Filling the Vacuum 1995

[ViolentPanda]

What a bizzarre turn in this thread, bigging up the violence, etc not a Left i want to be part of.

Personally I wouldn't want to be part of any political grouping that couldn't acknowledge that sometimes violence is the only apt tool for making a political point. I admire pacifists, but don't share their belief that there's always an alternative to violence: Sometimes there isn't.

 

[ViolentPanda]

The analysis in the Filling the Vacuum document was spot on. I'd say it highlights the absolute relevance of groups such as the IWCA.

Or rather the relevance of their analysis.

 

[LLETSA]

It does highlight the irrevelance of the IWCA though, I think we can leave them to their reminiscing now

What-while you go off and start a new workers party?

How many times is that now?

 

[belboid]

The analysis in the Filling the Vacuum document was spot on. I'd say it highlights the absolute relevance of groups such as the IWCA.

but does one bit of (good, yes) analysis mean you dont have anything else to worry about for fifteen years? One bit of analyis, no matter how good, is just that.

The point is to change the world, not just interpret it. Sadly,. on this thread, there has been no attempt an honest analysis of why the project hasn't progressed. Of why it got so far, but then (seemingly, I can only go on what I read on here and what's on the various IWCA sites, which isnt a lot) stagnated and then went backwards.

If that analysis isn't been carried out, then it makes the original fade into nothingness

 

[tbaldwin]

" What is more, senior anti-fascists are confident that in the inevitable head to head with the BNP for working class hearts and minds, the IWCA will emerge victorious"

That was part of what was said by the person who wrote filling the vacumn. So what has happened since. How much impact have the IWCA had compared to the BNP?
The article does have some good points that many people agree with. But so do lots of left articles and groups.
Where i think they all go wrong is the insistence that you have to agree with all their views.

 

[Joe Reilly]

It does highlight the irrevelance of the IWCA though, I think we can leave them to their reminiscing now

In the same way the Left regarded the BNP as an irrelevance? Well whose being blown away by the dust of history now?

 

[Pickman's model]

poor metaphor: the left are dust, sucked up by the dyson of history.

 

[Joe Reilly]

but does one bit of (good, yes) analysis mean you dont have anything else to worry about for fifteen years? One bit of analyis, no matter how good, is just that.

The point is to change the world, not just interpret it. Sadly,. on this thread, there has been no attempt an honest analysis of why the project hasn't progressed. Of why it got so far, but then (seemingly, I can only go on what I read on here and what's on the various IWCA sites, which isnt a lot) stagnated and then went backwards.

If that analysis isn't been carried out, then it makes the original fade into nothingness

In 2002 the ratio of councillors was 3 -1 in the BNP's favour. Over the years the IWCA continue to demonstrate what could be mined by the working the coalface. The Left choose to ignore the evidence. The key orientation to working class communties was not mimicked. Indeed every excuse was invented to avoid doing so.

At the end of the day had the far-right shown as little resolve as the revolutionary Left etc, then it would be Griffin and co who would be in the position of defending their adoption of the euro-nationalist approach on places like Stormfront.

For once above the radar they would targetted by the mainstream parties working in concert as happened with the IWCA and what ever initial gains were made in say Burnley and elsewhere would come under increasing pressure. However the Right had two advantages. One was ambition.

The other resources. For a while the Left had vast resources too but rather than invest in a long term strategy they decided to spunk it instead on a variety of vanity projects, SLP, SA, RESPECT, which were both short-term and self-serving with every serious intention of avoiding engaging with the neglected working class.

Now the money is gone. While the BNP meanwhile have just added £4 million to the coffers plus untold recruits. The basis for new branches...and so on.

And to judge from the response to the original document on here, for all too many the penny is yet to drop.

 

[The39thStep]

but does one bit of (good, yes) analysis mean you dont have anything else to worry about for fifteen years? One bit of analyis, no matter how good, is just that.

The point is to change the world, not just interpret it. Sadly,. on this thread, there has been no attempt an honest analysis of why the project hasn't progressed. Of why it got so far, but then (seemingly, I can only go on what I read on here and what's on the various IWCA sites, which isnt a lot) stagnated and then went backwards.

If that analysis isn't been carried out, then it makes the original fade into nothingness

Jesus wept

 

[sevenstars]

What-while you go off and start a new workers party?

