Saturday, May 26, 2007

Labour Left Forum already has first “splitters and wreckers”


Less than 48 hours after the formation of a new hard left blog - “Labour Left Forum” they have already had their first split! The “Editor” censured a post title by a member over the Labour Party deputy leadership contest. A new member quite rightly objected to this and it ended up with him leaving the forum. He didn't follow the "line". See comments below.

"Clarification of the Labour Left Forum editorial guidelines"
9 Comments -
Show Original Post
Collapse comments
Owen said...
"I only did this in order to maintain the "LLF" line of total impartiality in the ongoing Deputy Leadership contest..."Mikael, my impression was that this isn't a political faction - it's just a discussion forum for those on the Labour Left. If, however, there are certain lines dictated by yourself that you expect everyone to follow, than I'm afraid that I'm going to have to excuse myself from this forum. Sorry.
26 May 2007 16:17
Mikael said...
That's right, again. I will change the word "line", in the post, to "guideline". The only "line", in this case, is that no Deputy Leadership contender should be promoted on any post. That is the only line. If you cannot stick to it, then yes, you will have to excuse. Having said that, I hope you understand that this is for everyone's benefit. If I am not wrong, you once defended Cruddas against some criticism on my part.
26 May 2007 16:57
Mikael said...
It should have said:The only "line", in this case, is that no Deputy Leadership contender should be promoted as the official candidate of the forum-members on any post .
26 May 2007 17:05
Owen said...
Mikael,I've got absolutely no interest in promoting any deputy leadership candidate. That's not actually what I was getting at. My point was that, if you're going to start imposing political lines and treating this as a political faction rather than a discussion forum, it's not actually going to work. There's a difference between a guideline (e.g. avoid abuse, stay comradely in debate etc), and an arbitrary political line from yourself that you expect everyone to follow - especially if you start editing people's posts. Furthermore, it sets a precedent where you will, presumably, continue to issue other lines on other questions.But anyway, in the most comradely manner possible, I won't now be taking part in this forum so please do remove my email address.
26 May 2007 17:14
Mikael said...
Strange decision, Owen. It discussed with other members of the forum who agreed that it would be best not to discuss the leadership election to any greater length - this doesn't mean that it cannot be discussed at all; simply that it shouldn't be THE topic, whixh it seems to have become on other "Labour Left" blogs. The idea was to discuss policy, strategy, programme etc.As I said, I changed the title. It wasn't decision that I took lightly, but since it appeared at the top of the page, I did want it to sound more conciliatory. Wrong, perhaps, but Grim was free to change it back. She didn't (really) do so, if she had well, frankly, that would have been fine. If you go back to the comment you will see that I asked her for permission."My point was that, if you're going to start imposing political lines and treating this as a political faction rather than a discussion forum, it's not actually going to work."I wouldn't call it a "line" as such, simply, it was a way to make sure that the debate wasn't overtaken by the Deputy Leadership contest, which is what has happened in other blogs. " Furthermore, it sets a precedent where you will, presumably, continue to issue other lines on other questions."Sorry, Owen, but that's sort of an extreme suggestion. Honestly, I think it's deliberately provocative and quite insulting. Given that you have requested to leave the forum, fine, I will delete your account. I hope you will come back at a later stage.
26 May 2007 17:26
Curlew said...
This is why I had hoped that we could have a LRC members only site. We can only freely criticise each other/contenders etc etc if it is a closed forum. Otherwise we are seen as "there's the left bickering amongst each other" yet again.It would be fantastic if we could all follow John MCDonnell's example and keep it to POLICY and not mention personalities.Sometimes the paranoid in me thinks people infiltrate to upset the applecart - but I guess it is just human nature ;-)Owen come back - the struggle for the left is more important than this issue.
26 May 2007 17:31
Mikael said...
Curlew,There is a possiblity of restricting the "forum" to its members which I briefly contemplated before setting it up. I would personally be against it, since that would prevent it from growing. To a certain extent, that is already with the "no anonymous comments" option, which is active on this forum."Otherwise we are seen as "there's the left bickering amongst each other" yet again."That is why I would prefer to "stay out" of the Deputy Leadership contest. As you know, Labour Rightists are rubbing their hands as we speak due to the amount of ink wasted by good Labour Left comrades slagging of Cruddas - for whom I have no particular sympathy.What do you think? Should I restrict this forum to members only? My "gut feeling" is that I ought not to.
26 May 2007 17:40
Curlew said...
I'd like to keep it open too, but we must remember that the opposition are watching all the time and we don't want to provide them with bullets.Net Nanny :-) (aka Curlew)
26 May 2007 17:57
Mikael said...
:-) I'll ask Duncan, without whose encouragements I couldn't have set up the forum to begin with, for his opinion.Until then, I'll leave it open, but restricted to those possessing a "google account" - that should limit the damage, for a while. :-)Comradely,Mikael
26 May 2007 18:03
marshajane said...
Hi all just to add my tuppenth worth.I don't think you should have changed the title of susans blog - this is a discussion blog with a variety if different contributors and opinions.Perhaps add a disclaimer @ the top of the page saying LLF is a number of individuals with differing views.Were not a faction to be endorsing DL candidates but that doesn't stop us posting with headlines like - y I'm not backing cruddas or y I'm backing benn - it starts off discussion.Also I don't think we should be members only - we should air our differences comradly in public - yes some may say oh the left bickering again. But that's not what it is its a discussion and we are all individuals with different views.(That's what makes us different from the careerist toe the line right wingers)I think if this LLF is to grow we shouldn't have any restrictions on what we post or that any one person should have editorial control over contributors (unless its to remove persona, uncomradely or abusive posts)RegardsMj
26 May 2007 18:51
Mikael said...
Hey Marsha,I agree - this is an open Labour Left forum - and I regret Owen's decision. I tried to disuade not once, but twice. I don't think that my editing of Susan's title was reason enough to leave and I sincerely hope he comes back. As far as Susan's post is concerned, I would have changed it back to normal if she had asked me to. She did not - in fact, the very same post appears on her own blog with another title altogether - "The Cruddas Question". If you ask me, it is the best of the 4 titles that the entry in question has had during these last 12 hours. The Cruddas issue was beginning to "grind my beans", so to speak, and I didn't want to be bombarded by a myriad of comments from "soft-Left"-types, claiming that the entries, let alone the debate, was uncomradely - I hope you see what I mean. Of course, I know - and you know, and Owen knows - that no-one intends to be deliberately uncomradely; I was simply trying to remove a title which could have been decried as uncomradely by others. Unfortunately, though it was in no way my intention, my action was seen as "uncomradely" (though not by susan, apparently) and that is what I regret the most. The present title will stand however - again, in light of the fact that Susan hasn't complained.The forum will be kept open, come what may - for the moment, I hope that's final.
26 May 2007 19:04


