Liam redux

,

An anecdote about Ed Miliband

Any Daily Telegraph readers worried that Ed Miliband’s election as leader of the Labour Party means that it’s likely to move sharply left will be reassured by his performance at last year’s climate change talks in Copenhagen. Diana Raby told a tragi-comic little story at last week’s Socialist Resistance event on Latin America, the source…

Liam
1–2 minutes

image

Any Daily Telegraph readers worried that Ed Miliband’s election as leader of the Labour Party means that it’s likely to move sharply left will be reassured by his performance at last year’s climate change talks in Copenhagen.

Diana Raby told a tragi-comic little story at last week’s Socialist Resistance event on Latin America, the source of which was a member of of the Cuban delegation.

Obama had flown in and demanded that a last minute deal be forced through which he’d stitched up with China, India, Brazil and South Africa. Many of the countries of the global south were opposed, rightly saying that it was a charter for richer nations to carry on pumping carbon into the atmosphere. Miliband stomped into the room where they were meeting at 4am and ranted that if they didn’t sign up they’d be denied access to a putative $30bn fund. The high drama of this bit of blackmail was lessened slightly by the fact that he was in his pyjamas at the time. It’s hard to be a moral titan in your jimjams but it’s easy to be the message boy of the rich and powerful.

The Guardian reported at the the time: “Tuvalu, in speaking against the accord, likened the financing offered to the “30 pieces of silver” Judas Iscariot received to betray Jesus.” Miliband wasn’t even Judas. He was the one who told Judas about the cash prize. Inspiring stuff.

32 responses to “An anecdote about Ed Miliband”

  1. Madam Miaow Avatar
    Madam Miaow

    This isn’t quite right, Liam. As I commented at the time, the Danish Text produced in secret by the rich nations led by the US was in OPPOSITION to the position of China, India, et al. It would have left the US producing carbon emissions at four times per capita that of the Chinese.

    But you are right in that Ed made his bones and proved himself a safe pair of hands just when the scandal of the Danish Text was about to hit the headlines. Ed yelled, “Look over there” and blamed the Chinese for wrecking the talks. Meanwhile, there’s been no proper debate about green technology so that, for example, while Britain invented carbon capture technology for coal powered stations, we have built precisely zero while China has built a slew of 44% carbon capture stations, as well as revolutionising green energy technology. EG, those big expensive wind turbines are obsolete as China has smaller machines using electro-magnetic energy. Plus an entire city has its domestic appliances powered by solar energy. But young Ed shied away from these facts and avoided the debate.

    http://madammiaow.blogspot.com/2009/12/sinophobia-and-copenhagen-open-letter.html

    Like

    Reply
  2. Tweets that mention An anecdote about Ed Miliband « Mac Uaid — Topsy.com

    […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Newbloke and Derek Wall, Liam Mac Uaid. Liam Mac Uaid said: An anecdote about Ed Miliband: http://wp.me/p5JDA-1hu […]

    Like

    Reply
  3. Anthony Brain Avatar
    Anthony Brain

    http://brainontrotskyisttheory.blogspot.com/2010/09/why-ed-millibands-election-as-leader-of.html This document represents what I think the Miliband election as Labour leader represents?

    Like

    Reply
  4. prianikoff Avatar
    prianikoff

    Toby Helm and Anushka Asthana, in the “Grauniad”, report that:-

    “MPs who supported David Miliband warned that Ed Miliband’s reliance on the union vote was a “disaster” for the party – leaving it open to charges that its leader would be in the pocket of its leftwing paymasters, and wide open to attack from the Tories and rightwing elements in the media….one senior MP said it was bleak day. “I think this will trigger a constitutional crisis in the party. It is complete madness that we can be seen to have a leader who was put there by the unions,” the MP said.”

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/sep/25/ed-miliband-wins-labour-leadership

    In the same paper, Hélène Mulholland and Paul Owen report that :-
    “The Tories have sought to capitalise on Ed Miliband’s reliance on trade union votes to deliver his leadership victory, accusing the party of taking a “great leap backwards”.”

