The leadership of Left Unity refuses to put out a statement on Woolwich, leaving it to individuals to do whatever they want.
Left Unity is the only organisation claiming to be part of the left that has no official statement. Incredible but true.
For daring to complain about this state of affairs, Kate seems to have decided that my contributions to the website are no longer wanted.
After many complaints from me about her selecting a photograph of herself grinning broadly at her own thoughts on Woolwich – themselves no more than a regurgitation of what she had already distributed on behalf of a different organisation (CND), – Kate Hudson finally got round to realizing that apparently laughing all the way through the funeral that is the aftermath of the Woolwich atrocity might be deemed a tad tasteless. Kate did eventually get round to replacing that photo with a much more sombre looking one.
I guess we should be grateful for small mercies, and we are. Even so, as I had already explained to her, “Not everything is about you, Kate.”
Why does Kate Hudson feel the need to have any photograph of her alongside her thoughts on Woolwich? Is this key turning point in British politics just one more photo opportunity for Left Unity’s leader? Surely not.
Can’t Kate make statements without us seeing what she looks like? With elections coming up (internal within Left Unity in a few months) and, eventually, with Left Unity needing candidates to stand in the real world, is it Kate’s hope that her ability to have her face the most recognizable of all Left Unity’s available candidates (courtesy of all this self promotion on the website) will give her an edge over all alternative candidates?
I would much rather know something about Kate’s politics (and that of all the other candidates) than to be constantly reminded what a beautiful smile they have. One of the atrocious things about Left Unity as it stands today is that virtually none of the 8,000 signatories to Ken Loach’s online petition have a scoobie as to the politics of the majority of the interim leadership. That is a very serious problem.
The Woolwich atrocity could have allowed the 8,000 supporters to scrutinize who is closest to our politics and who could not be further away. If amongst the ten leaders someone wanted to call for greater powers for MI5 and the rest of the Intelligence agencies, revealed a hitherto unnoticed Islamophobic side, wanted to support this vile act of terrorism, supported the use of NATO’s drones, or one or more of NATO’s wars, apologized for the broadcast media’s reactionary indifference to the permanent detention of Muslims at Guantanamo without due process…
The Woolwich atrocity presents Left Unity’s supporters with a chance to get to grips with that problem of who amongst the leadership isn’t helping, and then to flush them out. Why has none of this happened? Why does there appear to be no intention to make it happen?
Kate Hudson’s expressions of support for Left Unity strike me as hypocritical when she doesn’t address any of these criticisms, who furthermore sees to it that none of the other 8,000 signatories to the Left Unity statement can read my considered criticisms of how badly I think she is leading the organisation. Kate sees to it that my contributions vanish as though they were written in invisible ink.
There is an article called “All ideas should be out in the open for debate”. I contribute to that thread and Kate sees to it that my ideas are amongst the very few she has a problem with. Consider some of the ideas Kate does not have a problem with…
Sophie Katz says Left Unity has to agree with the English Defense League and Al Qaeda that the Woolwich murder represents a “clash of civilizations”: http://leftunity.org/the-clash-of-civilisations/. It is hard to tell exactly what Sophie thinks she means by this, but it looks to me like she is sympathetic to such acts of terrorism. That is hardly going to help Left Unity’s electoral interventions, is morally repugnant and the diametric opposite of Kate’s own idea that killing is never the answer, although that begs the question about self defense, and implies that Left Unity issues a posthumous condemnation of all sides in the Spanish and American Civil Wars etc. Left Unity, in other words, is all over the place. The hope appears to be to be all things to all men and women, in the hope of not alienating anyone, whereas all that is likely to happen is that no one will take Left Unity seriously.
As if Sophie Katz’s attitude towards the clash of civilizations rhetoric shared by Al Qaeda and EDL was not bad enough, we now find a contribution from someone called Jonno.
Kate Hudson, it would appear, has no problem with Jonno’s support the EDL’s Tommy Robinson, at least that part of this fascist that was lauded by a deluded so-called anarchist. Jonno believes this fascist leader is more in touch with the working class than socialists are, endorsing in particular his policies on immigration!
Jonno quotes approvingly the following peon of praise to Tommy Robinson, pilfered from Ian Bone’s wretched excuse for a radical blog:
- In truth the Left/anarchists have no one coming close to Robinson as a canny political operator as anyone seeing him give Paxman the runaround in his Newsnight interview way back would have to acknowledge. He is working class, he talks like he’s working class. One of the few times you hear a working class voice talking politics on the telly. The snobby left trying to say he’s stupid need to wise up quick. After the Newsnight interview many snobby leftists were laughing at his grammar. He is also daring and bold – the rabbi stunt was fucking funny as well as daring. He leads for the front – ever seen any left leader do that? He has a strategy of how to get from A-B.
Pass the sick-bag.