Paul Robeson

Paul Robeson, a hero in the valleys, an ardent socialist and campaigner against injustice. Singing the welsh national anthem (in english).

Riots to Reform.. The evolution of organised Labour

In 1910 one of the most fierst riots took place at Tonypandy in the South Wales Coalfield....

The miners of the Cambrian Combine took to the streets following a bitter dispute with the pit owners. Violence ensued and the striking miners fough for a living wage against the owners. The situation soon escalated and the South Wales Miners Federation urged a strike of up to 12,000 miners employed by the combine to support them. As the riots developed, the owners found solace in a certain Winston Churchill, soon to be war hero. Churchill with his well known skill for leadership, sent in army infantry to the area, along with hundreds of metropolitan police soldiers to crush the miners in their tracks.

The result, a paltry wage increase, a strong mark in the local phsyche, still felt by many, and determination to organise and change society.

1984, during the last conservative government. South Wales agian found itself at the brunt end of the rugged individualism found in thatcher's economics. This time however, the troops were not needed. Slash and Burn to the NCB and the south wales coalfield led to community destruction. Miners were put against miners. The struggle that lasted a year took its toll on these communities, whose solidarity was never questionable. "There is no society." she proclaimed. And her attack on South Wales went along way to making her farcical idea a reality. However the miners and their families, their communities and their neighbours were more together than ever. Food organisations, strike committees, Choirs and Rugby Teams; all helped eachother in the finest principles of organised labour.

So what does all this mean for us today? well, as we listen to the various views in this leadership contest, we must ask ourselves 'were are we taking society next?'. Labour values, trade unions, organised for better wages, an NHS, freedom from the fear of poverty and despair. yet we canot let the wheels of our movement grind to a slow walk.

Who is going to take us further, bring in new ideas, solve the modern problems that we have in society?

While reading about David Miliband making a speech at the Keir Hardie lecture in Aberdare, i couldnt help but cast a thought back to the struggles our communities have previously fought. Will we need to fight the same battles? its very unlikely, but that doesnt mean we shouldnt take the values from what those who have gone before us used in their own troubling times. Our world is not perfect, our problems will grow under the ConDem cuts, and we will dountless feel the pain of the global recession. 


After a labour government of 13 years, now is our chance to look back, take stock, rethink, revise and revolutionise our party. The way forward is in real redistributive policies that protect and promote equality in our society.


Can we find the answer in any of the Labour leadership candidates?


discuss..............

"Another success for Cardiff Labour Students!"

- Huw Lewis AM on our new blog!

Newport Does It Again.....!

What is it about this city that produces such quality comedy rap...?




Interesting to reflect on why we in Wales love to parody ourselves. We are not, after all, a serious people, but rather talk about the day to day things with a bit of humour.


For another, not so politically correct, insight into another of Wales' great cities, go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zGmJ8wpw9Q.(not responsible for the questionable content!)


On a more political note, interesting article by Tomos Livingstone of the Western Mail today here.


The case for a yes vote in the referendum must be properly explained if it is to be won. Wales, as a place with limited conservative support, must be able to properly carve its own political destiny to reflect its dire needs. The LCO system is a major block to this.


"A “yes” vote in next year’s referendum on strengthening the Assembly’s powers would be a first step to addressing this – and the need for citizens to be able to understand what’s going on in their name is an argument that could do with a more frequent airing."


As a politics student its hard to understand what is devolved, it must be made simpler for true accountability.


Food for thought,
Josh

Labour's Scarlet Future - The case for Andy Burnham...

This may come as a surprise to you but... the more this leadership contest develops, the more I find myself thinking Andy may be our man.
Why you ask? Why should Andy take Labour into the future and not one of the other sterling candidates.


Well for me there's many reasons.


Im yet to decide 100% who im going to vote for, but this is my opinion at the moment....


Andy Burnham talks of 'aspirational socialism'. Now, i know the S word can be taken 2 ways in this situation. Firstly, the new labour lot will see it as an anchor from the bad old days of unelectable labour. Secondly, the real socialist will decry Burnham's involvement in new labourite governance and see it as merely rhetoric. 


