Visited Barnes today to find a spot to set up a literature stall (the branch is planning one there on Saturday 28 April from noon till 2pm). Found one, where the Tories had one today. Spoke to them, said we were standing and gave them a leaflet. It turned out that one of them was Paul Hodgins, who is standing in Barnes ward and is the current Leader of the Council.
Plenty of Tory placards in gardens saying "I'm voting to keep weekly rubbish collections" (talk about parish pump politics !). Only one Liberal one. According to a leaflet found in a rubbish box, the LibDems have formed a coalition here with the Greens, presenting a joint list and leaflet of 2 LibDems and 1 Green for the 3 council seats up for grabs. No doubt payback to the Greens for not standing in the December 2016 parliamentary by-election and so helping the LibDems to unseat the Tory MP, Zac Goldsmith (he got back in, just, at last year's general election).
No Tory posters in the northern part of the ward near Hammersmith Bridge, where the residents are less well off. Crossed the bridge into Hammersmith to find a spot for a stall there (planned for next Saturday 14 April at noon). Plenty of room in King Street. In fact, the main reason for contesting Barnes is its proximity to Hammersmith where the branch has to decided to concentrate its activity.
Socialist Party Election Blog : The blog by Socialists involved in Socialist Party campaigning in London Elections. For the main party website click Here
Showing posts with label Conservative Party. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Conservative Party. Show all posts
Saturday, April 07, 2018
Monday, November 11, 2013
Nearly done
Five of us finished off covering the ward today. Some 4000 of the 5000 have now been distributed. Only 500 or so needed for what's left, so we'll have some over for handing out in the street or if we do a stall. The remaining 500 letter boxes should be covered before the deadline we set ourselves of 13 November when the ballot papers will be sent to postal voters (some 10 percent of those on the electoral roll).
We had planned to meet at lunchtime in a cafe in Mostyn Road called "Revolution" which sounded suitable and which we hoped might give us a free coffee for the free advertisement we'd been handing out for them entitled "Revolution the only solution". But it was closed.
Came across more Labour and LibDem leaflets, also one Tory one on glossy paper (in the posh part of the ward between Brixton Road and Clapham Road). It too said it was a two-horse race claiming "Only the Conservatives can beat Labour here". Very doubtful if anyone can, though the Labour candidate must think he has something to fear from the LibDems as he has started a scare campaign pledging to stop LibDem attacks on council housing. It's a dirty business, conventional politics.
No sign of UKIP, the Greens or TUSC as yet.
We had planned to meet at lunchtime in a cafe in Mostyn Road called "Revolution" which sounded suitable and which we hoped might give us a free coffee for the free advertisement we'd been handing out for them entitled "Revolution the only solution". But it was closed.
Came across more Labour and LibDem leaflets, also one Tory one on glossy paper (in the posh part of the ward between Brixton Road and Clapham Road). It too said it was a two-horse race claiming "Only the Conservatives can beat Labour here". Very doubtful if anyone can, though the Labour candidate must think he has something to fear from the LibDems as he has started a scare campaign pledging to stop LibDem attacks on council housing. It's a dirty business, conventional politics.
No sign of UKIP, the Greens or TUSC as yet.
Thursday, May 07, 2009
Change you can't believe in
It's a little known fact that Old Etonians represent an excluded minority, long persecuted and barred from office. At least, that is the message of David "Vote for change" Cameron. Taking President Obama's campaign message, and using it to get Conservatives elected is the latest phase in the silliness that began with Hague's "Conservative revolution" campaign ten years ago.
At a European level the Tories aren't well placed to make any change. They've withdrawn from their European Parliamentary bloc (the European People's Party). They're going to try and set up their own bloc Movement for European Reform. Essentially, leaving the biggest grouping in the Parliament to set up their own potemkin party.
Of course, for our fine feathered revolutionary Tories, they're content to see the European elections solely as a referendum on Gordon Brown's government. Polliticking games to get their arses on Government benches. The Party of peopel "born to rule" want to get back in their rightful place. That's the change they can believe in.
At a European level the Tories aren't well placed to make any change. They've withdrawn from their European Parliamentary bloc (the European People's Party). They're going to try and set up their own bloc Movement for European Reform. Essentially, leaving the biggest grouping in the Parliament to set up their own potemkin party.
Of course, for our fine feathered revolutionary Tories, they're content to see the European elections solely as a referendum on Gordon Brown's government. Polliticking games to get their arses on Government benches. The Party of peopel "born to rule" want to get back in their rightful place. That's the change they can believe in.
