|
zandtao has been following with some interest the issues around the formation of "YourParty"; he had been hoping that this might be a genuine grassroots movement. The rhetoric from Jeremy and Zarah sounds wonderfully grassroots, but the formation is full of splits and ego issues some of the details of which zandtao can indicate in this advice but others he does not fully understand because he is not on the ground.
Is YourParty grassroots or is it simply a collection of socialisms?
Back when he was active he met two collections of socialisms - socialist conference in Sheffield and the STA within the NUT, both were exciting neither were effective - the STA was destructive. For a discussion about socialist conference and the STA continue reading, or jump to here for direct discussion about YourParty.
 Socialist Conference
Before he attended bill knew little of the socialist conference, and at the time he was in the other theoretical divisiveness - the communist party; he was in the NCP. The communist parties were less divisive but were in some ways a kiss of death for his own activism. He got attracted by the history of activism amongst NCP members, and the amount of understanding about socialism and the movement; he learnt a great deal. But as soon as he joined the NCP he was marked as enemy by the Trots - Militant, SWP etc. In many ways he was their enemy but no more than before he joined as even early on he saw the divisiveness of these far left intellectual groupings. Before he joined the NCP he was secretary of Trades Council - that meant he did all the hard boring organising; these intellectuals maybe did the organising within their own factions but they did not want to do the graft for the collective. After that organising had tired him out he began personal political development studying Marxism with the NCP, and learnt a great deal - valuable now. But it meant within Trades Council he was an enemy except for George who he now thinks of as an unconscious pathtivist - still a socialist because he wanted to unite the grassroots movement but a class activist - divisive of the 100% because he was against the rich per se. George completed bill's political education but that education was wasted in terms of political activism as bill soon left the UK - never regretted leaving but as an expat never again a member of a grassroots movement.
Now YourParty rings of Socialist Conference but the difference is the state of society - Jeremy was a key organising figure of socialist conference about 35 years ago. Today activism is dominated by Reform, Tommy Robinson and the divisive politics of forlorn white men - by forlorn zandtao means white men who can find no place in the jobs market. At the time of Socialist Conference the movement had just lost to Maggie-et-al with the Miners, but there was still a vestige of jobs for the white men of that time. But there had been some Unity with the NUM so maybe there was Unity with Socialist Conference? Far from it. There was a sense of excitement and Unity at conference, that was hope; but during workshops there was just division, one version of socialism arguing against another and being divided by minutiae. As he was NCP at the time his own politics were reinforced.
STA
Now the STA was more effective collectively, and as a result was more divisive. The STA stood for Socialist Teachers' Alliance, a group of socialisms united within the NUT - mainly SWP. bill learned about the STA and NUT at conference. He went to one conference, it was a great experience and fundamentally a complete mess. Instead of conference being an annual uniting of activists it was an annual battle between the established leadership of opportunists and a procession of STA activist speakers. During conference these leaders were basically the enemy. Reason - membership. The NUT needed membership fees to survive, and action was losing those fees.
NUT tathata
Before he can describe the mess of conference and the STA, there must be a tathata of the NUT. As usual activists mostly came from the conurbations - London, Manchester etc. In those conurbations activists from all unions and parties gathered, and far left groups formed; within these conurbations the NUT had teachers associations, the one bill knew was ILTA - Inner London Teachers Association (he met them because of his anti-racist work - maybe discussed in his book on pathtivism). STA was basically a collection of these inner city activists across the country.
But in no way did these activists reflect the views of membership. Membership was both tiers of schooling - primary school and secondary school. Primary school members were mostly married women. They were good and caring teachers but were not activist teachers; they were also mothers who had teaching as the second job in a family so they could look after their kids whilst working. This is an observation not a criticism, they were good and useful teachers. But there is another tathata that we need to know, teachers were mortgaged up to the hilt. Rather than getting a mortgage to live within their means they pushed for increased mortgages and better houses - meaning their finances were always on a knife edge. Secondary school had some women like this - "second income", but secondary teachers were more diverse, they had male teachers who were careerists, and they had the union divisions at the time NUT NAS and AMMA (no strike union). There was a huge need for change in conditions of service, unions needed to be active on improving conditions of service but all that ever happened was that the NUT and NAS sometimes got together for needed increased pay. Increased pay reflected the desires of membership but they wanted increased pay without strike action - balanced finances and mortgages couldn't afford to lose pay.
