really be counted on to hold such a country together ... Democracy is a means, not an end in itself."

And that quote is by none other than GEORGE GALLOWAY.

The 257 votes for the *** in Kensington&Fairfield ward, didn't come from nowhere. Mike Lane has consistently put out newsheets, attended many meetings in the community and raised criticisms at early stages that are now accepted as being valid. Mike has put out tens of thousands of the Whistleblower, for the past four years, it has contained criticism of the New Deal for Community (New Labour) government initiative.

As Mike's agent I directed Mike to stand in that ward, because he'd done so much work there, rather than the Yew Tree ward in Dovecot where we haven't done much. There was a lot of support from people who saw Mike Lane as speaking up for those being forced out of their homes and communities.

Another variable in this election has been the ***'s support in Kensington of a family facing threatened eviction over the past 6 weeks, myself and Mike Lane took FULL ADVANTAGE of the count to raise their situation, with the media, press and local councillors. Putting aside this usual farse of council elections, we know for a fact that we've ensured one family won't disappear into cardboard city without a fight for their human rights. We were seen as last hope for the family and since our help was asked for over six weeks ago, the Liberal-Dems and Labour councillors have since shown keen interest and housing staff no longer treat the family with their previous contempt because they've now got 'support'.

The *** have consistently since 1998 made housing the 'big issue' in Liverpool, the BNP's candidate in Norris Green tried to touch on the subject in his full colour glossy leaflet. We've actively opposed demolition of our homes, neighbourhoods and communities, the leading party doing so. It seems we rattled the Liverpool Labour Community Party people (Namely Alf Hincks stated it to me at the count) by putting up a candidate in Croxteth ward. The *** candidate had been out leafleting in 2001 and 2002 against Stock Transfer she's also a victim of the Boot estate demolition, we stood in Gillmoss in 2002, that's our justification for putting up a candidate there, when LLCP had another name and simply didn't oppose Stock Transfers in the North East of Liverpool. If you add our 80 votes to any of the three LLCP candidates and they'd still not have been elected as councillors! Two of our members in Croxteth were able to vote for the working class socialist candidate in a working class socialist party, a party with a manifesto and a broad socialist non-parachial outlook.

All *** candidates are tenants either of Liverpool City Council, Housing Companies, RSLs, Housing Associations, or private landlords, three candidates have lost their homes due to the policies and decisions of Liverpool City Council's Clueless councillors and housing staff.

The votes for the BNP came as no surprise to me at all, there have always been very right-wing elements in Norris Green (some running tenants associations) I recall that from my community activism period. The fact that the local house owner who publicly called for demolition of our neighbourhood (the Boot estate) had nothing but personal abuse for me at the count but spent the rest of the night happily chatting with the BNP candidate and his friend (in clear view of the Labour Party members at the Norris Green count table) underlined what's going on in working class communities. This same houseowner featured in the Labour Party's election leaflet.

So let's not get fooled that Labour are for the working class, they never have been! They're not now and never have been a socialist party or party for the working class...

Congrats to the IWCA who now nave three councillors in Oxford and to the *** who now have a town councillor in Gainsborough in Lincolnshire.

Kai Andersen, agent for *** candidates in Liverpool

Tom, I'm sure someone could find ANY quote that smears ANY historical figure. If you're a communist, Trotsky and Lenin have said bad things. If you're an anarchist, Bakunin and Proudhon have said bad things....add something constructive to the discussion.

The alternative votes combined outweighed the racist vote in Norris Green and a lot of people went for the safety first option, which I don't hugely object to in the case of this particular ward at this particular time.

I'm not meaning to be non-constructive, but I came across the Galloway quote and thought it highly important. The difference between the Galloway to RESPECT is not analogous to Trotsky/Lenin to communism or Bakunin/Proudhon to anarchism because communism and anarchism are ideologies and RESPECT is a political party and George Galloway is the de facto leader of RESPECT: on the european election ballot paper RESPECT were labelled as 'RESPECT: The Unity Coalition (George Galloway)'. Coupled with his comments (in the Independent I beleive) praising Castro this means RESPECT are potentially no less authoritarian than the BNP. This is important, although I can see how it can be viewed as 'non-constructive'. A constructive criticism of the recent elections would be that political parties per se are undemocratic and the turnout in most wards gives no legitimacy to the winners. I just think it is vital to point out to many would-be RESPECT voters what an authoritarian con it is, lest a revolutionary swing away from the neoliberal party (a.k.a. New Labour, Tories, Lib Dems) be wasted on some more unaccountable authoritarians. As such a revolutionary swing seems unlikely at present, maybe we don't have to worry about it, but the Spanish revolution was betrayed by events worryingly similar to the emergence of RESPECT 'from' the anti-war movement. Heres a quote from Murry Bookchin (an anarchist, although an accurate historian aswell) writing pre-RESPECT:

""Partyness" has replaced politics, mindless "loyalty" has replaced theory , "balance" in weighing facts has replaced commitment , and an ecumenical "radicalism" that embraces Stalinists and reformists under the banner of "unity" and "coalition" became Spain's shroud and was used with impunity to destroy its revolution and risk delivering the country to Franco" - Bookchin, M (1994), To Remember Spain, AK Press, Page 67.

We SERIOUSLY NEED to learn from history lest the biggest mass movement in Britain for a very long time be co-opted/alienated by an authoritarian 'counter-revolution'.

I think the criticism of RESPECT is a valid one, and it is essentially SWP and MAB, both of which are fairly hierarchical in structure. And we can see a tendency to rally around the strong personality of George Galloway.
However, there are things these groups do which is very good, which is to get organised, perhaps due to this hierarchy. I think, however, the sort of things they choose to do with this organisation is limited, and could benefit from a greater flexibility of thought. Don't undervalue a lot of what they have done in terms of organising during the anti-war movement. Don't overestimate either, I think a lot of the time the organisers of STW had no idea how to channel the huge power of millions of people. In a way, they have leadership problems. On the one hand, there is very much a leadership structure, which may be a good or bad thing depending on if you believe in leadership or not, but in any case, this leadership fails to inspire and lead the people.
Are you ready to lay down your life for the revolution as led by George Galloway?

I think the true left has serious problems relating to people in this country. Notice how people didn't drift away from Labour to vote for left-wing parties in huge numbers. Instead, they went for Liberal Democrats and Tories *grimace*. That is not a success, even if Tony Blair has been given a bloody nose. Nothing fundamentally changes if Blair goes, to be replaced by Brown, or another of those mainstream parties.

If we are truly serious about social change, we need to seriously discuss how to change things, on the ground, for the better, and win public support. We need to learn how to relate to people, not to isolate ourselves from the people in intellectual contempt because they just don't 'get it'. We need to shake off the image of 'weird lefties' and show that ideals of social justice and human rights are universal, that they are to be held by all people, not just the 'privelaged left', in their weird little cults...

OK, I'm sounding a bit wound up. I love you guys really, but you do infuriate me by being so broad-minded and yet so small-minded as well...

When anarchists organise something that gets 2,000,000 people on the streets of London, then I'll stand up and take notice.

Taken from Red Action Website


joe owens norris green liverpool bnp
joe owens bnp candidate recieves 327 votes slp 168 greens 199. all this considering the mans controversial past and an assault charge looming! must set the alarm bells ringing, just goes to show all squeaky clean candidates standing on merseyside have the potential of gaining massive votes

i come from norris green and voted labour and im shocked that the bnp have gained this amount of votes being that owens was the candidate.

the liverpool echo have made a mockery of the bnps votes across merseyside, but 2,260 people voted for the bnp without standing a full slate of candidates.

Left results in the local elections 2004... as they come in...

 http://www.socialistunitynetwork.co.uk/reports/elections.htm

sorry we don't have the greens but we have everyone else (unoess you know different - in which case let us know)

highlights:

socialist party win 2 seats in Coventry

Indepednat Working Class Association win 3 seats in Oxford

Forward Wales win a seat in Wrexham (miss another by 6 votes)

"When anarchists organise something that gets 2,000,000 people on the streets of London, then I'll stand up and take notice"

Firstly, I myself am not an anarchist, being opposed to authoritarian co-option does not make me so. As a movement we have to get beyond reductionist 'left/right', 'anarchist/communist' black and white dichotomies. The world is in full glorious colour people ;-)

Secondly, I know many anarchists who organised many coaches to the Feb 15th demo. Brighton sent 30 coaches, and many anarchists were involved as were members of the SWP. Feb 15th was the product of unity, however fleeting, not the organisational attributes of the SWP or anarchists in particular. Unfortunately, F15 also had a hell of a lot to do with mainstream media support, showing that grassroots media projects have a long way to go - people still wait to see it on the BBC to believe it. The kind of unity seen on F15 was not the kind that RESPECT preach, i.e. 'trust us'.

