In a recent article on the Guardian's 'Comment is Free' section, comedian Frankie Boyle suggested that following the decision to abstain in the recent welfare bill vote the Labour party was now so passive it could be "led by an out-of-office email".
It was indeed, a pathetic move by Labour. Even if you agree with the tactics that Labour should attempt to fight the 'middle ground' with the Tories, this was still spectacularly unnecessary. That bill will hurt the worst off in society, exactly the kind of people that you expect the Labour Party to want to protect as part of it's DNA.
This is the background to which the Labour Party leadership election is being fought. And, I get to vote.
I'm not a member of the Labour Party for many reasons - I'm a revolutionary Socialist rather than a reformist. However my Trade Union, the GMB, is a major backer of the party. Personally my belief is that the political fund should be democratised, and MPs should be given backing on an individual basis, irrespective of party.
However, that is not an argument that has been won within the union, so whilst it continues to give part of my subs to the Labour party, I believe that I have a right to exercise my democratic rights in voting in this election.
Don't get me wrong, I understand why people do become members of the Labour Party, despite everything that it has done wrong. People are pragmatic. They don't expect perfection, but they know they have to fight for what they can.
When I lived in Bolton I knew a group of trade union activists who worked within the council who collectively joined the Labour Party because they were tired of being 100% ignored by the elected councillors. Now they are only ignored 90%.
Why do people bother with Labour, when it is so 'top down' in it's 'democracy'?
I was talking to two Labour Party members on the TUC anti-austerity demo in October 2012. Both were ordinary trade unionists who had joined Labour to continue the struggle from beyond their workplaces out in to the wider world. Both had voted for Ed Milliband because he had been the only mainstream candidate who spoke about the need to correct Labour's mistakes (and he wasn't vague about those mistakes - he attacked the New Labour ethos and said that the invasion of Iraq was clearly wrong), and both now wished they had voted for David Milliband instead.
That wasn't because in hindsight they decided that the political agenda he put forward was now the correct one. No, it was for one reason - they were frightened that the Tories would get re-elected.
Everything was driven by that fear. That's why ordinary party members may look towards Yvette Cooper or Andy Burnham (or the sadistic towards Liz Kendall).
But now we have a candidate worth voting for in Jeremy Corbyn. He is pretty much spotless. Not only has he always stood up for the right causes throughout his political career, he has also managed to do so without being a crazed ego maniac (oh George Galloway, I remember the hope we had only for you to smash that to smithereens).
The Daily Mirror has reported that Jeremy Corbyn is way ahead in the leadership contest so far with a 42% poll rating (Yvette Cooper currently second with 22.6%). Hardly surprising, this is what the ordinary activists, both inside and outside of the Labour Party, actually want in a leader.
Who is voting against Corbyn? Well, some activists who still have that 'pragmatic' fear of losing to the Tories, but also the 'professional' political figures within the party.
MP's make a good living from their position. As such, it is a position they want to protect. I'm not saying that none of them care about politics, but it makes a big difference when your income depends on winning elections. In that position, you are desperate to keep your seat. This is not a gravy train they wish to disembark from.
It certainly explains the tendency to lean to the right in such arguments. The same goes for full time, unelected trade union officials. They don't want to rock the boat with employers any more than they have to, because they have their own income to protect. Again, it's not to say that none of them care about the workers they represent, it's just that it does explain the tendency to want to avoid fighting for what is right.
All union officials should be workplace based and elected by the members. That way, if the members do not agree with their actions they can be removed from the post and go back to their job. If that job is there, and their income doesn't change when elected, they will be a lot less likely to take the side of the bosses.
But still, is there any point in striving to elect a leader like Jeremy Corbyn if no-one will vote for Labour in a general election? Well, it turns out that the general public actually agree with most of his policies, with a significant majority willing to support moves to renationalise the railways, bring in rent controls, etc.