STA tathata
Now the STA was this collection of inner city teachers associations, a collection of inner city activists many of whom were in the inner city far left organisations. Far left teachers and educations workers were in the SWP - Socialist Workers Party; the SWP was an independent party, had its own policies and the SWP was key in the STA and were very divisive. At one stage they had a policy of causing as much strike action in their schools with the "vague hope" that their action would be some kind of vanguard for national activism. Basically this was a policy that created systemic racism. The only place where the SWP had a voice was in inner city schools so their action led to additional burdens on the students in those schools who were already burdened by racism. A day of action in a school had much more than a day's impact on the education of students, in bill's inner city school SWP politics in general, and days of action in particular, led to great division between teachers where the violence inherent in the class conflict aspect of socialism turned to intimidation of colleague teachers.
STA at conference
The STA were great fun at conference, they brought vitality to conference in their battle against NUT leadership. And to be fair many of their platforms were arguing for conditions of service. But whatever they argued for they always called for strike action, and usually the leadership fought this because strike action would lose membership. Membership wanted more pay, better conditions of service but didn't want to lose money in strikes. So conference was a play between leaders and the STA to avoid a policy of strike action, it was all concerned with membership finances paying for sabbatical leaders and the union's lifeblood - the legal and administrative staff who looked after the many legal cases brought by oppressive education authorities. Conference did not lead to any form of activism on conditions of service and work-based stress, the reason there are so many teachers on long-term absence with the knock-on effect of increased workload for teachers; how many secondary schools (primary schools?) have long-term absences due to psycho-somatic illness?
Aside - bill left NCP
Conference finished with discos, and at the time in the NUT there was the STA disco and the Broad Left disco; bill was in his late 30s and still a bit interested in finding someone - it was not long after his deadly relationship. He walked into the Broad Left disco and all he saw was leadership sycophancy. The NCP strategy was wise - support the NUT leadership in building membership, but where was the socialism (bill was socialist at the time)? In fact all he saw was opportunism, the Broad Left did not support the grassroots; when you add the divisiveness of the STA the union was a mess. He had recently attended NCP education where their patronising attitude to women led bill to understand why NCP was mostly men - by policy women were recommended not to work down the mines or in the military. Their attitude of "men have to but why should women have to" was so paternalistic it mattered. bill left NCP.
As a corollary to his leaving when you have 6000 communist members in the country split at the time in 3 parties of 5000, 500 and 500 how can you possibly call yourself organisers and against intellectual splitting??
Apathy of teachers
Soon after this conference bill left the UK and taught in many countries - more schools were private sector. He never again met the conditions of service and the work-based stress he met in UK schools. Most UK teachers did not understand the power in trade unions, it was based on representation of activism - the union rep negotiated from a position of whatever power-activism the members would support the rep with. Nationally the members would support leadership with activism with strike action over pay. However most members were paying for a service with their fees - legal representation and paid-for-negotiation (the rep). Education authorities, head teachers and union leadership knew the teachers/members were apathetic and treated the unions accordingly.
Changes
It is good to finish the background history on apathy because it appears that the consistency between now and then is apathy. But society has changed radically since then with the populism (of Farage, Reform and Robinson) appealing to the racism of white male unemployed workers. Undoubtedly the grassroots movement has failed those men. History has meant that the workplace was racist and sexist - not offering positions for women and minorities; the grassroots movement has advocated for these minorities. The system-of-accumulation recognised the possibilities of manipulating the workforce in favour of cheaper labour from overseas and more jobs for women; so there is a generation of these white men turning to populist fascism.
Conditions for YourParty
These are different conditions than the state of the grassroots movement at the time of Socialist Conference and the STA; there is a more pressing need to bring back to the movement the white men who have turned to populism - and some fascism. What is needed is a united grassroots movement; can YourParty do that?
Observations of YourParty and conference
Now zandtao was not there so these observations are based on selective media. Prior to conference YourParty was a mess of individuals but this is OK as there had been no conference. The rhetoric was great - all people appealing to grassroots activism. However the YourParty conference felt like it was going to be a Socialist Conference - a collection of socialisms rather than a grassroots movement. If it remains as a collection of socialisms it will not impact the fascism (populism of Farage, Reform and Robinson). For YourParty to be meaningful it has to be Your - the grassroots. That means it has to make the grassroots active, and zandtao would guess that now more than in a long time the grassroots is looking for something meaningful.