But, and its a big one, I think there's more to Andy's use of the S word than meets the eye. One of the fundamental things in any "progressive" (current chateratti buzzword) ideology is the need for wholesale change and socialism/social democracy is not exempt for this. We believe that society is flawed and by changing it fundamentally we can create a better place.

Brotherly rule?

David Miliband, the front runner, Brains, or the other leadership candidate that looks like something out of captain scarlet, presides over the Tony Blair mantra of labour party politics. Granted he has more ideological zeal, but is he really going to change society? He can face up to cameron, but he won't fix our problems (even if he does have by far the most campaign funds....suspect?).


Ed Miliband, on the contrary is the flipside of the miliband pound coin. He has the ideas; living wage, women shortlists etc etc but when it comes to oratory he leaves a lot to be desired and i cant help thinking that although both brothers are comp educated, they are far too intellectual for us everyday people.






This brings us to Balls, what can i say, Brown's pugnacious lovechild. I would have rather seen his wife run, but there we are. I cant help but find his motives dubious.


Abbot then, idealist in the true sense, but couldnt communicate her ideas to anyone. in fact, in a radio 4 interview today she was quizzed about private education (hypocrisy galore) and said nothing, literally, for 2 minutes. Not much of a leader.


So back to Burnham, why does he persuade me he can do things all the others cant?


He has the ideas, national care service, decentralisation from London, fundamental reform of the postcode lottery society, re-purchase of council houses. He has the oratory capability, and the rhetoric. He can bring our party out of the new labour era, and in to a new stage of labour politics, where we are no longer about Blair or Brown, or David or Ed, or backroom briefings and spin. But instead about standing up for working class families across the country on the issues that matter to them . He can lead us on a new path, create a labour thats not old or new, but encompasses the best of both.

Labour's Scarlet Future

This is why I think i'll be voting for Andy.


....But I could still be swayed!


Various links:
http://andy4leader.com/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jul/01/andy-burnham-labour-leadership-socialist-values
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/audio/2010/jul/14/politics-weekly-podcast-andy-burnham
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jul/14/labour-factionalism-self-indulgence-burnham


Happy reading


Josh

Whenever I feel disillusioned-

Katie

 I ask for your assistance as we seek to do our duty here. I say to this Assembly and to the people that I am not the boss – they, the people, are the boss.

- Rhodri Morgan

Yeah I Must Be A Fickle Person...

I have just watched Mandelson's interview on Sky News and have changed my mind about his book and also of his reasonings behind it. I still think he should have waited longer before releasing it, but as they have many times in the past, my opinions of him have changed.

Lord Mandelson is an excellent speaker, his ability to provide substantial arguments to win round an audience or interviewer is a very important talent in the realms of politics. What he has done in order to revive the party from the 1980s rut, along with Blair, Brown and several other leaders (as well as people behind the scenes), has kept the party relevant and though it has faced unpopularity, we owe a lot to New Labour, even though many profess to despise it and its baggage, without it, I'm not sure where we would be today. I think that we need to step away from its rhetoric now, but I still feel that many members of the Party are often blase about Blair, Brown and Mandelson's New Labour and what we have achieved as a political party because of it.

I plan to read Mandelson's book with an open mind, and hope that the media hype (which I admit I was a victim to) is pure exaggeration. I also recommend you watch the interview. Even if it is on Sky News...


PS Can I just say YCH A FI to Cameron and Obama's 'friendship'. Shame on you Barack.

Katie

Mandelson's New Book

I'm disappointed that Peter Mandelson has released his 'memoirs' so soon after the general election, when Labour needs to regain public trust, and of course, public image. I haven't read it yet, and I always think that you don't have the grounds to fully criticise something if you haven't read/watched/experienced it. It's easy to judge it negatively when extracts on Blair and Brown have been published across the mainstream media, representing them in a less than perfect light.


One good thing which could come from Mandy's book is that the public will see a more 'human' side to the past leaders, which is hard to find in Cameron and Clegg. But I think the book's release just confirms what many had already thought about the politician who has been given so many chances in the Party; that his main priorities appear to be himself, his image, and his money.

Katie

Not So Handy Mandy....

So.... Mandy is set to release his book today...what does this mean for us?


mandy's book is about to rip up all political 'respect' that might exist between these new labour cronies and expose what we all knew to be true already...the Blair Brown saga.


What can we learn from all this?


