SWP: Mother of all splits looms?

[AKA pseudonym]

Lindsey German and John Rees have declared all out war on the SWP central committee majority. There can be only one winner in this fight. If Lindsey and John lose the battle then a split is likely...

The latest Party Notes,
“I want to inform comrades that the central committee voted by a majority of 10 votes to two (John and Lindsey did not attend but expressed their opposition by text messages) to propose the following slate for the incoming CC:

“Alex Callinicos, Charlie Kimber, Chris Bambery, Chris Harman, Chris Nineham, Colin Smith, Hannah Dee, Judith Orr, Lindsey German, Martin Smith, Michael Bradley, Viv Smith, Weyman Bennett.

“There will be a full debate at conference which will be followed by the election of the CC” (December 1).


And that is all that the SWP membership is told. Note that the real significance of the decision - the removal of comrade Rees - is not considered worthy of a specific mention. The members are only informed that “John and Lindsey” by text opposed the move.

The second thing to note about the announcement is that the CC is proposing to have itself re-elected in its entirety minus one comrade, with the leading committee being reduced in size from 14 to 13. In this way, the entire blame for the whole Respect/Left List/Left Alternative debacle is being placed on the shoulders of one man.

more

 

[DotCommunist]

I for one would be shocked if a left organisation where to split

 

[omnipeta]

Who?

Does anyone really give a shit?

 

[butchersapron]

I do. So fuck right off skinny.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

Life of Brian gags aside, it would actually be very unusual for the SWP to have a significant split. They haven't had one in a very long time, more than two decades. It's actually a very stable party in organisational terms, even though it shifts politically quite a bit.

I don't think that a split is likely over this falling out by the way. On what basis would Rees be able to mobilise a significant group of members against the majority of the leadership? There may well be significant political differences between the minority of the leadership around Rees and the majority of the leadership, but those differences haven't been argued out amongst the wider membership in any kind of detail. The disagreements only seem to be spilling out into the wider party now in a round of aggregates and in the last internal bulletin before the conference. That's not enough time to organise a serious political faction, which only leaves Rees and Co with whatever personal base they have.

 

[omnipeta]

"anyone with a brain"

I meant "anyone with a brain" judging by your posts you don't fall into this category.
Shouldn't you be out on the street badgering folks to by your pathetic rag?
Membership 200 and counting, hilarious.

 

[audiotech]

^ Brainless.

 

[treelover]

Some of us do,(well a bit) if the SWP had behaved differently during the Iraq war and its colonisation of the Stop the War coalition, wer may now have a genuine and effective mass movement in the UK

 

[audiotech]

Some of us do,(well a bit) if the SWP had behaved differently during the Iraq war and its colonisation of the Stop the War coalition, wer may now have a genuine and effective mass movement in the UK

Well, I suppose half a dozen loons may have 'behaved differently' in comparison to the million plus people on the streets. Whether it would have been more 'effective' is debatable.

 

[AKA pseudonym]

I would be interested if we get any debate over the latest developments, especially with the pre-conferance bulletin out next week...

It doesnt appear that the SWP leadership is willing to shoulder any blame from their recent 'misfortunes' instead lumping it all on one man shoulders. Are the SWP that politically weak or naive, that one man could have engineered the whole Respect debacle amongst the many twists & turns their party demonstrates?

would or indeed can any swp members make comment?

 

[audiotech]

I would be interested if we get any debate over the latest developments, especially with the pre-conferance bulletin out next week...

It doesnt appear that the SWP leadership is willing to shoulder any blame from their recent 'misfortunes' instead lumping it all on one man shoulders. Are the SWP that politically weak or naive, that one man could have engineered the whole Respect debacle amongst the many twists & turns their party demonstrates?

would or indeed can any swp members make comment?

Member 18 years ago if that helps?

The SWP were both politically weak and naive to think they would be able to control that mother of all politicians George Galloway.

 

[butchersapron]

That's your critiisms of the SWP's actions over the last 5 years - it was GGs fault? That's it? Really?

 

[AKA pseudonym]

Member 18 years ago if that helps?

The SWP were both politically weak and naive to think they would be able to control that mother of all politicians George Galloway.

thats the point though. One would hope the vanguard of the revolution would see through political opportunists such as GG or others..