There have been a number within the Labour Party who have complained about 'Communists' and members of other left wing groups 'infiltrating' the party. Well, I'm a member of the SWP and I've not joined, nor has there been any call to do so. Has it occurred to them that Corbyn might simply be attracting activists to join?
And that's the thing that could make a real difference. When Tony Blair was elected with a massive majority one of the reasons he was able to do so was because he had over 60,000 activists campaigning on the streets. He offered a vision that was clearly different to what the Tories had to offer.
Yes, he was a fucking abomination, but beyond that, this was why he was able to win so convincingly. In the years that followed, the more he moved the party to the right, the more it appeared to be similar to the Tories, the more his majority fell.
Jeremy Corbyn stands up for policies that are right, and are what the mass majority of Labour members and supporters actually believe in, but have been too afraid to express in fear of losing the 'middle ground' to the Tories.
He is also someone who can carry forward arguments with the general public in a convincing fashion, and can attract a mass activist base to the Labour Party. Yes, they are up against the right wing press, and that is the biggest problem by far. Who gets to control the arguments for our political future, that which becomes seen as 'common sense'?
It will be a huge battle, and one that may well be lost in a coming election, but by God I'd rather it was lead by someone actually trying to fight than a party simply resigning itself to perpetual defeat.
I won't be joining the Labour Party, but I am part of the wider labour movement. As such, I will be voting for Jeremy Corbyn, I'll be voting for hope. But I won't be leaving it to him to do, I'll keep working with everyone in the movements from below to try and bring about real change.
At 10pm last night the polls closed and the BBC provided us with exit polls that predicted that the Tories would be the largest party, but would come short of a majority. Also the SNP would dominate in Scotland and the Lib Dems would be decimated.
The clear indication of a Tory victory sent me in to a depression. The question is, would the Lib Dems have enough MPs to be the junior partner in a coalition or not, or rather would the Tories turn towards the DUP (Democratic Unionists - the dominant Loyalist party in Northern Ireland) to make up the numbers.
At 6am I was woken by the cat. I checked my phone to see the prediction had now shifted to suggesting that the Tories would come to within 1 seat of an overall majority. After seeing that, try as I might, I couldn't get back to sleep.
Then in the morning when I'm driving my girlfriend to work I hear on the news that the Tories will definitely get a majority after all. Only my love for her stopped me turning the car over in to the River Irwell. Who would have thought that those exit polls were a best case scenario?!?
Ok, so nailing my colours to the mast, I'm a big old leftie. Actually, I'm proud to call myself a Socialist - the term still exists, I've just checked a dictionary.
As such, general elections to me are only one part of politics. When most people think about politics, they think it is something you elect someone else to do every five years, and hope they don't all bollocks it up too much.
The elections are still important of course, because these are the people who decide on our laws. I was going to write that they run the country, but that's far too simple a concept, and we all know how much money and power outside of official 'politics' plays it's role.
What we have had under Tory rule (propped up by the Lib Dems), is an austerity drive as a method of bringing down the national debt. In the last 5 years we have started to see growth, and employment increase.
It was always going to be hard to shift a party that's in power when growth begins, however, we would have had growth whether the Tories or Labour had been in power. It's the global market recovering. We were not as hard hit as many countries in Europe for a variety of reasons, and growth was always going to happen.
The worst aspect to the government position was just how much the very worst off in our society have been affected. Look at the degrading assesments around disability benefits. ATOS, a private company, being given the job of trying to find any reason to force people off benefits. A big number of those who complained won their appeals. Think of how many didn't appeal because they didn't have the knowledge, energy or ability to do so.
Labour offered us essentially a nicer version of what the Tories were doing. Still austerity, but stretched over a longer period, and with promises to look after the NHS, introduce a Mansion Tax and other reforms to make the rich pay at least some share of the costs.
If you look at what Ed Milliband was promising over the last few weeks it sounds pretty good. The poorest and most vulnerable in society would be protected in some way.