Hermes, I agree that things aren't so simple as to say 'SWP bad, anarchist good' or vice versa, but there are some fundamental aspects of the RESPECT/SWP/MAB strategy that mimic the Stalinist counter-revolution in Spain, right down to the rhetoric of 'Unity Coalitions'. In Spain to there was a popular mass movement that was *successfully* resisting Franco's army. Then some self-appointed (openly stalinist) leaders from the fringes of the parliamentary left decided that centralisation was needed. This disempowered the movement, popular participation and support plummeted and Franco won. Throughout the newly installed leadership denounced the original revolutionaries as the 'splitters', and the Stalinist counter-revolution delivered the country to Franco.

Its not an exact parallel with RESPECT, but those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.

I apologise if I have diverted this thread from its original topic, but I think there is an important issue with automatic solidarity with 'left' parties: The BNP are more left wing than Lab, Lib or Con. We hate them because they are fascists, authoritarians, not 'right-wing' or 'extreme-right'. Milton Friedman is 'extreme-right', not Nick Griffin who is a Nazi national socialist. See  http://www.politicalcompass.org

Without developing a more nuanced view of the political process, we are doomed to be co-opted and perpetually disappointed. We need a democratic revolution. What form this takes i don't know, but i'm working on some ideas. Peace ;-)

Would just like to aplaud Liverpool SLP for standing against other Leftwing candidates. This is of course exactly what the people of Liverpool need.

Ian Croft
Secretary
Merseyside SLP

we need recallable delegates accountable to all their constituents rather than manifesto-party candidates that currently personify the present system. People are excluded from the process of their own governance except for periodic elections. These are generalisations, no doubt there are some great individual candidates who are members of parties, having not met the candidates I can't comment on specifics. My point is that systematic change is needed, and that this could be a focus for 'left' unity rather than the sectarian scramble for votes that we are permitted every four years or so. Its a bold step, but participatory budgeting in Porto Allegre for instance seems to have some success.

I am not being sectarian, I am imploring people to learn the lessons of history: Often those who shout 'Sectarian!' the loudest are those that seek 'unity' only to gain control, not to give 'power to the people', you know, democracy.

Just what about Marbrow was a lie? As far as I am aware, everything said is absolutely true. The Friends Reunited entry I saw myself, the register of member's interests that he failed to complete cannot be denied either. Walking around trying to get thanks off the Lib Dems just shows what a egotist Mike Lane is. Wanting a right-wing agenda for Liverpool is what you're admitting there, and lo and behold that is what you have got! That'll have helped the people won't it? And I don't think Jane Kennedy even noticed!

Claiming that Labour is right wing goes to show just how wide of the mark you are. All you far left nutters, I can imagine sit round talking about what is bad about Labour and revelling in your own ideas of one day having some power. Wake up! It's not going to happen and Labour is the best chance you have.

I am Labour and I come from a Working Class Conservative background (that's right - some working class actually support the conservatives!). I don't agree with all the policies Labour has and on other things I may not disagree with the way we go about things but, in total, the Labour party is the party for me. AND it is the only left-wing party with a chance of power. Whether you like it or not, that is the key - power is what changes things in the end. Don't keep kidding yourself that acting like apressure group will get you anywhere. Just look at the SLP v BNP vote in Norris Green. Kai Anderson claiming he has the support of lots of people but then gets thrashed by the far right. I don't rejoice in that because I would rather the BNP got no votes at all, but it is an indication of the standing of the SLP in many areas.

As for the idea that somehow it is Mike Lane that will always stop Labour winning in Kensington - don't flatter yourself Mike. You're not some power-broker around Kensington by any mark! I saw your leaflets claiming that most of Kensington was due for demolition. Scandalous because you know it is not true. A few streets need to be demolished because they are too expensive to renovate, but ALL streets along Molyneaux? It'd be funny if it didn't scare people.

By all means carry on standing but don't expect to be any kind of power broker. Deluded fool.

I'd say go for a drink to think about it but...

"All *** candidates are tenants either of Liverpool City Council, Housing Companies, RSLs, Housing Associations, or private landlords, three candidates have lost their homes due to the policies and decisions of Liverpool City Council's Clueless councillors and housing staff."

