Sheridan abandons hope for the SSP and tries to form new party

[Fisher_Gate]

In poll after poll the majority of the working class want to bring back hanging.That doesn't mean its a good thing.
As an ex-pat Scot in Wales I've never been to fussed about independence
one way or another but I'd be happy to see the UK state break up.
So an independant socialist Scotland?Is Socialism in one country possible?
Would a little celtic island of socialism survive in a sea of capitalism?

The principle of the right of self-determination for nations even under capitalism is fundamental for socialists. It is not something that one can put caveats on. It is therefore different to other policy issues on which there may well be a majority of the population in favour, but socialists are opposed.

Endorsing the right of self-determination does not necessarily mean that socialists agitate or support every claim - but once a nation has decided that it wants its own state, then socialists must support implementing it, whether it is a capitalist, fascist, feudalist or socialist state.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

Why sit on the fence then? Oppose Scottish independence.

Yet what amuses me about English socialists like Fishergate is that whilst they wax lyrically about Scottish independence, they say nothing about England. I'm waiting for Fishergate to demand that Respect calls for an independent England.

I don't agitate for independence because England is the oppressor nation. But if a consequence of supporting independence for Scotland, Wales or Ireland is that we finish up with an English state, so be it. Obviously I'd prefer any state to be socialist rather than capitalist.

 

[junius]

I don't agitate for independence because England is the oppressor nation. But if a consequence of supporting independence for Scotland, Wales or Ireland is that we finish up with an English state, so be it. Obviously I'd prefer any state to be socialist rather than capitalist.

Twaddle. How does England oppress Scotland?

 

[JHE]

Twaddle. How does England oppress Scotland?

Our team gets into the World Cup and theirs doesn't. It's beastly for them.

 

[osterberg]

The principle of the right of self-determination for nations even under capitalism is fundamental for socialists. It is not something that one can put caveats on. It is therefore different to other policy issues on which there may well be a majority of the population in favour, but socialists are opposed.

Endorsing the right of self-determination does not necessarily mean that socialists agitate or support every claim - but once a nation has decided that it wants its own state, then socialists must support implementing it, whether it is a capitalist, fascist, feudalist or socialist state.

That would depend if Scotland was a nation as such.I've really no idea.I'll have to go away and think about it.
Of course there is absolutely no way that Scotland is an oppressed nation .
There are areas of England that are as deprived as deprived areas of Scotland if not more so.

 

[nwnm]

The principle of the right of self-determination for nations even under capitalism is fundamental for socialists. It is not something that one can put caveats on. It is therefore different to other policy issues on which there may well be a majority of the population in favour, but socialists are opposed.

Endorsing the right of self-determination does not necessarily mean that socialists agitate or support every claim - but once a nation has decided that it wants its own state, then socialists must support implementing it, whether it is a capitalist, fascist, feudalist or socialist state. I don't agitate for independence because England is the oppressor nation. But if a consequence of supporting independence for Scotland, Wales or Ireland is that we finish up with an English state, so be it. Obviously I'd prefer any state to be socialist rather than capitalist.

This is A) contradictory, B) utter drivel, C) anything but Marxist
On that basis you would be for an orange state in the North of Ireland <and by default for a 2 state solution btw>, you would be for the right of an Apartheid South Africa <which the south African CP were in the 1920's> and you would also have defended eugene terrableunge's right to set up his own fascist state after the collapse of Apartheid <and presumably against the ANC government when they kicked his arse for trying to do so>, You would also be a staunch defender of Israel <a country founded on wholesale slaughter of Palestinians> and by default for a 2 state solution. Have you thought of joining the AWL or the weakly worker lot? Maybe its a straw in the wind for the ISG - welcome to the margins; where purity is everything and impact is nothing.......