But it was still austerity, and that isn't the kind of politics that can energise activists. The SNP in Scotland however, who are not a radical party, could win activists. Getting rid of Trident (our nuclear deterrant), ending austerity, these were the kind of policies that got people excited.
The SNP might have lost the referendum on Independence, but politically they won massively from it's aftermath. Many working class voters, traditionally Labour, voted for independence, and switched to the SNP as the only major political force in Scottish politics that backed it.
The Yes vote might only have got around 45% of the vote in the referendum, but if you have even close to that many people deciding to support one party in 'first past the post' politics they will win every time.
The referendum was a massive democratic debate the like of which I have never seen in my lifetime. Apathy was pretty much impossible in Scotland around this time. This platform was enough to turn the SNP into the biggest force by far in Scottish politics.
Whilst the SNP were the biggest winners despite losing, the biggest losers despite winning were the Labour Party. The three big parties of the time were all strongly in favour of the Union, but it was Labour that delivered the campaign and the vote. When the right wing aftermath from the Tories and UKIP in England showed how actually disregarded the Scottish are south of the border, it was the Labour Party they turned on.
It made no difference to the Tories, so really, they were the ones who really won.
Aside from Scotland though, the Labour party also lost the argument throughout England and Wales as well. There are a few reasons as far as I can see.
The effect of the Scottish referendum also had a big negative impact on the Labour party in England I feel. As I said, it was the biggest democratic debate that I can remember in my lifetime, but if you lived in England you heard nothing on the news except about the referendum and yet had no say it whatsoever.
I'm not saying that English voters necesarily wanted a vote, but I do think it helped further enforce a feeling of disenfranchisment. In terms of English nationalism, many felt bitter towards the Scottish, and as soon as the election was confirmed the likes of the Tories and UKIP were on the news again banging on about 'English votes for English laws'.
The fear of an SNP/Labour coalition drove English centre-right and right wing voters away from Labour. This idea was pushed massively by the Tories and the right-wing press, and wasn't helped at all by Nicola Sturgeon constantly saying that they 'would work with Labour'.
Saying that was intended to appeal to Scottish voters, but also scared some English voters at the same time. Those on the left loved the idea of such a coalition (rather the SNP than the Lib Dems anyway), but Labour knew all too well that it would cost them votes from the centre ground in England.
Talking of the agenda of the right wing press, Ed Milliband in his interview with Russell Brand said he didn't think Rupert Murdoch had as much influence on this election as he has had in the past. Of course he does!!
Just because he personally hasn't said much means nothing, his media empire pushes his agenda for him. The Sun campaigned viciously against Ed Milliband, even republishing pictures of him looking slightly odd eating a bacon sandwich on the front page. Anything to frighten people in to voting Tory - fear Ed Milliband, fear Nicola Sturgeon, vote Conservative was the message.
The Sun is by far the widest read newspaper. Any office I work in usually has at least one copy floating around, and there's only so much people can see a person or group of people demonised before it is internalised as fact.
At the end of the day Labour were not able to convine the centre ground that they were a better alternative than the Tories. Why would they, Labour didn't appear to really be that different.
From working class or left wing roots folk also had little reason to back Labour. In the same way that many were convinced to vote Tory out of fear, all Labour really had was a fear about what the Tories could do to make you vote for them. Don't get me wrong, we do have every reason to be afraid.
Could Labour get themselves in a position to attract large numbers of new members to their party to reinvigorate and reinforce their activist base - have people to door knock, canvass and leaflet in future elections?
The SNP did that around the referendum, but there will not be anything like that for Labour. They are the party in opposition, but any opposition is in words only, never in deeds. They would have scrapped the Bedroom Tax, but will they genuinely stand in opposition to it?
No, they won't. Councils which are Labour controlled could refuse to enforce the Bedroom Tax, but they won't. They will do as they are told and will only complain through letters and council motions, which mean nothing in concrete terms.
The argument from Labour is always "when we get in to power, we can change things, but until then... " In other words, voting for them is the only thing you can do, and without that you are impotent.