Since when has it been a pre-requisite that to help others you need to be a tenant rather than a homeowner? This view that having money somehow devalues someone is patently ridiculous. Suppose Mr Scargill lives on the bredline does he?

Stop trying to justify yourselves as champions of the poor based simply on the premise that "we're not rich and everyone is out to get us".

Also, constant confrontation with those in positions of influence such as housing officers etc will never win them around to your ideas. There is a time and place for confrontation but it is not every time or every place!

The SLP are a bunch of loonies - that is the way you're seen whether you like it or not and the day that changes is nowhere in sight.

"I think the true left has serious problems relating to people in this country. Notice how people didn't drift away from Labour to vote for left-wing parties in huge numbers. Instead, they went for Liberal Democrats and Tories *grimace*. That is not a success, even if Tony Blair has been given a bloody nose. Nothing fundamentally changes if Blair goes, to be replaced by Brown, or another of those mainstream parties.

If we are truly serious about social change, we need to seriously discuss how to change things, on the ground, for the better, and win public support. We need to learn how to relate to people, not to isolate ourselves from the people in intellectual contempt because they just don't 'get it'. We need to shake off the image of 'weird lefties' and show that ideals of social justice and human rights are universal, that they are to be held by all people, not just the 'privelaged left', in their weird little cults..."

As you say, the left does has a problem relating to people in Britain. People, given a choice, in many cases anyway, have voted for 'traditional' parties, although there were an enormous amout of voters voting UKIP and BNP too. Worrying? Isn't that merely the will of the people? Democracy is touted by all the parties, as long as 'you' agree with us!!! Everyone is a democratic when you go along with them, and a fascist when you don't, if you get my meaning!

All of the above is entirely and utterly wearisome to me, and I am an interested outsider in these matters. What someone else thinks who isn't at all really politically aware or politic-conscious, is anybody's guess. It seems that some working class people are voting for right and far right parties, because they feel betrayed by Blair and co, and perhaps because they are being mischievous too; giving the PC Blair, and the middle class lefties the finger!! Most working class people feel they are not represented by any party now, and it is at times like these that radicals of all persuasions will fill the gaps. The Labour party as it is, has forgotten completely its heartlands, and embraced the monied middle classes. It is as simple as that. Telling people heartrendingly to 'keep the BNP out' means nothing to them, because nothing changes under Labour, or any of the mainstream parties for the poor. So, if some change will come, even dreadfully negative change, aka BNP, some will vote for this. The rise of the right in the UK is virtually mirrored by the rise in poverty and the ever-widening class divisions between the comfy and uncomfy, if you will. The BNP is at worst a protest vote, at best an indication that people are fed up waiting for half-baked promises. If the BNP and other right groups get a serious toe-hold in this country, and power, it will be virtually precisely because of the wilful neglect of the supposed Labour Party.

The Left does have a serious problem for many working class people. Either it is seen as middle class radicalism, with no real understanding or working class realities, or lefty weirdo's stuck in a timewarp politically with nothing of any value to say. It probably doesn't help that a lot of hard left is authoritarian and strongly hierarchical too. As a working class person, I am fed up with 'knights on white chargers' coming to save us poor peasants, only to ride off into the sunset once they have their power and mandate, off to London to secure their careers and bumper pensions, and their lucrative board of directorships and so on. Blair is the exact identikit of this reality; he promised miracles, and delivered crushing inevitabilities! He is on a sinking ship that is rapidly going down. And for much of that I blame on his ego, and his Stalin-esque leadership of the party. People are fed up with lies too.

There is no real democracy anywhere, no debate among groups of people that gets popular things done; virtually all is diktat, or the cards are held by a few, and dealt by a few. It is how things have always been done. If there was a glorious revolution, another group of despots would call the shots, and then we'd need another revolution and so on. Look at Russia and Communism for this.

The left is either seriously damaged by in-fighting and largely irrelevant points-of-difference, that few people outside of these cliques know or care about, or so determined to be politically perfect, that again few outside the cliques in these parties, have an interest in such radicalism. Ergo, they appeal to few, and any votes they gain are lost and merely allow the bigger parties to get in, as ever. It is heartbreaking, but inevitable. I too was saddened Kai got beaten by the BNP, he's a nice bloke with a good sense of humour too, and I believe that he would make a good counsellor. People in Norris Green thought differently. And here is something else I detect; the disenfranchised working classes, those on sink estates with high unemployment, poverty, burglaries, crime, drugs, are in some cases voting for Right wing parties. I feel that the Left is using this as an excuse to hate working class people, the very people they are purportedly supposed to represent, and wilfully holding to their lost cause radicalism to punish the said same working classes, for not hanging on the radical Left's every word! It is a curious psychology I am trying to explain here, but I think that enough middle class people are anti-working class, and there is here a sort of explanation.