Basically i see the leadership as not leading at all.. ditch ree's and sure it's all forgot?

is it really that simple?

what has the current rank n file swippers got to say about this?, or are they that far removed from the leadership process that it really doesnt matter...

 

[audiotech]

That's your critiisms of the SWP's actions over the last 5 years - it was GGs fault? That's it? Really?

The SWP's fault lies in their accommodation to those who were on the right in Respect - businessmen, religious and social conservatives.

The lack of any significant numbers of the anti-war movement joining the Respect project, including it should be said, many SWP members themselves didn't help matters. I suspect Galloway at it's head put many off too.

Also, previous to Respect, the way the SWP handled the running of and then the closing down of the Socialist Alliance, didn't engender much trust either.

In reality, the whole of the left are at fault. Included are those who seem to wallow in their splendid isolation - the different small sects who don't make mistakes because they don't do very much, but split into ever smaller grouplets.

However, it's those in the Labour party, who supported the bloody war in the first place, who, more than anyone, deserve the utmost contempt.

 

[butchersapron]

Name names. The swp isn't a monothought clique.

 

[audiotech]

is it really that simple?

No, but the SWP has to 'move on' as they say. Down, but not out.

 

[Kid_Eternity]

That's your critiisms of the SWP's actions over the last 5 years - it was GGs fault? That's it? Really?

I've had swp members say exactly that to me directly...amazing really given he was the best thing ever to happen to them.

 

[audiotech]

The glory years.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=4SmtLrmPDao

 

[AKA pseudonym]

No, but the SWP has to 'move on' as they say. Down, but not out.

i get you

i couldnt really see any great debate over the cc's decision.
I can foresee a whole cadre of the swp built on the concept of Galloway was the bogeyman. I dont get the impression that the 'grassroots' will be discussing slates or the inherent problems their party is experiencing. Are we not in the process of an economic downturn... is that not a fertile environment for developing their organisation? Rather than becoming more and more the pariah of the left..

if i was about the swp i would be asking some serious questions

 

[butchersapron]

Here comes the upturn again!!

 

[AKA pseudonym]

The glory years.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=4SmtLrmPDao

jaysus..

 

[audiotech]

Here comes the upturn again!!

Now, your putting words in my mouth, but that's not unusual for you.

 

[Citizen66]

Socialist revolutionaries in power struggle shock!!

 

[AKA pseudonym]

Originally Posted by butchersapron
Here comes the upturn again!!

Now, your putting words in my mouth, but that's not unusual for you.

gentlemen please..

"I will tell you one thing equivocably and clearly the one thing
just the one thing
er
well two things i will....
GG@Marxism

what a tosser
&only scapegoat ree's thought he was the messiah


is that the way democratic centralism works?
find the fall guy

 

[JHE]

Lindsey German and John Rees have declared all out war on the SWP central committee majority. There can be only one winner in this fight. If Lindsey and John lose the battle then a split is likely...

I'm not convinced this is going to be a split at all. It's a sacking, a demotion, a finding of a scapegoat - or two scapegoats maybe, if Lindsey stands by her man and/or by her role in the failure that was al-Respeq.

I've seen nothing to suggest that Lindsey & John are going to split from the sect to which they have given their lives.

The latest Party Notes,
“I want to inform comrades that the central committee voted by a majority of 10 votes to two (John and Lindsey did not attend but expressed their opposition by text messages) to propose the following slate for the incoming CC:

“Alex Callinicos, Charlie Kimber, Chris Bambery, Chris Harman, Chris Nineham, Colin Smith, Hannah Dee, Judith Orr, Lindsey German, Martin Smith, Michael Bradley, Viv Smith, Weyman Bennett.

“There will be a full debate at conference which will be followed by the election of the CC” (December 1).

There are far too many men called Chris on that committee.

Who are Viv Smith, Hannah Dee and Michael Bradley? I've not heard of them. Are they important people who have achieved their importance in fairly recent years or are they just loyal little Social Workers plonked on the CC to make up the numbers?

 

[poster342002]

The SWP's fault lies in their accommodation to those who were on the right in Respect - businessmen, religious and social conservatives.

And how many people were telling your lot exactly that at the time - only to be screached at with cries of "islamophopbe! sectarian!" etc?

