SWP: Mother of all splits looms?

[butchersapron]

So where do we stand now then - Rees/German against the CC majority, trying to lever nineham and bambery into their corner, these two not very responsive. ND putting out a piece criticial of the party's organisation but Rees (totally stupidly from a tactical point of view) attacking ND and so allowing the CC majority to position itself as siding with ND against Rees/German, and taking up the pro-democratisation postion, again helped by Rees demand for less democracy. JM acting as peoples tribune and attacking Rees from outside the CC, in hope that some of NDs stuff actually sticks and he can catch a lift back onto CC. CC majority learning from Rees getting totally outmanouvered by GG et al in RESPECT that they need only sit quietly and he'll fuck himself up for them (and he's well down that path already i feel).

Either way, i feel they've reached the pont where the NF were in the late 80s early 90s, were they just weren't the big fish anymore - they weren't the group automatically associated with all right wing activity, in the way that the SWP are ofgten assumed to be for left-wing stuff. They'll not dissapear, but they'll never have such centrality again.

 

[imposs1904]

Either way, i feel they've reached the pont where the NF were in the late 80s early 90s, were they just weren't the big fish anymore - they weren't the group automatically associated with all right wing activity, in the way that the SWP are ofgten assumed to be for left-wing stuff. They'll not dissapear, but they'll never have such centrality again.

I think you've hit the nail on the head there. That monolithic invulnerability that they once seemingly had is just crumbling away to dust now.

I think the Millies will - and have already done so to a certain extent - capitalise on the continuing difficulties of the SWP. There's a reason why Taaffe produced that pamphlet on the SWP recently. The Millies have been steadily growing in recent years and they can smell an opportunity when it presents itself. I wouldn't be surprised if the Millies replace the SWP as the largest Trot organisation in the next 12/18 months. (I know, I know. That no longer carries the cache that it once did.)

One last thought is that, like a lot of people, I took the piss out of that document produced a few years back by an SWP apparatchik on the dangers of the internet and email discussion groups.

Whoever he or she was, you can't deny they were onto something. A contributory factor to the SWP leadership getting fucked over in recent years has been the internet (and more especially blogs). That control that they once had over information being transmitted to both their rank and file membership and to the outside world is now no longer in place.

They've been found out. Just wish it had happened years ago.

 

[Random]

I think the Millies will - and have already done so to a certain extent - capitalise on the continuing difficulties of the SWP. There's a reason why Taaffe produced that pamphlet on the SWP recently. The Millies have been steadily growing in recent years and they can smell an opportunity when it presents itself. I wouldn't be surprised if the Millies replace the SWP as the largest Trot organisation in the next 12/18 months. (I know, I know. That no longer carries the cache that it once did.)

The problem is, though, that there's no longer the same numbers of radicals in universities, unions or the labour left for a trot party to hoover up. And that's what's bringing all the far left groups down. And the anarchists as well of course.

 

[imposs1904]

The problem is, though, that there's no longer the same numbers of radicals in universities, unions or the labour left for a trot party to hoover up. And that's what's bringing all the far left groups down. And the anarchists as well of course.

I agree with you. The numbers aren't there anymore, but I could still see the Millies becoming the biggest group in the near future. Granted it doesn't carry the kudos it once did.

I don't support their politics but I've got to give them credit that their apparent seriousness and consistency has brought them back from a period a few years back where it looked like they were going to go tits up.

That sort of approach that they've applied has obviously chimed with a layer of people, and probably the Carry On SWP farce has also helped them recruit.

As in, 'Look, at least we're not the SWP.' type of political argument. That can be highly persuasive to some people

 

[dennisr]

As in, 'Look, at least we're not the SWP.' type of political argument. That can be highly persuasive to some people

Like 'anarchists'?

Hasn't helped the SPGB though?

 

[Bakunin]

Like 'anarchists'?

Hasn't helped the SPGB though?

I'd take the Anarchists over the Trots any time, thanks.

 

[dennisr]

I'd take the Anarchists over the Trots any time, thanks.

..at least you are not the SWP

 

[treelover]

Here is one of the problems, it makesd it sound like it is all about 'market share' when it should be the 'ishoos', basic bread and butter stuff which the SWP have totally ignored and which the SP is somewhat better, (but still no call for protests about the welfare reforms)

 

[imposs1904]

Like 'anarchists'?

Hasn't helped the SPGB though?

FFS, dennisr, I throw the millies a couple of compliments and you throw it back in my face.

In future I'll stick to the usual sideline schtick of mentioning the fact that The Socialist is the most boring read this side of reading the back of a Cornflakes box . . . taking the piss out of the little matter of Peter Taaffe being your National/General Secretary since the mid-sixties . . . and wondering out loud what vote Chris Flood got in the recent London Assembly elections.