Phew, I hope that makes some sense anyway.

Why does the left have to only be interested in working class people? Why can't it be for the masses? (which happens to include a lot of the so-called middle classes!). Government has to be for ALL, not just one section of society.

And the "working class" are as likely to be racist as anyone else (some may say more so!). Plus the working class have had a long history of Conservative voting.

Far left parties have to face the fact that not all people want a revolution and quite a lot of people aspire to be middle class, so try and identify themselves with such behaviour. Voting is just one of those ways. Wanting a Socialist Alliance/Socialist Labour (etc) representative is, to some people, indicative of accepting their position at the bottom of the pile and, therefore, is unattractive.

Sectarian bugger
13.06.2004 16:03

Would just like to aplaud Liverpool SLP for standing against other Leftwing candidates. This is of course exactly what the people of Liverpool need.

Ian Croft
Secretary
Merseyside SLP

What are you referring to?

Leftwing results for Liverpool are on the Socialist Unity Network website:

 http://www.socialistunitynetwork.co.uk/reports/elections.htm

The SLP didn't stand against any other leftwing parties as far as I can see.

Shouldn't you welcome your fellow SLP members being candidate?

Why don’t you tell people who you are? What are you frightened of, is it the state machine? In a democracy people should learn to have dialogue with each other.

We working class guys in the SLP are not really as looney as you young Labour guys would like to think. This guy or guys, who have had a go at me, are living in cloud cuckoo land if they think that the present system and state are fair and just.

Isn’t there supposed to be some left-wingers still in the Labour Party? These young Labour Party activists who stood in the Kensington Fairfield area should go and speak with these people and find out what being a working class left-winger really means. They should also read books and study why people like me think the way we do.

It was rather disturbing to see these somewhat sinister angry young Labour Party activists at the count because I did not see them delivering the leaflets during the election campaign. Were they at home compiling and putting together their slanderous leaflets on their computers? I know the careerist MP and minister Jane Kennedy takes no notice to me, who the hell cares about that? I certainly don’t. But I can tell you one thing she was really angry with me, accusing me of being responsible for you guys not getting in. Oh, and as for the cap, it’s not a working class thing, its because my hair has gone grey. That’s the real truth about the cloth cap. In truth I really don’t like wearing it.

And as for us working class SLP’s wasting our time standing because we are never going to get elected. You have a point there, the probability is we will never get elected because the people of this country have over many years been indoctrinated through a right wing media to think that the word socialism, as well as being evil is an anathema. Our children are brainwashed (you young Labour Party activists are proof of this) through a school syllabus that contains within its centre a neoliberal ideology that does not teach our children to think or create and shape the world that surrounds them to what they want. No, they are indoctrinated into accepting and conforming to that which is being imposed upon them.

Why don’t you young Labour party activists look up a Brazilian guy called Paulo Freire who only died in 1997. His most famous book is called “Pedagogy of the Oppressed”. This web site describes him:
 http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-freir.htm

If you read Freire you will also be led to other guys like Giroux:
 http://www.education.miami.edu/ep/contemporaryed/Henry_Giroux/henry_giroux.html

It is also worth looking at a guy called Ira Shor:
 http://www.library.csi.cuny.edu/~esw/shor.html

And the Frankfurt School of thought:
 http://home.cwru.edu/~ngb2/Pages/Intro.html

The above academics have really opened my eyes to what being emancipated really means.

You guys claim to be working class. Real working class people who are politically educated would not sing praises to the Tories especially if they opened their eyes and took a real look around them and saw the injustices that are now being perpetrated against the working classes. They would also notice the fact that at this present moment there is a middle class resurgence taking place in this country and their beloved right wing central government middle class Labour Party leadership are behind it. As much as you guys want to ignore it, the middle classes, as well as having a different cultural perspective, oppress the working classes and the council administration i.e. the council officers really run this city. These predominantly middle class council officers are supposed to run the services, but in reality they are political. Just take a closer look at their behaviour, the way they send their community outreach agencies into poor working class communities like the Kensington New Deal for Communities area (there are quite a few Labour Party activists involved in this oppressive initiative which was supposed to be community led) and set into motion structures and procedures which are not conducive with empowering the community but are instead geared up to disempower and oppress it. All these so called community outreach agencies are staffed by people who are under the control of middle class senior council officers who work in council departments such as the Community Participation Unit. The latter has now probably changed its name to something else. The constant moving and changing names of council departments is a common feature and common practice by the predominantly middle class council officers.

