Monday 13 April 2015

On the Far Left's General Election Campaign

As well as being a pretty weird general election, 2015's will see a record number of far left candidates standing. As if to underline the peculiarity of the campaign, even anarchists are standing. So let's have a bit of a burrow into the lists and see what it says about the far left party family.

No one in a revolutionary socialist or anarchist outfit now would say women's rights and the question of gender are distractions from the hard graft of knuckling down and prosecuting the class struggle. At least aloud, or for public consumption. As self-declared representatives of the most class conscious sections of the British proletariat, they're the best fighters for women's liberation. The implementation of their programmes would strike a permanent and irreversible blow for equitable gender relations. We're a long way off from that happy day, however. So how do women fair as a percentage of far left candidates? I make it 52 out of the 223 listed so far. That's 23.3%. For TUSC specifically of 131 seats contested women are standing in 34 of them, or 25.9%. What to say about this. The LibDems say that just 26% of their candidates are women. Annoyingly, comparable figures for the Tories and Labour are hard to come by (I don't have the inclination to run through every single constituency). But of interest 29 for the former and 54 for the latter have been selected for the parties' top 100 winnable seats. Among all party selections done up until last November - including incumbents - it was 73-27 men-women. Of new candidates, Labour had selected 39% women, the Tories 31%, LibDems 30%, Greens 37%, and UKIP 12%.

Pretty poor for the far left as a whole to be outdone on women's representation by all bar UKIP, and to be less representative than the field of candidates as a whole. However, the far left should be cut a bit of slack, but only a little. They can only stand the activists they have on the books, and in the Socialist Party's case - who've provided the bulk of TUSC candidates - the party comprises one quarter to one third women. To be fair, during my membership they did encourage women to come to the fore and its leading body, the executive committee, had a slight female majority. Still, the same searching questions about why more women aren't involved have to be asked.

The second thing I want to look at is how much the election campaign is a party building opportunity. We know that far left candidates generally get pretty poor results - see last year's European election and 2010's outing, for example. To try and build a head of steam behind your campaigns, you require consistent electoral activity in a given area and a long-term strategic plan. Can we see evidence of that here? Last time, the far left contested 120 seats with 135 candidates. Have they built on this? Well, 92 of our candidates are standing in seats that were previously contested, which is 41%. This doesn't look too good but do remember that TUSC has massively upped its electoral game. 53 were contested in 2010, 26 of which were under TUSC's banner (I've included here the four Socialist Alternative candidates). Quite why the 17 that previously had TUSC haven't been so visited this time is a mystery. Also, only 15 candidates are standing in the same seat as 2010, ten of which are TUSC. Sitting MPs aside, I expect the proportion in the bigger parties is about the same or even lower. However, when you're in the business of building a radical alternative consistency and continuity between elections is important provided the candidate has been working the seat hard in the meantime.

All this begs the question of why. I doubt the CPB, SEP, CL, and WRP central committees sat down to determine their general election intervention believing a general breakthrough lies just over the horizon. Sure, like the SPGB, AGS, Workers' Party, SSP, and Class War, it's an opportunity to get the organisation and your work known. You're taking advantage of a wider interest in politics than is hitherto the case. But is it worth it? Taking 2010 as our benchmark, polling scores were more often beneath one per cent than not. However, the far left tend not to measure success in terms of votes scored - as anyone familiar with post-election write ups by those concerned will tell you. It's about the breadth of the message, of the leaflets distributed, papers solds, contacts made, and recruits who've signed up. There is also the experience of taking part in the campaign itself. To be involved and live in the micro universe of a campaign can be a gratifying experience, even if you don't win. It's an occasion of forming close ties, of working together collectively around a clearly definable common objective, of deepening one's relationship with the group. It's the stuff fond memories are made of. Or can be, provided it's not deeply dysfunctional and characterised by fraying friendships. So for a small party, it's a bonding experience, of toughening up collective discipline and identity. But it's a risk. For newer recruits the poor result can be an occasion for disillusion and burnout.

TUSC is qualitatively different. While the general election is an occasion for party building on the Socialist Party's part (and, to a lesser extent, the SWP's), the objective is to work TUSC up into an electoral force that will be taken seriously over the longer term. It's their contribution toward the new workers' party they believe is a necessity since Labour stopped conforming to what they think such a party should look like. Implicitly, TUSC exists to show an electoral life for leftist class politics outside Labour is possible. However, there are a number of problems.

As we know, the Green Party has grown massively since last summer, a growth reflected in its spread of candidates. TUSC's challenge, however, is not a result of organic growth. As far as I can tell, the SP is roughly the same size it was five years ago and the SWP, of course, are much diminished. Nor has there been an upsurge of active opposition to never-ending austerity that can power TUSC's 100% no cuts message. Why then such an effort which, lest we forget, is also supported by about 600 local council candidates?