Firstly, that the current labour leadership must be about sensible politicians. not a blair brown pissing contest, or any other feuding. But about real policies, real politicians and a real way forward.


Secondly that infighting, something so common on the left worldwide (see Italy for a fine example), is futile. The labour movement is just that, a movement. you can be an ardent socialist, a social democrat, anarcho-syndicalist, or even all of the above and fit in our movement. why is that? because we are about progressing society on to a better place, protecting the vulnerable and promoting equality.


Finally Mandy's book shows how the new labour style of politics with its westminster chateratti and briefing against fellow ministers, is gone. I would rather see the 5 currentleader candidates work together in cabinet, share their view, than fight tooth and nail against each other.


Any good from this?


MANDY's GONE!


and the book is at the right time, before the leadership decisions are made, and before any election. 


well done mandy, hope your book sales are good and your pockets well lined.


Ciao


Josh

Democracy is not just voting every 5 years and watching Big Brother in between and wondering why nothing happens. Democracy is what we do and say; where we live and work.

— Tony Benn

Party Political Paradox

“A Hung Parliament will not be a dream for the Lib Dems. It will be a nightmare”.

Some former Labour minister trying to play mischief by highlighting the divisions that persevere through the fragile coaltion agreement? Wrong. How about one of the right wing rags that bayed for Cameron’s blood even before the coalition and now see the coalition as a betrayal of conservative values? Nope, not that either.

It is however Paddy Ashdown, the de facto ‘conscience’ of the Liberal Democrats and for all intents and purposes, political sensei of the 57 MP’s and countless bearded, sandle-wearing members of the ‘other party’, not so long ago regarded as joke and now a ‘respected’ party of government. But Paddy Ashdown, it must be said, had acquirred the political foresight normally only afforded by the print press to economic ‘guru’ Vince Cable, he who predicted the global recession, America’s inevitable decline and probably Britain finishing last in Eurovision (though the latter prediction should ensure I become Chief Secretary to the Treasury or at least the coveted Duchy of Lancaster).

But Ashdown was, and is, right. A Hung Parliament and subsequently the coalition produces the ultimate paradox for the Lib Dems. As soon as they get their hands close to power in the immediate term, the long term prospect for the Lib Dems (which must be to eventually replace the Labour Party as the party of the centre left) slip away, like a human hand trying to catch a naked flame, or any middle aged male trying to keep control of those rubber, water snake toys available from all reputable gift shops west of Norwich. To reject power would condemn Lib Dems to ridicule for a political eternity (two decades?) as a merely a pressure group, not mature enough to take decisions and bare the consequences. Any hope of PR would be crushed by the lib dems inability to form a coalition, something necessary in all elections with a PR system. But to hop into bed with the Tories? The party of privelege, s.28, Norman Tebbit and Phil Collins? Unthinkable. And it gives the Labour Party possily unlimited ammunition for their PEB’s for next five years, “Vote Clegg, Get Cameron”. The echoing, war-drumming of this mantra will be almost impossible to surmont and will ensure a very good proportion of the ‘pissed off’ centre-left will make the spiritual journey back to Labour.

Is there anyway the Lib Dems can make this work for them? The Lib Dem need to carve out a separate identity seems to be the only hope for them. But as always, the Lib Dems need to satisfy all of the people all of the time and have it all their way. Soon to be crowned deputy leader Simon Hughes idea of shadowing the Goverment stil highlights the Lib Dems inability to take responsibility for their actions. They cannot be in government and opposition at the same time. The even more ludicrous fudge over nuclear power (no public money being used to help build but private money should be used) will likely result in lax enviromental standards with no accountability to the public, again just to satisfy the lib dems inability to take tough decisions. Changing your whole economic policy (cutting this year) is an easy step to make but obviously public money for nuclear power is just a step too far.

And if the Lib Dems think their policy of abstaining on difficult decision like increasing top up fees will stop them alienating their supporters then they, not Ed Milliband, must be the ellusive ‘Emissary from the Planet F*ck’. The policy of ‘abstain for change’ really doesn’t sound as catchy as vote for change? In addition to the fact that all senior Lib Dems signed an NUS pledge to vote against ANY proposal to increase top up fees.

