SWP expulsions and squabbles

[sihhi]

Everyone who invites a speaker hopes to gain something by it. Everyone who accepts an invitation hopes to gain something by it.

We shouldn't judge on purely individual successes - yes his appearances promote a kind of anti-imperialism for a Muslim audience, OK granted, yes it builds his personal profile, yes he talks about 'the people' a lot.
But as noted above, he hosts their TV programme on the Islam Channel and I don't think he's ever put forward any kind of structural or class analysis in any of the programmes he's been introducing and chairing - not the ones about Britain Politics and Media, nor the ones about Syria or Egypt. What exactly is this doing for the wider w/c movement Counterfire claims it is desperate to engineer?
(Interestingly, Rees took the lead in expelling the CPGB-ML from the STWC on the basis of a few words of dissent on STWC tactics in its magazine Proletarian - even on his own terms he is tying up his plans in knots)

 

[Nigel Irritable]

Reading SEYMOUR'S! blogs its obvious he has a high(Reesian?) opinion of himself, lots about his bravery etc, no mention of him totally changing his position on the refinery strikes when the line came down from Vauxhall...

That's a rather strange reading of his pieces on the dispute. He probably does have quite a high opinion of himself - most writers do - but in his account so far he's consistently portrayed himself as lagging behind other people in his understanding of what was going on, and as a bit hesitant generally. There's no hint of General Rees the master chess player in the image he's presenting.

As for the refinery strikes, well, you know my views on them, but why would anyone expect him to start talking about them in an account of this split?

 

[Nigel Irritable]

We shouldn't judge on purely individual successes - yes his appearances promote a kind of anti-imperialism for a Muslim audience, OK granted, yes it builds his personal profile, yes he talks about 'the people' a lot.

I've never watched his TV stuff. I wonder how much editorial discretion he has, and to what extent he's just a hired mouth doing his job?

 

[kavenism]

I've never watched his TV stuff. I wonder how much editorial discretion he has, and to what extent he's just a hired mouth doing his job?

It's not just him. Another Counterfire guy used to write the shows. Not sure if he still does though.

 

[redsquirrel]

saying that, on present evidence, I am not convinced is quite different to me making any 'assumptions.' Come on, you know the difference.

It does make Nigel's point that the way the SWP has handled this issue means that anything like this gains traction and will be used both against them and the left in general.

I really think the SWP are fucked, they might limp on for a quite some time but they're a rotting zombie.

 

[sihhi]

I've never watched his TV stuff. I wonder how much editorial discretion he has, and to what extent he's just a hired mouth doing his job?

I doubt we'll fully know, but put it this way, there seems a strong overlap with his talks for BDS and the content of his TV programmes, would he have been selected by the Islam Channel otherwise?
Take Michael Buerk was on Channel 4 earlier doing a yah-boo pensioners get too much benefits for Dispatches is he just fulfilling a documentary presenting role. If you look at what Rees is doing, the introductions he is making, the questsions he is asking etc he is not somehow an unwilling participant.
Note again I'm not saying he is antisemitic or conspiratorial.

 

[cesare]

''BBC Breakfast TV ran an item on the crisis in the SWP this morning (Sat 16/3) based on a two page spread in the Daily Mail. The Mail alleges a third female comrade has come forward and has made allegations of rape. It also claims that the party is haemorrhaging members and is on the point of collapse.''


didn't know it had been on TV, SWP head honcho's and some ex ones must be shitting themselves now...

Even Government Online have included it in their bulletins

http://www.government-online.net/so...adership-under-fire-over-rape-kangaroo-court/

 

[frogwoman]

Even Government Online have included it in their bulletins

http://www.government-online.net/so...adership-under-fire-over-rape-kangaroo-court/

that looks like a really crap website

 

[cesare]

that looks like a really crap website

Looks like it's run by the guardian

 

[frogwoman]

If you take a paid position on that kind of channel and your not saying anything to contradict the state's line you're basically being complicit in whatever other shit they're coming out with. Just like if he was being paid to appear on programmes about benefit scroungers. It's a fucking disgrace for somebody that calls themselves a marxist to do that.