Observing Divisions
Since July and perhaps before divisions have been observed between the key personalities of YourParty - between Jeremy and Zarah Sultana; most people think that these personality divisions are YourParty's death knell, for zandtao that is not the case. It is not a personality issue in that sense, it is an ego issue, maybe based on ditthupadana. For YourParty to be successful it has to be based on harmony and unity, and compromise on some ideals.
For zandtao it is OK that the media focuses on dividing the two factions if at conference harmony and unity prevails; zandtao suspects conference unity is a pipedream (fantasy) - see below. Corbyn has expressed a ditthi as an ultimatum - anti-zionism, understandable when you realise that Israeli zionists destroyed his chance of government - see Labour files. It is ironic how a complete anti-racist was destroyed by being portrayed as a racist, in the Labour files you can see how much zionists in Israel and elsewhere invested to remove Corbyn from the UK Labour leadership. Zarah has also expressed many strong left-wing idealisms, her own - not deriving from grassroots consensus.
For YourParty to truly be a democratic party these ultimata cannot be intimated as any form of policy, they can only be personal views. As soon as it is a YourParty ultimatum, there are people excluded - people who if they became activated might learn to choose to be anti-zionist.
As far as zandtao can assess, the Corbyn coalition with the Muslim MP's is based on anti-zionism; these Muslim MP's appear to have views across the political spectrum and that they have come together because of an anti-zionist ditthi. These MP's are not allied with a committed socialist like Zarah Sultana. This has been shown recently when one of the MP's resigned because Zarah supports trans.
YourParty can never activate a mass grassroots movement when there is insistence on particular views.
The Pipedream of Conference Unity
The key to YourParty success lies in harmony and unity in a strategy of making the grassroots active; conference might be able to provide that. The grassroots movement can NEVER be initially united behind a set of ideals (policy papers) because the grassroots is still conditioned and conformed.
Occupy Wall Street - no demands
This was the great hope of OWS - no demands. Behind OWS was the understanding that demands - views - could be used to cause division. Throughout OWS the media asked for demands, and the leaders simply said "Fix the system for the 99%". And people got behind OWS, and the only way the system could beat them was to mow them down with the police. For zandtao the harmony and unity of OWS was a guideline for future activism that he has only seen matched by the No Kings march. Ideas divide the grassroot movement because it is idealistically so diverse. But there is a harmony and unity of the grassroots movement - it is anti-authoritarianism and deep-down they know they live in a system that benefits the few not the many.
YourParty conference unity can work if it follows similar lines to OWS, it cannot work if it seeks a unity of ideals - it might well fail if it is like Socialist Conference. All  YourParty conference needs as a platform is harmony and unity for the many not the few, and stand back like OWS and tell the government to create a system for the many not the few.
This means that the activists like Corbyn and Sultana need to learn the discipline of not promoting their ditthis as conference policy - in the same way OWS leadership just stood behind the approach of:-
No Demands
Make a system for the many not the few
This is one of the images of OWS that stands out for zandtao:-
A collection of socialisms cannot unite but activists wanting to activate can. YourParty for activation, no demands except a system that is for the many not the few. Let's learn the lessons of intellectualism (and OWS), end the focus on individuals and particular theories, and activate for grassroots activism.
Slogan:-
YourParty - activating for grassroots activism.
Get the activists in line with activating and YourParty can become active.
So now to the conference.
Conference
Last weekend (28-30 November 2025) was the conference, and it appears to be an event that many have been waiting for. zandtao spent time online looking at the conference - not the same as being there. For a pathtivist there are dangers to conference as the emotional and intellectual egos can suck you in; nevertheless conference needs to be observed and pathtivists must evaluate with detachment and discernment.
Resources
Links - Record of Day1, Record of Day 2, Zarah discussing her boycott, Zarah's speech, Novara Media Summary of Conference, Podcast report end of conference
First impressions - bickering. That has to be the case because people are arguing about policy papers - an asylum for people suffering from ditthupadana; fascinating that these policy papers were not attributed despite the question being asked - central toxicity. But to be fair, expressing different viewpoints has to be the nature of a conference - unless it is for show.
SWP Expulsion
Was there a rule? There appears to have been expulsions - SWP?, and this dominated conference (especially on the first day) - apart from the Queen's speech on the second day. Expulsion led to dual party status - will that come back and bite them?
