Comments on: Pro-strike, but against This Strike Now

By: Banditry » Blog Archive » 160? We like

Banditry » Blog Archive » 160? We like — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 11:02:39 +0000

[…] I’ve got another Sharpener piece up about the Tube strike – specifically how Bob Crow isn’t even protecting the interests of his […]

By: Mark Rushton

Mark Rushton — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 14:56:11 +0000

“DidnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t seem especially relevant, …. As it happened, just under 50% voted yes; just over 50% abstained.”

It’s relevant because you seem to want to personalise this strike as being purely the responsibility of one person. Which is pure distortion.

As for your analysisEven Alistair Campbell would turn his nose up at that spin. True only 51% voted – but that doesn’t mean that they were in any sense abstaining. Of the remainder 98% (!) were in favour. You do know how democracy works don’t you ?

By: Al

Al — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 13:24:42 +0000

That would be tha’s left wing roots down pit in Guildford John? Good to see you drifting to the right…Mwuhahaha (Is this how you spell evil laughter?)

By: John B

John B — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 13:10:51 +0000

Didn’t seem especially relevant, since obviously a ballot is required to legally have a strike and there’s no suggestion that this strike was illegal.

As it happened, just under 50% voted yes; just over 50% abstained.

By: Mark Rushton

Mark Rushton — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 13:05:11 +0000

As much as personalising a strike is a favoured technique of daming them – you fail to mention whether there was a ballot.

You know, the sort of thing that gives the workers the choice whether to strike or not.

By: John B

John B — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 13:02:40 +0000

What’s your narrative of the miners’ strike then?

I thought the general consensus was: McGregor wanted to close uneconomic pits; Scargill took the entire industry out on strike because he thought the NCB would back down; so Thatcher decided to close the whole thing down to teach him and the other unions a lesson…

By: Andy kelly

Andy kelly — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 12:55:37 +0000

“..still in touch with my left-wing roots”

And yet totally out of touch with the events leading to the miner’s strike.

I suspect you are in the ‘I support workers taking action – until it affects me branch of lefft-wing thinking’

By: John B

John B — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 15:35:28 +0000

I don’t think it’s possible for the government to do that without being lynched, as I can’t see how you could sack the strikers without taking 3-6 months to train up replacements (hence Tube closed for 3-6 months, hence lynchings).

By: Phil Hunt

Phil Hunt — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 15:31:26 +0000

I pretty much agree with most of this. Yes, “no job cuts ever” is a ridiculous thing to ask for.

The one thing I would quibble with is when you say “a total strike is politically and economically unsustainable from the side of the government, which is effectively the employer, while it merely involves a loss of pay for the union members”

I don’t think that necessarily follows. One could imagine a situation where there was a particularly disruptive strike and the London authorities respond by sacking all the strikers and banning them all from using the tube for life. It wouldn’t surprise me if after a particularly long and bloody-minded strike, the majority of Londoners would be in favour of this.