 

[junius]

This is A) contradictory, B) utter drivel, C) anything but Marxist
On that basis you would be for an orange state in the North of Ireland <and by default for a 2 state solution btw>, you would be for the right of an Apartheid South Africa <which the south African CP were in the 1920's> and you would also have defended eugene terrableunge's right to set up his own fascist state after the collapse of Apartheid <and presumably against the ANC government when they kicked his arse for trying to do so>, You would also be a staunch defender of Israel <a country founded on wholesale slaughter of Palestinians> and by default for a 2 state solution. Have you thought of joining the AWL or the weakly worker lot? Maybe its a straw in the wind for the ISG - welcome to the margins; where purity is everything and impact is nothing.......

Oh dear.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

The English left crack me up.

This national chauvinist obsession some SSP members have with the "English left" or the "London left" is little sort of stomach churning. For what it's worth I'm Irish - not that it should make any difference either way to the validity of my arguments.

We dont support independence as a stepping stone, we support it as a principle...

Thanks for this though, you are proving the point I was making to Fisher_Gate - that the SSP, despite its formal position of supporting an independent socialist Scotland, has slid towards support for capitalist independence.

The UK state is a regime which supports terrorism internationally and repression internally.

And an independent capitalist Scotland, England or Wales would do exactly the same.

Remind me what the position of the leader of your party was on this?

One of these days you are going to learn to read what other people say before responding to them. I've already outlined Sheridan's views on the subject, which have been exactly as nationalist as those of the remnants of the SSP. ie He has advocated capitalist independence.

Solidarity, like the old SSP, contains a range of views on the Scottish national question. It also has the same formal position of support for an independent socialist Scotland. However, because the balance of forces within it is different it remains to be seen whether it will follow the SSP into the outright nationalism of advocating capitalist independence.

By the way, I have no idea what you mean by "the leader of your party". The only party I'm a member of doesn't have an individual leadership, only an elected committee.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

This is A) contradictory, B) utter drivel, C) anything but Marxist
On that basis you would be for an orange state in the North of Ireland <and by default for a 2 state solution btw>, you would be for the right of an Apartheid South Africa <which the south African CP were in the 1920's> and you would also have defended eugene terrableunge's right to set up his own fascist state after the collapse of Apartheid <and presumably against the ANC government when they kicked his arse for trying to do so>, You would also be a staunch defender of Israel <a country founded on wholesale slaughter of Palestinians> and by default for a 2 state solution. Have you thought of joining the AWL or the weakly worker lot? Maybe its a straw in the wind for the ISG - welcome to the margins; where purity is everything and impact is nothing.......

Oh dear, indeed... an obvious inability to see the difference between oppressor and oppressed does not merit much of a response.

Now I never said Scotland was an oppressed nation (the English are a different issue altogether). But the nature of the scottish national question is a well-traversed terrain and the most useful short summary is by someone who is actually a member of Solidarity now, so maybe you could ask him if he still agrees with what he said back in the 1990s while in the Scottish Socialist Alliance

http://www.whatnextjournal.co.uk/Pages///Back/Wnext4/Scotland.html

 

[Fisher_Gate]

This national chauvinist obsession some SSP members have with the "English left" or the "London left" is little sort of stomach churning. For what it's worth I'm Irish - not that it should make any difference either way to the validity of my arguments.



Thanks for this though, you are proving the point I was making to Fisher_Gate - that the SSP, despite its formal position of supporting an independent socialist Scotland, has slid towards support for capitalist independence.



And an independent capitalist Scotland, England or Wales would do exactly the same.



One of these days you are going to learn to read what other people say before responding to them. I've already outlined Sheridan's views on the subject, which have been exactly as nationalist as those of the remnants of the SSP. ie He has advocated capitalist independence.

Solidarity, like the old SSP, contains a range of views on the Scottish national question. It also has the same formal position of support for an independent socialist Scotland. However, because the balance of forces within it is different it remains to be seen whether it will follow the SSP into the outright nationalism of advocating capitalist independence.

