Bar Wars return: Plans for Pendle Bar to only open ... - Scan - Lusu

46COMMENTWeek 2 - Summer Termscan.lusu.co.uk/commentA word for the lingering Labourites of the LeftChris WitterShould we of the Left supportthe Labour Party, even intheir Post-Labour (i.e. neoliberal,pro-austerity, antiworker)form? A common attitudeon this question goes somethinglike this: “We have to be realisticand compromise: if we don’t votefor Labour we will end up with theTories back in power.”This is usually followed by astream of citations of Labour policeswhich, four or more years ago,had some generally positive effect.Undeniably such accounts are erudite,but they are also conspicuousin avoiding both the many manifestfailures of the Labour Party and therightwards trajectory of the Party.Not only are Labour Councillorscurrently facilitating cuts, but evenin opposition the Party has takento attacking immigrants, welfareclaimants and unions, whilst determinedlyapproving anti-workerpolicies (e.g. the public sector payfreeze).Labour takes all its cuesfrom the Right.But, even those who do see thegeneral picture often fall back onarguments based on pragmatismand realpolitik in order to justifythe necessity of voting for the LabourParty in the name of compromise(e.g. the whole SWP).This question of ‘compromise’must be addressed, for it presentsitself in a somewhat mystifiedform. What is said to be importantis the relation between the politicalparties (i.e. “Better Labour thanthe Tories”). The paradigm hereappears to be consumption ratherthan political struggle (i.e. “I preferthis brand to that”). Indeed,perhaps commodity fetishism hassubsumed politics? One way or another,the typical Leftist objectionsto this are that “You might vote forLabour and still end up with theTories” or “Labour basically are Tories.”Both contain some truth, butboth are inadequate. The crucialthing is the relation between politicalparties and individual and collectivesubjects.“The balance of theclass struggle iscurrently weightedagainst the workingclass”The Labour Party is currentlyin a position where it is must prioritisethe interests of capital. Thisis so because the balance of theclass struggle is currently weightedagainst the working class andits allies, who are currently quiteweak. Meanwhile, despite, or perhapsbecause of, the economic crisisthe capitalist class is really doingvery well. It faces all sorts ofdifficulties, but it is more than coping.Whilst this situation persists,whatever the hopes of the few LingeringLeft Labourites, the party isnot going to be reformed.The problem is not simply theinternal/institutional problems ofbureaucracy, factions, ‘middleclass’members and ‘Blairites,’ butthe whole state of the class strugglein the current conjuncture. What‘compromises’ can be wrung fromthe Labour Party entirely dependupon the state of the class struggle;whilst the capitalist class hasthe upper-hand these offerings willbe very scant.That is the problem of the relationof the Post-Labour Party to collectivesubjects. Let us now come tothe question of individual subjects’relation to the Labour Party withregards the question of compromise.The fact is, Labour cannot bereformed in the current conjuncture.You approach them thinkingyou are compromising with it (“Ilike that, but I don’t like this”) butyou are not. The Party hears nothingfrom individuals. Tired of thisfruitless fight, you think you arecompromising with yourself. However– even here you are wrong. Foryour compromise simply a completecapitulation.On these last points, I am remindedof those young childrenwho have newly discovered theability to lie. They think they arepossessed of a secret ability, a secretcunning: the power of manipulation.They try it out on adults.In truth, whether the adult sees thelie or not, they decide to humour orscold, to accept the wheedling demandor ignore it, independently ofthe child’s will.Meanwhile the child triumphantlyflatters themselves thatthey are able to wield power andcontrol over their elders, thoughtin truth the reins are kept wellclear of their hands. So it is withthe ‘socialist Labourite’, who ‘playsthe part’ of Labour supporter whilstnurturing socialist view. The truthis somewhat the other way around.They think that they push, but it isthey who are pushed. Their failureto realise this is merely a self-flatteryborn out of the need to protectthemselves from the plain truth:that they are lending their energiesand support to something they detest.None of this, of course, excusesthe Post-Labour Party ministersand their cronies. They are deeplyimplicated not only in facilitatingausterity but also in the weaknessof the Left whom they have attackedand betrayed.What these insights do provide,however, is a little light tohelp guide our strategy. Two keypoints emerge: first, we must ceaseploughing our energies into reformingthe Labour Party; second,not only is Labour a valid target,but it must be attacked constantlyif it is to be shifted. Change willcome, but currently this will notcome through an internal strugglewithin the Labour Party.How do you solve a problem like North Korea?Alex LittleboyComment EditorIt isn’t easy to get informationfrom inside the DemocraticPeoples Republic of Korea.The country has a history ofimprisoning foreign journalists,as it is illegal for them to operatefrom inside the country. In 2009,two American journalists weresentenced to twelve years hardlabour for operating within thenation, although they werepardoned by Kim Jong-Il whenBill Clinton arrived in the nation.Because of this, it is impossible forus to truly know how the politicalstructure of Pyongyang works, andhow oppressed the North Koreanpeople truly are.“It is important forpeople in the Westto know the innerworkings of NorthKorea”It is because of this thatjournalists need to go undercover,this need for information, touncover the truth. Recently, inorder to get information for aPanorama broadcast on NorthKorea, BBC journalists enteredthe country disguised as visitingstudents from the London School ofEconomics. Despite insistence thatthe visiting students were informedof the potential dangers shouldthe journalists be discovered, theLSE insisted that the broadcast becancelled in order to protect itsstudents and interests.It is important for people in theWest to know the inner workings ofNorth Korea. The more we understandabout North Korea, the lessalarming their rhetoric becomes.North Korea often puts out violentrhetoric and threatens other nationsas part of a national delusionthat they are a country of globalimportance. So long as the NorthKorean people only see one sideof the debate, they will continueto view their nation as a playerin world politics, as opposed tothe highly condemned footnote inhistory that it truly is. Even NorthKorea is unlikely to start a warthey cannot win, but having thesetantrums allows them to maintainthe illusion that they brush shouldersand actively engage the superpowersof the world.Because of this complete lack ofunderstanding of the way that theDPRK works, it is of paramountimportance that we do what wecan to enlighten the general populationwith regards to the country.Therefore, the LSE should acceptthat it has a greater role toplay in the unmasking of NorthKorea. I understand the concernfor student welfare, and the ideathat the university must protect itsstudents, but if they were informedof the dangers, there is no reasonto be so protective. It is necessaryto deceive in order to allow themysterious world of North Korea tobe understood.