Well here's an SW article on the Bangladesh Hefazat situation:
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art/33266/Police+kill+protesters+as+Bangladesh+crisis+grows
SWP said:
Tens of thousands of Islamists had gathered to call for stronger Islamic policies.
These include the introduction of blasphemy laws and the repeal of laws on women’s rights
....
A mass movement has been occupying Shahbagh Square, the central point of Dhaka, demanding more trials and harsher sentences.
Many demand the banning of Islamist political groups.
The leaders of this movement are articulate and middle class.
Those on the streets last weekend came largely from the madrassahs, where poorer people send their children for schooling.
...
The week of demonstrations proves there is a massive political vacuum in Bangladesh which many forces are trying to fill.
The left needs to draw those who rage against putting profit before people into a movement that can challenge the rich.
This can attract those who look to the Islamists.
1) Pretty euphemistic way to describe hanging atheists, and the total exclusion of women from anything outside the home.
2) I wonder how "poor" are the Hefazat, Jamaat and BNP "leaders"? And, isn't there another category besides the poor and the middle class that's sometimes been seen as important for socialists....let me see now.....never mind, who cares about the actual unions anyway or whether their female members might like to do their jobs without being assaulted -- when there's grander forces at play!
3) So the massive organisational infrastructure of Islamism isn't any kind of obstacle to "attracting those who look to the Islamists"? Great! All we need is a few good slogans in solidarity with mass rapists and the revolution will be ours.
4) The rage directed specifically at Hasina/Awami seems to be much more the province of BNP/Islamists then the workers. In fact getting rid of Hasina would surely only be a "regime change" for something even worse.
4a.....I'm not lesser evilling in favour of Awami....but focussing on Hasina in particular massively misses the point, especially in comparison to Mubarak ffs, the man who *was* the regime vs a woman who was almost assassinated as leader of the opposition, and was jailed by the military government in 2007? However corrupt a custodian of Bangladeshi capitalism she presently is, that comparison is dangerously absurd.
Still I guess this is just the usual stuff isn't it. For signs of serious desperation how about Kimber's defence of "Lenisism" (LenISism?) against the rest -
. I've never seen top SWP types take the trouble of singling the out SP for special criticism before! Sign of acceptance finally of "micro-sect" status? Also, the conclusion is a total classic!