 

[Sean Delaney]

I've often said, that the conclusion of the understanding was the reading of the French revolution ISJ, and in particular the article by John Rees The Algebra of Revolution on the dialectic. The dialectic, the political economy, imperialism, sectarianism, racism and very pertinently sexism not only all made sense, but inter-meshed and supported each other. To get such an holistic analysis through my thick skull, WAS some achievement. Beyond that, you're probably right, your ideas are just too clever for me.

It is important to disabuse people of Rees's theoretical girth. As this article makes clear, Rees is actually hung like a hampster:

http://www.principiadialectica.co.uk/blog/?p=3003

 

[sihhi]

You don't need to speculate about whether or not Counterfire support the BDS campaign, but it's a bit of a leap to get from there to speculating about them buttering up conspiranauts and crazies.

It's not just with BDS or Islam/Muslims that the desire to have 'movements' gets Counterfire knotted up.
Take this recent examination of Grillo and 5 Stelle in Italy:
Apparently: "You could describe it as a movement of active citizenship, but also as a sort of coalition of resistance."
coalition of resistance? Yes, the same title as what Counterfire have been plugging at every opportunity as the solution for the working-class.

 

[butchersapron]

It is important to disabuse people of Rees's theoretical girth. As this article makes clear, Rees is actually hung like a hampster:

http://www.principiadialectica.co.uk/blog/?p=3003

Might want to check that link sean (or is it just me?)

 

[Sean Delaney]

Might want to check that link sean (or is it just me?)

No, some cocksucker is squatting on the site until we fix it. You can access it, it just takes patience.

 

[butchersapron]

No, some cocksucker is squatting on the site until we fix it. You can access it, it just takes patience.

You a postone-ist then. Might have to think about this again.

 

[sihhi]

Ugh, I stumbled across deliberation.info a few months ago. Horrible site.

The author has declared "I believe it highly unlikely that the CIA was responsible for 9/11, and very likely that the Lobby is responsible for US policy in the Middle East", nonetheless it's immediately been picked up by an even harder out and out conspiracist antisemitic website called The Rebel, so the circle continues.

 

[frogwoman]

fuck off. fuck off. (not you) they can get to fuck.
this shit shouldn't make me so angry but it does.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

It's fucking weird and horrible stuff. They aren't the kind of conspiracy shithead we get over here, really, so I'm a bit more thrown by it. We tend to get Freemen of the Land maniacs instead. You get the occasional SWPish leftist over here who sort of tolerates Freemen types in campaigns because they are willing to get out there and block a road or whatever, a line someone tried on me last week, leaving me almost speechless.

 

[chilango]

I think Jim W knows pretty's precisely where his ideas fit/come from.


but forget it. If you think might putting these views next to Jim W's was somehow wrong, I'm sorry.

PS. I do know where many leading members of this forum is views come from, they are just incoherent TO ME, especially when compared to the totally coherent views of the SWP prior to 2000 (When I was a member, read their publications et cetera).

I dunno whether posting my views next to Jim W's serves any purpose. Why would you? Why wouldn't you?

There are plenty of threads where most of us state exactly what our views are. Here you go. A recent thread. I'd say that's pretty explicit.

Why would you seek to compare the views of individuals with a party line? Of course the SWP line is going to be more "coherent" than an individual's bulletin board postings. Does it ever occur to you that such coherence is not a good thing?

...but regardless. What difference does it make?

 

[chilango]

''BBC Breakfast TV ran an item on the crisis in the SWP this morning (Sat 16/3) based on a two page spread in the Daily Mail. The Mail alleges a third female comrade has come forward and has made allegations of rape. It also claims that the party is haemorrhaging members and is on the point of collapse.''


didn't know it had been on TV, SWP head honcho's and some ex ones must be shitting themselves now...

Didn't see that...and I watch " Breakfast" every morning.