The Bedroom Tax is an interesting area for me. For those that don't know, this is the name given to the 'Under Occupancy Penalty'. For people who live in social housing (such as council housing), if you are deemed to have more bedrooms than you need you have money deducted from your Housing Benefit.
That benefit is designed to give you enough money to survive if you are unemployed. So for a starter, they are taking money away from the minimum that you need to live on, when in reality even that is not enough.
On paper it might not sound too bad. We have a housing shortage and it's not fair that people get to live in houses with a number of bedrooms if they don't need them. Other families need them so it's only fair that they move in to a smaller home so larger families can have them.
The problem is that the smaller homes do not exist. The waiting list for people who have declared that they are willing to downsize is huge because the smaller houses are just not there. What would happen in reality is that you would be forced to move in to the private sector and pay rent to a private landlord.
That's one thing when you're unemployed and in receipt of housing benefits, because the rent is covered. But when you get back in to work you pay your rent of course, but now you are paying a lot more because rents are much higher in the private sector. Don't worry though, Labour are going to bring in rent controls when they get... oh...
But there is one other thing, one other problem with forcing people to downsize - It's that the house they live in is their home. You know, because we are human beings, and that's what we do. We make homes, where we live and raise families.
Tories you see don't have homes - they have properties. Portfolios of them. Houses to them are commodities to be bought and sold.
When I lived in Bolton I helped form the anti Bedroom Tax group there, and it was a wonderful experience. I was the joint chair of the group alongside a woman called Linda, who was a tenant facing eviction. In the garden of her home she had buried the ashes of her late Mother and Brother. As you can imagine, she wasn't for moving.
But don't worry, she had no intention of moving. Nor, of paying the Bedroom Tax. Could she afford it? Not really, but that wasn't the point. She wasn't paying the Bedroom Tax because she was taking a stand.
We set up groups throughout the area, and attracted many people to public meetings. People who felt like they were alone and vulnerable found other people in the same situation. After that, they were not alone.
People were worried that if they didn't pay they would be evicted, physically thrown out of their homes. At these meetings pacts were made that if anyone ever faced eviction as many people as possible would be outside the front of their house to block access to any baliffs. We had a saying - "I'll stand by you if you stand by me."
But why was I so heavily involved? Was I facing the Bedroom Tax? No, I was working and lodging with friends. I got involved because it was an injustice and something needed to be done.
I met Linda and others through being involved in the Socialist Workers Party in Bolton and being active in my Trade Union. We met at the Trades Council in Bolton where they had come because they were given the number for the chair of the council as being someone who could help them to organise.
From that day I was joint chair representing the Trade Unions, and Linda was chair with me representing tenants affected directly by the Bedroom Tax. The campaign involved tenants, trade Unionists, and people from various political parties and non.
We were critical of Labour councillors at times but always invited them to our meetings - invitations that were often accepted. Labour Party members in various Unions became heavily involved in the campaign, alongside Green party members, SWP members, and many who were not a member of any political organisation.
Why am I telling you all this?
Well, after such a depressing election you ask yourself, what can we do about it?
My answer is that voting in elections is only one very small part of democracy, and that democracy is too important to just be left with MPs. There are alternative forms of democracy that you can be a part of.
If you work, join a Trade Union. They are not perfect organisations, but they are very important. If you are in a Trade Union become a workplace rep - just ring the number you have been given as a member for more information, they will be happy to tell you what is required. The politics in Unions can be limited times, but fight to make it more than just a helpline for colleagues to ring if they're in trouble, more than just discounts on credit cards or insurance.
Organise in your workplace, and not just on work issues. We have a whole tide of bullshit coming our way that we have to fight back against - the Bedroom Tax, Fracking, attacks on the NHS, closure of local services, etc. Organise and unite with people in your workplace, other workplaces, in your communities, nationally and internationally.
Doing this won't take away the feelings of anger or frustration at the Tories (or any of the major partes at times). But, what else can you do?
The Tories are in power. It's time to unite and fight.
