The @LordWalney Review on "political violence and disruption" is a manifesto for a police state.
If implemented, it would turn the UK - already an outlier in limiting protest - into something more like an 'illiberal democracy', to use Orbán's phrase.
A few highlights 🧵 👇
Let's extend use of police spies and surveillance to invade the lives of anyone we think might "cause disruption" on protests.
Organising a protest on your local high street without jumping through the hoops to get permission from the police? Prepare to be sued by all the shops there, if they can show you've caused them to have less footfall.
Give police powers to ban processions - not just direct action but marches - they think will "result in intimidation" or "cause serious disruption".
If you're one of the masses of people who have peacefully walked around London with a Palestine flag, this one is aimed at you.
Think there isn't enough police violence at protests?
Well now you're in luck, because soon they could have powers to ban face masks on any demo they don't like. Enforcing that will require, well, a lot of force.
"Interpreting the law on encouraging terrorism broadly" - always a reassuring phrase.
So if you use a chant on a protest, or like a social media post, you could now expect to be prosecuted as a literal terrorist.
And just in case none of this is enough to put you off organising a protest, the police will now send you a gigantic invoice for their time.
Welcome to Britain, where you can get beaten up all day by cops and pay for the privilege.
Worried that juries might not give verdicts you like? Simple, abolish the jury system!
Pay-to-protest is clearly a theme of this report.
Should we listen to @XRebellionUK and @JustStop_Oil? They seem to be quite upset about the end of the world or something.
Nah, ban them. And anyone else who "causes serious disruption".
@XRebellionUK @JustStop_Oil There is plenty more in here to be scared of
It's just as well that Walney isn't really taken seriously. And that the Tories are out of time.
Another thing worth noting from yesterday's TUC demo is that it feels like the intense sectarianism of recent years is evaporating a bit. Almost all my interactions were positive, including people who've disagreed with me in recent years.
All, that is, except one interaction...
Walking up the demo, I find smiles and waves. Good chats with folk in Counterfire, @CPBritain & later Socialist Appeal - all of whom were v critical of left Remainism (and me!). After all I'm leafleting for Don't Pay, an unrelated campaign.
Then I see the Young Communist League.
Sod it, I think. I've offered everyone else on this demo a leaflet, I'm not a sectarian, why not leaflet them as well?
Approaching the bloc, I'm approached by a masked YCL steward who shouts at me to "fuck off". When I politely attempt to hand leaflets to people on his bloc...
Finally got round to reading The Starmer Project by @EagletonOliver this week. I'm glad someone has done the research, and a lot of it is interesting and useful. But, like @FisherAndrew79, it's not just that I disagree with the chapter on Brexit, it's that I'm left baffled by it.
Firstly, it barely mentions Another Europe is Possible. It manages to mention me (who?) on multiple occasions but doesn't explain *what I was doing*, which must be odd for the reader. Instead, it rolls up AEIP into PV, an organisation we existed to oppose/ be an alternative to.
Erasing the anti-Brexit left (and literally crediting our work mobilising motions to PV) is convenient if your job is to present Remain as essentially Blairite thing which Starmer latched onto, full stop. But believing that requires a huge leap of logic & doesn't match the facts.
Chile votes for the final time today. Looks like Boric is slightly ahead, but there are all kinds of things that could go wrong (supressed turnout, polls being off the mark, Parisi supporters being volatile - the PDG, his old party, just voted by a large margin to endorse Kast).
Predictions now are pointless. What I would say is that if the Chilean left wins today, it will be proving two things:
1. It is uncrushable. Here's a force that endured dictatorship, free market hegemony, the hollowing out of its base - but still manages to find a way through
2. Humans don't reconcile themselves easily to the pure logic of capitalism. Here's a society in which the profit motive is valorised and dominates basic services; where people are drilled in the values of neo liberalism in a way that almost no other country has been. But...
Yesterday I left the @Another_Europe office for the last time. It's been a hopeful, brutal, inspiring, demoralising, exciting five years.
I will always be grateful to the organisation, and to the fantastic people who set it up and still run it.
I could (and will) list our "achievements" - there are many, by the standards of an NGO annual report.
But the truth is we got beat, and all I can say with any degree of honesty is that we tried our best, shifted the terrain a bit, and that we don't yet know how this story ends.
The more I think about it, the more I think @Another_Europe is a very precious political space indeed
It unites a coalition that includes reformist socialists, social democrats, Trotskyists, Greens, anarchists, left liberals & more in a democratic, action focussed organisation
A brief guide to proscribing organisations from the Labour Party: who they are and how it works.
(I am a gigantic leftwing nerd and Trotspotter, but even I took a look at the list that Starmer wants to proscribe thought "hang on, who?")
The first thing to say is that there is no proper working list of proscribed organisations that the party has in a formal sense. That was a abolished in the 1970s and never reinstated.
It's more of a "make it up as you go along" process, like most of Labour's internal workings.
In the 1980s and 1990s, the NEC and conference proscribed Militant and Socialist Organsier. Neither of them exist any more, and organised socialists these days tend to be expelled under 2.1.4.b (below - which could arguably apply to supporting Greenpeace, Momentum or Progress)
For the Workers' Party of Britain to get 21.9% of the vote in their first byelection is a hell of a result, and something that the left should take a close look at.
Their stated aim is to "replace Labour as the party of the working class". It won't work, and here's why:
1. So far, it's the George Galloway show. Galloway has morphed into a classic figure of the Trump era: he looks ridiculous to "sensible" pundits, but comes across as insurgent and populist. We shouldn't be surprised he can still do well, and WPB has no success outside of him.
2. Labour replaced the Liberals with a claim to the future of the working class. The WPB's critique of Labour is, if anything, that it's too modern: too internationalist, liberal, pro-trans.
It's an attempt to excavate a caricature of industrial WCs of mid-20th Century Britain.