tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post7907498478205808970..comments2024-03-27T09:14:27.496+00:00Comments on All That Is Solid ...: Socialist Party Replies to SWP on Left UnityPhilhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06298147857234479278noreply@blogger.comBlogger35125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-77088830374082566102009-06-29T11:45:44.109+01:002009-06-29T11:45:44.109+01:00Workers Power have produced a reply to the Sociali...Workers Power have produced a reply to the Socialist Party's response:<br /><br />http://www.workerspower.com/index.php?id=47,2046,0,0,1,0Johnhttp://www.workerspower.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-54238991430766206692009-06-29T10:58:20.788+01:002009-06-29T10:58:20.788+01:00I understand where you're coming from Charlie....I understand where you're coming from Charlie. But usually an open letter requires an open response, and what the SP letter does is quite accurately reflect the feelings and suspicions SP members have in general toward the SWP.<br /><br />If the SWP were to hold some sort of left unity event I'm pretty sure we'd send someone along to state our position and seek clarification on areas where we can cooperate - particularly on the general election. But - and I know how frustrating it can be for independent socialists - where the SP are concerned, we will wait and see if the SWP has changed its spots. Sadly, not following through with regular talks, the comments of leading figures at UAF, their non-attendance at the left coordinating body scant days after publishing the open letter does not bode well.Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06298147857234479278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-57028788999535053732009-06-28T22:01:14.133+01:002009-06-28T22:01:14.133+01:00I think it was a mistake for SP to respond as abov...I think it was a mistake for SP to respond as above - that is to say with reference to issues on which it and the SWP differ. Why? Because there's danger that it feeds into a vicious circle of sniping.<br /><br />My worry is that the message to both SP and SWP members from these statements is actually "carry on as before".Charlie Markshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12770820928636046622noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-25382243366776601782009-06-28T14:22:28.631+01:002009-06-28T14:22:28.631+01:00RB, how would the Lindsey workers have been succes...RB, how would the Lindsey workers have been successful this time if they had lost the winter strike?<br /><br />But that's beside the point. The SP is not going to initiate a process of left unity with the SWP for the reasons outlined above <i>in the absence</i> of new forces. That's not sectarianism - it's common sense.<br /><br />There is nothing stopping Workers' Power though. You can always show us how it's done by initiating unity talks with the likes of the cpgb, PR, AWL, IBT, etc.Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06298147857234479278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-11215169520974081152009-06-28T10:51:38.205+01:002009-06-28T10:51:38.205+01:00The SP's reply is, roughly translated, 'no...The SP's reply is, roughly translated, 'no'.<br /><br />They expose their own sectarianism.<br /><br />They have many criticisms of the SWP; some of these criticisms are justified (Respect), some reactionary (the first Lindsey BJ4BW walkout). <br /><br />But if they were serious about their own slogan of building a new workers' party, why not respond positively to the swp's letter while suggesting a new democratic conference and structure to take us towards a new party?<br /><br />Like this:<br />http://www.workerspower.com/index.php?id=47,2017,0,0,1,0RBhttp://www.workerspower.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-69479076039173111202009-06-28T10:50:00.240+01:002009-06-28T10:50:00.240+01:00I expect Roobin's not reading this, but I'...I expect Roobin's not reading this, but I'll say it anyway - I don't understand the vehemence of his reaction. Which statement "stinks people's shit"?<br /><br /><i>all organisations screw up, including one's own</i><br /><br /><i>those screw-ups have real consequences, including leaving other people lastingly and justifiably pissed-off</i><br /><br /><i>treating your mistakes [not] as a learning opportunity for you personally [but] as actions with effects that need to be put right.</i><br /><br />It all seems pretty sensible to me.Philhttp://gapingsilence.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-67943342680185616132009-06-28T09:56:30.975+01:002009-06-28T09:56:30.975+01:00I also wanted to say something about Roobin's ...I also wanted to say something about Roobin's idea of there not being an 'outside audit' in politics, but forgot to mention it yesterday.<br /><br />I'm slightly confused about the meaning. As I understand it for any revolutionary party the outside audit is performed during the course of activity, of its everyday exertions in the class struggle. If its practice has no purchase at all the organisation will wither on the vine after a period of disorientation. I think the SWP has problems on this score and could be facing the kind of decline we went through during the 90s because, going on my standpoint on the outside, it seems unable and/or unwilling to draw the necessary political conclusions from the practice of recent years.Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06298147857234479278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-42710148384411626482009-06-27T14:24:05.409+01:002009-06-27T14:24:05.409+01:00I meant to come on this a bit earlier.
