Kmflett's Blog

Purges of the left from Labour have a long history, but the right didn’t always win

Despite claims that Labour is a ‘broad church’ the Labour right has consistently sought since the 1930s to exclude the left from the Party. As Nye Bevan and Michael Foot proved, they weren’t always successful

After weeks of abstaining on key issues such as the SpyCops Bill Keir Starmer finally took some decisive action at the end of October. Unfortunately, but perhaps predictably, it did not mean fighting the Tories but rather sparking an internal war in the Labour Party.

Starmer suspended the immediate past leader Jeremy Corbyn because he disagreed with his response to the EHRC Report into anti-Semitism in the Labour Party, despite according to the BBC ,reassuring him the previous day that he planned not to. It remains to be seen where this ends up, but hopefully with the early reinstatement of Corbyn.

While only one other Labour leader has been suspended or expelled from the party, Ramsay Macdonald for joining a ‘National Government’ in 1931, in fact disciplinary action against those advocating policies to the left of what is usually a right-wing Labour leadership has been a consistent feature of the Party since the 1930s.

Nye Bevan and several other MPs were expelled in March 1939 for advocating a popular front against Hitler and working with the Communist Party and others. He was re-admitted in December 1939 after agreeing not to do this. However he remained a left-wing critic of the Government (when not a Minister himself) and came close to expulsion again on several occasions in the 1950s.

His biographer and successor to his Parliamentary seat in Ebbw Vale Michael Foot had the Labour Whip withdrawn by right-wing leader Hugh Gaitskell for voting against military spending estimates in 1961. It was not restored until Harold Wilson became leader in 1963.

More recently in 2003 George Galloway then the Labour MP for Glasgow Kelvin was booted out by Tony Blair for opposing the war in Iraq. Galloway subsequently became an MP for the short lived left of Labour party, Respect in 2005. Blair himself continues as a Labour Party member.

Labour has also moved against left-wing groupings within the Party. Organisations for youth and students have been a particular obsession. Most often the claim is they have fallen under control of those who prefer a politics of revolutionary change rather than social democratic reform. However true this may have been, the bottom line issues were that policies and actions were called for that were to the left of the right-wing leadership of the day.

The Militant was banned by Labour in 1982 along eventually with several Labour MPs. Even if we allow that it had a separate structure, again the real concern was that it promoted left-wing politics that in particular embarrassed the ex-left leader Neil Kinnock.

By contrast in the present day the Progress organisation, which has the support of numerous Labour MPs, has its own structure, a Director and is a registered company. It continues quite untroubled. After all it promotes the views of the Labour right.

A lot of activist energy and time has been expended over the decades in fighting various attempts by right-wing Labour leaderships to purge the left.

Sixty years ago Ralph Miliband opened his history of the Labour Party, Parliamentary Socialism, with the words that Labour had always been the most dogmatic of parties, not about socialist principles but about strict adherence to Parliamentary politics and procedures.

Jeremy Corbyn’s suspension has already restarted the debate about whether the left should stay in the Labour Party and fight the right, or leave and form a separate organisation.

It has has also rightly led to a strong campaign in his support.

Historically though the specific context has been key. When the left is strong in the Labour Party people join, as happened under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership. When it isn’t there are other left-wing parties and campaigns and social movements, Black Lives Matter and Extinction Rebellion in the present day for example.

The police Special Demonstration Squad (SDS)was formed after the 1968 protests against the Vietnam War.

Over an extended period it monitored (and worse) legitimate democratic activities of left-wing and protest groups often by covertly infilitrating them.

It was disbanded in 2008 and in 2015 then Home Secretary Theresa May announced an investigation. 5 years later the inquiry has begun to hear witnesses this week.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Demonstration_Squad

One early witness, retired officer Ernest Tate was asked how the SDS got its name. He appeared unaware of the official name but said it was known in the police as the ‘Hairies’ as undercover officers grew their hair and beards to apparently fit in better with the appearance of protesters.

Certainly appearing clean shaven and wearing a suit and tie at a protest meeting might have aroused interest but conversely it also reflects the pogonophobic nature of the police 50 years ago.

Indeed a SpyCop questioned at the Inquiry on 13th November as to why he had quit The Hairies responded:

HN326: I was fed up of the long hair and long beard. It was a strain. Until you’ve done the job you don’t know.*

He might however have had his reasons. Undercover as a protester at the anti-Vietnam War protest in Grosvenor Square in 1968 he was truncheoned by the Met Police because he had long hair and a beard:

Asked why the police had gone for him, he said: “It’s just the fact you’ve got long hair and a beard that they wallop you, you know. It’s 50 years ago, this is what they were doing. It’s a different attitude to things. Goodness”

Another SpyCop he has noted that he grew a beard, on this occasion to infiltrate the Hammersmith and Fulham branch of the International Socialist between 1971 and 1973

SpyCop HN343 ‘John Clinton’ statement read 19^th November

55. I would describe my appearance before I joined the SDS as neat and tidy. During my time in the back office before I was deployed I grew my hair and a bushy beard. Instead of wearing a suit, when I was deployed I donned ‘comradely attire’— flares, an army surplus jacket, and an old pair of boots.