Below are the tactics which Council officers, regeneration administrators, consultants and RSL officer use when oppressing any given community.

1. Divide and rule. (The dividing of the community into as many small groups as possible)
2. Encouraging parochialism (The more parochial a community is the easier it is for the council officers to isolate the community, thus stopping it from unifying itself with the wider community)
3. The learning curve excuse (All mistakes and incompetence by the council officers are argued away with the learning curve excuse)
4. The large family syndrome (finding large families and elevating them in positions of power in the community to act as sub oppressors to the council officer oppressors)
5. Rewarding failure
6. Iter-area rivalry (turning one area against another)
7. Identifying and buying off organisers (resident organisers are the most important people in any given community. They are the biggest threat to the oppressor council officers)
8. Identifying the agitators and pamphleteer (The levelling of all sorts of lies and allegations against the agitators and pamphleteers)
9. The corrupt use of the present ASBO and Harassment laws to silence agitators and pamphleteers (Taking community activist to court claiming that they are being abusive to the middle class council officers when in effect they did nothing but look at the officers and their outreach workers the wrong way or spoke loudly)
10. Distributing glossy newsletters that do not tell the community what is really happening
11. Turning the homeowners against the tenants
12. Using every aspect of the communities cultural perspective as a tool to subjugate the community with

The above list contains just a few items pertaining to the way middle class council officers oppress any given community. The list could continue add infinite.

Also, why don’t you take a look at the behaviour of Government Office for the North West which is situated in Cuanard Buildings, even one of your own MP’s Peter Kilfoyle has consistently criticised the insidious behaviour of these central government civil servants who are really spies for central government.

And as for my leaflets containing lies about forthcoming demolitions. If they don’t happen in the near future you can bet they will happen ten years down the line. The New Labour Party is behind these demolitions. I forget what the project is called, I think it was heartlands? Your government wants to increase home ownership in most inner city communities and decrease the rented sector, i.e. RSL and council housing. Your government is even looking at ways of decreasing private landlord accommodation by introducing draconian legislation, which will make it almost impossible for private landlords to set up in business.

There is defiantly a political issue behind what is going on in relation to housing. The government knows that the more homeowners there are the easier it will be for them through local government to control the community, Government Office civil servants are watching and orchestrating it all. What they want to do is reverse the present situation of tenure in inner city communities, which is now roughly 60% tenants and 40% homeowners to 70% homeowners and 40% tenants. This middle class government knows that if a constituency consists of more homeowners than tenants the likelihood is that these mini-capitalist homeowners will vote for them. They have always been terrified of tenants organising themselves and fighting for a better deal so they weaken the tenants by scattering them and dividing them with the sole intention of diminishing their collective power. All this crap that tenants are the reason behind antisocial behaviour is in effect crap. The real reason behind antisocial tenants is that the ruthless housing associations or RSL’s as they are now known have never put into place simple procedures to address the issue of antisocial tenants. In other words these RSL’s, especially when they want to bring an area down, don’t bother to monitor the tenants, thus letting antisocial tenants into the community. The homeowner’s kids are just as bad as the tenant’s kids anyway. If central and local government continue to punish instead of addressing the issue of social deprivation and exclusion these antisocial tenants and their children will increase not decrease.