 

[bolshiebhoy]

That John Game piece on the IS Blog makes much of the socialism from below approach of the IS tradition. And goes on to argue that this needs to inform the 'ossified' position of the SWP on women's oppression. No surprises there, back we hark to Rowbotham et al again. But one thing these fans of Rowbotham and BtF need to deal with is how the notion of 'socialism from below' fits with the socialist feminists' general opposition to the crowning achievement of the IS socialism from below method, namely the theory of state capitalism. Sheila in particular broke with the IS in 71 over several issues, including crucially the fact she regarded North Vietnam as socialist.Which Is in slight contradiction shall we say with the self emancipation from below of the working class. Or is it? Cause once you talk in terms of separate struggles of the oppressed from below that can develop independently of the united class struggle then why not argue that the self emancipation of the Vietnamese people created a people's republic that has some of the features of socialism? Just as the battle against Patriarchy might create its own parallel revolution. When Chris Harman caused an uproar in 69 at a meeting on Vietnam by daring to mention the murder of socialists within Vietnam by the regime he was attacked on all sides by the Ortho Trots and Stalinists. And by the socialist feminists! Something the people in the ISN who wax lyrical on the tradition of socailism from below and breaking with the 'ossified' Marxist analysis of oppression might want to bear in mind.

 

[barney_pig]

The theory of state capitalism .. The crowning achievement of the IS socialism from below method?
Must be news to the spgb

 

[Nigel Irritable]

That John Game piece on the IS Blog makes much of the socialism from below approach of the IS tradition. And goes on to argue that this needs to inform the 'ossified' position of the SWP on women's oppression. No surprises there, back we hark to Rowbotham et al again. But one thing these fans of Rowbotham and BtF need to deal with is how the notion of 'socialism from below' fits with the socialist feminists' general opposition to the crowning achievement of the IS socialism from below method, namely the theory of state capitalism. Sheila in particular broke with the IS in 71 over several issues, including crucially the fact she regarded North Vietnam as socialist.Which Is in slight contradiction shall we say with the self emancipation from below of the working class. Or is it? Cause once you talk in terms of separate struggles of the oppressed from below that can develop independently of the united class struggle then why not argue that the self emancipation of the Vietnamese people created a people's republic that has some of the features of socialism? Just as the battle against Patriarchy might create its own parallel revolution. When Chris Harman caused an uproar in 69 at a meeting on Vietnam by daring to mention the murder of socialists within Vietnam by the regime he was attacked on all sides by the Ortho Trots and Stalinists. And by the socialist feminists! Something the people in the ISN who wax lyrical on the tradition of socailism from below and breaking with the 'ossified' Marxist analysis of oppression might want to bear in mind.

This is a pretty weird post. There's nothing inherent in disagreeing with the SWP's analysis of feminism which leads to a softness on Stalinism.

You are also being very loose with your reference to "Ortho Trots" given that (a) the "socialists within Vietnam" were what you would call "Ortho Trots" and (b) the IMG's horror at Harman's remarks would not have been shared by other Trotskyist organisations. Indeed, from an SP point of view that would be regarded as one of the high points of Cliffism.

 

[imposs1904]

First the Millies nick our name and now the SWP have nicked our Conference Hall. Trot bastards.




Hat tip to Andy L. over on facebook. It's his very funny image . . . in response to John McDonnell's recent tweet that he won't be speaking at Recruitathon this year.

 

[J Ed]

It's fucking weird and horrible stuff. They aren't the kind of conspiracy shithead we get over here, really, so I'm a bit more thrown by it. We tend to get Freemen of the Land maniacs instead. You get the occasional SWPish leftist over here who sort of tolerates Freemen types in campaigns because they are willing to get out there and block a road or whatever, a line someone tried on me last week, leaving me almost speechless.

Noticed a few of these types in Sheffield, do they really exist in any numbers?