The emergence of the third party as a party of Government does grant the lib dems the allure of ministerial office, and all the privelege that goes with it. But is the real paradox, that at the moment the two party system seemed destined to be dismantled, the third party’s inability to take responsibility, will prolong the endurance of the duopoly of British Politics? Well take at look at them noooow…..

By Dominic

Lights, Camera .... Cut!

So as we waited with baited breath for the unveiling of the most blood curdling tale of our times since Nosferatu, our very own Bram Stoker, Mr Gideon Osbourne allows us to feast on his first budget.

Sadly this government was exposed to sunlight by their own minister Bob ‘Renfield’ Neil who in a moment of madness revealed ‘Those in the greatest need, ultimately bear the burden of paying off the debt’ and drove a stake through the heart of the government’s so called ‘compassionate conservatism’.

Though we would be naive to say this is the first shred of evidence that prooves this new Goverment merely plays lip service to the needs of our most vulnerable. The cutting of the Future Jobs Fund, the abolotion of the child trust fund, the proposed taxing and limiting of child benefits, the scaling back of tax credits, the increase of VAT, the maintaining of the NI rise for employees have already prooven the bloodthirsty nature of this coalition of the un-living. Just to add the extra bite the cutting of the free school meals for under-priveleged children is just the piece de resitance of this invasion of the food snatchers. But still the hollow screams ring out ‘We’re all in this together’ (What I said to myself whilst watching the ill-fated Mel Brooks, Dracula Dead and Loving it).

But back in the world in the world of the living, just how long can the Lib Dems subscribe to these measures? When these pain-inducing cuts start to bite and sap the life-blood out of the economy how can these so called ‘progressives’ look at themselves in the mirror? Sadly, like Nosferatu, they may see nothing at all.

By Dominic

The Future of the Labour Party...?

Last week was an important one for me.... Meeting David Miliband opened my eyes to the labour leadership contest in a way I would have never expected. In the Labour Party many strive to make a difference, and as a broad church party this is sometimes difficult. Different opinions and views held against each other can sometimes separate us, but it is this which makes the Labour movement diverse.


My question to David Miliband at an old style town hall meeting was simple; 'Andy Burnham talks of 'aspirational socialism', do you think theres a future for socialism in the Labour Party?


The answer......


Well he is a politician after all, and I knew the question was provocative. The answer was a dance around the question, I would like to agree with you, thanks for the questions but no, kind of answer. Socialist values, socialist principles etc etc.


For me the problem with the leadership is this. The Labour movement is one that seeks to fundamentally change society, to make all barriers non-existent, to make the post code lottery of birth irrelevant. So that I can walk comfortably through life, from cradle to grave, without having to face exploitation and struggle against other forces.


Has the Labour party become about managing the state and not changing it? herein lies the problem.


Heres an interesting take from Burnham: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jul/01/andy-burnham-labour-leadership-socialist-values


Living Wage by Ed M: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7138527.ece


So my opinion of David Miliband? Good politician.... uninspiring answers!


Who should we vote for?


Yet to decide, but the one who proposes real societal change will get my vote.

Josh

The UK General Election. A (delayed) point of view.

This general election was hugely important to me. It was the first general election that I could participate in by voting (I’m 20 years old), though I have voted in the Welsh local election of 2008 and the European Parliamentary Election also. But this election was different. I became politically active towards the end of 2008, not long after I had started university and joined a political student group. My political alliances have strengthened since, and from campaigning for Julie Morgan, the former MP for Cardiff North since September 2009, I became quite attached to the idea of Labour winning the general election from working with such a dedicated MP. 

People always say that politicians are all the same, that they earn too much money and don’t care about people. Well that’s the message I’ve often received when knocking on doors and telephoning people. However, when we’d ask people about their MP Julie, the overwhelming majority of her constituents would say how much she has done for them, and how much respect they have for her. I find that most of the politicians I have met don’t actually live up to the ‘uncaring and money-grabbing’ careerist image that the media often declare. This, along with my strong socialist values, and pride of what the Labour Party has done for not only myself but for the country (hate to sound all national pride-like) has led to my strong attachment for the party.

