Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Workers Power have split

A sitcom about the SWP or the SP could be very funny, whereas you wouldn't even need a good scriptwriter for one about the sparts or posadists - in fact a documentary about the sparts or posadists would be hilarious.Whereas a documentary about the SP or SWP might make you cringe but it wouldn't be all that funny.

Now that's a post I never thought I'd type out :D


Not a sitcom but check out Trevor Griffiths' The Party. A play from the early 70s but it was filmed by the BBC in the late 80s/early 90s. When it debuted in the theatre Laurence Olivier played Gerry Healey Jock Tagg . . . I kid you not.
 
By the way has anyone seen this?

http://en.internationalism.org/ir/94_parasitism :D



Individualism can also derive from petty bourgeois influences, or from directly bourgeois ones. From the ruling class it takes up the official ideology which sees individuals as the subject of history, which glorifies the “self-made man” and justifies the “struggle of each against all”. However, it is above all through the vehicle of the petty bourgeoisie that it penetrates into the organisations of the proletariat, particularly through newly proletarianised elements coming from strata like the peasantry and the artisans (this was notably the case last century) or from the intellectual and student milieu (this has been especially true since the historic resurgence of the working class at the end of the 60s). Individualism expresses itself mainly through the tendency :
  • to see the organisation not as a collective whole but as a sum of individuals in which relations between persons take precedence over political and statutory relations;
  • to advance one’s own “desires” and “interests” as opposed to the needs of the organisation;
  • consequently, to resist the discipline necessary within the organisation;
  • to look for “personal realisation” through militant activity;
  • to adopt an attitude of constantly contesting the central organs, which are accused of trying to crush individuality; the complementary attitude is that of looking for “promotion” through gaining a place in these organs;
  • more generally, to adhere to an élitist view of the organisation in which you aspire to be one of the “first class militants” while developing a contemptuous attitude to those seen as “second class militants”.

The phenomenon of political parasitism, which to a large extent is also the result of the penetration of alien ideologies into the working class, has not been accorded, within the history of the workers’ movement, the same amount of attention as other phenomena such as opportunism. This has been the case because parasitism has only significantly affected proletarian organisations in very specific moments in history. Opportunism, for example, constitutes a constant menace for proletarian organisations and it expresses itself above all when the latter are going through their greatest phases of development. By contrast, parasitism does not basically manifest itself at the time of the most important movements of the class. On the contrary, it is in a period of immaturity of the movement when the organisations of the class still have a weak impact and not very strong traditions that parasitism finds its most fertile soil. This is linked to the very nature of parasitism, which, to be effective, has to relate to elements looking for class positions but who find it hard to distinguish real revolutionary organisations from currents whose only reason for existing is to live at the expense of the former, to sabotage their activities, indeed to destroy them. At the same time, the phenomenon of parasitism, again by its nature, does not appear at the very beginning of the development of the organisations of the class but when they have already been constituted and have proved that they really defend proletarian interests. These are indeed the elements which we find in the first historic manifestation of political parasitism, the Alliance of Socialist Democracy, which sought to sabotage the combat of the IWA and to destroy it.

To the extent that the workers’ movement, in the shape of the IWA, possesses a rich experience of struggle against parasitism, it is of the utmost importance, if we are to face up to the present-day parasitic offensives and arm ourselves against them, to recall the principal lessons of this past struggle. These lessons concern a whole series of aspects:
  • the moment of parasitism’s appearance;
  • its specificities with regard to other dangers facing proletarian organisations;
  • its recruiting ground;
  • its methods;
  • the most effective means of fighting it.
In fact, as we shall see, on all these aspects there is a striking similarity between the situation facing the proletarian milieu today and the one confronted by the IWA.

:eek: :eek: :eek:
 
This being said, even if parasitic currents are often led by declassed adventurers (when not by direct state agents), they do not only recruit in this category. We can also find there elements who at the outset are animated by a revolutionary will and who don’t set out to destroy the organisation but who:
  • impregnated by petty bourgeois ideology, impatient, individualist, elitist, preferring affinity relations to political relations;
  • “disappointed” by the working class which doesn’t move ahead quickly enough for them;
  • finding it hard to put up with organisational discipline, frustrated at not finding in militant activity the “satisfaction” they hoped for or the “posts” they aspired to,
end up developing a deep hostility towards the proletarian organisation, even if this hostility is masked by “militant” pretensions.

oh my god do real people actually talk like this in real life? :eek: "proletarian milieu" lol!