Leadership Division
This was a significant problem between Zarah and Jeremy resolved by conference as collective leadership of some form. Probably more of a problem for the Central Toxicity than for Jeremy.
Central Toxicity
What is this central toxicity of YourParty? Basically it is rules and centralised control, Zarah discussed her position here. Her boycott and this clip makes things clear to zandtao about central toxicity. A few months ago she inadvertently called it a boys' club, withdrew the comment but that is what YourParty appears to be for zandtao - a club. It is the centralisation zandtao experienced in the 80s and 90s with the rhetoric of going out to the constituencies.
This toxicity arose back in bill's day - and perhaps before. It used to be common for Labour politicians to electorally shoot themselves in the foot, and with the MSM bias it was always reported to excess. Labour central saw this and gradually took over trying to control this; the result is far worse and is what zandtao is terming central toxicity - Zarah's term? This can only be overcome by increased activism and awareness of MSM bias.
Brynn
bill had first hand experience of this toxicity. Brynn knew bill when bill was working in the trade unions but Brynn chose Labour. Brynn was a grassroots activist, and had a small team of activists around him in a ward. In their ward they knocked on doors, listened to the people, wrote a newsletter about what was happening to what the people were interested in, and he and the team delivered the newsletter to all the people in Brynn's ward. Lot of work, lot of activism, and people were becoming interested.
There were council elections coming, and the Council and Labour MPs didn't want Brynn's involvement. Ward meetings are usually small - 15-20 people, apathy had been driven into people back then as well. Everyone who usually went to the ward meetings were behind what Brynn and his team were doing - good solid grassroots activism that would show up the Labour MP and the Council. So they drifted into the meeting where the candidate for the Council would be nominated - all at the meeting were expecting to nominate Brynn.
Now bill does not know how high up the Labour Party this decision went, he expects Walford Road (that will date bill for Labour people in the know). They did the Tory trick of rounding up old women and cups of tea, took them to the nomination meeting with a nice mild ineffective nomination who never attended that ward. She was voted as the nominated person for Council, and the Labour ward voted her in.
Jeremy and central toxicity
This (Brynn) is typical central toxicity, and Jeremy has suffered from it all his life. In the Labour files Al Jazeera showed how the right-wing Blair side of the Labour party including backroom administrators - the central toxicity - promoted the anti-semitism row A Lifelong anti-racist being deposed as an anti-semitic racist because he supported Gaza. One has to wonder about this given that we can see genocide in Gaza but then Starmer's Labour are supporting the Zionists and genocide.
Zarah - Queen of Conference
This was no dreary Xmas day Queen's speech, this was what conference came for. And from an emotional point of view it was great. Listen to it, she was fun. And conference loved her - no doubts. Jeremy clapped and left. What did Jeremy want? As he is getting old, maybe his political expectations were realistic and strategic, and then along comes Zarah's rhetorical dreams with the speech that was the keynote of conference.
In terms of seeing the way things are, it was mostly on the nose - mostly seeing system-of-accumulation for what it is. However she used the term parasite for the rich - understandable, as a socialist bill always used to use such words. But as a pathtivist he does not, he characterises the rich as conditioned by the system-of-accumulation - we all are conditioned. There are some rich who are conditioned and accept even relish and promote the parasitism, and there are others compassion can work with; once compassion works with some rich, others will follow. For some of the richer, Cayman Island accounts can lose a few zeroes; and maybe they will cooperate to do so - not the parasites.
Zarah called for an end to capitalism - basically an end to the system-of-accumulation, but she associated all-the-rich-as-parasites with intending the system-of-accumulation. For zandtao this association is not the case, the rich are controlled by system-of-accumulation and not vice-versa - some as parasites some as beneficiaries beyond their control. zandtao maintains that SOME of the rich want to be wealthy, manipulate with the power of wealth but don't want the harm that comes with the system-of-accumulation.
Zarah's rhetoric quite clearly attacked all-the-rich-as-parasites, in doing this there can be no harmony nor Unity.
Zarah wants YP as a party of the working-class, again standard rhetoric. What now is the working-class? This is not the proletariat of Marx's era. With increasing automation working-class has limited power as trade unions, has limited power as strikers, and limited power as workers because there are less and less jobs with less and less consuming power. And those who are working are forced to work longer and longer. What is the working-class now?
