Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

Sad, desperately sad.

Doesn't say anything about the type of movement that needs to be built ... and whether democracy has anything to do with it...
 
nwnm said:
people like Danny Cohn Bendit in France, Tariq Ali in Britain and Bernadette Devlin in Ireland.

More recently, Fausto Bertinotti .

really fills you with confidence doesn't it? At least they don't mind being upfront about their tailism. Whatever the merits of a new TS fronted formation, this is pitiful garbage.
 
The article is explicitly taking on the argument about the role of prominent individuals, and the role that they play in a movement. Which is why it isn't talking about the detail of structures and conferences - this new formation hasn't even formed and FG wants to talk about what kind of national council it would have.

Now if people would like to actually put an argument, rather than shaking their heads and going 'dear oh dear' (or reaching for their thesaurus for more quirky ways of spelling 'Respect') then that might be interesting.

Fullyplumped: It's based on the experience of seeing how Respect pulled in loads of people who weren't at all keen on the old Socialist Alliance. That is one of the things that has put Respect orders of magnitude ahead of waht the SA achieved. But it's very tentative cos I don't know the SSP, which was itself way ahead of the SA, or at least was until its engine blew up.
 
mutley said:
The article is explicitly taking on the argument about the role of prominent individuals, and the role that they play in a movement. Which is why it isn't talking about the detail of structures and conferences - this new formation hasn't even formed and FG wants to talk about what kind of national council it would have.

Now if people would like to actually put an argument, rather than shaking their heads and going 'dear oh dear' (or reaching for their thesaurus for more quirky ways of spelling 'Respect') then that might be interesting.

Fullyplumped: It's based on the experience of seeing how Respect pulled in loads of people who weren't at all keen on the old Socialist Alliance. That is one of the things that has put Respect orders of magnitude ahead of waht the SA achieved. But it's very tentative cos I don't know the SSP, which was itself way ahead of the SA, or at least was until its engine blew up.


Trying to look at this objectively, its difficult to see where in scotland, TS and allies are going to find the sort of new forces they are talking about. The SSP had the sort of geographical spread and organisation in scotland that the SA in england could only ever have dreamed about and indeed more then Respect has now. Allthis talk about the forces around the G8 begs the point that the carnival moved on with whatever political forces that were mobilised already being taken by the SSP or greens, anti war movement similar. What I suspect they will get are formerly active SSP members who have dropped out for various reasons over the past few years and a few people motivated by the Sheridan victory, but I suspect that the amount of genuinely new forces will be pitifully small.
 
mutley said:
The article is explicitly taking on the argument about the role of prominent individuals, and the role that they play in a movement. Which is why it isn't talking about the detail of structures and conferences - this new formation hasn't even formed and FG wants to talk about what kind of national council it would have.

....

No I'm not interested in organisational issues but political ones. Having talented individuals within an organisation is of no use unless there is a functioning democracy that can call them to account and determine priorities for the organisation as a whole not the individual.

The SWP's failure to understand this is shown in the article, by their past behaviour in the SA where they pissed off completely a serious independent who was the figurehead (Liz Davies) through their undemocratic (not to say criminal) behaviour, and by their refusal to call Galloway to account in Respect when he oversteps the mark.

There is no doubt a Sheridan-SWP lash-up would be little more than a fan club, rather than a functioning organisation in which the membership had a real say. The mystery is why the CWI are going along with this (for now at least).
 
Fisher_Gate said:
unless there is a functioning democracy that can call them to account and determine priorities for the organisation as a whole not the individual.

I agree but I'm finding it difficult to square your comments here with your support for Respect, which, as you seem to suggest, is precisely failing - thanks to the SWP stewardship - to hold Galloway to account.

I would think that the CWI involvement in these preparatory stages is about trying to avoid opportunities being thrown away and prevent the same mistakes from being repeated.
 
articul8 said:
I agree but I'm finding it difficult to square your comments here with your support for Respect, which, as you seem to suggest, is precisely failing - thanks to the SWP stewardship - to hold Galloway to account.

I would think that the CWI involvement in these preparatory stages is about trying to avoid opportunities being thrown away and prevent the same mistakes from being repeated.

I'd accept that the BB episode was a fuck up of the first degree, though hanging GG out to dry wouldn't have improved things.

But can you tell me what else exactly he's done since that sorry incident that has been so appalling, and in need of 'holding to account'? What I see is someone who's been roasting the Israeli's and New Labour over Lebanon just recently.

(waits to see what offering this hostage to fortune results in...)
 
mutley said:
I'd accept that the BB episode was a fuck up of the first degree, though hanging GG out to dry wouldn't have improved things.

