SWP expulsions and squabbles

[Spanky Longhorn]

I'm going to make a prediction for the trajectory of the ISN - I think Seymour wants to form a loose organisation around himself, a website, and possibly a journal that can intervene in issues and wider campaigning groups and that is clearly similar in style if not substance to Counterfire - however at least half those involved initially won't end up in it, they will scatter in different directions as they start reading and debating what to them are fresh ideas.

 

[barney_pig]

I'm going to make a prediction for the trajectory of the ISN - I think Seymour wants to form a loose organisation around himself, a website, and possibly a journal that can intervene in issues and wider campaigning groups and that is clearly similar in style if not substance to Counterfire - however at least half those involved initially won't end up in it, they will scatter in different directions as they start reading and debating what to them are fresh ideas.

I predict a rash of new posters raving about Maurice Brinton in the near future ((( bless)))

 

[bolshiebhoy]

Bleedin' Irish con artists I stand corrected.

That would be Irish in one paper and Scots Irish in t'other.

 

[bolshiebhoy]

I like how you've set the only two possible options for them. There is literally nothing else they can do except stay as SWP (drones while the CC lie and rig the elections) or join the ISN.

Good god no, I realise they'll eventually head in all directions. More than a few will end up in Labour with me!

People who say the ISN and Counterfire can't merge because of the history may be right. But given the political transformation of Rees and German since the split it will be very hard to maintain a real difference between the two ex IS currents. In a years time if they both still exist how do you convince someone totally knew to join ISN by explaining that people they've never heard of in Counterfire did unspeakable things to other people they've never heard of in the ISN, years ago when they were all in another party? Like I say personalities and egos aside the political logic is at least collaboration.

 

[bolshiebhoy]

http://www.leninology.com/2013/03/on-resigning-from-swp.html

Seymour speaks.

Not quite as eloquent as Hitchins description of his own resignation. So he says he has much, much more to say about all this. That'll be fun and will serve to set the outward looking tone of the ISN from day one.

"I also want to register my gratitude to those in the International Socialist tendency who supported the fight" Ah. London branch of the ISO anyone?

 

[chilango]

Good god no, I realise they'll eventually head in all directions. More than a few will end up in Labour with me!

People who say the ISN and Counterfire can't merge because of the history may be right. But given the political transformation of Rees and German since the split it will be very hard to maintain a real difference between the two ex IS currents. In a years time if they both still exist how do you convince someone totally knew to join ISN by explaining that people they've never heard of in Counterfire did unspeakable things to other people they've never heard of in the ISN, years ago when they were all in another party? Like I say personalities and egos aside the political logic is at least collaboration.

You could say that about all the tiny little left groups.

History suggests they'll stay very separate and probably splinter further.

 

[The39thStep]

Brighton swss resignation statement on is blog.

Its like Czechoslovakia in 1968

 

[butchersapron]

I bet red pepper and the whole let's go beyond the fragments crew again are rubbing their hands.

 

[Random]

That and far,far higher trade union membership, a decades long tradition of people's war against a military junta, much worse conditions...

Far higher? Since when? http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DatasetCode=UN_DEN

 

[sihhi]

The post-conference analysis is only just beginning.

The Guardian's has the unfortunate title 'The SWP and rape: why I care about this Marxist-Leninist implosion' almost suggesting the SWP is a ML group - ie anti-revisionist.

Sexism on the left is the punch you weren't expecting. This week the Socialist Workers party, Britain's largest far-left organisation, is on the brink of collapse after a rape scandal. The scandal is not just that a senior party member was accused of raping a young female activist, but that the party responded by convening its own court, comprised chiefly of the alleged attacker's friends, to decide whether rape had occurred. They decided that it hadn't. At a special conference this weekend its members voted for the second time to uphold that decision.
So far, so throat-closingly vile – but why should we care about the implosion of a Marxist-Leninist party with a few thousand members? Here's why. The SWP is small, but it has been a significant organising force on the British left for more than 30 years, taking a leading role in coalitions like Stop the War, Unite Against Fascism and, recently, the fight against austerity in the nation's poorest communities. Its affiliate parties in Europe and the Middle East, like Germany's Die Linke, also punch above their weight in terms of influence. Lots of writers, thinkers and journalists have been members of the party; some still are. I've never been a member, but it matters that it is disintegrating because its leadership cannot confront its own misogyny.

It doesn't explain the Conference aggregates were rigged and the outcome doesn't reflect the membership. Also the SWP is smaller than the SP.

