Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

SWP expulsions and squabbles

butchersapron said:
First 20 pages should give you the flavour :D

Very telling in that those who had the right instincts were the SP and the anarchists - the ones it's been suggested place individual rather than class struggle at the centre of their analysis - and the ones who didn't were the SWP and the harder trots, the ones constantly going on about placing collective class struggle at the centre (unlike those creeping feminists, autonomists anarchists other marxists who are too tied up in union bureaucracy to see the real living class movement).
Click to expand...

As the one who suggested that anarchists place individual rather than class struggle at the centre of their analysis Can I just say that on both here and on the other board my instincts were right on this dispute as well:)
 
Now up to 12 SWSS statements today, with more apparently still coming. This speaks of a very high level of national coordination, given that the CC control the usual means of communication. I wonder to what degree the "dissident" CC people and/or sacked student full timers are responsible for getting this
moving?
 
Nigel Irritable said:
Now up to 12 SWSS statements today, with more apparently still coming. This speaks of a very high level of national coordination, given that the CC control the usual means of communication. I wonder to what degree the "dissident" CC people and/or sacked student full timers are responsible for getting this
moving?
Click to expand...
The students are the generation that uses Facebook and Twitter et al, as a first line of communication. The SWP CC can not compete with that. I think it is a healthy thing.
 
I think that's probably right.* Every member of the SWP that wants to can read Lenin's Tomb and the Internationalsocialism blog. The CC can't use the paper to control the flow of information to the members and manage dissent in the way it is used to.

What assetts does the Party own, and maybe more importantly in whose name are they in? Just thinking back to the implosion of the Communist Party, and the way resources were fought over and lost, will something similar happen to the SWP? Will the current central committee continue to "own" the name and brand and assetts even if the party completely breaks down.

* EDIT: The students on twitter thing, not the SWP Spring thing :D
 
Hocus Eye. said:
The students are the generation that uses Facebook and Twitter et al, as a first line of communication. The SWP CC can not compete with that. I think it is a healthy thing.
Click to expand...

Of course (although more Facebook than twitter). But this simultaneous burst of statements doesn't look like something spontaneous, or like a series of groups learning from each other. It was clearly planned and coordinated behind the scenes (through Facebook and email and almost certainly by telephone). The question is if the people who had been runnIng SWSS were involved in that coordination, because that will tell us to what degree the "hard" and "soft" oppositionists have coalesced.
 
Delroy Booth said:
What assetts does the Party own, and maybe more importantly in whose name are they in? Just thinking back to the implosion of the Communist Party, and the way resources were fought over and lost, will something similar happen to the SWP?
Click to expand...

Doubt it and as for the assets being "fought over" after the winding-up of the old CPGB? Some prime real estate had already been sold, nevertheless, the issue remains the subject of controversy.
 
mk12 said:
This is important for the SWP's future development, as students make up such an important part of their yearly recruits.
Click to expand...

It also has a symbolic "IS tradition" thing about it.

IS breaking with from Labour Party entrism as suggested by LSE IS students in 1966-7 ending with the LSE "events" where a genuinely large body of students participated in significant struggle (Chris Harman was a big spokesperson). Then LSE students taking the struggle straight into student-work rank and file struggle against the Wilson government.
 
Delroy Booth said:
What assetts does the Party own, and maybe more importantly in whose name are they in? Just thinking back to the implosion of the Communist Party, and the way resources were fought over and lost, will something similar happen to the SWP?
Click to expand...

I suspect that there is nothing like the old CP's asset base to fight over. As I recall, they sold their commercial printing operation a few years back. I don't know if they own their offices, or what liquid assets they have.
 