But can you tell me what else exactly he's done since that sorry incident that has been so appalling, and in need of 'holding to account'? What I see is someone who's been roasting the Israeli's and New Labour over Lebanon just recently.

(waits to see what offering this hostage to fortune results in...)


er ... repeating the statement he made at the General Election in saying he's not going to stand for parliament again? This was a stupid statement and not discussed or agreed by Respect. What happens if Respect members want him to?
 
articul8 said:
I agree but I'm finding it difficult to square your comments here with your support for Respect, which, as you seem to suggest, is precisely failing - thanks to the SWP stewardship - to hold Galloway to account.

I would think that the CWI involvement in these preparatory stages is about trying to avoid opportunities being thrown away and prevent the same mistakes from being repeated.

Because I'm trying to change it - see www.respectpartyplatform.org - CWI give up without trying eg walking out of the Socialist Alliance ... and now you've walked out of the SSP within a few weeks of a conference where you had the right to put your position before the membership. Little surprise that people suspect sectarian mischief-making from you rather than principled politics.
 
mutley said:
I'd accept that the BB episode was a fuck up of the first degree, though hanging GG out to dry wouldn't have improved things.

But can you tell me what else exactly he's done since that sorry incident that has been so appalling, and in need of 'holding to account'? What I see is someone who's been roasting the Israeli's and New Labour over Lebanon just recently.

(waits to see what offering this hostage to fortune results in...)

This part of an interview in February was not exactly his finest hour ...

"As someone who claims to be inherently connected to the struggle for gay equality, does Galloway insist that candidates for his Respect party adhere to the same views?

"No, because we're a coalition, and we don't bind a Muslim candidate in Yorkshire to the explicitly socialist parts of our programme."

"Many of them are small business people and wouldn't describe themselves as socialists and are not bound to accept it. And the same goes for other issues including tax and these issues."
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-539.html
 
Pretence or purge?

Fisher_Gate said:
This part of an interview in February was not exactly his finest hour ...
But his description of Respec' is accurate as far as it goes!

Would you prefer to kick out the non-socialists, capitalists and anti-gay people or would you just prefer Galloway not to admit they're part of the coalition?
 
"In France, peasant leader José Bové is seen by hundreds of thousands of people as the person who best expresses their feeling against the system."

Hard to believe that the SWP's French co-thinkers are part of the LCR, but they do not mention the presidential candidature of LCR member Olivier Besancenot, after the LCR conference took an extensive open and democratic debate to support building his candidature while pushing for a united left candidate.

Instead the British SWP just declare to their membership that Bove is "the person who best expresses their feeling". For the SWP democracy is okay when the decision goes your way, but if it doesn't you can feel free to ignore it.
 
JHE said:
But his description of Respec' is accurate as far as it goes!

Would you prefer to kick out the non-socialists, capitalists and anti-gay people or would you just prefer Galloway not to admit they're part of the coalition?

I prefer Respect to become a party in which it is clear that elected representatives vote for the democratic policies of the party in their elected positions.
 
Fisher_Gate said:
I prefer Respect to become a party in which it is clear that elected representatives vote for the democratic policies of the party in their elected positions.
Galloway would point out to you that Respec' is "fragile", as he said recently while debating what to do about the ructions in Tower Hamlets.

(The Social Workers will do what GGG tells them - and neither GGG nor the Social Workers would do anything to upset the Slaves of Allah.)
 
Fisher_Gate said:
This part of an interview in February was not exactly his finest hour ...

Is that it? What should be done, public flogging? It's a coalition not a democratic centralist party.

As for GG saying he ain't gonna stand, I'm not sure that many electors would want an mp that basically wanted to move on.

I hear the sound of barrell bottoms being scraped frankly.

As for the Bove/Besancenot non-issue, the SW article said that 'José Bové is seen by hundreds of thousands of people as the person who best expresses their feeling against the system'. What's FG saying, that that ain't true? That cos the LCR have made a decision, any people who look to Bove are what, undemocratic? Deluded? Misguided?

The SW statement is an assertion of a claim - that Bove is seen by 100's of 1000's as blah blah, not that Bove is blah blah.
 
Fisher_Gate said:
I prefer Respect to become a party in which it is clear that elected representatives vote for the democratic policies of the party in their elected positions.

The question in the interview was about people 'adhering to the views' not voting, and GG made it plain in the debate about the blasphemy law last year that he would vote the way Respect conference asked him to.
 
What other MP has a 2 hour radio show twice a week?

What other MP regularly humps the Murdoch media Empire and anyone else who confronts him...without spin doctors?

The Senate?

GG is the greatest left wing MP since Tony Benn retired but with far greater media savvy than Benn. TS would do well to link up with him.
 