Also we have the situation of council housing being transferred to the ruthless RSL’s. So far most of the council housing stock in Liverpool has been transferred to RSL’s. If you go and observe what is going on on these former council estates you will soon come to the realisation that what has happened is the council housing and land, which was owned by the public i.e. owned by the public means the public owned the houses and the land that the houses stood on, this means that the council tenants actually owned the council houses that they lived in because they are the public. The council housing officers were employed by the tenants who owned the houses and the council to look after their houses. But over the years the middle class council officers became oppressors for the ruling class and connived with central government to cut all aid to council housing thus allowing the houses to fall into disrepair making it easier for them to persuade the uniformed tenants to transfer to the RSL’s. The strange thing is the councils gave away the houses that were owned by the people to the RSL’s for nothing, why could they have not have given the houses to the tenants, many of whom had paid for them three times over in rent? Well, the real reason behind this is: The corrupt middle class oppressor council officers in full view of the idiot Labour, Lib Dem councillors working in so called “PARTNERSHIP” with corrupt property developers and builders wanted to demolish large swathes of the council houses so as to build houses for sale on the former publicly owned land. They knew full well that they could not have done this had the houses and land stayed in the hands of the public i.e. the tenants who lived on the estates. So they coerced the tenants into transferring their house over to the RSL’s. This is proof that the middle classes are borne and bred to oppress the working classes so that the rich ruling classes can steal and cheat the working classes out of what is rightfully theirs.

These ruthless RSL’s want to get shut of much of their old stock and move into new builds for rent. They get massive funding of the government’s corrupt Housing Corporation to do this. They let their inner city terraced properties fall into disrepair put antisocial tenants in causing many tenants to leave the area altogether and then force out the remaining homeowners and demolish the area or sell the former terraced RSL accommodation off to demolition homeowners. In effect the RSL’s are downsizing because they are moving into new builds for rent and part ownership. This means that thousands of poor working class families will be forced into private landlord properties with rents of £95 to £110 per week. God help the poor people who are on benefits because the Housing Benefits will only pay £70 or less a week towards their rent which means they have to find the rest from their meagre living allowance. How can you as working class labour Party activists ignore this injustice? What would you do if you were in the position of these poor people? And don’t start coming out with the usual crap that they should get jobs. Most of the jobs that are now available for the unskilled don’t pay much more than the minimum wage, which means workers bring home less than £200 per week. How can people have a decent standard of living earning this when they have to take into account their private landlord rent and community tax? Even with help from the state people, especially single parents will be forced into poverty. For every argument that you New Labour activists bring up supporting the middle class New Labour Party there are a million arguments to show that your party does not care about the poor and disenfranchised, and these arguments are based on concrete reality. This is why us left-wingers exist. If we were not in existence god knows what people like you and the middle class government you follow would get up to?

Many of you young Labour Party activist say that the doctrines of Carl Marks and Lenin are historically outmoded, but most of the stuff that these guys wrote is as relevant today as it was in then. Have you ever bothered to read a book called the Ragged Trousered Philanthropists? If you read this book, which was written in 1911, you will be astonished. It is as though it was only written a couple of years ago. Also try reading, for instance, Lenin’s “The State and Revolution” this particular book looks at local and central government as it was in 1917 in Russia. I think Lenin wrote this small book when he was in hiding. Again, just like the Ragged Trousered Philanthropists, it is as though this book was only written a couple of weeks ago. What I am trying to say here is, technology may have changed but the way people think has not really changed all that much over the last eighty or so years. You young ruthless Labour Party activist want to make a decision who you are fighting for and whether you are an altruist or a careerist. If you are a careerist, like most of the Labour Party MP’s, especially ministers, then you should join the Tories, but it would seem that New Labour is now a Tory party anyway.

You know what they call guys like you don’t you? Working class traitors!

As much as I would like to consider myself one of these young Labour people I am pretty sure that 38 is not considered particularly young these days (certainly not in political terms!). I suppose you could call it ageism! And as for giving my name - why should I? Just what does it serve to do so?

Regarding reading literature you mention. Ever tried to formulate your own views. I mean, really sat back, considered your position and then made a decision or do you need pther people to inform you? I understand the need to then reinforce or dismiss those views but I prefer to form my own first and I already have. You would love us believe there is some great conspiracy against the "working class". There isn't - there is just life, so get on with it.

The idea that all council workers are middle class New Labour is frankly as absurd as your aspertions on the Labour Party. Liverpool does not want the far left anymore. The country doesn't (and never did) want it. They do want progress though, and a socialist agenda rooted in the real world. That is what the Labour Party offers.

The anonymous Labour Party activist... '??&&'
Wrote:

"Liverpool does not want the far left anymore.
The country doesn't (and never did) want it."

Well Liverpool had it's highest local election turnouts when the city council was politically to the left, upto 58% I believe the turnouts were at the highest in the 1980's.

"They do want progress though, and a socialist
agenda rooted in the real world."