How many times is that now?

Im not involved in starting up a new workers party, I'm a grassroots activist trying to talk to other people about what we do next.

I'm even interested enough in your analysis to try to engage people here in a debate about why it has not achieved what it set out to do, despite its orginality.

However people seem to prefer to reminisce about street fights 15 years ago, remind themselves how great their analysis was over a decade ago and throw sectarian insults about rather than do so.

Theres no attempt to learn from mistakes so we can go forward, it suggests that the IWCA failed because they were a mirror image of the same left they were always denouncing. Can you not do better than that?

 

[durruti02]

it may be a turn in the thread, but you go where the comments of the posters leads you - especially if they make outlandish claims that fit in with History re-writing amongst what passes for a Left in this country. Downplaying the role of others and overstating their own.

Its hardly 'bigging up the violence'; its more a comment on the effectiveness of the violence that HAD to be used as a tactic in the days spoken of. (Even close calls like Abbey Wood would have made their lot think quite a few times about returning; more so when they've been hospitalised.

The 'nonsense of West London' has been mentioned a few times; well it seems to have had a dual benefit of humiliating them (including some skins arriving late in black BNSM uniforms - wonder what fun they were intending for their night time entertainment had they not been escorted home in a London ambulance?) and getting rid of some of those hanging around AFA who really did not know what they were letting themselves in for.

If the Fash at the time, weren't on the receiving end, if they ever went home thinking 'that was a piece of piss' then they bring their mates next week; their confidence grows; their presence in areas that 'The Left' like to frequent would have made it much harder for them to have meetings, carnivals, tree hugging days out etc these days. You'd just be left with internet forums.

afa argued at the time that they were providing a place that left wing politics could organise safely. i disagreed then and still do now. nowhere was i aware that left wing politics was not able to organise because of the far right. i think RA, and the rest of us, could and SHOULD have done, what they did in the late 1999s, transforming into IWCA, in the early 1980s

re kensington, sorry it was not good. many people think it was a GG/M15 set up to destroy RA. i am happy to say i wanted out. it was not the level of violence, which i have no problem with, but the context, which i think ended up with in jail sentances all round.

 

[Streathamite]

Where i think they all go wrong is the insistence that you have to agree with all their views.

ermm, WHO, precisely, is 'insisting' on this?

 

[tbaldwin]

ermm, WHO, precisely, is 'insisting' on this?

The organised groups to the left of labour.

 

[ViolentPanda]

However people seem to prefer to reminisce about street fights 15 years ago, remind themselves how great their analysis was over a decade ago and throw sectarian insults about rather than do so.

Theres no attempt to learn from mistakes so we can go forward, it suggests that the IWCA failed because they were a mirror image of the same left they were always denouncing. Can you not do better than that?

IMO we do need to look at past analysis, if only to sort the meat from the gristle. That way we can "learn from past mistakes" rather than dooming ourselves to repeat them ad infinitum.
As for sectarianism, I'm afraid my prejudices are such that I feel the need to Swappie-bash, if only to remind people of the authors of so many of "the past mistakes" of the British left.

 

[ViolentPanda]

The organised groups to the left of labour.

To be fair, that could mean anyone, including the lib-dems.

 

[cogg]

Durruti's original post made the point that this was a document that turned out to be spot on in what it said would happen. The discussion since has often been replaying old fights.

Forget it.

If you want to start again and make a difference politically, read the thread I set up based on the IWCA article on the elections and comment on that.


Arguing over interpretations of the past are on the whole a waste of time.

 

[durruti02]

yup

 

[belboid]

In 2002 the ratio of councillors was 3 -1 in the BNP's favour. Over the years the IWCA continue to demonstrate what could be mined by the working the coalface. The Left choose to ignore the evidence. The key orientation to working class communties was not mimicked. Indeed every excuse was invented to avoid doing so.

At the end of the day had the far-right shown as little resolve as the revolutionary Left etc, then it would be Griffin and co who would be in the position of defending their adoption of the euro-nationalist approach on places like Stormfront.

For once above the radar they would targetted by the mainstream parties working in concert as happened with the IWCA and what ever initial gains were made in say Burnley and elsewhere would come under increasing pressure. However the Right had two advantages. One was ambition.