Re: the s...I meant to come on this a bit earlier. <br /><br />Re: the seriousness of the SWP's approach to unity and the use of the open letter - I'd agree with previous posters that it owes more to internal consumption and positioning on the left than a genuine overture.<br /><br />Why?<br /><br />Shortly after Martin Smith spoke at <a href="http://averypublicsociologist.blogspot.com/2008/11/sp-and-swp-debate-revolutionary-party.html" rel="nofollow">Socialism 2008</a> the SWP leadership approached the SP with the offer of regular talks. The SP leadership accepted. And since then? Nothing. Not a sausage.<br /><br />Admittedly this was shortly before the SWP was caught up in the internal ructions around John Rees's removal from the central committee, but they're long since over now and the SP hasn't heard a thing. If the SWP was seriously minded when it came to unity, wouldn't it be sensible to reopen this channel?<br /><br />Another matter makes me doubtful of the SWP leadership's intentions too. At the last Unite Against Fascism steering committee meeting (or whatever its leading body is called), Weyman Bennett and Martin Smith comprehensively laid into No2EU for letting the BNP in. Leaving aside the refutation of this argument (<a href="http://averypublicsociologist.blogspot.com/2009/06/why-left-is-not-to-blame.html" rel="nofollow">see here</a>), these are not the sort of vibes leading figures should be sending out if they want a serious alliance. I very much doubt such arguments would have been made had anyone involved with No2EU been in the room.Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06298147857234479278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-24032473454285344112009-06-26T18:37:26.952+01:002009-06-26T18:37:26.952+01:00Scuse me, I'm going to be crude, but that atti...Scuse me, I'm going to be crude, but that attitude stinks people's shit. That's nothing to do with common ground, that's collective monomania, that's repent and seek forgiveness. Fucking hell, I've stupid. I've been trolled on someonelse's blog.Adam Markshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18155314207452345741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-25976605949910867222009-06-26T08:16:09.733+01:002009-06-26T08:16:09.733+01:00Where is the common ground?
The common ground be...<i>Where is the common ground?</i><br /><br /><br />The common ground between the SWP and SP (and others) is that<br /><br />a) alone, they're all screwed<br />b) they all get some things right - and those things need to be built on, collectively<br />c) they all get some things wrong - and those things need to be dealt with, collectively<br /><br />I think what I'm calling for here is a general willingness to admit that all organisations screw up, including one's own - and, above all, to admit that those screw-ups have real consequences, including leaving other people lastingly and justifiably pissed-off. It's the difference between treating your mistakes as a learning opportunity for you personally, and treating them as actions with effects that need to be put right.Philhttp://gapingsilence.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-54532962916986278482009-06-25T14:14:53.990+01:002009-06-25T14:14:53.990+01:00As an SWP member I can't say I'm surprised...As an SWP member I can't say I'm surprised, either by the content or the tone. And I'm not surprised by some of the comments either - if you think that the SWP is the problem, then you'll agree with the SP's approach here. <br /><br />The point about the 'outside audit' is that in business, outside audits are done by disinterested bodies who are simply checking whether a particular set of rules have been followed. In that sense, there can be no outside audit in politics (I don't see the SP disagreeing with that.<br /><br />That's quite different from saying that the SWP doesn't listen to anyone outside our ranks. There are people whose judgements I trust who sometimes agree with us and sometimes don't; there are other people whose judgements I don't trust, who sometimes agree with the SWP. We listen to other people, but we then make our own minds up - that's true of any organisation. If anything, I'd argue we're more open to influence than the SP in that respect.chjhnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-507419963990573502009-06-25T13:47:44.915+01:002009-06-25T13:47:44.915+01:00"You've missed the point."