 

[barney_pig]

Sheila in particular broke with the IS in 71 over several issues, including crucially the fact she regarded North Vietnam as socialist.Which Is in slight contradiction shall we say with the self emancipation from below of the working class. Or is it? Cause once you talk in terms of separate struggles of the oppressed from below that can develop independently of the united class struggle then why not argue that the self emancipation of the Vietnamese people created a people's republic that has some of the features of socialism? Just as the battle against Patriarchy might create its own parallel revolution. When Chris Harman caused an uproar in 69 at a meeting on Vietnam by daring to mention the murder of socialists within Vietnam by the regime he was attacked on all sides by the Ortho Trots and Stalinists. And by the socialist feminists! Something the people in the ISN who wax lyrical on the tradition of socailism from below and breaking with the 'ossified' Marxist analysis of oppression might want to bear in mind.

When Harman invoked the memory of the murdered Vietnamese Trotskyists, the horror of the img led VSC leadership was that a representative of the Vietnamese govt. was on the platform.
In 2004, a group of Iranian leftist a walked from Manchester to London to take part in an anti war demonstration which focused for its slogans on the threat of war against Iran. The SWP dominated leadership of the stwc denied them a speaker at the rally, as this would embarrass their guest, a representative of the Iranian govt.
Is this the proud is tradition, which once could identify a potential Stalinist bureaucrat state capitalist in a peasants black pyjamas, but now cannot see a clerical fascist when they are butchering workers on the streets?

 

[butchersapron]

That John Game piece on the IS Blog makes much of the socialism from below approach of the IS tradition. And goes on to argue that this needs to inform the 'ossified' position of the SWP on women's oppression. No surprises there, back we hark to Rowbotham et al again. But one thing these fans of Rowbotham and BtF need to deal with is how the notion of 'socialism from below' fits with the socialist feminists' general opposition to the crowning achievement of the IS socialism from below method, namely the theory of state capitalism. Sheila in particular broke with the IS in 71 over several issues, including crucially the fact she regarded North Vietnam as socialist.Which Is in slight contradiction shall we say with the self emancipation from below of the working class. Or is it? Cause once you talk in terms of separate struggles of the oppressed from below that can develop independently of the united class struggle then why not argue that the self emancipation of the Vietnamese people created a people's republic that has some of the features of socialism? Just as the battle against Patriarchy might create its own parallel revolution. When Chris Harman caused an uproar in 69 at a meeting on Vietnam by daring to mention the murder of socialists within Vietnam by the regime he was attacked on all sides by the Ortho Trots and Stalinists. And by the socialist feminists! Something the people in the ISN who wax lyrical on the tradition of socailism from below and breaking with the 'ossified' Marxist analysis of oppression might want to bear in mind.

The united class struggle eh? Go on tell us what that is then. And no, these people don't have to deal with what SR did in 1971, I can see why it might be usefull for you to insist that they do though. This is a desperate line of attack. What next, that they would have rejected military Keynesianism in the 60s?

 

[bolshiebhoy]

This is a pretty weird post. There's nothing inherent in disagreeing with the SWP's analysis of feminism which leads to a softness on Stalinism.

You are also being very loose with your reference to "Ortho Trots" given that (a) the "socialists within Vietnam" were what you would call "Ortho Trots" and (b) the IMG's horror at Harman's remarks would not have been shared by other Trotskyist organisations. Indeed, from an SP point of view that would be regarded as one of the high points of Cliffism.

Nothing surprising about your post, a few words on theory then concentrate on the important thing, name checking who was in what org.

Separatism does indeed lend itself to stalinism as people in the IS have always argued. A stress on the need for independent women’s or black movements can easily lead you into a sort of stages theory. A theor that says that talk of working class struggle can be postponed indefinitely while other sorts of struggle are sorted out and built first. Including national liberation struggles in the Third World.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

The theory of state capitalism .. The crowning achievement of the IS socialism from below method?
Must be news to the spgb

Or indeed anarchists

 

[Pickman's model]

The reason there's a certain softness towards stalinism in the swp may of course be that trotskyism is essentially stalinism with better pr.