Nigel Irritable said:
Of course (although more Facebook than twitter). But this simultaneous burst of statements doesn't look like something spontaneous, or like a series of groups learning from each other. It was clearly planned and coordinated behind the scenes (through Facebook and email and almost certainly by telephone). The question is if the people who had been runnIng SWSS were involved in that coordination, because that will tell us to what degree the "hard" and "soft" oppositionists have coalesced.
Click to expand...
Having skim read through a lot of the letters to the CC from the individual SWSS branches I notice the repetition in some of them of the same phrases and sentences but not too slavishly. This suggests to me that a standard letter template was created for the various branches to use as a starting point for their particular expressions of disagreement with the CC. That is of course co-ordination or perhaps their own rival form of 'centralism'. ;)
 
Delroy Booth said:
I think that's probably right.* Every member of the SWP that wants to can read Lenin's Tomb and the Internationalsocialism blog. The CC can't use the paper to control the flow of information to the members and manage dissent in the way it is used to.

What assetts does the Party own, and maybe more importantly in whose name are they in? Just thinking back to the implosion of the Communist Party, and the way resources were fought over and lost, will something similar happen to the SWP? Will the current central committee continue to "own" the name and brand and assetts even if the party completely breaks down.

* EDIT: The students on twitter thing, not the SWP Spring thing :D
Click to expand...


I have some back copies of Womens Voice that I failed to sell at the St Helens/ Castlefield final in 1982
 
Nigel Irritable said:
I suspect that there is nothing like the old CP's asset base to fight over. As I recall, they sold their commercial printing operation a few years back. I don't know if they own their offices, or what liquid assets they have.
Click to expand...

Surely one of the reasons this group is fighting for a recall conference, and to expell the CC, is that there's something worth fighting over other than the husk of a party and a toxic "SWP" brand. Why would you want to fight to rescue that? Bollocks to the "IS tradition" stuff there must be more to it than that.
 
Delroy Booth said:
Surely one of the reasons this group is fighting for a recall conference, and to expell the CC, is that there's something worth fighting over other than the husk of a party and a toxic "SWP" brand. Why would you want to fight to rescue that? Bollocks to the "IS tradition" stuff there must be more to it than that.
Click to expand...
That level of cynicism isn't needed. There has been tension in the SWP for years over its democratic structure. These people do not see the SWP as a 'toxic brand' - they are part of it and just want to change it for the better.
 
Delroy Booth said:
Surely one of the reasons this group is fighting for a recall conference, and to expell the CC, is that there's something worth fighting over other than the husk of a party and a toxic "SWP" brand. Why would you want to fight to rescue that? Bollocks to the "IS tradition" stuff there must be more to it than that.
Click to expand...

You're getting it wrong. The longer you stay and fight the more bees you are going to attract to your honey stick. If the branch left it would be described as autonomist end of discussion and few would follow.
When Lindsey German left in 2010 - classic letters :D

http://averypublicsociologist.blogspot.co.uk/2010/02/lindsey-german-resigns-from-swp.html

Only Doncaster SWP followed.

Here they are fighting only to win as many of the undecideds/swayers as possible.
 
When dealing with the SWP all levels of cynicism are needed. And these people, many of them, are reporting on how the SWP is becoming a toxic brand in their own blog. The fact it's been a toxic brand for much of the British general public, and even on the left for as long as I've been able to remember, surely can't have escaped their attention. It might be cynical, but ownership of the three letters SWP alone doesn't explain why they're fighting tooth and nail to remove the CC - I'd suspect most people would just leave the organisation not fight to claim it.

Maybe they are just really really keen on Tony Cliff and state capitalism and I'm just speculating wildly as usual.
 
Delroy Booth said:
reporting on how the SWP is becoming a toxic brand in their own blog.
Click to expand...

I'd guess that's something to do with the liberal students cold-shouldering the SWP on the basis of trying to leap-frog them in 'student politics' by spreading a 'OMG they rape people in the SWP'/'They don't let women report rapes to the police' line.
 