In response to the ICC’s analyses and concerns over parasitism, we are often told that the phenomenon only concerns our own organisation, whether as a target or as a “supplier”, through splits, of the parasitic milieu. It is true that today, the ICC is parasitism’s main target, which is explained easily enough by the fact that it is the largest and most widespread organisation of the proletarian movement. It consequently provokes the greatest hatred from the enemies of this movement, which never miss an occasion to stir up hostility towards it on the part of other proletarian organisations. Another reason for this “privilege” of the ICC is the fact precisely that our organisation has suffered the most splits leading to the creation of parasitic groups. We can suggest several explanations for this phenomenon.

:D
 
Firstly, of all the organisations of the proletarian political milieu which have survived the 30 years since 1968, the ICC is the only new one, since all the others already existed at the time. Consequently, our organisation suffered from a greater weight of the circle spirit, which is the breeding ground for clans and parasitism. Moreover, the other organisations had already undergone a “natural selection” before the class’ historic resurgence, which had eliminated all the adventurers, semi-adventurers, and intellectuals in search of an audience, who lacked the patience to undertake an obscure labour in little organisations with a negligible impact on the working class. At the moment of the proletarian resurgence, this kind of element judged it easier to “rise” in a new organisation in the process of formation, than in an older organisation where the “places were already taken”.

what does this mean lol? :D
 
Not a sitcom but check out Trevor Griffiths' The Party. A play from the early 70s but it was filmed by the BBC in the late 80s/early 90s. When it debuted in the theatre Laurence Olivier played Gerry Healey Jock Tagg . . . I kid you not.

Yeah Trevor Griffith's "The Party" is meant to be really good, it's meant to be about the various splits that took place in the trot movement in the 1950's and 60's, the era of the The Club which I was interested in writing about.

Didn't Chris Mullin write a book about something like that too? Can't find it, maybe I'm mistaken.
 
At the outset, ideological decomposition obviously affects the capitalist class first and foremost, and then the petty-bourgeois strata which have no real autonomy. We can even say that the latter identify particularly well with decomposition, in that their own situation, their lack of any future, matches the major cause of ideological decomposition: the absence of any perspective in the immediate for society as a whole. Only the proletariat bears within itself a perspective for humanity, and in this sense it also has the greatest capacity for resistance to this decomposition. However, it is not completely spared, notably because it rubs shoulders with the petty-bourgeoisie which is decomposition’s principle vehicle. The different elements which constitute the strength of the proletariat directly confront the various facets of this ideological decomposition:


wtf
 
Who are socialist fight? There is some mental guy on my facebook who thinks that Russia and all other eastern block countries are still all somehow stalinist. He wrote a blog entry where he actually criticised me among other wordy polemics for "accommodating to liberal bourgeois nationalism" for being a fan of England on facebook!
When I was a member in southampton, we got an order in party notes saying that comrades who did not attend branch meetings which were taking place during England world cup games would be expelled. I think this was a SWP 'joke', hut it was read out at branch with all seriousness.
 
Okay..here we go here's my list of current lefty/anarchist groups in the UK. Some may be defunct, and I've not included localist groups or journals. let me know if I've missed any.

If anyone fancies helping putting up a blog with info on all these (a kinda lefty trainspotting encyclopedia) let me know.

Anarchist Federation
Alliance for Green Socialism
Alliance for Workers Liberty
Autonmous Class War
Class War
Communist Corresponding Society
Communist Party of Britain
Communist Party of Great Britain (Provisional Central Committe)
Communist Party of Britain-Marxist Leninist
Communist Party of Great Britain-Marxist Leninist
Communist Workers Organisation
Communist Action
Communist League (The Militant)
Communist League/Movement for a Socialist Future
Communist League of Great Britain
Counterfire
The Commune
Economic and Philosophic Science Review (International Leninist Workers Party )
Green Anarchist
International Bolshevik Tendency
International Communist Current
International Communist Party - Communist Left
International Communist Party - Internationalist Papers
International Communist Party / Socialist Equality Party
International Communist League (Fourth International) / Spartacist League
International Communist Tendency (ex IBRP)
International Socialist Group / Socialist Resistance
International Socialist Group – Bamberyite
International Socialist League
Independent Working Class Association
Industrial Workers of the World
Liberty and Solidarity
Maoist Internationalist Movement
New Communist Party
Proletarian Democracy
Peace and Progress Party
Permanent Revolution
Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist)
Revolutionary Communist Group
Revolutionary Democratic Group
Revolutionary Internationalist League
Revolutionary Internationalist Movement
Revolutionary Workers Party
Respect
RCPGB-ML
Socialist Action
Socialist Appeal
Socialist Fight
Socialist Labour Party
Socialist Workers Party
Socialist Party
SPGB - Socialist Standard
SPGB - Socialist Studies
Solidarity - Sheridanites
Solidarity - Solidarity paper
Socialist League
SolFed
TUSC
United Socialist Party
Workers Action
Workers Power
WRP (Newsline)
WRP (Workers Press) / Movement for Socialism / Reclaim the Future
WRP (WIRFI)
Workers Internationalist League
Workers Fight
World in Common
 
