Labour 1208
Conservatives 630
Respect 604
Liberal Democrats 110
Mile End by election result
Labour 1208 Conservatives 630 Respect 604 Liberal Democrats 110
1–2 minutes
25 responses to “Mile End by election result”
-
Bugger.
LikeLike
-
Don’t you mean “Buggered” [not in any particularly gay way?
I started to think this was bound to happen when I was looking at the geographical spread of the BNP’s support yesterday (I’m not accusing you of being Nazis, though it is peculiar Galloway couldn’t spot that his fellow presenter on TalkSport, Rod Lucas is one), they also have pockets of support while not having “local” politics, but even with far more support they are still unlikely to get an MP elected.
Yes I am gloating a bit. Perhaps this should start the re-assesment of what an overwhelmingly electoralist organisation exists for when it has no lasting electoral support.
LikeLike
-
As I’ve posted on the SU site – this actually represents an increase in the proportion of Respect vote in this ward since May – up from 22.2% to 23.7%. Even in the high water mark of 2006 when one of the three seats were won, the Respect average vote was only 24.6% in this ward.
The Respect councillor who was elected in 2006 (the other two were Labour) joined the SWP shortly after he took office, participated in their acrimonious split in October 2007 and then joined the Tories this year. It has hardly surprising that in the circumstances, Respect has some ground to win back. What is impressive is that the vote is still consolidating around the 22-24% mark. There are few places in the UK where the left has such a significant level of consistent electoral support.
The result is not enough to win a seat and it is disappointing not to be higher, but it is hardly the end of the world and indicates that there are still strong possibilities of taking forward the Respect project.
LikeLike
-
Skidmarx – let’s trust that you aren’t going to start a “Galloway blind to BNP menace” bandwagon.
At a moment of Labour recovery a left force getting 20%+ of the vote is not a bad thing. If the Socialist Party got a similar vote in a comparable ward would one gloat because they hadn’t won or think it was indicative of a positive trend?
That should not be a hard question to answer.
LikeLike
-
It does not appear a terribly good result (from the outside – I’m in Islington). But my main impression drawn from the result is that we will have to try harder (maybe I just mean that i should try harder).
It isn’t such a long time ago that Sinn Féin in Belfast (and Derry, and Newry) got a couple of hundred die-hard votes.
Labour shared something of the ‘Brown bounce’ – but that may have deflated by the time of the next elections, EU, UK and local.LikeLike
-
” let’s trust that you aren’t going to start a “Galloway blind to BNP menace” bandwagon”
I have no such plans.
20% of the vote in an area Respect once represented is going backwards. I read somewhere that you said at the Respect conference something like “We have a few councillors”. Aas we get further from the anti-war mood that elected them there will be fewer and fewer, and only a fool would believe you’ll win any seats at the next el;ection. You’ll soon look like David Owen’s SDP, with only the hope of PR to save you.
LikeLike
-
A good result? A bad result? It depends what your perspective is. If the campaign is purely an electoral one then it is a bad result, if Renewal (which is open to question) were involved in using the election to build genuine networks of class struggle and community resistance, and used the election as a platform to build links with people who want to do something about the credit crunch and move into action, then I think it would be an okay result.
LikeLike
-
I don’t really think it’s open to question. If it were, there would be Renewalists saying “This is a bad result, but we have to focus on what’s important and move on.” Instead it is reminscent of Animal Farm in two ways, an “I must work harder” response to setbacks, and responding to the failure to meet targets by setting even more ridiculous ones.
This is what it said on the Respect Renewal website before the election:
“Just to reiterate we have a great chance of winning this election… Mile End East ward is a crucial swing ward in the forthcoming general election when George Galloway will be trying to unseat Jim Fitzpatrick in the constituency of Poplar and Limehouse.”
How bad does it have to get before it’s recognised that “Respect” as a vehicle makes the Ford Edsel look roadworthy?“If the Socialist Party got a similar vote in a comparable ward would one gloat because they hadn’t won or think it was indicative of a positive trend?
That should not be a hard question to answer.”I’d tend to go for the positive trend. They are from what I know a consistent left wing party and so votes for them would indicate a rise in socialist consciousness. It would be hard to define “comparable ward” in this hypothetical.
I don’t see quite what that has to do with what has increasingly become a political vanity project based on increasingly communalist support that has as much of its reason for existing the belief that it has an electoral base that is likely to expand, and that belief is simply false. What is is going to take before you realise this?And if anyone sees Kevin Ovenden I’d still like an apology (PHRASE DELETED – SEE COMMENTS POLICY LIAM) for calling me a liar.
LikeLike
-
“if Renewal (which is open to question) were involved in using the election to build genuine networks of class struggle and community resistance, and used the election as a platform to build links with people who want to do something about the credit crunch and move into action, then I think it would be an okay result.”
Spot on and for there are many inside Respect who see things just as clearly.
The question then for local Respect members will be:
1) Did we recruit a new layer of activists during this campaign?
2) If not then why not? If yes, then what are they going to do with them?