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Husting in Southwark
Yesterday morning the Socialist candidate ventured into Southwark to speak at a hustings meeting organised by the Southwark Pensioners Action Group at their offices in Camberwell Road. On approaching the office we could see someone handing out leaflets. We were surprised to find that it was someone from the Left List since we hadn't come across them before in the constituency. We were even more surprised on entering to see that their representative was their mayoral candidate herself, Lindsey German.
Also present were the outgoing Assembly member for Lambeth and Southwark (Val Shawcross), Southwark Councillor Caroline Pidgeon (the Liberal candidate), Southwark Councillor Kim Humphries (standing in for the Tory candidate) and Shane Collins for the Greens. Apologies were received from the animal rights candidate, the Eng-dems and the Respect George Galloway party.
The Socialist candidate, because he was sitting at one end, spoke first. Danny explained that the problems discussed at these and other elections were caused by the existing system of the private ownership of the means of production by rich people and their use to produce things for profit. There was no use tinkering about with this system as, despite the promises and pledges of the politicians, it could never work, or be made to work, in the interest of the vast majority of people, who depended on having to work for a wage or salary to live. The alternative was socialism, a system based on the common ownership and democratic control of the means of production where things would no longer be produced for profit but directly to satisfy people's needs and where the principle "from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs" would apply. Danny's 2 minutes were up while he was in the middle of explaining the waste capitalism's need for a money system involved.
Assemblywoman Shawcross spoke next. She outlined what the GLA under Ken had done. She also appeared to say that CCTV cameras on buses allowed bus drivers who behaved badly to be disciplined. Maybe this was a slip of the tongue but it's the sort of thing Labour politicians say these days.
Councillor Pidgeon said that one of the advantages of extending the tram system into Southwark and across the Thames would be that there would be public toilets at the stations.
Councillor Humphries was surprisingly honest. He was against having a quota of "affordable housing" in all new housing developments as this could sabotage such schemes. In other words, would reduce the profits of the developers who would take their money and invest it somewhere else where they could make a bigger profit.
SWP Central Committee member German was pathetic. She talked just like the other three, tacitly accepting the present system and proposing minor changes to it.
Green candidate Shane Collins introduced the big picture again saying that with global warming the site of the 2012 Olympics would be flooded (not then but a decade or so later). He was not afraid to offer unpopular reforms such as a 20 mph speed limit on side roads and the legalisation of heroin. (He is a legalise cannabis campaigner and was once caught with 19 plants in his house. It turned out that Danny and him had in fact met each other a few years back at Glastonbury.)
Question time proved interesting. We noticed that Councillor Pidgeon (Liberal) and Councillor Humphries (Tory) refrained from criticising each other and in fact put on a double act when Southwark Council was criticised. This struck us as strange but then the penny dropped. As in Bill's Camden Southwark Council is run by a Liberal-Tory coalition. The shape of things to come perhaps after the next election? Though the Liberals would also be prepared to do a deal with Labour if they get a better offer. Not that it would make a difference either way.
You wouldn't know that Lindsey German is a leading theoretician of the SWP, the author of articles and pamphlets on feminism, war, etc including one entitled Why We Need a Revolutionary Party. There was nothing revolutionary about what she said. Even on reforms she came across as less radical than the Green candidate. The one thing she got really passionate about was bendy buses. They should be taken out of service and replaced by new Routemaster buses (the ones you can fall off) with a conductor; that, she said, would stop the fare-dodging that now goes on on the overcrowded bendy buses. The Tory representative immediately jumped up to say "yes, that's what Boris wants too". That about sums it up.
Actually, the clue to her behaviour is to be found in that pamphlet of hers. It's pure Leninism. The workers are so thick that they can't understand the case for socialism if put to them directly (as we do and as Danny was doing at the meeting). They are only capable of developing a trade union consciousness:
"That is why building a principled revolutionary party is important today. It is also why the Socialist Workers Party takes so much of its theory of the party from the experience of Lenin and the Bolsheviks".
"That is why all those who want fundamental change in society have to be part of a Leninist organisation".
"Socialism in the 1990s means rebuilding the real Leninist tradition".
So it's all a front. She's only pretending that reforms of capitalism are possible, offering them as bait to get workers to follow her and the rest of the vanguard in the SWP. She doesn't really believe that bendy buses should be replaced by Routemasters. That's just a ploy to get a working class following. Or is it? We got the impression that opposition to bendy buses was really what got her going. In any event, it was the only thing she spoke about with passion at the meeting.