Some of us have fond memories of Workers Power though they were a pale shadow of themselves from their heyday with the Revo Boards
I think the rot set in before the PR split when when they expelled the external faction of WP from their Revo Boards following their polemic against Workers Power's campaign to send an International brigade to Iraq , the debacle at the G8 demo at Gleneagles when a Spar shop was looted , the issue of Australians in Acton and whether tattoo removal on the NHS should be in the Revo election manifesto.

Neither WP or Permanent Revolution really never recovered from the flurry of letters in the Weekly Worker that followed or the Revolution Betrothed polemic that set out a new political landscape.

The external faction of Workers Power later set up the very successful Skateboarders Against the War .
 
A sitcom, why not? The obvious title would be "Carry On Recruiting" (I don't claim originality for this). But, seriously, what's also needed is a political/sociological study into the continuing appeal of "Trotskyism". Normally this should have died out with the demise of the USSR twenty years but for some reason it hasn't. Why?

As far as I can see the two basic principles shared by all Trotskyist groups are: (1) the idea of a vanguard party of super-activists to lead workers in their struggles, and (2) "transitional demands" as demands to attract a following but which the vanguard knows can't be achieved, the theory being that in struggling for these demands workers will learn that they can't be achieved and so turn to the vanguard for leadership against capitalism itself.

I don't think most members of Trotskyist organisations are really as cynical as (2) suggests. I get the impression from the members of SPEW and the SWP I've met (not those of the cults) that they really believe that the demands can be achieved under capitalism and are sincerely struggling to try to achieve them. This is understandable enough as there's plenty to protest about and struggle against under capitalism. But why does this common-or-garden reformism or basic trade-unionism have to be attached to Trotskyist ideology (particularly defence of the Bolshevik revolution)? And where does the vanguard party come in? Obviously some organisation and centralisation is required for any struggle, but why to the degree proposed by Trotskyist theory, especially as (as has been pointed out here) the struggle between rival vanguards prevents the struggle for reforms (or, rather, these days against them being whittled away) being as effective as they might be through neglecting the old trade-union principle that "unity is strength"?
 
chilango - there's the "communist corresponding society" as well - they all LOOK like they're trying to look like marx :D
 
A sitcom, why not? The obvious title would be "Carry On Recruiting" (I don't claim originality for this). But, seriously, what's also needed is a political/sociological study into the continuing appeal of "Trotskyism". Normally this should have died out with the demise of the USSR twenty years but for some reason it hasn't. Why?

As far as I can see the two basic principles shared by all Trotskyist groups are: (1) the idea of a vanguard party of super-activists to lead workers in their struggles, and (2) "transitional demands" as demands to attract a following but which the vanguard knows can't be achieved, the theory being that in struggling for these demands workers will learn that they can't be achieved and so turn to the vanguard for leadership against capitalism itself.

I don't think most members of Trotskyist organisations are really as cynical as (2) suggests. I get the impression from the members of SPEW and the SWP I've met (not those of the cults) that they really believe that the demands can be achieved under capitalism and are sincerely struggling to try to achieve them. This is understandable enough as there's plenty to protest about and struggle against under capitalism. But why does this common-or-garden reformism or basic trade-unionism have to be attached to Trotskyist ideology (particularly defence of the Bolshevik revolution)? And where does the vanguard party come in? Obviously some organisation and centralisation is required for any struggle, but why to the degree proposed by Trotskyist theory, especially as (as has been pointed out here) the struggle between rival vanguards prevents the struggle for reforms (or, rather, these days against them being whittled away) being as effective as they might be through neglecting the old trade-union principle that "unity is strength"?
Most members of trotskyist organisations aren't trotskyists. Most members of trotskyists organisations don't even know what trotskyism is. There clearly is an individual psychology of trotskyism but not a collective one. There's a psychology of group defence that can develop out of the mixing of these two though, and that's what we see in the worst sorts.
 