I have been looking a lot into critiques of Leninism in the last few days and I agree with a lot of what I have read although I think that some of the authors of these criticisms underestimate the fact that leninist parties like the SP and SWP, because they are the most visible and most organised, are able to assist in struggles most effectively and help to organise people, a lot of their members also don't obey the principles of Leninism or suspend them in certain situations, not all (or even most!!) of the SPs members for example aim to take over a movement most of the time when I've been involved in stuff we have done so because we wanted to offer people practical assistance not because we wanted to convert people to trotskyism. I've come across some people in trotskyist organisations who are basically reformists who want to create a better version of capitalism, I do not say so to criticise them but I think they are often very clever and very intelligent people.I don't think it is a bad thing that they are there at all, since it may be that their experiences and things they learn in the party etc will lead them to think that capitalism should be abolished and to investigate further and make their own conclusions and even if they don't and they are still gaining confidence in how to help themselves/others in struggles etc thats still a good thing. Equally there are quite a few people in the party that would go a lot further than its current leadership in terms of their view of capitalism. The point is that many people in trotskyist organisations don't agree with Lenin and would not do things the way that Lenin did.

The problem with the whole thing is that democratic centralism as it's practiced by most (and probably all) trotskyist parties is clearly not a good basis for running a revolutionary organisation which aims to replace capitalism with socialism from the bottom up. However leninist parties at least in the UK have been the most successful form of organisation on the left and they have often achieved a lot of good things as well as bad, they help people get confident and organise in the workplace. I do think that the point about leninist parties sometimes seeming to hold back and go through "organised" channels such as trade unions, when people who supposedly just have a "trade unionist consciousness" want to go further, is a valid one. The thing is tho what do you do? And I don't know if I have an answer to that. I would also say that a lot of anarchist organisations also suffer from a similar problem to leninism in that they want to be a vanguard and there are some people who become self appointed leaders etc.

i have read some articles etc about lenin and the whole principle of democratic centralism tho and suffice to say that the facts are very different from anything i have heard from trotskyist organisations. I am probably not the first person to mention the K-word on the thread but I have been looking into that as well and I can say that what happened in 1921 was terrible. I would say that democratic centralism in its current form needs to be changed at the very least and also that trotsky and lenin are probably not adequate figures to base a frame of reference around or to copy the mode of organising of. But what is? In some ways leninism has worked quite well and I really really dont have an answer to this. To be honest I would think that if Lenin and Trotsky were alive today many of the people I know in the SP, perhaps most would oppose what they were doing. I think we do need to move away from Lenin but I don't know what the alternative is.
 
frogwoman said:
I have been looking a lot into critiques of Leninism in the last few days and I agree with a lot of what I have read although I think that some of the authors of these criticisms underestimate the fact that leninist parties like the SP and SWP, because they are the most visible and most organised, are able to assist in struggles most effectively and help to organise people, a lot of their members also don't obey the principles of Leninism or suspend them in certain situations, not all the SPs members for example aim to take over a movement most of the time when I've been involved in stuff we have done so because we wanted to offer people practical assistance not because we wanted to convert people to trotskyism. I've come across some people in trotskyist organisations who are basically reformists who want to create a better version of capitalism, I do not say so to criticise them but I think they are often very clever and very intelligent people.I don't think it is a bad thing that they are there at all, since it may be that their experiences and things they learn in the party etc will lead them to think that capitalism should be abolished and to investigate further and make their own conclusions and even if they don't and they are still gaining confidence in how to help themselves/others in struggles etc thats still a good thing. Equally there are quite a few people in the party that would go a lot further than its current leadership in terms of their view of capitalism.

The problem with the whole thing is that democratic centralism as it's practiced by most (and probably all) trotskyist parties is clearly not a good basis for running a revolutionary organisation which aims to replace capitalism with socialism from the bottom up. However leninist parties at least in the UK have been the most successful form of organisation on the left and they have often achieved a lot of good things as well as bad, they help people get confident and organise in the workplace. I do think that the point about leninist parties sometimes seeming to hold back and go through "organised" channels such as trade unions, when people who supposedly just have a "trade unionist consciousness" want to go further, is a valid one. The thing is tho what do you do? And I don't know if I have an answer to that. I would also say that a lot of anarchist organisations also suffer from a similar problem to leninism in that they want to be a vanguard and there are some people who become self appointed leaders etc.

