Written By: - Date published: 9:03 pm, December 6th, 2012 - 159 comments
Categories: community democracy, labour -
Tags: blogosphere
Word is that a senior Labour MP (who will go unnamed) has been lobbying National Council to put rules in place for party members who participate in the blogosphere. It appears they don’t like the idea that members might voice their concerns about the way their party is run. I can only assume that there would have to be some kind of a process whereby members who broke these rules would face a loss of membership or some other form of censure.
A cynic might feel compelled to point out the hypocrisy of such a policy. Especially when John Tamihere has compared the party to the head-hunters on national TV and then had the party leader intervene to get his membership approved. Double especially when Shane Jones gets to attack the Green Party on matters he holds no portfolio for and yet faces no censure. And that’s not even talking about the way caucus members themselves have brought the party into disrepute with their online antics.
But rather than be that cynical, I’ll just stick to pointing out the fact that the Labour Party membership is the lowest it has been in the history of the party and that to try to introduce such a proscriptive and draconian policy would only encourage that number to sink even lower.
It’s also antithetical to every theory of organising in the modern age that I can think of. Almost without exception member and volunteer based organisations are opening up their discourse and flattening their hierarchy as they realise that in the age of social media people need to feel connected and that they have a voice if you want them to join your organisation and help build your cause. In this light, telling people that joining the party means shutting the f*ck up on the internet isn’t really a winner.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
Seriously though, how cool is the internet? Look at the power its given to the plebs (sorry population)
Note the first words of the article – ‘Word is’ that a nameless someone has said something pretty vague and unspecified to persons unknown.
This is rumour-mongering.
Dismiss it.
Sure is, but at least we can see from the trackbacks that its giving the right wing blogosphere plenty of oxygen (that is sarcasm, before anyone sticks me, guts me and skewers me on a spit roast).
Of course it would be rubbish for the LP to try and censor its members online. It’s terribly unnecessary and counterproductive because those who are actually members (and are not just serial politics junkies) would probably think twice about the kind of information they put out there about the Party.
Nope. That was a turn of phrase that perhaps made it sound more like gossip than fact but it is fact.
I can also assure you that I don’t air the party’s laundry like this without good reason.
“I’ll just stick to pointing out the fact that the Labour Party membership is the lowest it has been in the history of the party and that to try to introduce such a proscriptive and draconian policy would only encourage that number to sink even lower.”
Or just push more of the left over to the Green Party (even Labour party members might vote Green with the party vote and Labour for their local electorate), mainly due to the fears over Labour being weak towards National come 2014. Either way will still be voting Green, as their environment and education policy is more promising that Labours at the moment.
Considering that my electorate MP is Grant Fucking Robertson, I’ll vote for the Green candidate with my electorate vote even if they stand a stale Christmas pudding, the embalmed corpse of Leonid Brezhnev, the second law of thermodynamics or a greyish shade of brown. They’re all less dreary and toxic and show less bad faith.
I’ll certainly be voting Mana or Green or in some other strategic way to keep Labour’s vote low. It’s worth the risk to hope a Left coalition can still be formed but with the minimum of power needed for that coalition going to Labour. A powerful Labour coalition partner would be in many ways worse than a National government. At least another term of National may create just the tiniest flicker of hope that it just may be possible for the Left to begin thinking that maybe, just maybe, they need to start talking about whether it could be time, perhaps soon, for them to look at the viability of whether or not they should get their fucking act together.
All of this makes me think of an oldie but a goodie:
“Your majesty, the peasants are revolting!”
“Yes, I know.”
Except that there’s a real element of panic obvious.
I’m thinking of going with another party. If one cannot participate as a party member on social media websites, then what is the point? The members are the backbone, are they not, or should be. Sometimes wanted, sometimes not?
I know a few people including myself that think – should join the labour party and up the support. But then I think of all the times I have been involved in environmental, political, feminist groups over the last 30 years and think oh god – there will be the GDA’s (grim dour activists with no sense of humour) present, there will be boring meetings where it is run in a way that the GDAs put you off saying anything because :they “know everything” and there will be also very little fun in it because how can we possibly have fun when the issues are so serious
If the labour party wants more support, there has to be change in the approach and people who have been involved for ages need to look at themselves and think ” how inclusive am I” .
I know not everyone is like that, but it only takes a couple of GDAs who are, to put people off and it puts me off.
Also I try and read Red Alert but find it really patronising and they are trying to be so “clever” with their words that I think WTF are they talking about and why would I want to go to meetings when it is all pontification blah blah blah.
At least here I can read the stuff, understand it and there are always further posts to clarify what I don’t get or links.
Yeah, Red Alert is quite patronising, agree with that. I notice some MPs never post on it, yet others often do.
Damn, forgot to press ‘reply’ earlier.
Anyway, testing this to see if it works:
http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-08122012/comment-page-1/#comment-560097
Yes that pretty much sums up some of my experiences. In regard to your:
“… don’t see activism as a social outlet, or expect “fun”, and I think I understand that the left is diversity by definition, and solidarity in diversity is much harder work than I imagine a National Party fundraising dinner would be. Fighting oppression will never be a smooth ride, and so in that respect I do understand and share your trepidation at rejoining the fray”
This reminds me of a parent who withdrew their child from a teacher friend of mine’s class because they were having too much fun – and how can you learn when you are having fun?
Imagine having fun and being an activist at the same time – they are around – musicians, clowns, artists, etc
I think you mis interpret my meaning of fun and humour – and just had such a good laugh at the thought of me attending national dinner parties and will have a great time telling my friends so thanks for that. I also think that while being involved in groups is not solely as a social outlet, I have made plenty of life long friends who share the same values and connect, so I think for some people it is their “social outlet” and why not?
Anyway I actually do quite a lot of work and still have elements of fun and humour while I am doing it, even when the work is serious.There are alot of community initiatives out there where people are gathering together with music, kai etc and having some fun while also workshoping ideas that are important to them. No endless boring speakers, no people coming to the meeting saying these are our ideas and then feeling threatened if you have other ideas.
I think we do need to have some creative ideas around how to get people involved and I am sure there are plenty out there and plenty of people who have great ideas, they are just not going to go along to “meetings” and share them. Sure still have meetings for those who love them but lets get some other ideas, that’s all.
…. I have made plenty of life long friends who share the same values and connect, so I think for some people it is their “social outlet” and why not?
Quite true. I do hope it will be different this time, I’d really like to enjoy myself, I shouldn’t be pessimistically preparing for the worst. It would be great if the established groups did some soul-searching about being inclusive, and open and welcoming.
Imagine having fun and being an activist at the same time – they are around – musicians, clowns, artists, etc
I remember all that, and the helium balloons, when the Green Party used to visit the university, and feeling jealous that our lot was so boring by comparison. But frankly, we couldn’t have pulled off a carnival atmosphere if we’d tried.
Hi, I’m going to reply to this in ‘open mike’ because I can’t really see the relevance of your comment to this thread.
(I wish I could put a link to ‘open mike’ to make things smoother but I haven’t figured out how to do that yet).
If you click on the date/time link of any post (I like to open it as a new tab or window) then then you can cut and paste teh URL of whatever you have opened.
Perhaps in solidaratory we all keep the CV thing going as a minor part of your nic….and hide within our ranks the real CV and if one falls bleeding from the knives then as ROB states rise the army of CVers. Beware the circling radish wolves….red on the outside but white streaked with blue on the inside.