As far as I can see the two basic principles shared by all Trotskyist groups are: (1) the idea of a vanguard party of super-activists to lead workers in their struggles, and (2) "transitional demands" as demands to attract a following but which the vanguard knows can't be achieved, the theory being that in struggling for these demands workers will learn that they can't be achieved and so turn to the vanguard for leadership against capitalism itself.

Well nothing about 1 is specifically Trotskyist - it's general Leninism. And the SWP - at times at least - have rejected the idea of the transitional programme and argued for minimum (ie. for working in broad united fronts) and maximum (what the party really thinks) programmes instead. Though do they claim to be Trotskyist (as opposed to standing in the tradition of Trotsky or some such)?

More important - is the belief in revolutionary internationalism and permanent revolution - based on an understanding of combined and uneven development?
 
Okay..here we go here's my list of current lefty/anarchist groups in the UK. Some may be defunct, and I've not included localist groups or journals. let me know if I've missed any.

If anyone fancies helping putting up a blog with info on all these (a kinda lefty trainspotting encyclopedia) let me know.

Anarchist Federation
Alliance for Green Socialism
Alliance for Workers Liberty
Class War
Communist Party of Britain
Communist Party of Great Britain (Provisional Central Committe)
Communist Party of Britain-Marxist Leninist
Communist Party of Great Britain-Marxist Leninist
Communist Workers Organisation
Communist Action
Communist League (The Militant)
Communist League/Movement for a Socialist Future
Communist League of Great Britain
Counterfire
The Commune
Economic and Philosophic Science Review
Green Anarchist
International Bolshevik Ttendency
International Communist Current
International Communist Party
International Communist League (Fourth International) / Spartacist League
International Socialist Group / Socialist Resistance
International Socialist Group – Bamberyite
International Socialist League
Independent Working Class Association
Industrial Workers of the World
Left List/Left Alternative
Liberty and Solidarity
Marxist Party
Maoist Internationalist Movement
New Communist Party
Proletarian Democracy
Peace and Progress Party
Permanent Revolution
Revolutionary Communist Group
Revolutionary Democratic Group
Revolutionary Internationalist League
Revolutionary Internationalist Movement
Revolutionary Workers Party
Red Party
Respect
RCPGB-ML
Socialist Action
Socialist Appeal
Socialist Equality Party
Socialist Fight
Socialist Organiser
Socialist Labour Party
Socialist Workers Party
Socialist Party
SPGB - Socialist Standard
SPGB - World in Common
SPGB - Socialist Studies
Solidarity
Socialist League
SolFed
United Socialist Party
Workers Action
Workers Power
WRP (Newsline)
WRP (Workers Press)
WRP (WIRFI)
Workers Internationalist League
Workers Fight

Just a couple of things on this.

Class War don't actually exist as an organistion anymore iirc. They've tried restarting a few times but I wouldn't say they they deserve to be on this.

For IWW, although I understand why you put them on here, they are an officially registered union that has members of L&S, AFed, Solfed, Alliance for Workers Liberty, Green Party and Labour Party (The ones I encountered from the last 3 were paper members though and there maybe some from the Commune as I've seen stuff about IWW in there before).

Left List/Left Alternative aren't around anymore since TUSC has come along afaik. So maybe replace them with TUSC.

What are the difference between the numerous WRP and SPGB groups?

International Maoist Group? Really? I thought the Maoist groups died out in the 80s.
 
What do you mean how so? By siding with smaller states in their struggles with larger states rather than with the (international) w/c against both/all states. I'm not going to bother arguing if this is the correct thing to do (it's not), but it sure as hell isn't revolutionary internationalism. You're thinking of the belief in the necessity of international revolution - different thing.
 
On the sitcom thing, it has to be a spart an SP member and an SWP member end up sharing a house with a normal person not interested in politics with hilarious results. Hmm, I'm wondering if there should be a tory in there somewhere as well? No better a Lib dem! Yeah the normal one has a friend/relative/partner who is a lib dem and only turns up occasionally.

The Tory would be their landlord - and played by Alexei Sayle.
 
Back
Top Bottom