In 2020 there are plenty of police officers with beards who are most definitely not involved in covert operations.

• thanks to Laurence Cox for the reference

Beard Liberation Front

13th November

contact Keith Flett 07803 167266

The Beard Liberation Front, the informal network of beard wearers, has said that veteran golf commentator Peter Alliss is set to join the Beard of the Year longlist when it is announced on Monday.

Alliss is a veteran pogonophobe claiming as recently as the 147th British Open Championship in 2018 that the increasing number of golfers with beards was due to the use of garden fertiliser.

However Alliss has now repented and come out with a beard as part of the BBC’s commentary team on the current US Masters golf..

BLF Organiser Keith Flett said, it has taken a while but we are pleased that at last Peter Alliss has embraced facial hair. His appearance on the Beard of the Year longlist is likely.

The Beard Liberation Front, the informal network of beard wearers, has said that Lee Cain, an advisor to Boris Johnson, may have been forced to resign because he was found to be growing a beard.

Johnson presides over a clean shaven Cabinet and has never had a beard himself suggesting that he may have pogonophobic tendencies.

While Dominic Cummings sometimes appears unshaven, he has been banned for life from the Beard Liberation Front, and given his legendary hypocrisy may well have been involved in the ousting of Cain.

BLF Organiser Keith Flett said, we are firmly opposed to prejudice against beard wearers even in Boris Johnson’s private office itself.

London Socialist Historians Group

Media Release

11^th November

Contact Dr Keith Flett 07803 167266

Socialist Historians slam continued Tory ‘culture wars’ attack on the National Trust

The London Socialist Historians Group, which convenes the socialist history seminar at the Institute of Historical Research, University of London, has slammed the continued Tory ‘culture wars’ attack on the National Trust.

The attack seeks to deflect the renewed interest in the historic links of British Institutions with the slave trade that has come from the Black Lives Matter movement, by arguing that it is not legitimate to research the links.

The National Trust has recently published a report on the links between some of the properties it looks after and the slave trade. This is a particular focus of attacks from hard right Tory MPs

https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/features/addressing-the-histories-of-slavery-and-colonialism-at-the-national-trust

On 11^th November there was a short debate in Westminster Hall (part of the Commons) on the National Trust.

The full transcript is here:

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-11-11/debates/14F2215E-66AC-4A16-B4E2-4937E24BAC26/FutureOfTheNationalTrust

Below is a key exchange:

Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)

That this House has considered the future of the National Trust…..

…On top of that, we have a hobnailed boot of a document called, “Addressing our histories of colonialism and historic slavery”, which is considered sufficiently off-piste to attract the interest of the Charity Commission as regulator.

Kevin Brennan (Cardiff West) (Lab)

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for giving way and congratulate him on securing this important debate on the National Trust. On his point about the report, what is wrong with the National Trust researching the history of the buildings it looks after? Historic Royal Palaces has just advertised for a curator to uncover its links to the slave trade. Is he suggesting that that organisation should also be subject to this kind of witch hunt by the Charity Commission?

Dr Murrison

The hon. Gentleman ought also to look at English Heritage’s 2013 publication on broadly the same subject. He may wish to compare the quality of that report with the National Trust’s report and form his view as to whether it is appropriate to associate some of our national figures with slavery, as the title of this particular contribution does….

LSHG Convenor Dr Keith Flett said, it is entirely appropriate that the National Trust looks at links between its buildings and the slave trade. It is part of British history and while this has clearly passed some Tory MPs by, as Boris Johnson has clearly said we need to look at all of our history without avoiding bits we don’t like or find awkward.

Beard Liberation Front

11^th November

Contact: Keith Flett 07803 167266

Campaigners welcome end of UPS beard ban

The Beard Liberation Front, the informal network of beard wearers, has welcomed the decision by UPS the giant delivery company to end a ban on its employees wearing beards.

The company previously had a policy that allowed beards for medical or religious reasons but otherwise forbade them.  It has now allowed all employees to wear beards in line with a new ‘diversity’ policy.

The new UPS policy states that beards may be worn “as long as they are worn in a business-like manner and don’t create a safety concern”

The campaigners say that it is good news that UPS has finally emerged from the Victorian era and recognised that as long as its employees are smart its up to them how they appear.

BLF Organiser Keith Flett said, the move is welcome if long overdue. In 2020 employers should not be dictating to employees how they appear. That said you probably shouldn’t expect your next UPS delivery to be bought along by a Brian Blessed look alike.

