SWP expulsions and squabbles

[Red Cat]

There is a psychological element, but I don't think that it's necessarily the most relevant. As I have mentioned in a previous post, I was for a relatively short period of time a full-time organiser. I certainly saw myself as defending the leadership's position and - in a sense - being their representative in the area. As an organiser, you also tend to value those members who are "loyal" rather than those who might be described as loose cannons. In great part, I would now put this down to being a young very keen impressionable revolutionary (and being in awe of those leaders that I was rubbing shoulders with), but there may well be a deeper explanation.

I don't think it's the most relevant, I think it's part of the picture. I don't think you can talk about how a political group operates or think about how we should organise without it. It's a basic political question - can a sound structure prevent rot? What structure is that? Regardless of structure are there tendencies in human relationships that are present in most societies, perhaps in different forms, or are our (mainly) hierarchical organisations necessarily reflective of current social relations either as deliberate political strategy or because they're internalised?

I was a branch sec so I recognise your portrayal of yourself. I don't think being a young impressionable revolutionary is a trivial explanation just because in some ways it's obvious. It's part of an explanation isn't it? We were all young impressionable revolutionaries weren't we? There will be different psychological explanations (depending on your preference) for the processes involved in being young and impressionable in relation to a leadership, but I think it's fairly certain that this kind of political apprenticeship in which the new member identifies with an idealised leadership contributes to undemocratic ways of working. But identifying with people we admire is part of how we learn, it's not a pathology we can avoid with the right structure.

 

[Oisin123]

if the structure is sound, rot can't set in.

I think it's more to do with having a genuine connection to working class revolutionaries than structure.

 

[Red Cat]

I think it's more to do with having a genuine connection to working class revolutionaries than structure.

So democratic centralism can work if there is a genuine connection to working class revolutionaries?

Realised i didnae answer the question adequately. In a rush, but i might get back later.

Thanks for taking the time to answer the question btw.

 

[Red Cat]

That's right I never take the argument seriously.

I think you do and that is part of the problem. It's always about 'the argument'. THE political argument as decided upon by the CC and everything else is seen as irrelevant, as NOT the argument.

 

[discokermit]

I think it's more to do with having a genuine connection to working class revolutionaries than structure.

except the seventies stuff, higgins, protz, birmingham engineers, etc. happened at a time when they had their best connection to working class revolutionaries.

 

[Oisin123]

So democratic centralism can work if there is a genuine connection to working class revolutionaries?

I mean that the best guarantee of exposing the arrogant, the ignorant and the bullies in the movement is to put them before confident articulate workers who have experience of leading mass struggles. This applies generally and not just to aspirant democratic centralist parties.

Specifically in the SWP, disco, while different structures should certainly be fought for (an ending to the slate system, etc), there's no structure that can correct the majority loyalists now. You'll remember the impact of the Miners' Strike on the SWP and how that democratised the party. I don't see that happening again.

edit: moved the quote marks to their proper place.

 

[redcogs]

except the seventies stuff, higgins, protz, birmingham engineers, etc. happened at a time when they had their best connection to working class revolutionaries.

Yes' which reminds me of the old swp dictum that: 'any internal issues that you believe we have will all be resolved by the oncoming upturn in class struggle and the consequent increase in membership and upsurge in working class membership', just don't talk about structure politics, wait, and shortly things will rectify themselves..

The problem though, was that the 'upturn', like the rainbow's end, was always just around the corner, in the near to medium term future, and it then became highly convenient argument (for the CC and their layer of obedients) to use in the sense that they could avoid any examination of why structures were delivering mainly top down dictat and very little rank and file influence on policy strategy or tactics.

Very very unhealthy set of circumstances no?

 

[Red Cat]

I mean that the best guarantee of exposing the arrogant, the ignorant and the bullies in the movement is to put them before confident articulate workers who have experience of leading mass struggles. This applies generally and not just to aspirant democratic centralist parties.

Yes.

 

[SLK]

Wonder when that changed? Recent ex members seem very confident that all CC members and some other fters are not assigned to branches but are in the category "national members", alongside semi-expelled people like the CPGB mole with a piece in IB3

I'm sure they weren't in branches in the 90s. They sold the paper though.

 

[SLK]

They will walk, by and large, I reckon. Because they no longer recognise the party as being the one they joined and spent decades fighting for. Quite rightly.

I'm sure they'll walk as well.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

I'm sure they'll walk as well.

Many of them certainly will (and as with all splits there will be losses from the winning camp and from "middle ground" types too, due to demoralisation). But how many and whether its an organised split will depend to a significant extent on the Stacks, Birchalls etc.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

I'm sure they weren't in branches in the 90s. They sold the paper though.

My comment about selling the paper at meetings stemmed from ESF preparatory meetings a decade ago. I remember being quite surprised that half the SWP leadership would be at them, but there'd be one rank and filer leafleting or selling papers at the end. It seemed bizarrely stratified.

 

[Karmickameleon]

Many of them certainly will (and as with all splits there will be losses from the winning camp and from "middle ground" types too, due to demoralisation). But how many and whether its an organised split will depend to a significant extent on the Stacks, Birchalls etc.

David Renton clearly seems to be setting out his stall for some sort of left regroupment in his latest blog post. He also says on Facebook:

The thing which keeps on puzzling me is the interaction between three possible kinds of left regroupment. 1) a possible regroupment between all or some of the SWP and all or some of the ISN. 2) a merger involving all or some of ISN, ACI and WP. And 3) Left Unity.

 

[SpackleFrog]

if the structure is sound, rot can't set in.