Really, so how is privatisation of council housing progess or even socialist it's backward and is now making life intolerable for us working class tenants. How is privatisation of; National Air Traffic Service, the London Underground, the Post Office PLC, privatisation (PFI) in education and (PFI) the NHS progress?

Question is New Labour *progress* from what to what?

Only progress is from being out of power to being in power. I assert that their policies are not progressive and absolutely nothing at all to do with moving towards a socialist society, just a continuation of Thatcherite Tory policies - end of story!

Let's get it straight New Labour ain't socialist in any shape or form just ask your own Mr Blair, New Labour are just like the right-wing Labor party in Australia in the mid 1990's which was another new Tory party.

"That is what the Labour Party offers."

New Labour offers another decade of unfettered Free Market, New Labour ain't for the majority it most definitely ain't for the workers (the producers), don't give us the shit about the 'Minimum wage', it's poverty level pay enshrined in law, and beneath poverty pay bottom line we have the asylum seekers and refugees doing the sub-five pounds an hour work. We wouldn't need a minimum wage if the most restrictive anti-Trade Union laws in Europe were abolished, the very same laws that Thatcher brought in during the 1980's and left in place by Tory Blair.

Blair has truly "out Thatchered" Thatcher, even that right wing 'anti-working class' tyrant only had one war, the Falklands. Blair's had Sierra Leone, Yugoslavia (with a threat to carpet bomb Belgrade), Afghanistan and Iraq none of which were defensive or entailed defending British citizens. Blair's New Labour Government have privatised the
public services that the Tories left untouched, New Labour have privatised more council housing in their first five years (through Stock Transfer) than the Tories managed in 18 years. Brought in tuition fees for Students, abolished grants for all and left the detested 'loans' system in place.

As that well known Liberal-Christian, Tony Benn has said New Labour are nothing more than a bad slogan.

If Mike Lane standing in Kensington & Fairfield meant that the right-wing New Labour party didn't get a council seat and it upset Labour plans then the SLP in Liverpool isn't as insignificant as you'd like everyone to believe.

Just take a look at SLP policies, and you'll see what socialist policies really are, the same kind of ones the old Labour party becoming New Labour in the process ditched to get well heeled south of England middle class voters and ex-Tories and more importantly the support of British and America's corporate elite so as to get media (favourable coverage) and big business (funds) backing for winning the election in 1997.

I don't believe for a minute that a Liberal-Dem' council is any better or worse than a right wing New Labour council, it's just the same and the people of Liverpool believe that too, it is that which explains why the Labour voters in Liverpool stayed at home in 1998 and the mostly middle class (Old Tory) Lib-Dem vote held up. Reason is we had a Tory government until 1997 and the 'moderate' ie right-wing Labour council who were pro-business, though not as pro-big business as the Lib-Dems' and Labour councillors were telling us it was all the fault of the Tory government why it couldn't improve housing and other council services. New Labour gets elected in 1997 and there was no one else to blame and the reality of New Labour hit home, the week it was elected New Labour put a ex-Tory in charge of higher education, before the year was out it set about cutting disabled and single parents' benefits. We've seen New Labour shit on the Fire officers in 2003 and New Labour's so called coalition is rapidly falling apart.

The best we could hope for in the local election in Liverpool was a 'hung' council!

We don't get another election now until 2006 by which time there will be no council housing left in Liverpool, because the collaborating and Pro-Labour Liverpool Tenants Federation won't fight it, the Labour party councillors simply don't care, the Trade Unions in Liverpool can't even fight for their own members rights never mind wider community rights and of course the Lib-Dems want the end of publicly owned and accountabile council housing. The Lib-Dems have already laid the ground for Stock Transfer, it has effectively rejected the PFI or ALMO privatisation options. Oh and if the council had been Labour in majority it would have been no different.

Oh and I reluctantly voted New Labour in April 1997

Stop hiding in peoples front gardens Kai.

If it's hide and seek then we'll have to use the searchlight.

It is wrong you do not the results for The Liberal Party, some 3 councillors and 6% of city wide vote in local elections, 8% of Euro vote as an alternative to the two main parties Labour and Lib Dem

On many issues we have had to be the effective radical and liberal voice

eg

Legalisation of Prostitution
Votes at 16
Civic Register for Gays and Lesbians
Opposition to sale of Victorian Parks
Opposition to section 28
Equal Age of consent

All debates forced by Liberal Party resolutions to council. even though other parties claim to support these policies it was Liberal Party Councillors to table and force the debate