Fisher_Gate said:
Because I'm trying to change it - see www.respectpartyplatform.org - CWI give up without trying eg walking out of the Socialist Alliance .

I think you'll find re the Socialist Alliance that the SP put forward a positive proposal for a federal consitution, warned what the consequences of the SWP's railroading through of their centralising version would be, and only walked out when all alternatives were exhausted. (and had its predictions more than borne out by the subsequent fiascos).

To my mind the new TS led formation heralds an opportunity. It might not be fully taken up, but at least there are potential gains to be made. It's hard to see how the SSP is going to do anything beyond maintain an ever-dwindling band engaged in permanent recriminations.
 
DexterTCN said:
GG is the greatest left wing MP since Tony Benn retired but with far greater media savvy than Benn.

Its true that some of Galloway's media appearences are brilliant: the senate, the sky news show, the radio show from Lebanon, but his media savvyness is rather a double edged sword:

GallowayBLOG.jpg


nbbro14.jpg


gallowaysaddamweb1ee.jpg


Tony Benn, never did anything so stupid (Okay he did meet Saddam, but he didn't slobber over him like Galloway) so I'd say that Benn was overrall more media savey than GG mainly in that he always comes across as very likeable whereas GG often does not.
 
He trashed the Senate.

He trashed Hitchens.

He trashed Sky News.

He takes on all-comers on his weekend radio shows.

And as to your pics...no such thing as bad publicity...I believe is the saying.
 
looks to me like FG has taken a total spanking on the issue of the new Sheridan initiative, so has decided to derail the thread into anything else to save face - jose bove, whats wrong with galloway, what went wrong with the Socialist Alliance.

You wouldn't be trying to provoke a row between supporters of the CWI and the SWP on this thread when its one of the issues we actually agree on by any chance would you? :eek:
 
Fisher_Gate said:
Any subplots are in your fantasies

Yeah right - just seen this in Scottish Socialist Voice -

"Seeing ourselves as others see us

by James Nesbitt

The Umbrian hills in Italy recently hosted Scottish Socialist Youth (SSY) and hundreds of others for the USFI’s 27th annual international youth summer camp, attended by over 550 young revolutionaries, hailing from all across Europe, and as far afield as the Philippines.
Designed to help build links between socialists from different nations and varying situations, the camp was successful in terms of each delegation enriching its understanding of the international struggle against capitalism.
Many levels of success and optimism were expressed.
It was particularly heartening to learn from the Greek and French sections, who both have recent experiences of mass movements of young people entering into conflict with the current system.
We were saddened, yet inspired, after speaking with the Filipino comrades, who shared their experiences of state repression, armed resistance movements and comrades being brutally murdered by Maoist guerrillas.
Each of the delegations we met with expressed keen interest in the progress of the SSP - our project is looked to internationally as a massive step forward for Left regroupment and the fight for socialism.
To this end we deemed it crucial to engage with the other major regroupment ‘projects’, particularly the Portuguese Left Bloc, the Danish Red-Green Alliance and Rifondazione Comunista of Italy.
Each of our situations presents important lessons for the anti-capitalist Left. Meeting with the delegation from Portugal impressed us and reinvigorated our hopes for building a united left - they have managed to build a popular base and a national profile on a radical socialist programme, despite many internal contradictions.
The Danes told us of their continued development and growth, but expressed some concerns at a perceived stagnation and feelings of frustration amongst much of the membership.
Rifondazione seems to hold the bleakest prospects (the party is being torn apart in a civil war over its participation in the centre-left government), with some comrades speaking of Rifondazione as “dead” or “a thing of the past”.
The international socialist movement must learn from all of these parties.
We felt that we managed to make a positive intervention, in giving an insight into the situation in Scotland and pioneering our distinctive political methods.
At the camp commission’s closing ‘balance sheet’, we were praised by both the Danish and Belgian sections for our commitment to revolutionising educational methods on the Left, particularly through participatory meeting techniques and the use of popular education.
This came as a refreshing break from the slightly stale and at times alienating practice at some of the larger meetings of long lectures by perceived ‘experts’.
This is intended as a constructive criticism - I personally felt that much of the political content was more developed and advanced than the current level in the SSP.
The USFI seem to have worked to recognise the crucial nature of class issues such as LGBT liberation, internationalism, women’s liberation and Marxist ecology. In particular, they make no bones about their commitment to feminism, something which would undoubtedly be contentious in the SSP.
Our delegation came home satisfied, having learned a lot, had fun and made important new contacts.
The USFI are not the only show in town on the international far-left, but SSY were glad to have been involved and grateful to the organisers and delegations for their friendliness, hospitality and solidarity. I would strongly recommend young members attend next year and to learn more about the USFI, their history and their current perspectives.
* For more info, see: internationalviewpoint.org

Not even a hint of a fishing trip there eh :D
 
nwnm said:
looks to me like FG has taken a total spanking on the issue of the new Sheridan initiative, so has decided to derail the thread into anything else to save face - jose bove, whats wrong with galloway, what went wrong with the Socialist Alliance.