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/sep/25/ed-miliband-victory-tories

    So Ed’s win, if not his policies, has to be seen a positive development for socialists and trade unionsts opposed to New Labour.
    Surely?

    Like

    Reply
  5. ID Avatar
    ID

    Prianikoff

    “So Ed’s win, if not his policies, has to be seen a positive development for socialists and trade unionsts opposed to New Labour.”

    Indeed. And in fact, some of his policies are an advance. Jetisoning some of the grotesque positions of New Labour that put it to the right of the current government is a gain – see his Sunday Telegraph article here.

    But I will never tire of pointing out; none of this would have happened had New Labour not completely deservedly lost the General Election. If that had happened, neo-liberalism and anti-trade-unionism would still be firmly entrenched in the Labour Party and British politics would still be moving to the right.

    Instead, we have a limited but real shift to the left in Labour, as a result of this defeat, and the prospect of real struggles against a neo-liberal government that is potentially weak and vulnerable. This is a new political situation and the Marxist left needs to carefully evaluate its tactics towards it, and towards Labour.

    Like

    Reply
  6. ID Avatar
    ID

    If that had not happened, I mean (obviously)!

    Like

    Reply
  7. alf Avatar
    alf

    Hold your horses ID, dont run away with the situation. Yes naturally with the cuts carried out by the Condems there is a growing opposition and yes Labour has picked up members and coucil by election wins as a result.Yes trade unionists affected by the cuts are seeking an alternative.

    We must carefully evaluate before we make conclusions. However does Ed represent total and outright opposition to the previous agenda of New Labour pro-business and pro- middle class Third Way agenda?

    Before we all over assume anything, is this a real swing to the Left or just another Harold Wilson yet younger and not smoking. With Neil Kinnock’s blessing does this really represent a new turn or just another Left cover for pro-Capitalist policies, whilst appealing to others to support the camouflage netting?

    If he calls for a total withdrawal from all illegal wars, condemns Israel’s illegal occupations, opposes all cuts etc then perhaps yes. But read his own words. ” Some cuts etc.

    Are the union leaders going to moderate opposition to the present cuts in order not to be seen to be rocking the new boat of new found unity? Or are they going to take the position of supporting the Labour leadership and Labour councils as long as they do not collaborate in carrying out the condem attacks on working people.

    If Ed is prepared to support the mobilising of working people and the oppressed in society in defending jobs and services then you may be correct. In the meantime we need to build the mobilisations and welcome them on board if they do.

    However let us not forget the role of the labour aristocracy in laying the groundwork for Tory attacks in the past.

    Like

    Reply
  8. Hello, I’m Mister Ed « Harpymarx Avatar
    Hello, I’m Mister Ed « Harpymarx

    […] Liam M. […]

    Like

    Reply
  9. ID Avatar
    ID

    alf

    “Before we all over assume anything, is this a real swing to the Left or just another Harold Wilson yet younger and not smoking. ”

    Actually, Harold Wilson’s election was a limited shift to the left from Hugh Gaitskell, who tried and failed to abolish Clause IV. A Blair before his time, so to speak.

    “If Ed is prepared to support the mobilising of working people and the oppressed in society in defending jobs and services then you may be correct.”

    I doubt that he will do much in that regard. Centre-right social-democrats tend to sit on the fence over things like that. Plenty of sitting on the fence from ‘Red Ed’ this morning on Andrew Marr’s show. Indeed, just like Harold Wilson in many strikes. Blah blah blah, strikes are a last resort, etc.

    But the Labour Party under Wilson was still recognisably social-democratic. Unlike under Blair and Brown, when it became openly Thatcherite – even inviting the old witch in for ‘consulations’ and tea and crumpets with two Labour PM’s no sooner were they in Number 10.

    Ed M appears to be a centre-right social democrat – which is why he got union support in a limited but real leftward shift.

    I don’t expect him to act like a revolutionary socialist. If you want that you will wait a very long time. But a Thatcherite he ain’t. And that is a step to the left.

    Like

    Reply
  10. harpymarx Avatar
    harpymarx

    “So Ed’s win, if not his policies, has to be seen a positive development for socialists and trade unionsts opposed to New Labour.
    Surely?”