The other resources. For a while the Left had vast resources too but rather than invest in a long term strategy they decided to spunk it instead on a variety of vanity projects, SLP, SA, RESPECT, which were both short-term and self-serving with every serious intention of avoiding engaging with the neglected working class.

Now the money is gone. While the BNP meanwhile have just added £4 million to the coffers plus untold recruits. The basis for new branches...and so on.

And to judge from the response to the original document on here, for all too many the penny is yet to drop.

not actually a reply to the questions there tho is it joe? merely more self congratulatory egotism. hey ho.

still, i guess one good idea was mor than a lot of lefty groups managed

 

[belboid]

Jesus wept

so Steptoe bunged him a fiver and pretended to be a member of his party

 

[Nigel Irritable]

not actually a reply to the questions there tho is it joe? merely more self congratulatory egotism. hey ho.

still, i guess one good idea was mor than a lot of lefty groups managed

Exactly. Nobody in or supportive of the IWCA has answered your question or any questions about IWCA strategy and its failings. I'm beginning to suspect that this is because none of them have any answers.

 

[durruti02]

you must have missed their statement .. actually there is thread too http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=292310

http://www.iwca.info/?p=10141

 

[Nigel Irritable]

you must have missed their statement

No I read the statement. It doesn't contain anything about the difficulties the IWCA have encountered or how it plans to overcome them. It doesn't explain how they propose going from a single viable local outpost to a real national force, it just states that such a force is necessary.

 

[Joe Reilly]

No I read the statement. It doesn't contain anything about the difficulties the IWCA have encountered or how it plans to overcome them. It doesn't explain how they propose going from a single viable local outpost to a real national force, it just states that such a force is necessary.

That's right. It just states a real national force is needed. Contained in that is the recogntion that the IWCA will be not be trying to be that 'national force'. Implicit also is the observation that trying to bolt together ill-matched off cuts, 'No2 EU. Yes to Oblivion!' for example on the dubious premise that doing something badly is better than doing nothing at all, in a game of play pretend, merely postpones the necessary public post mortem of the last 25 years that will have to happen if the likes of the BNP is ever to face a serious challenge for working class hearts and minds, over the next 25.

 

[Joe Reilly]

If by 'one good idea' you mean an orienation directly to the working class proper - most IWCA supporters would i suspect take that as a compliment.

 

[belboid]

what does 'proper' mean?

 

[Nigel Irritable]

That's right. It just states a real national force is needed.

Exactly. And without a viable strategy for getting there it's wish fulfillment on the same lines as some Spartoid telling us that a real revolutionary party would be nice.

How are you, by which I mean not just the IWCA but all of the forces you see involved in your future "real national force", going to get from a few local "pilot schemes" only one of which has managed a prolonged life to this "real national force"? You've served up plenty of bluster in this thread but there isn't a word of interest about such trifling matters. Where is your strategy?

 

[Joe Reilly]

Exactly. And without a viable strategy for getting there it's wish fulfillment on the same lines as some Spartoid telling us that a real revolutionary party would be nice.

How are you, by which I mean not just the IWCA but all of the forces you see involved in your future "real national force", going to get from a few local "pilot schemes" only one of which has managed a prolonged life to this "real national force"? You've served up plenty of bluster in this thread but there isn't a word of interest about such trifling matters. Where is your strategy?

All in good time.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

All in good time.

I'd have thought that fifteen years was probably enough time to come up with a strategy.

 

[LLETSA]

I'd have thought that fifteen years was probably enough time to come up with a strategy.

In the same way that an entire century ought to have been enough for the Trots?

 

[Nigel Irritable]

In the same way that an entire century ought to have been enough for the Trots?

Indeed. But here we are talking about the IWCA, who have set out to break the mould of left politics and indeed rebuild a working class movement. And in fifteen years have dramatically shown us... how to lose a load a branches and get two councillors elected.

Proclaiming your own brilliance and sneering at everyone else is all very amusing, but the IWCA's actual record is far from overwhelmingly impressive. And it still shows little evidence of learning from that experience and even less evidence of an ability to develop a viable strategy. About the best we've got after fifteen years is "All in good time". How about dropping the usual cantankerous and self-aggrandising bluster and actually coming up with something sensible to say about the IWCA's strategy?