You wouldn't be trying to provoke a row between supporters of the CWI and the SWP on this thread when its one of the issues we actually agree on by any chance would you? :eek:

Lol ... as if it needs a lone commentator like me to get the CWI and SWP to fall out, when they are perfectly capable of doing by their own sectarian selves ...

There's actually little more to be said on the Sheridan fiasco ... the SWP and CWI are helping to smash up the most successful regroupment within the British left for an age, all for their own sectarian ends period

I'm just pointing out they both have form.
 
John McAllion tells Tommy Sheridan's new party to get stuffed.

Although I was disappointed that after much faffing about he jumped ship to the SSP after losing his Dundee seat to the SNP in 2003, I and many others in the Labour Party still have a lot of respect and affection for John McAllion. He has shown good judgement in turning his nose up at Tommy Sheridan's vanity project.
"The creation of the SSP was a great achievement in bringing together the left in this way, but to say there is now room for two socialist parties in Scotland is just daft. Tommy's new party has no chance of achieving anything."​
 
articul8 said:
I think you'll find re the Socialist Alliance that the SP put forward a positive proposal for a federal consitution, warned what the consequences of the SWP's railroading through of their centralising version would be, and only walked out when all alternatives were exhausted. (and had its predictions more than borne out by the subsequent fiascos).

To my mind the new TS led formation heralds an opportunity. It might not be fully taken up, but at least there are potential gains to be made. It's hard to see how the SSP is going to do anything beyond maintain an ever-dwindling band engaged in permanent recriminations.

'federalism' = the SP/CWI can do what they like and don't have to be beholden to anyone, least of all democratic decisions

How come you never fought for the same organisational structure in the SSP? Nothing to do with the fact that the SWP were in a different numerical relationship I presume?
 
mutley said:
Is that it? What should be done, public flogging? It's a coalition not a democratic centralist party.

As for GG saying he ain't gonna stand, I'm not sure that many electors would want an mp that basically wanted to move on.

I hear the sound of barrell bottoms being scraped frankly.

As for the Bove/Besancenot non-issue, the SW article said that 'José Bové is seen by hundreds of thousands of people as the person who best expresses their feeling against the system'. What's FG saying, that that ain't true? That cos the LCR have made a decision, any people who look to Bove are what, undemocratic? Deluded? Misguided?

The SW statement is an assertion of a claim - that Bove is seen by 100's of 1000's as blah blah, not that Bove is blah blah.

The point about the comment on Bove is that Besancenot is not mentioned, yet is meant to be the candidate supported by their French members ... oh yes, and he's also ahead of Bove in the current opinion polls, and got not hundreds of thousands of votes but over 1.2 million for a revolutionary when he stood for election in 2002.

Like their tactics in relation to the SSP, the SWP will walk away from the LCR when it suits them, whatever the principles involved. There's a word for the SWP's tactics - opportunism.
 
Fullyplumped said:
John McAllion tells Tommy Sheridan's new party to get stuffed.

Although I was disappointed that after much faffing about he jumped ship to the SSP after losing his Dundee seat to the SNP in 2003, I and many others in the Labour Party still have a lot of respect and affection for John McAllion. He has shown good judgement in turning his nose up at Tommy Sheridan's vanity project.
"The creation of the SSP was a great achievement in bringing together the left in this way, but to say there is now room for two socialist parties in Scotland is just daft. Tommy's new party has no chance of achieving anything."​

A voice of sanity against the madness ...

If Sheridan has no hope of winning ex-Labour people like McAllion, his project is ultimately stuffed, and the SWP and CWI will go down with him.
 
DexterTCN said:
What other MP has a 2 hour radio show twice a week? What other MP regularly humps the Murdoch media Empire and anyone else who confronts him...without spin doctors?
Other notable media performers include Derek Hatton and Robert Kilroy Silk.
 
Fullyplumped said:
Other notable media performers include Derek Hatton and Robert Kilroy Silk.

Oh ffs that's pathetic. They use their media exposure to defend every reactionary idea that is in their tiny heads (at least KRS, fuck knows what Hatton does or what media he gets). Galloway uses his to flay the powers that be, particularly over imperialism, time and time again.
 
Back
Top Bottom