 

[dennisr]

FFS, dennisr, I throw the millies a couple of compliments and you throw it back in my face.

In future I'll stick to the usual sideline schtick of mentioning the fact that The Socialist is the most boring read this side of reading the back of a Cornflakes box . . . taking the piss out of the litter matter of Peter Taaffe has been your National/General Secretary since mid-sixties . . . and wondering out loud what vote Chris Flood got in the recent London Assembly elections.

Pheww that better, imposs - the urban75world had been turned upside down for a few moments there. complimenting the SP whatever next...

 

[imposs1904]

Pheww that better, imposs - the urban75world had been turned upside down for a few moments there. complimenting the SP whatever next...

I feel better because of it.

 

[treelover]

and which the SP is somewhat better, (but still no call for protests about the welfare reforms)

Ahem....

 

[dennisr]

Ahem....

http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/6696

 

[audiotech]

So where do we stand now then - Rees/German against the CC majority, trying to lever nineham and bambery into their corner, these two not very responsive. ND putting out a piece criticial of the party's organisation but Rees (totally stupidly from a tactical point of view) attacking ND and so allowing the CC majority to position itself as siding with ND against Rees/German, and taking up the pro-democratisation postion, again helped by Rees demand for less democracy. JM acting as peoples tribune and attacking Rees from outside the CC, in hope that some of NDs stuff actually sticks and he can catch a lift back onto CC. CC majority learning from Rees getting totally outmanouvered by GG et al in RESPECT that they need only sit quietly and he'll fuck himself up for them (and he's well down that path already i feel).

Either way, i feel they've reached the pont where the NF were in the late 80s early 90s, were they just weren't the big fish anymore - they weren't the group automatically associated with all right wing activity, in the way that the SWP are ofgten assumed to be for left-wing stuff. They'll not dissapear, but they'll never have such centrality again.

It's obvious that organisationally the SWP have not had a good time of it as of late, but it's only the rest of the fucked-up left and the yet stillborn anarcho's who are obsessed with all this stuff anyway. It's worth pointing out that they've not had a good time of it either.

Afterall, it's not as though the myriad of other far-left groups, along with the anarcho allsorts, who've had any kind of influence on working class struggle, thats very much different from the SWP's experience in recent years is it?

But do keep deluding yourselves. If knocking the SWP, who at least committed themselves to building the largest anti-war movement in living memory, makes you feel any better, then fine.

 

[imposs1904]

It's obvious that organisationally the SWP have not had a good time of it as of late, but it's only the rest of the fucked-up left and the yet stillborn anarcho's who are obsessed with all this stuff anyway. It's worth pointing out that they've not had a good time of it either.

Afterall, it's not as though the myriad of other far-left groups, along with the anarcho allsorts, who've had any kind of influence on working class struggle, thats very much different from the SWP's experience in recent years is it?

But do keep deluding yourselves. If knocking the SWP, who at least committed themselves to building the largest anti-war movement in living memory, makes you feel any better, then fine.

There you go, mc.

 

[audiotech]

There you go, mc.

Bollocks.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

Apparently we should get the CC response to Davidson tomorrow.

That will be the most entertaining document of the lot as presumably it won't spend much time contradicting Davidson's ludicrous bombast about the greatness and significance of the SWP, but will instead concentrate on defending the indefensible. That is, it will have to make an argument for the SWP's current undemocratic structure and even argue that it is, in fact, democratic. The lies and contortions should be worth a laugh.

MC5:

Slagging off anarchists and sectarians aside, what's your actual take on this? This is the first time since the 1970s that there's been this kind of debate in the SWP after all.

 

[audiotech]

MC5:

Slagging off anarchists and sectarians aside, what's your actual take on this? This is the first time since the 1970s that there's been this kind of debate in the SWP after all.

Ah, yes the sectarians, those “tiny ferocious creatures devouring each other in a drop of water”.

Put simply, the SWP seem to be ditching the old methods of working and it appears a number of the present CC as well, favouring local initiatives from below, to be, as the French Marxist Daniel Bensaid noted and whom Neil Davidson quotes: "Ready for the improbable, for the unexpected, for what happens.”

 

[imposs1904]

Ah, yes the sectarians, those “tiny ferocious creatures devouring each other in a drop of water”.

Put simply, the SWP seem to be ditching the old methods of working and it appears a number of the present CC as well, favouring local initiatives from below, to be, as the French Marxist Daniel Bensaid noted and whom Neil Davidson quotes: "Ready for the improbable, for the unexpected, for what happens.”

Would that be the same drop of water that the SWP is currently drowning in?

Here, have the whole box.