By the way, I have no idea what you mean by "the leader of your party". The only party I'm a member of doesn't have an individual leadership, only an elected committee.

Obvious grammar point - "your" has both a singular and plural meaning.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

Twaddle. How does England oppress Scotland?

I never said that ...

 

[Fullyplumped]

I never said that ...

Quite correct. The phrase was "England is the oppressor nation".

Now the thing is - if England is the oppressor nation, which other nation or nations is it oppressing? Forgive us if we thought you meant us.

And who are you to suggest, as you did earlier at 391, that Scotland has decided that it wants its own state? Most Scots who voted on the issue have rejected this and nationalist parties always form a minority at the national level in Scotland.

The reason why bits of the Scottish and English left support separation is because they think it will fettle the imperialist nature, as they would have it, of the UK. Actually what it would do is create an England in which Tory rule is sustainable. But the daft left don't worry about the Tories, do they?

 

[q_w_e_r_t_y]

Most Scots who voted on the issue have rejected this

What rubbish in the 79 referendum 51.6% voted to "put the provisions of the Scotland Act into effect" (in itself an obsure form of wording) - a majority that was totally and utterly ignored as the next 16 years were spent under a government who never held more than 22 out of 71 scottish seats in the UK parliament.

and nationalist parties always form a minority at the national level in Scotland.

True, but then you have to look at this in the context of a news media which concentrates almost exclusively on parties which operate throughout the UK, with the exception of a small amount of regional news. The proposal for a "Scottish Six" was shot down in flames despite 70% of scottish viewers in favour,

The reason why bits of the Scottish and English left support separation is because they think it will fettle the imperialist nature, as they would have it, of the UK.

Yup

Actually what it would do is create an England in which Tory rule is sustainable.

Maybe, maybe not - but England wouldnt have the international power to behave in the same way as the UK does on the international stage. Besides afaic, there is very little difference between New Labour and the Tories these days. Better to have real tories than pretend socialists - at least then you know who your enemy is.

Why should we risk having a tory g'ment with no mandate just so that you lot should have the possibility of not having one

But the daft left don't worry about the Tories, do they?

 

[greenman]

What is the difference between "capitalist independence" and "independence"?
Is there a "capitalist" NHS, because it happens under capitalism and those who defend it are not revolutionary enough to overthrow the system? Are trade unions "capitalist" because they exist under capitalism and do not seek its immediate overthrow? The CWI will be consistent (if even more irrelevant) when they cease to defend the welfare state and trade unions as they are "capitalist" in the same way that they oppose the break up of the British Imperialist State on the grounds that independent Scotland, Wales and England would be "capitalist".
Down the ages we hear the echoes of those traitors in the British "socialist" movement who treated the Irish Citizen Army and its leader as pariahs and objectively supported their slaughter by the British State.
If we are going to be accused of propmoting "nationalism" I would rather be accused of giving tacit support to populist civic nationalism in England, Scotland and Wales that seeks the end of British Imperialism than be accused of giving tacit support to the monarchical prison house of nations that is British nationalism. Because the latter is what the "British national" socialists do in all their 57 varieties.

 

[osterberg]

... the monarchical prison house of nations that is British nationalism...

You're serious,are you?

 

[Fisher_Gate]

What rubbish in the 79 referendum 51.6% voted to "put the provisions of the Scotland Act into effect" (in itself an obsure form of wording) - a majority that was totally and utterly ignored as the next 16 years were spent under a government who never held more than 22 out of 71 scottish seats in the UK parliament.



True, but then you have to look at this in the context of a news media which concentrates almost exclusively on parties which operate throughout the UK, with the exception of a small amount of regional news. The proposal for a "Scottish Six" was shot down in flames despite 70% of scottish viewers in favour,


Yup


Maybe, maybe not - but England wouldnt have the international power to behave in the same way as the UK does on the international stage. Besides afaic, there is very little difference between New Labour and the Tories these days. Better to have real tories than pretend socialists - at least then you know who your enemy is.