The poin..."You've missed the point."<br /><br />The point is this is a polemic against the SWP. That would be fine, except that it it's called a reponse to Left Must Unite to Create an Alternative, which discusses possible future left unity. If it is a bit of BOTH then the only possible conclusion I can come to these are conditions to future unity.<br /><br />I must tell you there is a strong current of feeling amongst comrades I know which I will sum up as "unite with who?" I don't think that's right, but the fact is people feel that way. Raise the Socialist Alliance and you'll get a near universal groan. People do not want to go back to a situation where, every fortnight, they meet for a round of fruitless argument and denounciation. This letter will confirm that opinion.<br /><br />Like I said there are lots of things I can raise about all sorts of people and groups. It would not get us one step further to unity. Where is the common ground?Adam Markshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18155314207452345741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-13777058560981364132009-06-25T10:44:23.403+01:002009-06-25T10:44:23.403+01:00'independent socialists across Britain, most l...'independent socialists across Britain, most likely the majority given the shrinking of the left and its activity, should disregard these groupings and move onwards without them'<br /><br />But what does that mean in parcatice? If the independent socialists get organised, then they're no longer independent. If they don't, then how on earth can they have any impact? I can understand people staying independent cos they don't like the options on offer (its a coherent position, even if i don't agree with the judgements being made) but independents seem doomed to give some kind of support to some kind of organised initiative by someone, or they will remain marginal, however many there may be.<br /><br />I certainly think that there are a fair few, from the 57,000 who voted SA in 2001, to the 300,000 who voted SLP or NO2EU (although some of those last ones might not be explicitly socialist). Whichever way you cut it, there are still probably 10, 20 30 times as many willing to vote Socialist as are in the organised Left. But atomised disorganised socialists cannot have an impact imo.<br /><br />'anyone but England'Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-28735025373795334172009-06-25T03:08:39.286+01:002009-06-25T03:08:39.286+01:00What this comment thread highlights is the long an...What this comment thread highlights is the long and troubled history of the existing left.<br /><br />But if the main socialist organisations cannot overcome this history, than independent socialists across Britain, most likely the majority given the shrinking of the left and its activity, should disregard these groupings and move onwards without them. No group - SWP, SP or any other - should be able to hold the rest of us to ransom.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-71763671056789984732009-06-24T22:25:10.034+01:002009-06-24T22:25:10.034+01:00But that's not what you want to hear
You'...<i>But that's not what you want to hear</i><br /><br />You've missed the point. (I'm not speaking on behalf of the SP, incidentally, not least because I'm not a member. The same goes for Respect.) I'm not saying what conclusions the SWP leadership ought to arrive at about their past interventions - I'm saying they should talk to those people directly affected, and form their conclusions after listening to what those people say. You could call it an "outside audit".<br /><br />You said yourself that in politics there's no outside audit. I'm saying that this doesn't have to be the case - there are plenty of sources for this kind of feedback. But if you pre-emptively rule out listening to them - and ridicule the idea of paying any attention to them (<i>agree with what's been said and say soweeee</i>) - then I guess it must seem like there's nobody here but you.Philhttp://gapingsilence.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-62211758456783922612009-06-24T16:44:26.111+01:002009-06-24T16:44:26.111+01:00On the wisdom of an open letter:
You're right...On the wisdom of an open letter:<br /><br />You're right, Roobin, for a number of reasons.<br /><br />1) An open letter usually comes across as an aggressive tactic. <br />2) Serious moves to unity and collaboration require private meetings in advance with any public statement coming from much more than the leadership of one organization.<br />3) No organization in Britain has the authority to pull everyone around its vision; there has to be much more give and take than any of them have been used to.<br />4) The open letter has induced a defensive reaction all round. Paradoxically, it risks closing down discussion about such matters as Respect, electoral interventions and the Lindsey dispute. <br />5) It has been responded to in kind by the SP. I must say I found that response depressing - and the further justification of relative sizes and weights of each organization even more so. Here was a chance for the SP to approach the SWP privately and seek a much more serious process. <br />6) I find it inexplicable that the SWP did not reciprocate the SP's invitation to attend its event. It suggests to my mind not so much bad faith, as really bad coalitional politics.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-79506520246270409512009-06-24T12:27:20.023+01:002009-06-24T12:27:20.023+01:00You see, whenever I have someone ask me about the ...You see, whenever I have someone ask me about the politics of the SP for a while now I've told them to speak to an SP member, go see what they actually do. There's no way I'm going to give a fair, informed account of the Socialist Party. In one sense why should I, it's not my job. <br /><br />When it comes to the points in the letter I don't think they are particularly correct or even fair. Like I said, I think I can knock them back. I doubt if you'd be happy with the answers though.<br /><br />On the matters you raise directly I'd summarise my response as; Respect - right analysis, drastically wrong tactics; Lindsey - absolutely no complaints, it was right and still is right to raise the wider implications of BJ4BW. But that's not what you want to hear.<br /><br />So, if I was representing the SWP and you the SP, the question is how do we achieve unity, and what kind of unity? Especially as we both agree, in the abstract, that we should. We both have things about each other that we don't like (and, let's face it, aren't really going to change). What's the solution? Well, in this letter it's for the SWP to agree with what's been said and say soweeee. T'aint gon hapn.<br /><br />I am personally wondering about the wisdom of putting the appeal in the form of a letter now. Perhaps top-level meetings followed by branch-level discussion might have been a better idea.Adam Markshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18155314207452345741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-27370388061090233682009-06-24T10:00:18.720+01:002009-06-24T10:00:18.720+01:00as far as I'm concerned the SWP does lots of a...<i>as far as I'm concerned the SWP does lots of accounting and assessment ... In business the question is what does the outside audit say? There is no outside audit in politics.</i><br /><br />But that's precisely the point - what the SWP's got in the way of an "outside audit" is the sum of the feedback the party gets <b>from outside</b>. I gather that there's been a fair amount of "accounting and assessment" within the SWP since John Rees and friends decided to go nuclear on RESPECT; to take a more recent example, there's probably been a bit of rethinking of the SWP's initial reaction to the Lindsey walkout. But has anyone from the current SWP leadership approached the individuals who got the sharp end of the party's approach over the RESPECT split* and apologised for the tactics that were used? Has anyone contacted the SP about Lindsey and said "you know what, you lot called this one right and we initially got it wrong"?<br /><br />I somehow doubt that anything like this has happened - but that would be when you'd get the outside audit. Accounting and assessment <b>within the party</b> just enables the party to project all its problems onto mistakes that may have been made in the past - and in exceptional cases onto a scapegoat like Rees.<br /><br />*Obviously I'm not going into individual cases here - hopefully we can agree that there were such cases and leave it at that.Philhttp://gapingsilence.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-14244292214601045732009-06-24T09:36:40.533+01:002009-06-24T09:36:40.533+01:00To follow on from what Dave says, I hope that both...To follow on from what Dave says, I hope that both SP and SWP will hold meetings to encourage socialists of all parties and none to work together.Charlie Markshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12770820928636046622noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-73920078007095197622009-06-24T05:57:20.747+01:002009-06-24T05:57:20.747+01:00Two questions:
(1) Is the SWP unity memo a seriou...Two questions:<br /><br />(1) Is the SWP unity memo a serious attempt at unity or simply an exercise in feeding the chickens?<br /><br />(2)Is the SP's reply a serious attempt at exploring unity or simply an exercise in feeding the chickens?<br /><br />The other complication is that <i>if</i> the SP wants to adopt the high ground by referencing No2EU as 'unity in action' how much democratic flex has that project got such it could become a viable unity vehicle?<br /><br />It seems to me that if the SWP is guilty of one form of obscurantism, the SP is guilty of another.<br /><br />To put it frankly comrades, the real audience in all this, isn't so much the amorphous "left" but Joe and Mary average SP and SWP member.<br /><br />That stands out a proverbial mile.Dave Rileyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05319742357589026156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-66094910071105544572009-06-23T22:59:54.954+01:002009-06-23T22:59:54.954+01:00I really have doubts whether the SWP, as an organi...I really have doubts whether the SWP, as an organisation, is worth working with. There are some good people in the SWP, but fundamentally they are the far left wing of middle class politics.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-61052471809295088942009-06-23T14:06:06.133+01:002009-06-23T14:06:06.133+01:00I'm glad that the SP has taken time to reply, ...I'm glad that the SP has taken time to reply, but I think that some of what they ask for is unrealistic. First, it makes little sense to ask for a detailed appraisal of NO2EU in such a letter. If that had been provided, then an equally detailed appraisal of the SLP, the SSP and who knows what would also be necessary. The basic message would have been completely lost in the detail, and everyone would have just argued about their own piece of the picture. <br /><br />Secondly, the disagreements about how to oppose the BNP are not exactlly irrelevant, but can, for now, be put to one side. A recognition that simple anti-bnp campaigning is insufficient is at the heart of the Open Letter, but if we are going to demand agreement about how anti-bnp stuff should be conducted, along with every other detailed campaign, then what hope of ever agreeing is there?<br /><br />On the other hand, I do think that they've got a point about Marxism. The SP should be invited imo.<br /><br />This needs to be a process, I'd be happy if people just don't tread on each others toes in the GE, and if we can aim for a united left formation for the next Euros and GLA's that would be something!<br /><br />'Anyone but England'Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-68426987311740744042009-06-22T19:58:41.283+01:002009-06-22T19:58:41.283+01:00Hi comrades
a good reply to the swp. a poster abo...Hi comrades<br /><br />a good reply to the swp. a poster above said why is our reply 'open', well because the initial swp letter was an open letter!!<br /><br />there is one org that is done the most to destroy left unity in the UK, that is the swp. socialist alliance anyone? <br /><br />don't let yuor very understandable desire for left unity cloud the issues and alibi the swp.<br /><br />paul<br />coventryAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-69452865242077909702009-06-22T18:15:42.558+01:002009-06-22T18:15:42.558+01:00Ted: I think that's a bit simplistic. We don&#...Ted: I think that's a bit simplistic. We don't have to forget problems of cooperation in the past, but they shouldn't hang round our necks and weigh down the possibility of new initiatives.<br /><br />What if this time is different? The SWP say they are prepared to begin working towards something new - the open letter even assents to a conference of all interested groups. Take them up on it! If they are disingenuous or obstructive the process can continue on without them, having benefited from their support in getting the ball rolling. And if not, bygones. Our task is too important to tolerate unnecessary disunity.<br /><br />Of course there are problems with the SWP approach. The open letter barely mentions no2eu and outright dismisses the Greens' increased (and obviously progressively-minded) vote. But I am prepared to take them at their word, as I am of any group that proposes socialist unity.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-43734562730431525392009-06-22T16:15:03.737+01:002009-06-22T16:15:03.737+01:00"Saying 'yes we have made mistakes' i..."Saying 'yes we have made mistakes' is not the same as accounting and assessing what has happened in the past."<br /><br />The thing is, as far as I'm concerned the SWP does lots of accounting and assessment. <br /><br />This kind of thing goes on in businesses all the time. In business the question is what does the outside audit say? There is no outside audit in politics. If an alliance depends on people agreeing what an 'honest account' is there'll never be an alliance. <br /><br />The question is what arrangement can each group live with at the moment.Adam Markshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18155314207452345741noreply@blogger.com