Re: Red Ken outrage

[David Welch <david.welch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 11 May 2000, M A Jones wrote:
>
> No, Russell, and don't be predictable. It's not about municipal socialism,
> it's about new kinds of mass politics. You can live in your quiet little
> sectarian humidor if you like, untainted by the raucous, noisy, turbid,  and
> carnivalesque politics of guerrilla gardening, anarchy, green/reds and all
> the other stuff that's going down. You won't be missed. I agree
> it's hard to cut the big movements from Seattle to Washington to London and
> a dozen other places, to fit the incredibly small procrustean bed you're
> offering. It's hard to understand what it's all about for us old 'uns. But
> make the effort, for God's sake. You may not have noticed but these
> untutored, untrained kids who are not marching behind your banners, have
> nonetheless identified where the real enemy is and have brought big numbers
> onto the streets to protest about things like the WTO and the IMF, which I
> don't remember your General Staff making such a big issue out of. Ken
> Livingstone is trying to conect up Ford workers with gardening guerrillas,
> and the potent symbolism of this frightens the pants off The Times leader
> writers. They see it, even if you don't.
>
What sort of movement does Ken Livingstone represent when less than 30% of
the population can be bothered to vote in the London elections?