Why should we risk having a tory g'ment with no mandate just so that you lot should have the possibility of not having one

Good post. The referendum majority in 1979 marked a key turning point in the debate, sadly ignored by SWP and English Militant.

Unfortunately some socialists support forced state mergers - remember "Socialist Federation of Argentina and Britain" during the Falklands/Malvinas crisis? Demanding a union of Scotland and England as the only way we can get socialism is similarly ludicrous.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

Quite correct. The phrase was "England is the oppressor nation".

Now the thing is - if England is the oppressor nation, which other nation or nations is it oppressing? Forgive us if we thought you meant us.

And who are you to suggest, as you did earlier at 391, that Scotland has decided that it wants its own state? Most Scots who voted on the issue have rejected this and nationalist parties always form a minority at the national level in Scotland.

The reason why bits of the Scottish and English left support separation is because they think it will fettle the imperialist nature, as they would have it, of the UK. Actually what it would do is create an England in which Tory rule is sustainable. But the daft left don't worry about the Tories, do they?

There's never been a multi-option constitutional referendum in Scotland - only take-it-or-leave-it devolution which was supported by a majority twice, in 1979 and 1999. The question of who forms the government, whether in local, general or devolved parliament elections, is a different question. That's why the SSP has rightly supported a referendum.

 

[greenman]

You're serious,are you?

The mental chains of royalist British Nationalism can be observed in just five minutes conversation on the subject of Britain with ordinary working people just about anywhere in the UK.
It is the elephant in the room when we talk about socialism, radical reform or any real challenge to the status quo in this part of the world. And the response of much of the Brit left is to ignore it, pretend it is an irrelevance or tacitly back it by pretending that the working class in Britain will only behave in a united fashion if they are under the Union Flag. If we believe people should unite across national borders it does not matter how many borders there are, whilst the continuation of the UK is a major political/psychological barrier to effective united action by perpetuating a royalist mindset that is more easily manipulated by the ruling class than democratic and civic national alternatives.

 

[Fullyplumped]

What rubbish in the 79 referendum 51.6% voted to "put the provisions of the Scotland Act into effect".

But that was about a devolved assembly within the UK state, not about a separate state. I was there, campaigning for the assembly in 1979 (proud )

True, but then you have to look at this in the context of a news media which concentrates almost exclusively on parties which operate throughout the UK, with the exception of a small amount of regional news. The proposal for a "Scottish Six" was shot down in flames despite 70% of scottish viewers in favour,

Ah, the meeja. The future of the nation forestalled because Viv Lumsden doesn't get to read the news.

Yup

We agree, then.

Better to have real tories than pretend socialists - at least then you know who your enemy is.

Predictable it-doesn't-matter-how-you-vote-the -government-gets-in and there's-no-difference-between-new-labour-and-the-tories. The daft left don't worry about the Tories.

Why should we risk having a tory g'ment with no mandate just so that you lot should have the possibility of not having one

Who do you mean by "you lot"?

 

[Fullyplumped]

remember "Socialist Federation of Argentina and Britain" during the Falklands crisis?

I'd never heard of that and if it wasn't someone like you saying it I wouldn't believe it. Did they never bother thinking about voters at that time?

 

[Fullyplumped]

The mental chains of royalist British Nationalism can be observed in just five minutes conversation on the subject of Britain with ordinary working people just about anywhere in the UK.
It is the elephant in the room when we talk about socialism, radical reform or any real challenge to the status quo in this part of the world. And the response of much of the Brit left is to ignore it, pretend it is an irrelevance or tacitly back it by pretending that the working class in Britain will only behave in a united fashion if they are under the Union Flag. If we believe people should unite across national borders it does not matter how many borders there are, whilst the continuation of the UK is a major political/psychological barrier to effective united action by perpetuating a royalist mindset that is more easily manipulated by the ruling class than democratic and civic national alternatives.