It's all too little, too late. The damage is done. Time this entire outfit exited the political scene.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

Remind me again of what exactly it is that George Galloway has done in the last 12 months to betray millions of working class people in Britain that seemingly puts him on a par with Ramsey Macdonald and Joe Stalin such that he has to split from and denounced?

I mean he's no angel, no one is, but I don't see that he's any different now to what he's always been. So I'm still at a loss to understand how SWP members, often reasonably intelligent people, can justify to their own conscience that he's the main thing to blame for the SWP's woes.

 

[AKA pseudonym]

So I'm still at a loss to understand how SWP members, often reasonably intelligent people, can justify to their own conscience that he's the main thing to blame for the SWP's woes.

thats what im driving at.. its sad really


in other news SWP splits from SWP

 

[articul8]

Remind me again of what exactly it is that George Galloway has done in the last 12 months to betray millions of working class people in Britain that seemingly puts him on a par with Ramsey Macdonald and Joe Stalin such that he has to split from and denounced?

I mean he's no angel, no one is, but I don't see that he's any different now to what he's always been. So I'm still at a loss to understand how SWP members, often reasonably intelligent people, can justify to their own conscience that he's the main thing to blame for the SWP's woes.

The Profs reasoning

In the case of Galloway and the circle around him, the decline of the anti-war movement from the peak it achieved in 2003 combined with pessimism about the capacity of organized workers to mount effective resistance to the attacks mounted by New Labour and the bosses to generate the conclusion that the way forward for Respect lay in sustaining alliances with local Muslim notables who could deliver votes. But this reasoning – and the split that it produced in Respect – was overlain by a growing reconciliation between Galloway himself and New Labour. This was reflected first in his support for Ken Livingstone’s unsuccessful re-election campaign for Mayor of London in May 2008 and then in his rallying to the aid of Gordon Brown’s beleaguered government during the Glasgow East by-election that July, when a Blairite candidate was defeated by a massive swing to the Scottish National Party.

totally disingenuous since

1) Respect was always an alliance of local muslim notables that could deliver votes on a "broad" political basis
2) Galloway fought his explusion from the Labour party, and clearly strives for a Real Old Labour (sic)
3) Giving critical support to Livingstone was hardly a sell-out in the context of a contest that inevitably boiled down to him or Boris Johnson.
4) Galloway had always made clear his anti-nationalist stance re Scotland.

None of this suggests adequate political grounds for a split, unless they are acknowledging that the whole conception of Respect was flawed from day one. They seem to be just blaming Rees for Galloway not wanting to take his orders.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

The Profs reasoning


totally disingenuous since

1) Respect was always an alliance of local muslim notables that could deliver votes on a "broad" political basis
2) Galloway fought his explusion from the Labour party, and clearly strives for a Real Old Labour (sic)
3) Giving critical support to Livingstone was hardly a sell-out in the context of a contest that inevitably boiled down to him or Boris Johnson.
4) Galloway had always made clear his anti-nationalist stance re Scotland.

None of this suggests adequate political grounds for a split, unless they are acknowledging that the whole conception of Respect was flawed from day one. They seem to be just blaming Rees for Galloway not wanting to take his orders.

I don't agree with 1) of course - Respect clearly reached a muslim layer who were mostly ex Labour and many of who were working class. It never relied on the notables as was most strongly evidenced most obviously by Lavalette's re-election in 2007 where he won majority support from white voters who were not influenced by muslim 'notables' one bit.

Galloway's history and attachment to the Labour Party is hardly new. Ironically it was the SWP who invented that story that because Lavalette had once been in the Labour Party in Glasgow, he and Galloway were old comrades-in-arms within the party - in fact they never met while in the Labour Party. Respect never took a position on how to vote in Scotland, nor should it have - there were probably at least four positions on Glasgow East, and it was not an issue of principle. And it was Lindsey German who was the first to call for a vote for Livingstone, and the SWP who voted unanimously for the position that the Respect NC would rediscuss the mayoral election if a 'credible' tory challenger emerged - well Johnson was more than 'credible', he actually won and London will be the worse for it.

This spat is more about babies throwing rattles out of prams, than any principled disagreement within the SWP. Which is why I actually don't think there will be a split. The CC will have its way, and Rees will retire gracefully and go back to writing books that nobody reads.