BBC report

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54876527

Mary Wollstonecraft: 2020 a year of controversial statues

Writing in the Telegraph in June Boris Johnson said he would resist calls to remove a statue of Winston Churchill in Whitehall. Who was making this call? No one. It wasnt a demand of Black Lives Matter or anyone else. It was just another shot in Tory culture wars

There is though rightly some focus on re-situating some statues of prominent slave traders and imperialists away from very public positions. There is no great demand to take down any war memorial, not even that of Bomber Harris in Aldwych which is probably amongst the most contentious.

Black Lives Matters is not about taking down or putting up statues but since the issue has been raised I list below a handful that seem long overdue. I’m sure there are others.

10^th November sees, finally, the unveiling of a statue of Mary Wollstonecraft on Newington Green in North London. There has been a public campaign and fund raising effort for this and the statue is long overdue.

A work of art by the artist Maggi Hambling, the form, a naked statue of woman (not Wollstonecraft) has proved controversial:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-54886813

I support the erection of the Wollstonecraft statue and was a supporter of the campaign. As for the form of it, as might be expected I wish they had consulted a feminist historian before getting it designed.

Video of the new statue

Putting up some statues

Sylvia Pankhurst (1882-1960) socialist suffragette

Mary Wollstonecraft (1759-1797) Author of A Vindication of the Rights of Women

William Cuffay (1788-1870) Black Chartist leader in London

Jayaben Desai (1933-2010) Led Grunwick strike of Asian women, for equal pay, against racism

Joe Biden and what happens to a dream deferred.

The media are mostly useless at history so Joe Biden’s line in his Saturday victory speech ‘too many dreams have been deferred for too long’ has not been picked up on as far as I’ve seen. It can be read of course as a reference to Martin Luther King’s ‘I Have a Dream’ speech but the specific link is probably to Langston Hughes 1951 poem Harlem:

What happens to a dream deferred?

       Does it dry up

       like a raisin in the sun?

       Or fester like a sore—

       And then run?

       Does it stink like rotten meat?

       Or crust and sugar over—

       like a syrupy sweet?

       Maybe it just sags

       like a heavy load.

       Or does it explode?

Langston Hughes

The poem has resurfaced again with the Black Lives Matter movement this year and rightly so because the final line poses an important question.

A reference in a speech is of course no indicator of what Biden as President might or might not do even with Kamala Harris the first ever woman of colour to be Vice President.

Both Biden and Harris have interesting colonial backgrounds relating to the former British Empire which several historians have commented on. The media of course has not.

10 years of the Euston Tap

This week marks 10 years since the Euston Tap at the front of Euston station first opened its doors.

Pete Brown provided a pre-opening preview here:

The day after that was posted(my twitter feed for 2010 tells me) I was in there sipping a glass of Thornbridge Bracia.

I’ve been in there quite a bit since, a decently priced beer bar with a good selection of cask and keg beer being still not as common as one might hope in central London.

Its shut for its birthday thanks to the English lockdown but it will without question be back.

Trying to remember who I’ve met and bumped into in there over the years is perhaps beyond my not particularly reliable memory. I do recall though on one occasion Michael Rosen appearing to check if the fact I was tweeting about drinking a beer in the Euston Tap actually accorded with reality. It did.

Of course the beer world has moved on in the last 10 years and while the Euston Tap was one of the very few outlets for craft beer in London then, now there are lots. The beer range has kept up though, and there is always something interesting to drink on the board along with old favourites.

The spiral staircase is legendary as are the toilets it leads to (they have improved). The Euston Tap is a listed building so there are limits as to what can be done but even in COVID times the upstairs lounge, the seated areas downstairs and outside are a decent space.

The best tribute though is that after 10 years not only has the Euston Tap survived, beer wise, it remains a relevant location too.

The Ambridge Socialist

8^th November

‘You know what them Archers are like’

With a new lockdown in England a reminder of the fundamentals of the class war is always welcome and the Archers has provided it this week.

Looking for Roman coins in one of Brookfield’s fields Eddie Grundy was discovered by David Archer. Eddie was able to explain himself away but handed over an apparently discarded metal detector which in fact belonged to him. Just as he does on every occasion (except when murdering badgers) Archer was off to the police with it. Eddie explained to Will Grundy that to put Archer of the scent he had agreed to keep an eye on the area in case other treasure hunters appeared. Will thought Archer would still be on Eddie’s case with the comment ‘you know what them Archers are like’. Indeed we do.

Moss slavery cover-up crisis continues

Philip Moss is still planning to depart for Wales and there appears to be an ever widening split with Gavin Moss his son who has clearly worked out that he will be left in the lurch as a result. The ever credulous Kirsty is entirely on board. However the chances of the Moss’s modern slavery operation being discovered are increasing every week, although don’t expect Sgt Knacker Burns to be the one to do it.

Lower Loxley’s links with the slave trade

The Ambridge Socialist investigations into whether Lower Loxley was originally built with funds derived from the slave trade continue. It is not on the current National Trust list of properties where the link is certain but discovering such links often requires considerable historical investigative work

The Xmas Show

The show must go on and on and it appears Lynda is getting involved again. We can hardly wait. Not to listen.