    Er, prianikoff, you should have (tho’ you might have) heard Mister Ed being interviewed by Andrew Marr. If you or anyone indeed has illusions in him then that interview would surely dampen them.

    He sees strikes as a “sign of desperation” as opposed to a sign of defiance (actually, have people short memories…remember his appalling behaviour over the Vestas occupation!) all suggest strongly that Mr Ed will continue the non-support for justified industrial action that he showed during the Vestas dispute (strikes are a sign of determination btw Mister Ed). There was no sense of outrage at what is about to happen to people. No pointing out how such a policy is proving counter-productive in the Republic of Ireland.

    If you are unwilling to directly support struggles at least attack the intellectual basis of the ConDem attack on public services.

    Liam is correct when he says Mister Ed is “the message boy of the rich and powerful.”

    Like

    Reply
  11. skidmarx Avatar
    skidmarx

    I mentioned to a friend last night that maybe there was some comparison between Miliband and Harold Wilson. His reply was that at least Wilson didn’t take us into Vietnam.

    Like

    Reply
  12. Scottish Socialist Youth » Red Ed? Don’t think so.

    […] over climate change at the Copenhagen summit. Socialist Resistance member Liam Macuaid has an interesting piece on his blog detailing how “Red Ed” tried to coeerce poorer countries into accepting a […]

    Like

    Reply
  13. prianikoff Avatar
    prianikoff

    I didn’t even vote for Ed Miliband as leader of the L.P, so I can hardly be accused of having any illusions in him.
    I certainly don’t expect him to implement the list of demands Alf raises.
    He didn’t get where he is today by being a Revolutionary Socialist.
    Oh No!
    He’s a middle of the road sort of Miliband, with sufficient elasticity to appeal to both the unions and right wingers like Kinnock.

    It’s more a question of the possibilities his election as leader opens up.
    Since he’s been talking about Labour “changing”, new members of the LP, the trade unions and people fighting the cuts are going to ask “How?”
    What are his policies?
    Who will be in the shadow cabinet?
    There’s also some space for re-opening issues like the Rulebook, the primacy LP conference, autonomy of branches and the bans on socialists standing, as in Tower Hamlets.

    Just as important will be the role of the LP leadership and the role Labour councillors in the anti-Cuts campaign.
    The Coalition of Resistance Conference in Camden Centre on November 27th will be an important political focus for this.
    I’m dreading the thought of another “campaign” in which hundreds of thousands of people run around in mindless activity and get nowhere.
    It needs to have a political focus and governmental slogans.

    It’s axiomatic that the Cuts can’t be challenged effectively unless the Coalition is brought down.
    Because if the campaign is sucessful, the government has to fall.
    So this demand needs to be an explicit aim of the campaign.
    The reformist leaders of the Labour Party need to be continually “dragged out of their lairs” and into this debate.

    Socialists can always be purists in their own sects, but there’s absolutely no possibility of a Respect or CNWP government in the foreseeable future.
    So the focus has to be on breaking the weak link in the Coalition; the Liberals, 10,000 of whom have recently joined Labour in disgust.

    The programme required by an incoming Labour government needs to be spelled out.
    An Action Programme that shifts the burden of cuts to where it belongs; with the big bankers, the multinationals, the tax evaders, wasteful public projects and foreign wars .

    Re-nationalising the massively profitable power and water utilities and pegging prices would be a very popular demand too.
    The taboos on discussing such matters in the Labour Party ever since Blair abolished Clause 4 need to be challenged.

    Like

    Reply
  14. billj Avatar
    billj

    Well Ed’s no leftie. Or in any substantive sense to the left of his brother. But he is less unpleasant to look at. So that’s a step forward then!

    Like

    Reply
  15. alf Avatar
    alf

    But billj wasn’t that the arguement made for supporting the young Blair also. Moderniser in white shirt and no jacket, or is that Cameron or is it Cleg? Such clones of style. As for politics, Ed has already disowned the struggle of RMT members, what next?