Sorry about this digression. Back to the surprisingly honest Tory representative. He made it clear that the problem for local councillors was money. What they were doing was allocating a finite amount of money which was never enough to allow them to do what they'd like to. Danny jumped in to explain why: under capitalism the priority is profit and any money given to local councillors to spend on the public services for which they have responsibilty (most comes from the central government which also regulates how much they can raise through the rates) has to come in the end from profits. There's no way out. That's the way the system works and must work and why the politicians can never deliver on their promises. Profits must come first and always will as long as capitalism lasts.
Danny's exposition of the case for socialism brought him two direct questions from the 20 or so assembled pensioners. "Why do you want to go back to barter?" and "What about human nature?" And the basement of the Southwark Pensioners Action Group was transformed for a few minutes into Hyde Park Speakers Corner.
In closing the meeting the chairman said that he too was a socialist but felt that something could be done now. He was probably an old CPer.
We had planned to leaflet the surrounding area in Southwark after the meeting but the place was full of high-rise flats you can't get into. So we got a 35 (non bendy) bus back to Clapham. On the way who should we pass going the other way down Brixton Road but George Galloway atop his campaign bus. It was festooned with red and green balloons -- green for Islam not the environment. We couldn't hear what he was saying through his loadspeaker but it sounded like "Vote for Me".
Also present were the outgoing Assembly member for Lambeth and Southwark (Val Shawcross), Southwark Councillor Caroline Pidgeon (the Liberal candidate), Southwark Councillor Kim Humphries (standing in for the Tory candidate) and Shane Collins for the Greens. Apologies were received from the animal rights candidate, the Eng-dems and the Respect George Galloway party.
The Socialist candidate, because he was sitting at one end, spoke first. Danny explained that the problems discussed at these and other elections were caused by the existing system of the private ownership of the means of production by rich people and their use to produce things for profit. There was no use tinkering about with this system as, despite the promises and pledges of the politicians, it could never work, or be made to work, in the interest of the vast majority of people, who depended on having to work for a wage or salary to live. The alternative was socialism, a system based on the common ownership and democratic control of the means of production where things would no longer be produced for profit but directly to satisfy people's needs and where the principle "from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs" would apply. Danny's 2 minutes were up while he was in the middle of explaining the waste capitalism's need for a money system involved.
Assemblywoman Shawcross spoke next. She outlined what the GLA under Ken had done. She also appeared to say that CCTV cameras on buses allowed bus drivers who behaved badly to be disciplined. Maybe this was a slip of the tongue but it's the sort of thing Labour politicians say these days.
Councillor Pidgeon said that one of the advantages of extending the tram system into Southwark and across the Thames would be that there would be public toilets at the stations.
Councillor Humphries was surprisingly honest. He was against having a quota of "affordable housing" in all new housing developments as this could sabotage such schemes. In other words, would reduce the profits of the developers who would take their money and invest it somewhere else where they could make a bigger profit.
SWP Central Committee member German was pathetic. She talked just like the other three, tacitly accepting the present system and proposing minor changes to it.
Green candidate Shane Collins introduced the big picture again saying that with global warming the site of the 2012 Olympics would be flooded (not then but a decade or so later). He was not afraid to offer unpopular reforms such as a 20 mph speed limit on side roads and the legalisation of heroin. (He is a legalise cannabis campaigner and was once caught with 19 plants in his house. It turned out that Danny and him had in fact met each other a few years back at Glastonbury.)
Question time proved interesting. We noticed that Councillor Pidgeon (Liberal) and Councillor Humphries (Tory) refrained from criticising each other and in fact put on a double act when Southwark Council was criticised. This struck us as strange but then the penny dropped. As in Bill's Camden Southwark Council is run by a Liberal-Tory coalition. The shape of things to come perhaps after the next election? Though the Liberals would also be prepared to do a deal with Labour if they get a better offer. Not that it would make a difference either way.
You wouldn't know that Lindsey German is a leading theoretician of the SWP, the author of articles and pamphlets on feminism, war, etc including one entitled Why We Need a Revolutionary Party. There was nothing revolutionary about what she said. Even on reforms she came across as less radical than the Green candidate. The one thing she got really passionate about was bendy buses. They should be taken out of service and replaced by new Routemaster buses (the ones you can fall off) with a conductor; that, she said, would stop the fare-dodging that now goes on on the overcrowded bendy buses. The Tory representative immediately jumped up to say "yes, that's what Boris wants too". That about sums it up.
