Repoliticise Labour? A proposal to the LRC.
I’m not a Labour Party member, and I’m unlikely to rejoin the Labour Party, even secretly, just to vote for Diane Abbott. Yet I suspect there are few socialists who would not appreciate the re-politicisation of the Labour Party membership.
I have only my own experience and that of others of like-mind to support this contention, but the lack of debate over issues (beyond property development, traffic lights and similar things) at branch and constituency Labour Parties is key to the continuing inability of the Labour Left to engage decisively within its class or within the Party.
Why is there no initiative to change that? I know of several people who sought the position of Political Education Officer within their CLP because they felt they could bring some debate to their CLP. Perhaps it’s time to support them.
A central body like the Labour Representation Committee, backed by the research groups of various unions, the TUC and even (gasp!) Compass, could issue one resolution every week, for debate at branches, to be voted on by the end of the meeting. Information in support of the resolution could be issued much in the way that New Labour issued their talking points bulletins to the PLP (except our version would be intellectually more engaged and honest).
Such debates, in the lead up to Labour’s conference, would provide the opportunity to orient new or depoliticised members to key issues facing the Party and the working class. This will be vital in distinguishing between candidates for conference delegate. But these debates will only happen if groups like the LRC press Party members to regard the proposal of resolutions and the toeing of a socialist line as their duty at CLP and branch meetings.
It might also lead to a wider activism; it doesn’t take an intellectual giant to draw a link between a resolution supporting a national strike (of which there are liable to be a few, and this is just an example in one area) and the potential for actually doing something to support the strike at a local level. If one or two members for each geographically tight region (done by county perhaps) was willing to oversee this development, support to picket lines or protests against job cuts etc would be easier to bring out.
When people see this happening, they’ll be more likely to join, and those who join as a result will be more likely to take an activist role and stance.
Additionally, it might provide a way to establish contacts in those branches which don’t necessarily have a strong Left contingent. One member would be enough to start the debate. Even if that member didn’t feel especially confident running a section of the LRC, passing back contact details to the LRC officers would help in fleshing out that organisation.
From the point of view of a member of the Socialist Party, it may seem unimportant to strengthen Labour’s grassroots. But the reality is that a Labour Party that moves Left will form one arm of a broad coalition of the working class – wherever they stand politically – to fight the Conservative-Liberal government and their cuts.
In fact, there’s an argument to be made that an LRC, forced to the Left by a greater connection to its class, and staffed by committed community and trades union activists – particularly of the younger generation – will feel a pull towards mobilising for mass disaffiliation of CLPs from Labour, if an alternative political organisation can successfully upset the Con-Lib agenda.
Just a thought.
Great post Dave!
Anyone who’s ever been to a Labour branch meeting will know of the perpetual pot-hole related boredom to which you refer. Its stating the bloody obvious really, but the base of any movement needs to incorporate proper political discussion if it is to have any hope of serious long term success as a mass social movement, yet this is something certain people in the Labour Party need constantly reminding of..
You make a very good point about people who recognise this central role seeking election as Political Education Officers to CLP’s. This is something Ive spoke about repeatedly and which I intend to do myself in the run up to our next AGM.
I will certainly take the time to discuss this idea with other LRC Comrades next time I get a chance. I think as an organisation we could be doing more to encourage the recapturing of these essential positions.
Coincidentally, I’m just working on a local leaflet that covers some of this repoliticisation territory. I’ll put the text in as a comment when I’m done (needs to be configured with rest of leaflet).
Yes, a good idea. I think the main impetus has to be local but anything the LRC can do to stimulate (and there’s the payback of increased membership) would be good.
‘It might lead to wider acivism’.
Yes, it might, as part of a package of measures, but let’s walk left before we run.
Why does the impetus have to be local? You know I’m always in favour of local ideas, and the rendering of everything into local terms – but there’s no reason why a member of the LRC’s EC couldn’t take it upon themselves to put up a draft resolution, with supporting information culled from the better sections of the blogosphere.
On the other hand, there’s national issues which deserve consideration – e.g. the recent controversy over the Union Learning Fund / Union Modernisation Fund. Tooling up Party members to combat the same guff from Telegraph, Times, tabloids and even the televisual news is a Good Thing. And then it can be up to people like us to show how these themes can have local relevance.
“Mobilisation for mass disaffilation” ?????? No.No. No. We’ve been through that one many many times and why commit political suicide
Mobilisation for building more LRC Branches ( one more next week in Norwich ), speaker meetings, debate, discussion, yes. Over 20,000 have re-joined Labour and that, frankly, is the best way to rebuild and re-motivate , re-politicise Branches. As well as , as you say, working with the broader left and labour movement.
Dave @3: Sorry, clumsily put by me. All I’m saying is that the initial ‘opening out’ to LRC submissions will need to be local. Certainly I’m not suggesting that all resolutions need to be locally focused – indeed quite the reverse if CLPs are going to feel engaged beyond the traffic lights you mention (a bit of an exaggeration on your part, but you make the point).
Susan @4: Have given notice to our CLP sec of motion re: affiliation to LRC in September. But it won’t be easy to win. CLP has been a bit ‘under the weather’ for while, so not been able to do it to date.
Susan, there’s no point in me continuing to have this discussion with you. You’ve admitted there are no circumstances in which you’d leave Labour. That’s your call. But as political pressures build, there will be a split in Labour. Ultimately it’s inevitable – you can’t have two horses trying to pull the same cart in opposite directions. That’s neither here nor there, however. In the meantime, build the LRC – and this would be a good way to get Lefties singing from the same hymnsheet.
@Paul, sorry, my misinterpretation then. Yes, I’d agree with you.