 

[audiotech]

Would that be the same drop of water that the SWP is currently drowning in?

Here, have the whole box.

You a kleenex salesman?

 

[chilango]

It's obvious that organisationally the SWP have not had a good time of it as of late, but it's only the rest of the fucked-up left and the yet stillborn anarcho's who are obsessed with all this stuff anyway. It's worth pointing out that they've not had a good time of it either.

Afterall, it's not as though the myriad of other far-left groups, along with the anarcho allsorts, who've had any kind of influence on working class struggle, thats very much different from the SWP's experience in recent years is it?

But do keep deluding yourselves. If knocking the SWP, who at least committed themselves to building the largest anti-war movement in living memory, makes you feel any better, then fine.

C'mon MC5, as JM himself says:

The worst mistake however was the failure to admit or correct mistakes even after they had long become evident

So, how about it?

 

[audiotech]

C'mon MC5, as JM himself says:


So, how about it?

I would agree with that statement.

So chilango, now that the SWP have admitted to their mistakes, do you think we are likely to see those who don't make mistakes, because they don't do fuckall, giving it a rest anytime soon?

 

[Bakunin]

I would agree with that statement.

So chilango, now that the SWP have admitted to their mistakes, do you think we are likely to see those who don't make mistakes, because they don't do fuckall, giving it a rest anytime soon?

Ah, so those who dare to criticise the SWP's many and enormous variety of disasters are doing nothing, are they?

Wrong again, there's plenty going on, such as the Climate Camps and associated actions at which, and mercifully IMHO, the SWP don't seem to have had much of a presence. Could it just possibly be that the work around the issue of climate change has been so big and (relatively) effective (when compared to anything the SWP CC have attempted) precisely because the Swappies weren't around to 'lead' and 'organise' things into the ground like with their various front groups?

 

[mk12]

work around the issue of climate change has been so big

Really?

 

[Bakunin]

Really?

I did say 'relatively', and you surely can't deny that climate change has become a major issue and is extensively and regularly covered in the even the most mainstream of media.

As far as actvist work around the issue goes, I don't doubt for a second that the absence of the SWP attempting to 'lead' and 'organise' activists' activities around the issue has helped it along massively, in that, IMHO, many people would have been put off by any hint of Swappie involvement and the sheer, blinding tactical and strategic incompetence of the SWP CC.

 

[bolshiebhoy]

Either way, i feel they've reached the pont where the NF were in the late 80s early 90s, were they just weren't the big fish anymore - they weren't the group automatically associated with all right wing activity, in the way that the SWP are ofgten assumed to be for left-wing stuff. They'll not dissapear, but they'll never have such centrality again.

Quite possible butchers. But the comparison with the fascists don't really work does it? The NF were squeezed between the twin pillars of an anti-fascist movement and a soft-racist maggie. Outside of Urban there's not exactly an organised movement to smash the swp. And nor is there any obvious left reformist surge that's going to smother the far left. Yes the swp will batton down the hatches for a while but it ain't really going anywhere is it? Least I hope not.

 

[audiotech]

Ah, so those who dare to criticise the SWP's many and enormous variety of disasters are doing nothing, are they?

Usually, but there are exceptions.

 

[Bakunin]

Usually, but there are exceptions.

Cobblers, there's loads going on in various places and with various groups and individuals.

I don't doubt that there are some keyboard activists out there, but to say that people who criticise the SWP usually are keyboard activists is ridiculous, IMHO.

 

[audiotech]

I don't doubt that there are some keyboard activists out there,

poll?

 

[chilango]

I would agree with that statement.

So chilango, now that the SWP have admitted to their mistakes, do you think we are likely to see those who don't make mistakes, because they don't do fuckall, giving it a rest anytime soon?

Fat chance!

Anyway...you're right of course, the SWP are not alone in making mistakes. Take a look at the Plane Stupid thread to see an example of a DA (or not) that generated a lot of criticism and debate.

The differences being that the SWP has until recently been in a position to shape the strategy of pretty much most campaigns when it wished to, so its mistakes had a wide repurcussion.

...and two, the almost blanket defence on here by you lot of positions that prominent SWPers are now admitting were wrong. Not something you'll see amongst the anarchos for example who seem more than happy to debate their mistakes on here (though too ooften this descends into bickering).

Perhaps most interesting though, is your reliance upon activism as a kind of defence. Something almost universally shared amongst the Left and Anarchists is a kind of moralism based upon activity. That those who are "active" have a stronger position to comment than those who are "armchair". Now, certainly there is an element of practicality about this position, involvemnet leads to more detailed knowledge of whats going on, sure. But, as the point must be to engage with those who are not currently active, then the viewpoints of those who are in that position are perhaps the most important, no?

Just a thought.