It would perhaps be a more accurate description (research needed to confirm) to say that the working-class are anti-immigration first, that is the appearance of Reform. zandtao cannot know, he does not live there. And whilst the working-class abhor Andy-the-pedo, how many working-class want an end to monarchy? Socialists do, working-class - maybe not?
So when Zarah makes this queen's speech she has no collective mandate - in the vein of Magic Grandpa she is the darling of collective socialism. But does she represent the working-class?
Pathtivism Zarah and YP
But the big question throughout her speech is HOW? If she attacks all-the-rich-as-parasites, all-the-rich will protect each other, their families and their standard of living. Harmony works against that self-protection. All-the-rich can afford to give some back and keep their standard of living. The rich must be frightened of war, the state of the world, the climate crisis, and possible extinction events. They can build island sanctuaries but tidal waves can destroy them. Even if Zarah unites the working-class and if by some miracle she unites them as 99% where is the power? They are numbers without money, and money buys security ie security firms. Will security unite with class or the provider of their standard of living?
People like Zarah use the term revolutionary socialist - does Zarah? As soon as the word revolutionary is used the majority of the working-class are alienated. They fear violence more than poverty, until the level of poverty reaches survival. Is it there now? Zarah has no How? - just bang on doors. Maybe there will be increased activism, but how much? Most of the 99% don't want violence, they just cannot afford to live - Zohran Mamdani. How similar is Zarah's message to Zohran? zandtao does not know. Can she have the same impact? Can YP have the same impact?
zandtao loved this speech, he loved the unity the speech showed in conference, but he is not deluded by its message. That speech and Zarah's antics united conference to 7 out of 10. Is that enough to work with? Is that enough to make people active and to counter Farage? Time will tell.
Organisational not Ideological
zandtao was not there and is not defending zarah for breaking ranks, but he can see it from here. Grassroots activism means involving local people in constituencies, getting them active, and then they make policy. This strategy makes most of these policy papers irrelevant, what matters is what is happening on the ground, and what is needed on the ground. zandtao now understands the membership letter and subscription money, zarah wants the money for local grassroots activism. Should she have done it? zandtao's history is in central toxicity, thinks she lacks discipline, and is bringing YourParty into disrepute.
But here's the rub. They (Team Corbyn?) have already stamped YourParty with a central toxicity that had no grassroots vindication; it is just the usual way. Talk about grassroots but define control from the centre. This is the model of all parties including SWP, but grassroots activism needs something different - it wants local control. Did Zarah have a choice? So screw bill's disciplined political ego - grassroots or nothing. Better - grassroots or failed past.
Is zack different?
Zack Polanski is profiting from this division but the problem is that Zack's geniality is just Jeremy 2.0. He is not offering grassroots activism, he is offering central(green-toxicity) policy. At the moment people are more likely to go for Zak's genial central toxicity, but that is not grassroots activism.
Occupy OWS and Knocking on doors
Many of these genuine grassroots grievances were worked out at OWS but Occupy never really happened in the UK. YourParty has not dealt with it - conference is not enough time.
People don't want armed conflict or military conflict/ revolution. Mamdani caught the mood - affordability and authoritarianism - fascism. People in the US and UK can't afford to live the way they used to, Jeremy knows this and repeatedly talks about building housing. But central toxicity is attached to Jeremy, people are not sure whether he intends this centralisation. To be clear he is responsible for what is done in his name, and instead of trying to be Magic Grandpa zandtao asks for Jeremy to call them out - and dissociate from them.
With dual party knocking on doors has been compromised. All kinds of socialist parties can go out knocking on doors claiming to be YourParty - including SWP. Will the radical nature of these socialisms alienate the "working-class"?
Mandate from conference?
7 out of 10 was the conference mandate from Novara Media and Crispin Flintoff. Collective leadership and dual party appears to be what conference wants, and now YP comrades will go out and build. How will it be? Maybe people are ready for a radical socialist message and knocking-on-doors will be effective. We can only wait - for grassroots activism? - for Council elections next May?
Fatigue Apathy and Activism
Apathy is an intended strategy of the system-of-accumulation to avoid accountability. With most people being apathetic an environment is created where those currently making decisions in favour of the system-of-accumulation are not questioned - or if questioned not held accountable.