    The issue is that the Labour leadership is depserate for good news but at the expense of the labour movement. Whilst they fight over redefining the centre ground the rest of us struggle to survive.

    Building the resistance and arguing for an alternative to Third Way solutions must be our priority now. Whether we can build the type of coalition needed depends on all of us.

    Like

    Reply
  16. prianikoff Avatar
    prianikoff

    Other than the right wing cranks in the Tory press, no one believes that Ed Miliband is “Red Ed”.
    So writing endless tracts about how right wing he really is can be a trivial exercise in exposure journalism.

    The real political question remains; What does his election signify for the relationship between the unions and the LP?

    It’s self-evident that the unions re-exerted their influence over the LP in this election. So they can also exert their influence over policy in the future.

    Like

    Reply
  17. edgar Avatar
    edgar

    Ed M has moved quickly to position himself back in New Labour territory, which actually is where he positioned himself anyway. It is just that the so called ‘free’ press is incapable of objective quality reporting and must sink to moronic Ed the red soundbites.

    Incidentally when are the left going to start moving beyond Marx and see that a free press isn’t one owned by a few wealthy individuals.

    If this is what a free press looks like I say fuck the free press.

    Like

    Reply
  18. billj Avatar
    billj

    Alf I didn’t support Blair and I don’t support Ed. But he is less unpleasant to look at than his brother.

    Like

    Reply
  19. David Ellis Avatar
    David Ellis

    `It’s self-evident that the unions re-exerted their influence over the LP in this election. So they can also exert their influence over policy in the future.’

    Two things

    1. `The unions’ is a bit abstract. The union bosses certainly went for Ed Milliband and the pressure they exert will be conservative. The Brownites have called on the union bosses for help in suppressing opposition and channeling it as much as possible into the parliamentary dead end. They hope to get re-elected on the basis of working class quietism delivered by the unions. In actual fact the more the working class acquiesce to the cuts the more contempt they will receive and the stronger and bolder will become the coalition.

    `Re-nationalising the massively profitable power and water utilities and pegging prices would be a very popular demand too.’

    2. Our program must be based on objective necessity not what we think we can get away with but certainly we must present it in a way that makes this objective necessity as plain and as accessible as possible.

    Like

    Reply
  20. alf Avatar
    alf

    billj Marx and Engels were not pretty sights either but their politics were far better.

    Like

    Reply
  21. ID Avatar
    ID

    Interesting item on Lenin’s Tomb that points out that if the LP elections had functioned according to One Person One Vote, DIane Abbott would have come third, not last:

    http://leninology.blogspot.com/2010/09/one-person-one-vote.html

    Which in my view underlies the real leftward drift away from New Labour that happened in this election. Whatever Ed Miliband may do with his vote is another matter, though I suspect that those who consider he will simply revert to the most venal aspects of New Labour in opposition are wide of the mark (political logic points to a more left-posturing Labour Party, both in order to recapture the ‘core vote’ and not unrelatedly to rip off disillusioned left-inclined Lib Dem support from the coalition).

    But this was clearly a shift to the left in electoral terms coming from the base of the LP in the unions.

    Like

    Reply
  22. prianikoff Avatar
    prianikoff

    The Unions had to campaign among individual members opting to pay the political fund in order to deliver the vote. So it’s not just a question of “the bureaucracy”.
    There’s a definite shift to the left, even if it’s produced a centrist leader, as it this stage, was almost inevitable.

    It would be excellent to see some big unions arguing the case for renationalisation of the utilities at LP conference now.

    As I said after the election “New Labour is dead”.
    But it’s not buried yet. There’s absolutely no doubt that the Blairites, the big non-union funders like Lord Sainsbury and Lord Alli will be very miffed, while the Tory right are incensed at David M’s loss, which was not what the script called for.

    To reiterate my main point:-
    It’s more a question of the possibilities that Ed M’s election as leader opens up than his politics.

    The arguments for disaffiliation are looking a lot weaker now. But there are good arguments for organising widespread action against the cuts outside of Parliament and putting all local and national Labour and Trade Union leaders to the test.