There are contradictions within Respect as there would always be in any such organisation. However, Skidmarx is wrong – the vision of outlined by Adamski is a living reality within Respect members and even leaders – even if for some there are a whole host of differing contradictory thoughts overlaying it.
The question I would put to the haters is where is the alternative project – the left-list aren’t just “not concentrating on elections” they are not concentrating on ANYTHING.
The SWP is doing some good work around the credit crunch but rather then building a broad radical network of struggle they are limiting themselves to building a network of revolutionaries (and even more narrowly revolutionaries who except their own model of stifling party organisation).
The credit cruch has scared people and is going to make their lives worse. However, in a storm it is often harder to jump ship – we are going to have to give up relying on broad anti-war or vague anti-neoliberal rhetoric and start coming up with some concrete, radical and believable steps to counter ordinary peoples suffering.
LikeLike
-
“revolutionaries who except their own model of stifling party organisation”
I’m fairly sure you mean “accept”.
“1) Did we recruit a new layer of activists during this campaign?
2) If not then why not? If yes, then what are they going to do with them?”1) Don’t you know? Is is the answer a big no?
2) You don’t even have any suggestion about what to do with any activists should they join.After the next election, where you may have three candidates who get nearly half of the Labour candidates vote(if Mile End East is typical and not one of the most favourable areas), are you going to be sat around with the few who haven’t decamped to an actually existing socialist organisation or to a bourgois party that might get into power; which I would guess means Galloway, a few embittered ex-SWP members, and possibly mark…anthony…france, still claiming that you’re going onwards and upwards?
And what are you going to do if Galloway does try to get back into the Labour Party/retire?Those should not be hard questions to answer.
Sic transit gloria Gallowayi.
LikeLike
-
I think most people who have been involved in electoral politics would actually agree that it is very hard to build the membership of an organisation during the election itself. There simply isn’t the time. However, what happens afterwards between the previous election and the next is important. It is then that the imformation / contacts gathered during the election can be better forged into networks and supporters. Of course doing that does not guarantee winning the next time – but failing to do that leave you with the same mountain to climb.
And by the way – are we now allowed to insult people using the hilarious method of swapping the odd letter around?
LikeLike
-
No Clive. We are not allowed to insult people on this site.
LikeLike
-
[…] Categories: Entries England: Respect obtained 604 votes (third place) in the Mile End by-election for Tower Hamlets council caused by a Labour resignation on health grounds. Labour held the […]
LikeLike
-
“I’m fairly sure you mean “accept”.” – Skidmarx
– I did, my spelling is crap – does that change the argument? What’s your answer to the question of what alternative organisation is trying to build genuine networks of class struggle and community resistance rather then a narrow(er) network of revolutionaries?
“1) Don’t you know? Is is the answer a big no?
2) You don’t even have any suggestion about what to do with any activists should they join.”1) As yet I don’t know. I live in Manchester so haven’t been intimately involved in the campaign. Lacking physic powers I expect I’ll find out after the local activists have taken stock and passed on the information. I hope the answer is yes.
2) I have plenty of suggestions. I expect they are not a million miles away from what you or Adamski would suggest. I.E. linking people together to take different community and class struggles forward.
Respect is a socialist party – it promotes radical socialist ideas. To think that only Revolutionaries are socialist is daft.
If Galloway retires and Salma decamps (which by the way she has failed to do despite your predictions so far) and Respect falls apart (true it probably would) I’ll be pissed off with them (though I could understand such decisions) and then I’ll move on. In such a situation I’ll end up in the same place you are already in – i.e. looking for how to create a new a broad radical party.
Clive – I take your point. The question is whether they will see their contacts as potential new recruits to contribute towards a programme of community and class struggle or just as a passive pool of supporters. I hope the former.
LikeLike
-
” does that change the argument?”
No. I just had better things to do than address it when I was uncertain of your meaning. I think the SWP is trying to do both, I realise you don’t agree, I don’t see the point in going into further detail.
“. Lacking physic powers I expect I’ll find out after the local activists have taken stock and passed on the information. I hope the answer is yes.”
I think you mean psychic, not that you are fatter than phat. I take it from Clive Searle’s contribution that the answer is no. I simply don’t believe that anyone is more likely to join outside of the flooding of the ward with canvassers.
To think that Respect is a socialist party, that it promotes radical socialist ideas is daft.
Are we allowed to call people liars on this site, then fail to apologise when this is shown to be a lie?
LikeLike
-
After a bit of thought I realised that I was allowing Clive Searle once again to divert the argument away from his inability to connect respect with reality, and so I acknowledge it was wrong to call Kevin a lurd, and apologize for any breach of the comments policy. I might also suggest to Clive that he address the two-by-four in his colleague’s eye before throwing a hissy fit about the splinter in mine.
Other questions that never got answered:
1. Why was Karl from Plaistow not allowed to talk about Ken and the de Menezes shooting on Galloway’s show?
2. Why was the resolution wording changed from “Defending Our People” to “Defending Working People”?
3. When you are clearly the Respect minority, what right have you to keep the name?LikeLike
-
When you are clearly the Respect minority, what right have you to keep the name?