i have read some articles etc about lenin and the whole principle of democratic centralism tho and suffice to say that the facts are very different from anything i have heard from trotskyist organisations. I am probably not the first person to mention the K-word on the thread but I have been looking into that as well and I can say that what happened in 1921 was terrible. I would say that democratic centralism in its current form needs to be changed at the very least and also that trotsky and lenin are probably not adequate figures to base a frame of reference around or to copy the mode of organising of. But what is? In some ways leninism has worked quite well and I really really dont have an answer to this. To be honest I would think that if Lenin and Trotsky were alive today many of the people I know in the SP, perhaps most would oppose what they were doing. I think we do need to move away from Lenin but I don't know what the alternative is.
Click to expand...
if lenin and trotsky were alive today i don't think anyone would care much about what they were doing, which would be vegetating on respirators in some hospital somewhere.
 
frogwoman I think that's a very thoughtful response, the only thing I'd add is that to be honest I think you might be being a bit harsh on democratic centralism as practiced on the British left. I mean as a method of creating a truly revolutionary party with mass working class backing in the year 2013, blatantly it's inadaquet, but these organisations have survived long after the politics of Trotskyism/Leninism was old and anachronistic. The fact the SWP and SP have survived this long is a testament to how resilient those small democratic centralist parties can be. But things that can't last forever, don't, some may last longer than others but they're all heading the same way in the end.
 
Delroy Booth said:
frogwoman I think that's a very thoughtful response, the only thing I'd add is that to be honest I think you might be being a bit harsh on democratic centralism as practiced on the British left. I mean as a method of creating a truly revolutionary party with mass working class backing in the year 2013, blatantly it's inadaquet, but these organisations have survived long after the politics of Trotskyism/Leninism was old and anachronistic. The fact the SWP and SP have survived this long is a testament to how resilient those small democratic centralist parties can be. But things that can't last forever, don't, some may last longer than others but they're all heading the same way in the end.
Click to expand...


Yeah I agree. But perhaps as somebody said earlier the strength could be to do with the extent to which they've abandoned leninism? Which is what I'm getting at. The SP certainly isn't an organisation with a homogenous political line and IMO that's a good thing, not a bad thing.
 
Delroy Booth said:
frogwoman I think that's a very thoughtful response, the only thing I'd add is that to be honest I think you might be being a bit harsh on democratic centralism as practiced on the British left. I mean as a method of creating a truly revolutionary party with mass working class backing in the year 2013, blatantly it's inadaquet, but these organisations have survived long after the politics of Trotskyism/Leninism was old and anachronistic. The fact the SWP and SP have survived this long is a testament to how resilient those small democratic centralist parties can be. But things that can't last forever, don't, some may last longer than others but they're all heading the same way in the end.
Click to expand...
that the swp and sp have lasted so long is a monument to the tolerance of the left
 
The SP isn;'t an organisation with a homogenous political line among its membership - I wasn't saying this to be harsh on them.
 
frogwoman said:
In some ways leninism has worked quite well and I really really dont have an answer to this. To be honest I would think that if Lenin and Trotsky were alive today many of the people I know in the SP, perhaps most would oppose what they were doing. I think we do need to move away from Lenin but I don't know what the alternative is.
Click to expand...

This sort of makes sense, but where is the move to?
I don't have an answer for anyone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ElizabethofYork
Men’s violence against women and girls is a national emergency
34 35 36 37 38
Replies
1K
Views
44K
The39thStep
The39thStep
Smokeandsteam
Facebook: Australia content ban, SWP removal and related news
2 3 4
Replies
115
Views
8K
NoXion
NoXion
S
Tory songs and bands
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
210
Views
10K
Wilf
Wilf
W
all these “So and so’s time is up” threads.
2 3
Replies
89
Views
4K
wow
W
J
To save the UK economy this is what Sunak and Hunt should be doing
Replies
18
Views
1K
bimble
bimble
Back
Top Bottom