Myself and a few others from the Cardiff Labour Students society stayed up till around 7:30am the night of the general election. It didn’t start off too well when we saw the swings to the Conservative Party, but at least the first few announcements were Labour holds. The night progressed and the mood saddened for us, seeing so many losses was depressing and also disheartening. When we saw that Julie had lost her seat by a margin of 194, the atmosphere was awful. I had this huge sense of anger after all the campaigning we had done, and the amount of support we had received from constituents. Why did people vote for the opposition candidate who had hardly campaigned and appeared to assume he had it in the bag? It’s still hard to think of now, but after going to sleep at 7:30 then waking up a few hours later to see the headline of BBC News- ‘Cameron trying to form a government’ was very depressing. Friday, May the 7th was a horrible day.

How do I feel about this new Cameron/Clegg love in? Weird. I can’t watch them for long, the smarmy and smug press conference in the garden of number 10 was unwatchable for me. Brown’s resignation was difficult to accept (I’ve met him briefly a few times and have huge respect for him), but seeing these conflicting party leaders on what I can only call the ‘Nick and Dave Show’ really made me angry. Nick Clegg’s wonderful quote in 2008- “Will I ever join with the Conservative party? No. I refuse to be merely an annex of another government.” - is all too fresh, and the hypocrisy of the new cabinet makes it difficult for me to take it seriously. An equalities minister who voted against most gay rights? 23 millionaires out of 30 ministers? Only 4 women? I could go on. It feels like we have gone back in time. After all that Labour did for Britain (yes I know there were mistakes, I don’t agree on many things they have done) how have we ended up with this?

When people thought the Liberal Democrat Party were some sort of saviours after the Leaders Debates I knew they were wrong. I’m obviously very biased, I know that. The Lib Dems are the dirtiest campaigners in my experience. On average, they had the highest expenses, but due to their silence on the subject, people thought they were the angels of the scandal. Their campaign literature is often shockingly inaccurate. They attempted to ‘steal’ Labour votes in Cardiff North by telling people it was a race between them and the Conservatives, that they were the only ones who could keep the Tories out. It was actually between Labour and the Conservatives, the Lib Dems had no chance. They’ve also used similar tactics in my home constituency of Pontypridd. Although the Labour Candidate Owen Smith lived in Surrey, he promised to move to Ponty if he got elected. The Lib Dems jumped on this. They also wasted space childishly saying about Kim Howells ‘drinking tea in his big house’. Umm what has that got to do with how good a politician he was? He was an excellent MP and minister. All of these tactics allowed me the common sense to know that they would form a coalition with the Conservatives if there was no clear winner. And they did. And now? They have compromised on many important issues, e.g. the economy, university tuition fees, and electoral reform, amongst many other issues. I wonder how long it will last. 

Opposition is probably good for Labour right now. We can create a new, fresher image with a new leader and hopefully, a stronger sense of support if the new membership numbers are anything to go by. But I do worry about what will happen as a result of these major cuts. I graduate next year, and the future is not exactly bright. Hmm we shall see.

Katie Murdoch

The First Cut is the Deepest

Police numbers, Housing Benefits, Unemployment benefits, Disability Allowance, Free School Meals, Child Trust Funds, Child Tax credits are all, it could be argued 'frontline services' but the cutting of the 'Building Schools for Future' Programme (despite the shoddy grammar) destroys any veneer that front-line services are going to escape the cuts. But lets be generous to Education Secretary Michael Gove and say this is the first time the coalition has cut frontline services, after all 'Micky' Gove has had a bad week. After misleading nearly 30 schools that they're building programmes would not be halted after handing in his report late, these schools were subsequently informed by the Government to 'See me after class' and informed of the halting of their BSF programmes.

Indeed the week just went from bad to worse after playground bully Tom Watson MP called Micky Gove a 'miserble pipsqeak' in class. Luckily good old Mr Bercow stepped in to prevent a fight breaking out. But still this wasn't Micky's week. In Maths class later Mr Gove was again embarrassed when he got his numbers in a twist. He found out that the plan to save 1 billion pound by scrapping the BSF plan wasn't nearly enough to add up for the £39 billion it is expected to cost the construction industry, let alone the £2 billion in compensation. Oh how he feared the public would react at the PTA meeting. Some even joked that Micky could be expelled from the Government but alas this was just playground 'tittle-tattle'. And with poor old Micky expected to explain his end of term results before the Parliamentary recess it looks like its back to the chalk board for Micky Gove.

