Glad the British Parliament stood up and finally determined not to be the US’ bomber-buddy. Funny though, because what’s being projected for Syria is so much less involved than in Iraq, and they went in all guns blazing with that one. Somewhat surprised, to be honest. Apparently the Blairites are going ballistic — threatening to resign, moralizing blather about the West’s supposed “humanitarian” duty, and similar histrionics.
Anyway, I can’t help but wonder:
It’s probably the former, at least in my opinion, but I suspect that the Cliffites (American ISO, British SWP, British ISN) would also be disappointed deep down that they wouldn’t get the chance to “radicalize” liberal opposition to the war and add 30-40 names to their membership rolodex.
August 28, 2013 Stop the War Coalition (traditionally dominated by the British SWP) protest; in the foreground Socialist Worker placards
…whereas the supposedly Socialist government of Denmark is ready to jump on the bandwagon…
People in the UK were not that enthusiastic about the invasion of Iraq. There were a million or so on the streets protesting against that war (we had 12 coaches from this town alone, and as we’re only an hour on the train from London many others went that way).
Most people in the UK did not want an intervention last time round, and this time the MPs took notice of this.
Only a minority in the Labour Party today are Blairites (in the ‘Progress’ faction).
Iraq discredited large-scale foreign expeditions, though not necessarily all targeted ‘humanitarian interventions’.
In this case there are a host of reasons to doubt the nature of the planned riposte.
The role of the SWP, or the (Counterfire-led) Stop the War Coalition, has been wholly marginal to all this.
Just looking around and wondered what people think about this line now? Also have people picked up that the foolishness at TNS is in a slightly less foolish state again (but I think Ben must still be involved as the dishonest style is still there). Anyhow I thought people might like to work some issues through on a higher basis now that the collapse of the anti-war anti-imperialist Neverland is so stark with both US and Australian troops re-deployed with hardly a bleat from the pseudoleft.
Pingback: British Parliament votes against immediate military intervention in Syria | Research Material
Hear hear Mr Coates.
The motion to invade Syria was tabled by the coalition (Conservative and Liberal Democrat) government and was defeated by a commons vote of 285-272. Crucially, thirty Conservatives and 9 Lib Dems voted against the motion but without the votes of opposition (Labour) and minority party MPs this would have gone through!
What Blairites threatened to resign? The only Labour party resignation I’m aware of was Jim Fitzpatrick, who resigned a front bench position but remains a Labour party member and MP. He resigned because he is “opposed to military intervention in Syria, full stop” and did so before the vote.
Maybe the SWP are disappointed that they can’t get more members on their rolodex but who really cares about a redundant, trotskyite party that’s only good for making eye-catching placards?
PS. Love this blog.