UPDATE from grayee: the whole post has now been "deleted" (or should I say vapourised?) from the Labour Left blog.


"Day by day and almost minute by minute the past was brought up to date. In this way every prediction made by the Party could be shown by documentary evidence to have been correct; nor was any item of news, or any expression of opinion, which conflicted with the needs of the moment, ever allowed to remain on record. All history was a palimpsest, scraped clean and reinscribed exactly as often as was necessary."

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

John Gray said...
so Less than 48 hours after the formation of a new hard left blog -“Labour Left Forum” they have already had their first split! The “Editor” censured a post title by a member over the Labour Party deputy leadership contest. A new member quite rightly objected to this and it ended up with him leaving the forum. He didn't follow the "line".

Good luck comrades!

My reply:

Ah, John Gray, that's precisely why I removed the title - It could have been misconstrued. Had I not removed it, you would no doubt have complained about the "Hard Left" ranting against Cruddas.

Comradely,

Mikael

P.S. By the way, your post has been from the deleted from the "LLF" in accordance with the "general posting guidelines" involving Agents-Provocateurs of the Labour Right.

John Gray said...

And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed—if all records told the same tale—then the lie passed into history and became truth. 'Who controls the past' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.'"
- George Orwell, 1984, Book 1, Chapter

Anonymous said...

Given Brown manoeuvres last week and the fact that the "our history" section of the Labour Party website has been removed, I would be careful with what I quoted if I were you, Gray.

John Gray said...

Hi Mikael

Not really sure what you are going on about? Anyway, why are you scared of my posting comments on Labour Left Forum? Only a very few sado’s such as myself are actually going to look at “Labour Left Forum”, never mind post anything?

Don’t you see something really interesting about the “left” reaction to dissent? Come on, you where bang out of order with “Owen” (good Welsh name) “deliberately provocative and quite insulting”. See my view on all this stuff on http://grayee.blogspot.com/2007/05/leadership-elections-treachery-forgery.html

BTW – are you a public school boy since you refer to me by my surname?

Anonymous said...

If you must know, Gray, yes I am, old boy. A problem, is it? It wouldn't have been my choice, but you have to do with what you get, old chap.

Cheerio, Gray!

John Gray said...

Hi Mikael
So looking at your blog I am now a nasty "proto NF fascist", a "renegade" as well as a "Liberal infiltrator"?

Oh well, never mind. Nice to know we are now in the same Party. I am sure that you will convince many to share your views. Not….

p.s what public school did you go to then?

John Gray said...

so public school boy, you have just deleted everying and pretended it never happened!

Mikael - this is just pathetic, why do people such as you have such a problem with cocking things up? No wonder the middle classes sleep comfortably in their beds.

* please note that Mikael has now deleted all the posts critising him and the site for being bonkers! I wish that we on the centre left of the Labour Party had a proper oppostion apart from the Blairites.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, Gray - thanks for that.

At least you didn't have to leave through the death and agony of going to French-speaking Public schools - trust me, I could have done without the beatings.

I can still re-post it, but it wasn't a good start. You know what, people can always link to you if they want the juicy details.

Anyhow, old boy, a small thing turned into a mountain of undesirable crap. I used to like posting on your blog, after all we agree on many things. I think you promote the right methods for fighting the BNP and I appreciate your stress on the importance of Trade Unionism.

I altered the title of the post to avoid squabbling - there had already been discussion over the Cruddas "issue" along other comment boxes on the blog. Was it a mistake? I don't think so, but, hey, nobody is perfect!

My dear Gray, a comradely good night,

Mikael

Anonymous said...

I went to a French-speaking Public school (there known as "private schools") in Paris.

Good evening, Gray.

Anonymous said...

I posted another which you haven't allowed through, I see!

Well, well, well, Gray!

John Gray said...

think that I have allowed everything?

On the Labour Left Forum comments you infer you were beaten up at your public school.

If true them then I am sorry about this. However, the average working class student has to deal with violence in and out of school. Without the privileges of a public school education.

Middle class revolutionaries who think they are some sort of cadre –well, I use to think that the answer to this question is - come the day of the revolution boyo - you know who we will have in our iron sights.

But now I think it is rather silly

Anonymous said...

Thank you, Gray. I appreciate your sympathy and trust it's genuine.

I was beaten up, but not more than I could take.

I briefly went to working-class school in an are of Paris - for that is where I grew up - commonly dismissed as "a white-trash ghetto" . School there was, quite frankly, far worse than the Public school I later attended. Things looked up though!

Of course, vast privileges come with a Public school education, but that doesn't make up for tough days, eh?

Anyhow, we'll argue more later.

Comradely,
Mikael

P.S . Yes, you have allowed everything through - I spoke too soon!