 

[SpackleFrog]

The new Network seems to be implicitly encouraging some supporters or sympathisers to stay in the SWP presumably to report back and try to influence softer oppositionists in their (the Network's) direction.

Which makes sense.

Nigel Irritable is spot on about the principal reasons this lot won't join Counterfire because they sided with the CC against Rees & German in the previous split for reasons that are in at least part consistant with their current position.

I agree they won't touch Counterfire, but are they so different politically? I mean it was the identity politics/popular front politics that characterised STWC/Respect, and Seymour et al don't seem far removed from that...

 

[The39thStep]

I bet red pepper and the whole let's go beyond the fragments crew again crew are rubbing their hands.

Into the swamp as the SWP put it at the time

 

[butchersapron]

Into the swamp as the SWP put it at the time

And as bolshie is already repeating

I don't hold much hope for the majority of the faction leaving - not after leading light Pat Stack, without the factions refusal to condemn it - called all non-swp people commenting on this 'filth'.

Nor do i buy the argument that if the swp split fatally, then hundreds or thousands of people will be lost to left-wing activity - frankly, if they can only operate under the aegis of an undemocratic, top-down, authoritarian non-participatory organisation then i'm not sure they'd be much use anyway. And who does the blame for producing such mutilated understandings of the possibilities of political organisation that the choices appear to be either the former or nothing? With whom does the blame lie for producing such demoralisation that they cannot face being politically active as this necessarily entails the former?

 

[butchersapron]

It'll be like the 80s in slow motion.

 

[cesare]

They won't even realise for the most part.

 

[sihhi]

I agree they won't touch Counterfire, but are they so different politically? I mean it was the identity politics/popular front politics that characterised STWC/Respect, and Seymour et al don't seem far removed from that...

They're not that different politically. But were Militant and the IMT, or Workers Power and Permanent Revolution etc?

The point is Rees-German-Nineham are seen as being responsible for the SWP's past errors that shrunk them down. So some people leaving them now are still angry at them.

When the Delta-Callinicos crew was seeking to eject the Rees-German grouping, they did so by throwing barbs over RESPECT, criticising Rees-German for being too slow to get together and organise a Right to Work style United Front. In 2008, 2009 the start of the recession was already evident, whilst Afghanistan was far from people's mind, RESPECT had taken most of the resources the SWP had done the legwork for - leaving the SWP without a meaningful united front (front organisation).

"But the CC, in another document in IB No2, titled 'Right to work ' the road from Brighton', write: '' in the wake of the collapse of Respect and the 'Offu cheque' [in 2007 John Rees accepted on behalf of the SWP front, Organisation For Fighting Unions, a $10,000 donation from a Dubai businessman] many in the party believed we were not in a position to simply kick off what some saw as an 'overarching united front against the recession".

 

[butchersapron]

And Rees/German pavlovian response was...to argue for a proper Leninism, exactly as the prof did this time. What a pathetically shriveled political repertoire all sides seem to share in this.

 

[articul8]

I bet red pepper and the whole let's go beyond the fragments crew again crew are rubbing their hands.

<rubs hands>

 

[butchersapron]

<rubs hands>

No need for you to rub your hands, you already are exactly where this sort of stuff ends up - in the labour party.

 

[sihhi]

And as bolshie is already repeating

I don't hold much hope for the majority of the faction leaving - not after leading light Pat Stack, without the factions refusal to condemn it - called all non-swp people commenting on this 'filth'.

Nor do i buy the argument that if the swp split fatally, then hundreds or thousands of people will be lost to left-wing activity - frankly, if they can only operate under the aegis of an undemocratic, top-down, authoritarian non-participatory organisation then i'm not sure they'd be much use anyway. And who does the blame for producing such mutilated understandings of the possibilities of political organisation that the choices appear to be either the former or nothing? With whom does the blame lie for producing such demoralisation that they cannot face being politically active as this necessarily entails the former?

My general feeling is they are not going to be lost to left-wing activity. Most appear to be students with their adult lives ahead of them, facing shrinking job opportunities and have experienced some sort of anti-cuts, anti-fees efforts in some fashion not totally controlled by the SWP. They want to be accepted more by wider non-SWP members, don't want the questions about the SWP hanging around their necks.

 

[butchersapron]

My general feeling is they are not going to be lost to left-wing activity. Most appear to be students with their adult lives ahead of them, facing shrinking job opportunities and have experienced some sort of anti-cuts, anti-fees efforts in some fashion not totally controlled by the SWP. They want to be accepted more by wider non-SWP members, don't want the questions about the SWP hanging around their necks.