A Covid example of accountability:-
NZ and UK are islands where control of travel and entry could be similar. During the recent Covid pandemic, Boris started with a policy of doing nothing - under the guise of "developing herd immunity"; as a consequence UK deaths were proportionally very high as Covid was allowed into the country during the do-nothing policy. Boris was not held to account as the system-of-accumulation profited from Covid - yet Boris's policy was instigated after NZ and Asia's closure policies had proven to save lives. In New Zealand Jacintha Ardern quickly closed down borders - enacting policies similarly enacted throughout Asia. In NZ deaths were proportionally much lower than the UK but apparently the economy suffered - the NZ rich-with-accumulation were not able to exploit the NZ governmental power in the way Boris enabled. Jacintha was hounded out of office, and because this hounding was so well financed life in NZ was so uncomfortable for her and her family then moved to the US. System-of-accumulation - human deaths are less important than the profits made through accumulation lending money to governments.
British people are conscious of the need to hold Boris accountable but it is beyond their control. The assertion of pathtivism is that they have surrendered their control because of the lack of activism; pathtivists assert that the active create their own representation, and apathy means they don't have to be represented.
Intended Apathy
Apathy arises out of many factors:-
 The first and most important factor is to convince people that nothing can ever be done.
To convince people that those who are active cannot achieve anything usually by some besmeering process.
To create fatigue amongst potential activists so they have no energy to be active. Societal demands add to the fatigue that is created in two ways:-
a) Unreasonable demands in wage-slavery
b)Creating societal conditions that increase familial needs either through increased financial demands or through practices that create family problems. Typically teenagers are not cooperative and sympathetic to the stress in parents; advertising encourages teenagers to be independent and financially demanding.
MSM Apathy and YP
MSM is key to targeting tired people and ensuring apathy. They attack organisations and people who are active highlighting weaknesses usually ego and division. Whilst the crits of ego and division might well be true, it is usually a hypocritical attack in the sense that the people the system-of-accumulation favours are usually narcissistic and divisive.
MSM highlights the divisions within YP particularly attacking the people seeking activism. It does not show the activists who now have a "7 out of 10" mandate to campaign within their communities.
Socialists not Revolutionary
Most socialists are not revolutionary. Whilst they talk of class they don't come to the conclusion of class that Lenin did - namely the need for class change through revolution. Beyond making people active and uniting with their class there is no further socialist strategy - and no strategy with a conclusion.
People need to be active, it is their apathy that has led to the system-of-accumulation with all the parties being bought off - as Zarah says, conservatives, labour and reform bought off by the rich-protecting themselves because deep down they know how much harm they cause.
YP Activism
Both Jeremy and Zarah spoke of being working-class led. For a pathtivist this is a phrase of their own personal grassroots activism embodiment, they want activism in others and they want the activists to lead; that is path embodiment.
For those with ditthis - idealisms, activism is far less so. Jeremy is an Islington stalwart, he has spent his MP-representative life helping his constituents from the time that bill knew of his work in the late 80s to now. How much of his grassroots work is concerned with his Islington community and how much with his socialist ideals? Back in the 80s Zarah did nothing , bill does not know whether she is locally active now.
Dual party has a danger. For many socialists activism is concerned with recruiting people to their particular idealism and not campaigning activism. For pathtivists it is the cause and activism, not the ideology that matters. Zandtao recalls an SWP comrade from conference who was a lynchpin in Grenfell campaigning, because of her campaigning she needs to be in YP. But is she an exception for SWP campaigning?
There needs to be an analysis of activism and activating - to follow in zandtao's bag.
The wrangling between Corbyn supporters and Sultana supporters continued for weeks after conference. For the elections they formed slates, and on the slates were "Grassroots Left" (GL) comrades supporting Zarah and "The Many" (TM) comrades supporting Jeremy. Anyway the elections are over and here are the results:-
from Novara Media.
The formation process is over, and if YP is going to work then the Central Executive Committee must put aside differences, work together and start activating. Sadly zandtao is not sure that will happen, his experience of these intellectuals is that they will dominate meetings with motions to fulfil their own agenda but not work for YP.
YP is now behind the Greens; zandtao judges that prior to Zack and before the public divisions public sympathy was for YP. If differences can be buried there could be a swing back or perhaps more likely a Green-YP coalition that can begin to benefit people - the grassroots movement.
BOUNDARY - zandtao is restricting his discussion on UK left-wing politics as he does not live in the UK and cannot feel the grassroots.
|
Books:-