Earth to skidmarx – the dispute between the two claimants to the RESPECT name has been settled, and one of the issues that was agreed was who got the name. If you’re a member of LA who thinks it should still be called RESPECT, your best course of action is to take this up with the LA leadership.
LikeLike
-
Phil, they just stopped fighting over your theft of the name. Your claim to it was based on being more representative of the membership (though like the justifications for invading Iraq, there were times when it began to be replaced with “We’re more popular so we’ve got a right to the name”). I didn’t say anyone actually agreeing that you had a right to seize the name and claim the history for your own. I see you don’t dispute being the Respect minority.
If you want to talk about petty issues how about justifying Kevin Ovenden’s comment that noone in Respect criticised those who attacked Livingstone over the de Menezes shooting, when you were one of the people in Respect who did exactly that. If you want to tackle something more substantial, why is it that your leaders are blaming the Mile End result on the SWP when you’ve spent the last few weeks claiming to be over them ?
LikeLike
-
And I never thought it was a very good name to start with. It reminds me of Abbie Hoffman, when he was on the run from charges of trying to sell cocaine to a cop, setting up a campaign to stop winter navigation in the St.Lawrence Seaway, and saying in his autobiography that usually such organisations have long names, but he wanted to keep it short and call it “Save The River”. I wonder how much time has been wasted deciding what the acronym should stand for.
In further reply to Joseph Kisolo, if Respect were an alliance of socialists, don’t you think it would be called something like the Socialist Alliance?
To reiterate my point to you Phil, I don’t want the name back, it would just be nice to know what justification the Respect minority could still have for thieving it in the first place.
I see the Respect Renewal blog currently has a plug for Socialist Worker. It’s nice to see that someone has responded to events with less sectarianism rather than more.
LikeLike
-
The Respect name should belong to Renewal instead of LA, because the electoral base of Respect considers itself best represented by George Galloway and Salma Yaqoob, not by John Rees and Lindsey German. This is not because they are “right-wing” but because the SWP leadership did not want to share control so that the party’s actual political makeup was represented.
There is no point going over the split yet again. I believe that the SWP should have remained in the coalition and it is weaker without them.
The point is not whether one side is a minority or majority but which side best represents politically the purpose of the Respect project, which is to occupy the space between revolutionary Marxism and social democracy and create a party comparable to Die Linke in Germany. This is a very necessary project and the left should offer support instead of ultra-left sniping about “electoralism”.
LikeLike
-
Skidmarx – Your arguments about Respect not being socialist are the same as those of the ultra left CPGBies. Perhaps your both right, but you should acknowledge that you are in disagreement with the SWP leadership who argued very hard that Respect didn’t need to have “Socialist” in the shortened name to be socialist.
As for non-sectarianism, you seem to be the one gloating about Respect not winning a councillor. If SWP/LA lost Michel Lavellette as a councillor I wouldn’t gloat I would say that it was a set back for the left.
LikeLike
-
I think this result is very bad. I speak as a supporter and former member of Respect. I think the split whilst history was a disaster for Respect. I read Galloway in the daily record on line. He is now very soft on new labour, he looks like a man wanting to get back inside the Labour Party. This will leave the project dead in the water. I regret that very much. I hope I am wrong.
LikeLike
-
“see the Respect Renewal blog currently has a plug for Socialist Worker. It’s nice to see that someone has responded to events with less sectarianism rather than more”
Surveying the blogs over the last month or so its increasingly apparent that the debates taking place on them have little to do with actual organisations and their actually existing practice. I suspect this is because the split has run its course and increasingly the threads are dominated by those who thrived off of it rather then regarded it as a setback to overcome. Not everyone of course but I think its a factor. The only worrying thing is that anyone might watch these arguments and think they reflect anything real. This has become truer of SUN I think then this blog which always tended to the sensible rather then silly wing of arguments.
LikeLike
-
” the SWP leadership did not want to share control so that the party’s actual political makeup was represented.”
The actual political make-up was that the supporters of George Galloway were a minority, and they swiped the name through a bureaucratic manoeuvre (i.e. winning the Nominations Officer to their side). To continue a theme, this was the final nail in the coffin for me that there was any justice in the arguments of Galloway and his cohorts. When asked why they didn’t formally split from Respect when they were clearly the minority, there was generally a lot of bluster and eventually justifications like yours, that they had a right to the name because they were more popular. If you can’t even be democratic within parties you are in, increasingly noone will believe that anything you say is anything but opportunism.
jack- he might always run into a problem that noone would want to give him a seat down South, and in Scotland there appears to be an over-supply of senior Labour figures.
johng- I see that Martin Smith went to Socialism 2008 to debate with the Socialist Party. There is an account of a remarkably friendly encounter on a very public sociologist’s blog. I hope he’s prepared to make nice with Weyman.
LikeLike
-
Interesting news about Socialism 2008. Thanks. I think thats an example about the difference between these discussions and reality. Again, not to suggest that everyone is a batty sectarian just that there is a bit of a divide.
LikeLike
Liam redux 
Leave a comment