I hope that you're right - and that way that the oppositions arguments were framed i terms of defence of the IS tradtion and leninism and all that was something that came from the longer standing members as senior faction members rather than them. I think i've read suggestions from people involved that the high profile resigners tend to be ex-students, people who were at uni in the last 15 years or so (many still there in some capacity - or mental headspace) rather than classsic18-22 year old students.

 

[sihhi]

And Rees/German pavlovian response was...to argue for a proper Leninism, exactly as the prof did this time. What a pathetically shriveled political repertoire all sides seem to share in this.

Shriveled - Exactly. Another one used when challenging bureaucratic procedure by a leadership is proper Leninism by not being a debating society. (By not debating! )

CC member Judith Orr won the prize for being the only speaker to roll out the phrase so beloved of bureaucratic centralists: “We are not a debating society.” Neither is the SWP “a co-op” - “we want to lead”.

 

[articul8]

No need for you to rub your hands, you already are exactly where this sort of stuff ends up - in the labour party.

in and against

 

[butchersapron]

in and against

In and up.

 

[Red Cat]

I don't hold much hope for the majority of the faction leaving - not after leading light Pat Stack, without the factions refusal to condemn it - called all non-swp people commenting on this 'filth'.

I thought he meant filth as another word for dirt as in 'dishing the dirt'. Even if he thought the people were filth in private he'd have to be pretty stupid to say it in public.

 

[butchersapron]

I thought he meant filth as another word for dirt as in 'dishing the dirt'. Even if he thought the people were filth in private he'd have to be pretty stupid to say it in public.

He put it in writing - but not public! I believe it was chosen due to its ambiguity. it's dual ability to refer to either non-party criticisms of the party and its behaviour as filth and to the people making those criticisms as filth - he even puts who the filth is in brackets so that his audience know:

My real fear is their case will be the next big cause celebre to set the bloggers off once more and probably trigger resignations. I think a lot of comrades would like some respite from the filth that is out there (here I’m talking about non-party bloggers), but these expulsions will only give that filth fresh impetus.

And this is probably the lead light of the IDOP faction. And if this is what the are saying in private to each other about people they claim to want to work with on a broader front...

 

[sihhi]

I thought he meant filth as another word for dirt as in 'dishing the dirt'. Even if he thought the people were filth in private he'd have to be pretty stupid to say it in public.

Stack's position was separate from demanding a non-botched investigation of the 3 victims' experiences (2 of Delta, 1 of the Sheffield fulltimer). His purpose was to ensure all discussion of internal abuse just stopped without too many members leaving.

"Like everybody else I am sure I have observed the goings on since conference with feelings of alarm and dismay, and feel I cannot simply say nothing when comrades seek my view. In light of that I feel I should make clear my views to you/the CC at the present time. My starting point is that I want the essentials of our politics to be maintained whilst loss of membership is minimised. I realise getting that balance right is going to prove very tricky to say the least. Anyway, here goes."

 

[Red Cat]

He put it in writing - but not public! I believe it was chosen due to its ambiguity. it's dual ability to refer to either non-party criticisms of the party and its behaviour as filth and to the people making those criticisms as filth - he even puts who the filth is in brackets so that his audience know:

He knew it would become public.

You may be right about it having been chosen for ambiguity. He's not someone I feel the need to defend so I won't pursue the point.

 

[Scribbling S]

I don't think that is entirely fair on Pat Stack - you can see that he attempted to make the investigation into "Delta" better in that he stood back and said that while "rape" could not be proved, "Delta" had done something wrong (standards of conduct below that expected of leading member or whatever formula), which as he was chair of the DC, you'd think should have swung the rest around - it would have been the best result possible within that structure. And the "filth" can obviously have those two different meanings (and also if he hadn't said it, we'd never have got Anna Chen's very insightful and moving poem - I'm hoping that will be set to music soon). It looks to me like Pat Stack was trying to do the right thing within a system that was going the wrong way. On the Counterfire issue - it's not impossible that there might be quite a few Counterfire people tempted to move towards the "Platform" people, rather than the other way round ?

 

[bolshiebhoy]

On the Counterfire issue - it's not impossible that there might be quite a few Counterfire people tempted to move towards the "Platform" people, rather than the other way round ?

Fair point. Now there's a thought that would keep Rees awake at night.