Actually, the clue to her behaviour is to be found in that pamphlet of hers. It's pure Leninism. The workers are so thick that they can't understand the case for socialism if put to them directly (as we do and as Danny was doing at the meeting). They are only capable of developing a trade union consciousness:
"That is why building a principled revolutionary party is important today. It is also why the Socialist Workers Party takes so much of its theory of the party from the experience of Lenin and the Bolsheviks".
"That is why all those who want fundamental change in society have to be part of a Leninist organisation".
"Socialism in the 1990s means rebuilding the real Leninist tradition".
So it's all a front. She's only pretending that reforms of capitalism are possible, offering them as bait to get workers to follow her and the rest of the vanguard in the SWP. She doesn't really believe that bendy buses should be replaced by Routemasters. That's just a ploy to get a working class following. Or is it? We got the impression that opposition to bendy buses was really what got her going. In any event, it was the only thing she spoke about with passion at the meeting.
Sorry about this digression. Back to the surprisingly honest Tory representative. He made it clear that the problem for local councillors was money. What they were doing was allocating a finite amount of money which was never enough to allow them to do what they'd like to. Danny jumped in to explain why: under capitalism the priority is profit and any money given to local councillors to spend on the public services for which they have responsibilty (most comes from the central government which also regulates how much they can raise through the rates) has to come in the end from profits. There's no way out. That's the way the system works and must work and why the politicians can never deliver on their promises. Profits must come first and always will as long as capitalism lasts.
Danny's exposition of the case for socialism brought him two direct questions from the 20 or so assembled pensioners. "Why do you want to go back to barter?" and "What about human nature?" And the basement of the Southwark Pensioners Action Group was transformed for a few minutes into Hyde Park Speakers Corner.
In closing the meeting the chairman said that he too was a socialist but felt that something could be done now. He was probably an old CPer.
We had planned to leaflet the surrounding area in Southwark after the meeting but the place was full of high-rise flats you can't get into. So we got a 35 (non bendy) bus back to Clapham. On the way who should we pass going the other way down Brixton Road but George Galloway atop his campaign bus. It was festooned with red and green balloons -- green for Islam not the environment. We couldn't hear what he was saying through his loadspeaker but it sounded like "Vote for Me".
Thursday, April 03, 2008
Booting Boris
An anonymous commentator says of the last post:
I've now looked in vain for his epic housing manifesto online at his site, and can't find it, after a good deal of searching. Now, maybe I'm a eejit, or maybe he's just not being very forthright about putting his policies forward.
But, lets look at what specifics I could find:
Release GLA-owned land and £130 million from the Regional Housing Pot to launch a new 'FirstSteps Housing Scheme', which will be open to first-time buyers frozen out of Government schemes
Work with the boroughs to build 50,000 more affordable homes by 2011
Invest £60 million from the Regional Housing Pot to start renovating the capital's 84,205 empty properties to help low-income Londoners off waiting
lists
Incentivise the boroughs to release dormant housing to those stuck in bed and breakfast accommodation, by returning the Mayor's precept to them
These are all driven by free market privatising dogma - as if lowering the precept (tax cuts! tax cuts! screameth the Dalek) is not itself going to be used by boroughs (esp. Liberal and Tory boroughs) to cut their own taxes (tax cuts! tax cuts! screameth the Dalek), even if strings are attached, money is fungible, and the boroughs would just reallocate the budgets elsewhere. Likewise, "releasing GLA land" is just more state shrinking.
As for the pittances outlined above, that renovation scheme amounts to about £700 per property, might do for a lick of paint, I suppose.
Like I said, Johnson is going to actively and as a matter of principle do nothing but channel the interests of the wealthy. The rest is bluster, blather and distraction from the reality of an exploited working class whose needs and interests always come in second place to the interests of profit and capital. A beautiful home is worthless if you can't afford to buy it.
Tired
Old
Tory
Ideas
Sorry I must disagree. You're clearly well out of your depth.Now, I did actually check out Boris' policy pages before posting (the clue to that, anonymous, was that I linked to his webpage), and all I saw on housing was a vague commitment to work in partnership with councils to raise more affordable homes (note his objection to a quota, what that means is Tory suburban strongholds not wanting to develop affordable housing on their patch, which is what the current situation does). Likewise his promise to protect "historic views".
Boris has come up with a range of policy proposals - I advise you to look at his policies on www.backboris.com/policy.
Manifesto's galore (just a small one for you, Ken's Housing Manifesto was 11 pages long, Paddick's 1 page long...Boris' 38 pages). He's the only candidate with new ideas and the only one capable of leading this city at a time where corruption in City Hall is rife.