There are two things going on here. SP cadre are keen to flag up how much more advanced TUSC is compared to UKIP after the first five years of its existence, while accidentally on purpose forgetting the last 25 years of the SP standing against Labour under a variety of labels. TUSC appears to be a project that has stalled. The 2010 results were down on its predecessor's 2005 efforts, including in its Coventry and Lewisham "strongholds". Since then local election results have given little cheer, even if they had a councillor elected last year ... on an independent ticket. As growth eludes TUSC, voluntarism has stepped into the breach. By pulling out all the stops and standing absolutely everywhere they can reflect back a sense of dynamism to their members, that this project might actually be going somewhere. The second issue is their friends in the RMT. As the sleeping partner in the TUSC initiative, it remains a source of acute embarrassment that barely any of its 72,000 members are aware of what TUSC is, let alone that their union is an affiliate. Even the much-missed Bob Crow studiously avoided all mention of the coalition of which he was a founder on his Question Time appearances. And now the RMT has Mick Cash, a Labour Party member at the helm, it's reasonable to suppose the union's support is living on borrowed time. In this context, to try and keep them on board, running a large campaign is about showing the RMT that another party is possible. It won't deliver the votes, but the SP must be hoping that the sheer size of the "biggest post-war left electoral challenge" will squeeze out a respectable - by far left standards - result. Because without the RMT, not only does TUSC go the way of the dodo,their perspectives suffer ignominious collapse and a good chunk of their membership will be profoundly demoralised.

But can TUSC and the other comrades standing in the election expect a continuation of poor results? Thanks to the rise of social media, the traditional press and TV matter less this time than has ever hitherto the case. They may be locked out of the leaders' debates but they can, to a degree, bypass them. There is also the general mood too. If by some dark miracle the Tories scrape their way into power again, it won't be because of a resigned acceptance of the need for more austerity. It's not uniform, it's complex and contradictory, but the much hallowed centre ground has moved left on a number of key issues. And also the far right has disappeared up its own backside. However, with established "anti-establishment" parties in the shape of UKIP and the Greens, and with the latter fielding its own anti-austerity message, it's hard to see how TUSC and family can hope to poll anything other than derisory votes in the absence of name recognition, consistent work, and in competition with more viable alternatives to mainstream politics.


Vinyl Miner said...

Like the fact that President of the RMT and former CP'r Peter Pinkey is standing for the Greens in Redcar. Probably get as many votes as the combined TUSC.

vox said...

Yep, Mick Cash being Labour and Peter being Green ends the pretence that the RMT backs TUSC as the SP claims. It used to a bit, and now doesn't at all in any meaningful way.

Josiah said...

Re. the stuff on women's representation among candidates, you might be interested in the Electoral Reform Society's latest report on this - got all the stats!

Waterloo Sunset said...

I actually suspect that Class War measure their success in terms of column inches rather than new recruits. From what I recall their highest ever membership was around 150 people, just after the Poll Tax Riots.

And I'm not sure that the SPGBeegees have any concept of success at all. They probably consider the very idea to be reformist. ;)

Phil said...

Cheers for that, Josiah.

Re: Class War, they played a wee role in my radicalisation - I was regularly fed issues of CW by a mate whose dad was a member. I recall asking how large CW were and the reply came ... "not that big, they have about 20,000 members."

Anonymous said...

Cant speak for other areas but to look at TUSC in teh MEdway Towns (in Kent)...

We are standing in all three parliamentary constituencies. (2RMT members and 1 SP...2 blokes and 1 female)

We are also standing in all 22 wards for council..something only Labour and the Tories have been able to do...even UKIP, which has an MP here, isnt standing in all wards.

Our council candidates are a majority female, a third under 30 and only 2 have ever stood for election before.

The RMT locally are fully behind TUSC - standing 5 of the council candidates and getting actively involved in the campaign and raising money.

Regionally the RMT are also supportive and invited us to address their regional AGM.

I think that the TUSC campaign is qualitatively different to other left campaigns and to previous TUSC campaigns.

Looking at the 'far left' may appear a hobby akin to stamp collecting for some, but TUSC represents a real process happening in politics.

Vinyl Miner said...

When the RMT stopped supporting the SSP to follow the CWI it was against the wish of most of its members. Top Down nonsense.

Anonymous said...

The far left campaign gains about nil national media coverage.

The Tories have already won because no big party will get the 326 MP minimum threshold to form a UK government.

The Lib Dems will be much reduced or even down to 19 MPs. So the gone party.

Labour could not gain the predicted 277 seats, but lose all 40 in Scotland.

Labour could lose some of their seats in Wales to Plaid Cymru.

The socialist parties need to win MPs in this election.

Because Between SNP, PLAID CYMRU - 99 MP seats.


Between them all upwards of nearly 250 MPs plus, in a powerful alliance on the opposition benches in the House of Commons.

Whereas now either from this election or from a second general election this year, we get a single government, with no opposition, formed of
TORY / LIB DEM / LABOUR coalition.

Without the socialists winning seats, cutting the number of Tory, Lib Dem and Labour MPs, we are inside a dictatorship.

A parliament needs two sides to be a democracy.

This has already ended.

The SNP need TUSC, to have 2 sides to the Scottish parliament, without the big parties.

Plaid Cymru need the few TUSC running in South Wales to do the same.

Little Mebyon Kernow in Cornwall can rid us of 6 Tory and Lib Dem MPs, and might link up with Plaid Cymru and SNP, as a Celt fringe.

Winning is the key.

We cannot just wait.

The starving cannot wait, nor the suicidal, nor the babes born premature when mother is sanctioned off food for months before due date, and for months after the premature birth, unable to breast feed from the stress and the hunger.

This is not politics.

This is food on the table and a roof over your head.