And its not just young Master Gove having a problem with schools. So is his best chum Dave Cameron who is "terrified" by the prospect of his children having to rub shoulders with some of those innner-city urchins. Dear me, he must think its like Oliver Twist. But for the life of me I can't figure out why Dave and his chums just don't start up one of those free schools for their children. They could all learn about the fun parts of history like the withdrawing of free school milk, Section 28 or the Slave Trade. Oh it would be a riot of a class, we'd just need someone to keep an eye on any intra-class warfare.

Yes Dave and Mike do understand that there are some schools so shoddy that bird faeces are preventing leaks but you see all this money to repair these schools could just be used to make brand new 'free' schools. But, so sorry to interrupt Sir, how is a school 'free' when it's being funded by the taxpayer? No, no, no young child if we spent money on your existing schools where would all these pushy Middle Class parents put their children? In the inner cities? And really whats the point in rebuilding a comprehensive school thats already burnt to the ground?. All in all their just another brick in the wall.

By Dominic Turner

On yer bike..

Seldom has macro-economic and monetary policy been more divisive or interesting. From 1997 to 2007 New Labour adhered to the basic orthodoxies of Thatcherism. Keeping inflation low is paramount. The need to cut was not there because of a seemingly ever-growing economy, so the cruelest excessives of Thatcherism were largely avoided.

But economics ‘got interesting’ with the collapse of AIG and Lehman Brothers. Every one from Carol Vordeman to Barry Chuckle had an opinion on the Sub-prime mortgage crisis Fiscal and Monetary Stimulus were the new economic school of thought. John Maynard Keynes was the new Friedrich Hayek, von Mises and Milton Friedman rolled into into one (okay I promise I will stop soon). Even America accepted the need for a more keynesian approach encorporating the largest stimulus package of all developed countries. The irony is that since then, the USA, the country which prides itself on economic liberalism and fiscal conservatism, now appears isolated in the world in its support for an interventionist economic policy whilst the so called progressives here in Europe are beginning to wage slash and burn austerity policies that will make Russell Brand’s latest summer film appear to be a valhalla of escapism .

‘Public Service Announcement’ does not pretend to possess the powers of economic foresight that Vince Cable has recently been dispossesed of (though we certainly are pretentious enough to refer ourselves in the third person). But when Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman warns that austerity measures in Europe will lead to a ‘third depression’ and former Bank of England policy maker Danny Blanchflower says ‘draconian cuts’ will plunge Britain into a ‘double dip recession’, I listen (and change what person i’m referring to this blog in).

Just this week ‘The Guardian’ revelaed leaked government statistics that project the coalition government’s budget will cost 1.3 million jobs (200,000 a year) over the Parliament and an amazing 700,000 of these in the private sector! The much promised private sector recovery still waiting in the wings longer than young adults of my age have waited for Toy Story 3 to succeed Toy Story 2 ( it took 11 years!!). This promise of a magical private sector recovery (aided by Professor Dumbledore’s School of Witchcraft and Monetary policy) does not add up. Unlike the thinkings or Richard Littlejohn and Melanie Phillips, the private and public sectors are not two simplistic divergent universes, where one is productive and efficient and the other is full of bureaucrats, occuping non-jobs and organizing post it notes and paper clips. The private sector needs a strong public sector to safeguard the recovery of the economy as a whole, to gain contracts from the state and to ensure that those who jobs in the public sector survive the bloodbath of ‘efficiency savings’ have enough capital and purchasing power to keep growth in the private sector and put money back into the economy.

The humblest student of economics knows, without having to delve into the nuances of theory, that rising unemployment will lower our productivity, lower our output and at the same time increase the welfare bill and thus increase the swelling deficit (which is the non-sensical reason for these swingeing cuts). It is not merely because of a social conscience we must oppose so much potential being thrown onto the scrap-heap of society, but also from a economic sense, that unemployment is not ‘a price worth paying.’

By Dominic Turner

Welcome to our new blog.

This is the brand new blog of the Cardiff University Labour Students Society.

The blog will be used regularly to keep you up-to-date on what the club is doing, and will communicate our campaigns; future, past and present.

Keep following the blog to hear more from our members!

Katie