I've now looked in vain for his epic housing manifesto online at his site, and can't find it, after a good deal of searching. Now, maybe I'm a eejit, or maybe he's just not being very forthright about putting his policies forward.
But, lets look at what specifics I could find:
lists
These are all driven by free market privatising dogma - as if lowering the precept (tax cuts! tax cuts! screameth the Dalek) is not itself going to be used by boroughs (esp. Liberal and Tory boroughs) to cut their own taxes (tax cuts! tax cuts! screameth the Dalek), even if strings are attached, money is fungible, and the boroughs would just reallocate the budgets elsewhere. Likewise, "releasing GLA land" is just more state shrinking.
As for the pittances outlined above, that renovation scheme amounts to about £700 per property, might do for a lick of paint, I suppose.
Like I said, Johnson is going to actively and as a matter of principle do nothing but channel the interests of the wealthy. The rest is bluster, blather and distraction from the reality of an exploited working class whose needs and interests always come in second place to the interests of profit and capital. A beautiful home is worthless if you can't afford to buy it.
Tired
Old
Tory
Ideas
Wednesday, April 02, 2008
The whited sepulchre
By special request, it's time to put the boot into Boris Johnson.
Essentially, I agree with Dave Osler, the chief characteristic of this campaign is the absence of policy, apart from a few populist gripes Johnson doesn't really say anything.
Of course, over the years he has said plenty, and is well known to be a hard Thatcherite and opponent of so-called "political correctness." And that is just it, it's known for those who care that he will veer to the wild right, and act in a manner to please the saloon bar bores of which he is one in extremis.
That's why he is policy light, because he is not a typical managerial machine politician, but a walking cipher for a certain Tory gut reflex - hence the "seat of your pants" approach he is trying to downplay.
The fact is, that his bluster plus his Chatshow Boris plus a few populist measures (lets plant some trees, do away with Bendy buses, etc.) might just sneak him in. Maybe the plan is to give him a competent team to delegate to like he did while he edited the Spectator; but, just as likely, he will blunder and bluster around like a loose cannon.
The real secret will be that he doesn't believe in doing anything, he will be sabbotaging the local administration so that his Tory mates, the city capitalists and the saloon bar bores can carry on without someone even having the temerity to try an alleviate the ills of capitalism.
Now, socialists are clear that the attempt to run capitalism against capitalist interests is doomed to failure; but Boris, behind the buffoonish facade represents capitalism's uncaring heart of darkness. It's easy to laugh at Boris the joke, but what he stands for, capitalism and elitism without even the pretence of caring, is no joke.
Whilst the wild ideologues have dreamed of such unrestraint, in practice, in power, they're usually kept in check by reality. Anarcho-capitalist wingnuts usually do not get within sniffing distance of power. Even Thatcher barely managed to reduce the size of the state, as she found after years of fruitless turmoil. Sadly, Boris' reality check would be unpleasant for us all.
Essentially, I agree with Dave Osler, the chief characteristic of this campaign is the absence of policy, apart from a few populist gripes Johnson doesn't really say anything.
Of course, over the years he has said plenty, and is well known to be a hard Thatcherite and opponent of so-called "political correctness." And that is just it, it's known for those who care that he will veer to the wild right, and act in a manner to please the saloon bar bores of which he is one in extremis.
That's why he is policy light, because he is not a typical managerial machine politician, but a walking cipher for a certain Tory gut reflex - hence the "seat of your pants" approach he is trying to downplay.
The fact is, that his bluster plus his Chatshow Boris plus a few populist measures (lets plant some trees, do away with Bendy buses, etc.) might just sneak him in. Maybe the plan is to give him a competent team to delegate to like he did while he edited the Spectator; but, just as likely, he will blunder and bluster around like a loose cannon.
The real secret will be that he doesn't believe in doing anything, he will be sabbotaging the local administration so that his Tory mates, the city capitalists and the saloon bar bores can carry on without someone even having the temerity to try an alleviate the ills of capitalism.
Now, socialists are clear that the attempt to run capitalism against capitalist interests is doomed to failure; but Boris, behind the buffoonish facade represents capitalism's uncaring heart of darkness. It's easy to laugh at Boris the joke, but what he stands for, capitalism and elitism without even the pretence of caring, is no joke.
Whilst the wild ideologues have dreamed of such unrestraint, in practice, in power, they're usually kept in check by reality. Anarcho-capitalist wingnuts usually do not get within sniffing distance of power. Even Thatcher barely managed to reduce the size of the state, as she found after years of fruitless turmoil. Sadly, Boris' reality check would be unpleasant for us all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)