I think this kind of gets to the heart of the issue to be honest, on democratic centralism, on left regroupment, and less importantly on the student movement. Personally I'm for the broad principle of democratic centralism. But whatever structure you have in an org, if the membership don't actively safeguard the internal culture of the org, then it'll rot. Much of the left obsess over structures, as if getting structure right will soehow protect us from a the ugly mistakes of the past. The reality is nothing can protect against degeneration except collective vigilance.

 

[Red Cat]

Much of the left obsess over structures, as if getting structure right will soehow protect us from a the ugly mistakes of the past. The reality is nothing can protect against degeneration except collective vigilance.

Obsessing over structure takes the problem out there, it abstracts it, makes it 'political'. How do we treat eachother is perhaps a more honest way of looking at it.

 

[discokermit]

in thirty years time, will bolshie be holding notes up the window in martin smiths flat in a bid for freedom?

 

[Red Cat]

in thirty years time, will bolshie be holding notes up the window in martin smiths flat in a bid for freedom?

Party notes?

 

[Karmickameleon]

But whatever structure you have in an org, if the membership don't actively safeguard the internal culture of the org, then it'll rot. Much of the left obsess over structures, as if getting structure right will soehow protect us from a the ugly mistakes of the past. The reality is nothing can protect against degeneration except collective vigilance.

This is a good point. IS in the early 70's was a considerably more democratic organisation than the current SWP. However, the bureaucratic measures used to against Higgins et al's IS Opposition bear many similarities to those used against today's oppos.
Mike Pearn commenting on this period on Facebook put it very well:
"The only lasting lesson from the 1975/76 struggle in IS is that workers democracy must be defended against all who threaten it including those leaders who would temporarily suspend it the better to wage the class struggle."
I replied: "that is not just the only lesson but also a crucial one for any realignment in the future."

 

[Karmickameleon]

Party notes?

He doesn't appear to read them. The way the SWP is going, it's more likely to be the Thoughts of Chairman Charlie (suitably edited from the "standpoint of the proletariat" by Comrade Rhetta).

 

[butchersapron]

This is a good point. IS in the early 70's was a considerably more democratic organisation than the current SWP. However, the bureaucratic measures used to against Higgins et al's IS Opposition bear many similarities to those used against today's oppos.
Mike Pearn commenting on this period on Facebook put it very well:
"The only lasting lesson from the 1975/76 struggle in IS is that workers democracy must be defended against all who threaten it including those leaders who would temporarily suspend it the better to wage the class struggle."
I replied: "that is not just the only lesson but also a crucial one for any realignment in the future."

How would IS suspend worker democracy?

 

[butchersapron]

Party notes?

Shouting Seattle Seattle like some mad pacino.

 

[treelover]

Obsessing over structure takes the problem out there, it abstracts it, makes it 'political'. How do we treat eachother is perhaps a more honest way of looking at it.

absolutely, and imo over the last twenty years, the answer is not very well...

 

[leyton96]

According to Company Check Charlie Kimber has resigned as one of the Officers of Sherborne Publications Ltd. Sherborne is one of the myriad companies associated with the SWP. Company Check lists its current state as:

£14,140
Cash

£-264,040
Net Worth

£116,475
Assets

£384,682
Liabilities

For the moment Joseph Choonara seems to be the sole officer for the company.
Could be significant, could just be rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

 

[butchersapron]

That's huge liabilities.

 

[redcogs]

absolutely, and imo over the last twenty years, the answer is not very well...

Except its quite a bit longer than 20 years treelover. When i left in the early 1990s, it was because the political culture could/would not tolerate dissenting voices. There was significant unpleasantness and the usual casting into the wilderness by those who had formerly been friends. i'd witnessed the same process a few years previously, so i'd say its a minimum of three decades - ie prior to the miners strike. And Karmickameleon suggests that the undemocratic bully culture predates that i believe.

Somewhere along the line numbers of swp comrades became rigid and incapable of comradely and honourable behaviour towards those who sought to encourage a slightly different modus operandi. It looks as though something similar is about to happen to the many current dissidents - and its all the more unworthy because todays dissenters simply wanted decency and fairness and accountability to prevail in a rape case..

You couldn't make it up.

 

[leyton96]

A bit more poking around in Company Check shows that Andrea Butcher (anyone know who she is?) resigned today as a Director of IS Books Limited.
Company Check has an account summary for IS Books Limited as:

£4,758
Cash

£-197,350
Net Worth

£132,543
Assets

£164,917
Liabilities

 

[barney_pig]

I can understand that these figures are artificial, designed to ensure that no tax will be liable, but somewhere there will be a shit storm of pain when this all hits the fan

 

[comrade spurski]

when you only have 2000 sub paying members and only sell 1400 papers per week then you are in financial trouble...serves them right

 

[Oisin123]

A bit more poking around in Company Check shows that Andrea Butcher (anyone know who she is?) resigned today as a Director of IS Books Limited.

I remember her from the late 80s. Then, she was part of the circle that includes Sue C, which I would say was a predictor of loyalism, except that Elaine H. was part of that circle too, so you never know.

Edit: I did wonder if these resignations somehow connect to getting rid of opposition members of sensitive companies. But if so, the connection is obscure, seeing as Charlie K. is one of those resigning.

 

[SpackleFrog]

According to Company Check Charlie Kimber has resigned as one of the Officers of Sherborne Publications Ltd. Sherborne is one of the myriad companies associated with the SWP. Company Check lists its current state as:

£14,140
Cash

£-264,040
Net Worth

£116,475
Assets

£384,682
Liabilities

For the moment Joseph Choonara seems to be the sole officer for the company.
Could be significant, could just be rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

Is it not possible they're just trying to offload any and all liabilities on Choonara? I mean, I've not had much experience of him, but if you were looking for a patsy...