"Brought to the brink of defeat"

[redjordi]

On Saturday's Guardian there was a very interesting in-depth article about what was going on in the British government in the build up to the Gulf War. The article shows how very worried Blair and Co were about the level of opposition to the war and how that movement nearly precipitated the fall of the Blair government.

I think this is very interesting and very encouraging for all of us. We nearly did it! It also means that despite the fact that the war has been "won" by imperialism, or at least this phase of the conflict, the British government has been badly wounded and particularly Blairism within the labour party and the trade unions. We can expect further clashes, and next time a big question comes up, this Blairite government might fall!

The full article is here:

Brought to the brink of defeat

[Paul Smith]

The problem with the softo-left-reformists such as the Guardian is, they would be happy with the downfall of Blair.

Worst of all claim it as a "victory".

We should not be satisifed with any such thing, although of course decapitating the Labour Party would be useful, we are in no position to make a revolution out of it.

The British constitition must be completely torn to shreads the monarchy destroyed, the house of lords destroyed.  The means of production brought under common ownership, the establishment of our dictatorship, the end capitalism, and the arrival of socialism out of the capitalist state.

The fall of Blair would bring it no closer, arguably it would push it even further away as huge sections of the left give up all struggle believing they have "won" all thanks to the "nice"-bourgeoisie.

[Grave Disorder]

Actually I suspect Blair has done more for Socialism than all the other Labour PMs combined. Popular disillusionment is rapidly strengthening the socialist movement, look at the SSP's gains.

[redjordi]

Hi Paul,

Obviously the fall of Tony Blair is not the same as the overthrow of capitalism. But clearly if Tony Blair's government had been forced to resign over the question of war in Iraq, as a result of a mass movement in the streets and been forced to withdraw from that war, that would have been an important blow to imperialism and would have strengthened the confidence of the masses in their own forces!

comradely

[Grave Disorder]

Unfortunately it was not so, but even so the mere fact that an elected (in the loosest sense of the word) government dared to defy such a huge mass movement has sent a clear message to the majority.

[Paul Smith]

SSP gains?

The 'Scottish Socialist' Party is an opportunistic reformist party, they're not interested in revolution.

They're interested in Scottish independance and fooling the masses with a couple of better pay deals.

How many here actually believe, that they could actually win a socialist revolution in an isolated independant Scotland?

Exactly, so they'll either proceed with this revolution and fail, or won't bother at all.  With the latter 99% likely.

Reformo-"Socialists" riding on the back of nationalism only spells disaster.

redjordi yes it be a blow to British imperialism, the US would continue, it would further isolate them so it would more rapidly unite the bourgeoisie of other nations into an alliance against them (with far too many people mindlessly supporting those national bourgeoisie, rather then revolution).  That's all if Britain still didn't enter the war anyway, just because Blair would get kicked out doesn't mean it would stop it.  The bourgeoisie in the UK were obviously very keen to go to war, a minor issue like Blair being kicked out of office probably wouldn't stop them for long.