Labour party | Militant| What's next for Labour | 1980s Politics | Blackpool | TV Eye | 1982
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 вер 2024
- A LIVE DEBATE FROM BLACKPOOL ABOUT THE FUTURE OF MILITANT - IN THE LIGHT OF THE LABOUR PARTY'S CONFERENCE DECISION. THE QUESTION:
SHOULD MILITANT MEMBERS NOW BE EXPELLED?
FRANK FIELD MP
TONY MULHEARN - TOXTETH CANDIDATE
AUSTIN MITCHELL MP
First shown: 30/09/1982
To license a clip please e mail: archive@fremantle.com
Quote: VT27901
Austin Mitchell, in reference to candidates with links to Militant, "They are not there to peddle their own ideas that are different from ours". Also Austin Mitchell, "Militant is not being expelled for their policy views".
Seems like Labour has had a long term issue with party democracy.
I guess he meant their ideas were so different they crossed the line into being incompatible with Labour politics. You can have varying views up to a point, but once they become something else, they don't have a legitimate place.
@@lamalama9717 But Austin stated that "Militant is not being expelled for their policy views" (10:05), so given this context, how can their ideas be 'incompatible with Labour politics'?
I thought Syd Little was on the panel until he was introduced as some guy called Peter Taaffe. 😀
Nothing has changed it has simply changed its clothes.
Even the Trots were well-dressed and intelligent back in the day
Well Trotsky’s writings were Socialist not Communist. He was from the party of the Soviet not the Bolsheviks, the Soviet’s joined the Bolshevik to form a government, a deal was done, because there wouldn’t been a government if the Soviet hadn’t joined, probably an going civil war.
frank field (who pulled out of the debate) is and always was a tory
No, he wasn't. He was a Labour man. Militant were a bunch of entryist Trots.
"was" 😉
When left Labour backed the workers
I had many friends in the militant tendency, went to many militant meetings and was privy to watching them plan taking over constituency party's in Liverpool. I can honestly tell you this. Militant was a party within a party. It's plan was to take over Labour wherever it could and it would never have become as successful as it did without working under the umbrella of labour
@@spartacusforlife1508 Labour has always had factions.
The workers seemed very happy to expel Millitant.
Militant kept the party in a solid socialist direction... As soon as they were out... Labour took on neoliberal ideology
Of course lab won 3 elections under blair how many elections did your lot win !!?
That was when they started winning significant votes, right?
Thank God for Thatcher.
she's dining with the devil
She’s looking up at us 😄
13:01 So out of touch: Not only was Austin Mitchell a committed Eurosceptic who supported withdrawal from the EEC and then the EU right to the end, but Liverpool, Militant's stronghold, turned out to be the strongest pro-EU part of the country.
That's certainly not true about Liverpool being the strongest people EU part of the country. Liverpool didn't even make it into the top 20 areas. The top 5 most pro remain areas were Gibraltar, Lambeth, Hackney, Foyle and Harringay.
3:30; Rodney Trotter's dad?
Kinnock was courageous in tackling Militant, and as a consequence we have a Labour government today.
That's a bit of a long bow to draw, isn't it? Long time ago.
@@lamalama9717 Maybe a bit of an overstretch, yes, but the general direction is correct. Especially considering the two-party UK FPTP electoral system, in other countries these Militant - OR rebel moderate - factions would become a separate party with their own niche. In UK this is not politically viable - they won't win any meaningful amount of seats consistently.
@@MagicNash89 yes it's certainly true that a PR system encourages small parties to form, whereas under FPTP they don't really stand a chance alone.