    Like

    Reply
  23. alf Avatar
    alf

    It’s more a question of the possibilities that Ed M’s election as leader opens up than his politics

    Opportunities for whom? New Labour without the word New. Between arguing as Darling did today that we must accept some cuts has anything really changed?

    Yes members may have expectations but the leadership is making it clear that they wish to quickly dampen them down.

    Like

    Reply
  24. ID Avatar
    ID

    “Yes members may have expectations but the leadership is making it clear that they wish to quickly dampen them down.”

    Virtually any Labour Party leadership in history, in the face of a left shift at the base, would try to dampen down expectations.

    This left-shift is in the unions, not particularly in the LP branches, which poses interesting tactical problems.

    But dismissing this because the leadership is not up to the aspirations of the base is not smart. It sounds like a sectarian reflex – deny that anything has happened.

    And of course, Darling’s speech was a polemic from New Labour (Brownite wing) against what is implicit in the situation, an attempt to pull the party back into line. Its possible it may succeed, or maybe not. There is likely to be a lot of counter-pressure from the unions. And Darling is hardly the most central figure after this leadership election, I suspect.

    Like

    Reply
  25. alf Avatar
    alf

    No one is denying the developments. Nor is anyone suggesting being sectarian. Yes the united front against cuts will and must include those in the Labour Party affected by and opposing the cuts.

    Yes we must support those in the Labour Party fighting the cuts, including Labour MP’s and Cllrs. And just for the record we distinguish between the impact of a Tory-Lib COALITION, which is anti-working class, and Labour.

    However, neither do we put a gloss on it and then suggest it will all be ok if we get behind Ed and keep stum.

    Like

    Reply
  26. ID Avatar
    ID

    alf

    “Yes the united front against cuts will and must include those in the Labour Party affected by and opposing the cuts.”

    So business as usual then This really does play down the importance of ‘these developments’ particularly among Labour-supporting trade unionists, who have at last struck a real blow against New Labour.

    That assumes that someone here is arguing we should ‘get behind Ed and keep stum’. A bizarre accusation – completely at odds with reality.

    And actually, New Labour in power was just as anti-working class as this coalition. Darling’s defence of his plans for cuts (‘worse than Thatcher’ as he agreed in the ‘three chancellors’ debate) is a manifestation of that.

    This is a new situation – Ed Miliband’s social base is those whose interests are completely at odd with Darling, New Labour and all that reactionary crap. That is what is new in the situation – they have expressed themselves politically for the first time, and that is the opportunity this represents.

    Like

    Reply
  27. prianikoff Avatar
    prianikoff

    That implies that we need to call for Liberal MP’s to vote against the cuts, force a new General Election and join Labour.
    There would also need to be a Manifesto which outlines a programme for defending pubic services, paying off the public debt over a longer term by progressive taxation of the tax evading corporations, cutting wasteful prestige projects that benefit private contractors and a privileged few (like Cross Link – £16 bn), involvement in foreign wars, Trident replacement etc….
    Wouldn’t it be better if the RMT and FBU were doing that inside the LP, other non-affiliated unions and thousands of socialists now joined?
    That would be the best antidote to the thousands of opportunists in the CLP’s.

    Like

    Reply
  28. bill j Avatar
    bill j

    stuart’s take on it here

    http://www.permanentrevolution.net/entry/3155

    Like

    Reply
  29. prianikoff Avatar
    prianikoff

    One thing I’ve been meaning to get back to is Miaow’s comment right at the top of this thread.

    The info she refers to on Chinese renewables above is very dubious. China is certainly applying itself to developing renewables on a big scale, but it’s government is not above producing its own ” Red-GreenWash”, which needs to be taken with a pinch of salt.

    There are some prototype Chinese wind turbines in development, using magnetic bearings instead of gears to translate the rotation of the turbine to the electrical generator.
    The idea being to reduce frictional losses and allow more power to be generated at low windspeeds.
    Behind the hype, it just sounds like an electrical induction motor in-reverse; nothing particularly groundbreaking.
    But these aren’t in mass production and anyway, the benefits of such a device aren’t sufficient to make all existing turbines obsolete.