300th anniversary of the Union next year!

 

[Fullyplumped]

On a slightly different point, I'm not sure if has been brought to the attention of the company.

The Dear Leader's face is an absolute picture.

 

[nwnm]

its been seen before. This one hasn't -
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=9780

But it does show the difference between the two organisations. Solidarity are on the march with 50,000 or so people calling for Bliar to go and for troops out of Iraq. The SSP are so befuddled by scottish independence that they can't even make it across the border to add their voices <and rely on the massed rank of the ISG to flog their paper for them>

At a time when Blair's bloodied but unbowed, Labour MP's are beginning to fall over themselves to speak on anti war platforms and the real nature of British imperialism is being unmasked on the streets. The SSP would rather retreat into their own little bunker

 

[junius]

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,,1879925,00.html

 

[Fisher_Gate]

its been seen before. This one hasn't -
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=9780

But it does show the difference between the two organisations. Solidarity are on the march with 50,000 or so people calling for Bliar to go and for troops out of Iraq. The SSP are so befuddled by scottish independence that they can't even make it across the border to add their voices <and rely on the massed rank of the ISG to flog their paper for them>

At a time when Blair's bloodied but unbowed, Labour MP's are beginning to fall over themselves to speak on anti war platforms and the real nature of British imperialism is being unmasked on the streets. The SSP would rather retreat into their own little bunker

So Sheridan was a speaker invited by the SWP ... no surprise.

Given that they also put Charles Kennedy on a platform, it's hardly a ringing endorsement by the anti-war movement ... and what did happen to that other Scottish guy when his party fell out with him?

I'm still curious to know whether the SWP will be inviting Sheridan or one of his acolytes to the Respect conference? Any port in a storm eh?

 

[tollbar]

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,,1879925,00.html

Monoghan played a totally treacherous role on the SSP list throughout the discussions around the Sheridan case at one time pretending to be non aligned at others putting pro Sheridan arguements under the pretence of playing 'devils advocate', whilst at the same time advising Sheridan on media tactics.

 

[sevenstars]

What an odd way to judge a scottish socialist party, by how well it attends demonstrations in England! Isnt there enough people here to go on our own marches? Was the class struggle in Scotland suspended for the day?

I was there myself, the handful of 'solidarity' banners and placards I saw were carried by a handful of SWP members, and given that all they've been doing for the last few months is plugging this demo thats not surprising is it? But so what? They seem to have no idea what to do next other than hopping from one demo to another.

So Tommy Sheridan spoke on another platform, maybe he will go the way of George Galloway, he's not exactly missed by his former Glasgow constituents either.

Last time I was on an anti-war march B LIAR was on placards, doesnt anyone think putting one of our own celebrity liars on the platform is a bit ironic, not to say cynical?

 

[nwnm]

What an odd way to judge a scottish socialist party, by how well it attends demonstrations in England! Isnt there enough people here to go on our own marches? Was the class struggle in Scotland suspended for the day?

For the SSP the war and occupation of Iraq was obviously....

 

[nwnm]

and what did happen to that other Scottish guy when his party fell out with him?

Who? Colin Fox? Well he was invited to address the anti war demo last saturday too. But the SSP found a far more important issue in the interest of class struggle and international <sic> solidarity for him to attend here <this story was originally dated 23rd september btw>-
http://icwestlothian.icnetwork.co.u...der-flys-to-homeless-world-cup-name_page.html

Fuckin' tragic

 

[junius]

Who? Colin Fox? Well he was invited to address the anti war demo last saturday too. But the SSP found a far more important issue in the interest of class struggle and international <sic> solidarity for him to attend here <this story was originally dated 23rd september btw>-
http://icwestlothian.icnetwork.co.u...der-flys-to-homeless-world-cup-name_page.html

Fuckin' tragic

Much more tragic is when letters like this get written.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article1433339.ece