    Despite increasing its installed wind capacity, China is still committed to coal-powered electrical generation.

    So what about its use of CCS?
    I find the quoted figure of 44% for CCS installations impossible to believe.

    China has been experimenting with Post Combustion Capture i.e. retrofitting existing power plants by using chemical scrubbers to remove C02 from flue gases.
    But I’ve not seen any evidence that it’s anything like on that scale. It’s also not the most technically efficient way to do it, just the cheapest.

    The other technologies possible are:-
    Oxy-fuel Combustion (burning fossil fuel in pure oxygen), which is more efficient and leads to lower and purer C02 output.
    Pre-Combustion Capture, which involves producing hydrogen from coal and then using it to power generators.
    All of which are feasible, if costly.

    The real problem to be solved with CCS is not the Capture, but the Storage (Sequestration) of the captured C02 stream.
    It’s been done in suitable geological formations in the North Sea, the American mid-West etc, but on a very limited scale so far.
    Upscaling such technology depends finding suitable storage sites and absorbing the added costs, which are considerable.

    China certainly hasn’t solved those problems yet, nor has anyone else.

    Like

    Reply
  30. alf Avatar
    alf

    ID says “This is a new situation – Ed Miliband’s social base is those whose interests are completely at odd with Darling, New Labour and all that reactionary crap. That is what is new in the situation – they have expressed themselves politically for the first time, and that is the opportunity this represents.”

    Ed may have publically disowned New Labour but welcomes the same approach of reducing the interest of the working class simply to ensuring re-election, with the aid of the middle class and proping up by union bureaucracy as long as they do not rock the boat. I.E. Crow and union resistance is condemned by Ed, which is what Social Democracy has always done.

    New name, new leader, old approach. I repeat, we must work to win over and support union activists and Labour Party members when they are willing to fight back, without any illusions about the role and turns of the leadership. That does not mean we all hide back in the Labour Party as such.

    Like

    Reply
  31. ID Avatar
    ID

    “which is what Social Democracy has always done.”

    But that is precisely the point. What we had in the New Labour period was the embrace of a form of politics by the Labour Party that was to the right of social-democracy. It was openly hostile to the organised labour movement, openly in favour of attacks on social gains made under previous (mainly social-democratic) governments, and thus on that basis gained the support of forces (e.g. the Murdoch press) that are utterly hostile to even the most tepid social-democratic reformism.

    This is a return to social democratic reformism, of a centre-right type. But in the context of the previous hegemony of New Labour, that is a shift to the left. If you don’t acknowledge that, you can’t actually explain what New Labour is, or what the fuss was all about when it was created.

    Like

    Reply
  32. PhilW Avatar
    PhilW

    Thanks to Prianikoff for the response to Madam Miaw’s contribution at the top. I was given to understand that there is no large-scalle CCS system fitted to a commercial fossil fule power station anywhere in the world, the most likely reason being that it costs at least 20% extra in energy use and the capitalist system is not willing to pay that.

    I also don’t think that smaller wind turbines are more efficient than larger ones – the most obviouse, but not the only reason is that wind speed are higher the further you get from the ground (and electricity output increases with the cube of wind speed, so it makes a very big difference). So if China is going small-scale, then that is misguided (but it may serve market interests, just as selling household wind turnbines does here: something promoted commercially by ex-energy minister Brian Wilson).

    As far “using eletromagnetic energy” in wind turbines: I thought turbines were meant to generate energy, not use it? There are improvements to wind turbine technology in the pipeline – much needed, as the wear on gearboxes seems to be shown by the large numbers of turbines you see dotted around the countryside that are not functioning. One of the latest developments seems to be by Siemens, not a Chinese system: http://www.inhabitat.com/2010/04/27/direct-drive-system-reduces-cost-weight-of-wind-turbines/

    That is not to say that China’s R.E. systems are not very large, in comparison to most other countries. But its fossil fuel economy is much, much larger and is expanding (in terms of quantity of energy used) much faster.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to Hello, I’m Mister Ed « Harpymarx Cancel reply

Trending