George Galloways Political Party??

[MarxistLeninistMaoistTrot]

George Galloways political party.
Is it a liberal Bourgesie reactionary anti war movement.
Or is it a socialist party.
?

[Dimentio]

Its a George Galloway party. The guy's a cut-off-the-pages populist.

[bricolage]

Fuck Galloway, reformist, reactionary, moralistic wanker.

[MarxistLeninistMaoistTrot]

so i take it he is not a socialist:)

[Irish commie]

He is a social democrat who would love old labour back and doesnt seem to see the clear flaws in the capitalist system. He also wants a media career. But his attempt to form a wider left coalition to oppse the law and the blatant attacks on public sector workers and unions by the new labour government which is something in his favour.

[Radical]

Comrade Galloway is a progressive Social-Democrat and a staunch Anti-Imperialist

[Stranger Than Paradise]

How can any Social Democrat be considered a comrade?

[OrganisedRandomness]

Social democrat, simple as that.

His "anti-imperialism" is generally the support of theocracies and their proxy groups; two of the most anti-socialist things in existence.

[blake 3:17]

RESPECT is an attempt to build an effective party to the left of Labour. It's got its problems. If I were in England I'd join it.

[ls]

Nope, RESPECT is not progressive nor socialist whatsoever.

Also blake, what group/party are you active in where you are (wherever that is)? And what led you to think RESPECT is progressive?

[blake 3:17]

Across the Atlantic, so who cares?

Edited to add: I do care. Actually across the Atlantic we might like him better. The Conservative government prevented him from speaking here, and the talks he gave reached tens of thousands of people, as opposed to a couple of thousand.

And he was kicked out of Labour for opposing the Iraqi invasion.

Here's a link to the RESPECT home page: http://www.therespectparty.net/ There's good stuff on it.

Edited to add:
Harman makes no serious attempt to explain the SWP’s dramatic switch - as far as George Galloway is concerned - from unquestioned leader to number one enemy of the left. It’s true that Galloway is a maverick and is a controversial politician. But he was both of these things the day Respect was formed and he remained so the day it split. At the time Respect was formed, the SWP saw it as important to include someone like Galloway in a project like Respect, if it was to have a broad appeal. And they were right, at least in principle, even if they got it wrong in practice. You can’t have a broad party including both revolutionary socialists and left reformists without any left reformists of any weight and influence. And Galloway is still the only left Labour MP to make a break with Labour, having been expelled from Labour over the war – and to have put his weight behind building an alternative. He is the best public speaker on the left, not an unimportant attribute, and was and remains a central leader of the anti-war movement. It is largely from these two factors that he has the biggest electoral base of anyone on the left outside of the Labour Party. He is left Labour in his politics, as he made very clear at the Respect Renewal conference. But it was this which he brought into Respect from the outset - a genuine component of left-Labour politics.

Alan Thornett on the SWP's attack on Galloway.

Link: http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article1407&var_recherche=respect

[Spawn of Stalin]

Respect isn't so different to the SWP really, neither are revolutionary parties, both have social democratic leanings on certain issues, etc. Galloway, despite being loud and annoying, is a good socialist, he supports all of Marxism-Leninism's great achievements in Russia, China, Cuba, Vietnam, and all around the world. A lot of socialists don't like him just because he was in Labour and appeared on Big Brother.

[Die Rote Fahne]

He's a democratic socialist.

[Irish commie]

How can any Social Democrat be considered a comrade?
here we are in danger of becoming counter productively revolutionary by this i mean so revolutionary and idealistic thatwe cannot join forces with these kind of people to create a progressive movement. He is left wing he tried to form a wider left alternative he is pro trade union and anti imperialism. he is our comrade

[ls]

here we are in danger of becoming counter productively revolutionary by this i mean so revolutionary and idealistic thatwe cannot join forces with these kind of people to create a progressive movement. He is left wing he tried to form a wider left alternative he is pro trade union and anti imperialism. he is our comrade

He is no comrade of mine. He is a moronic, religious, moralistic, soc-dem, pro-life ("'I have religious beliefs and try to live by them,' Galloway tells me. 'I have all my life been against abortion and against euthanasia - in fact, on Question Time two weeks ago I was the only panellist to inveigh against the creeping euthanasia in our society. I am not surprised if my position on these issues strikes a chord.'") sub-labour party bureaucrat who is not part of the revolutionary left.

[Die Rote Fahne]

He is no comrade of mine. He is a moronic, religious, moralistic, soc-dem, pro-life ("'I have religious beliefs and try to live by them,' Galloway tells me. 'I have all my life been against abortion and against euthanasia - in fact, on Question Time two weeks ago I was the only panellist to inveigh against the creeping euthanasia in our society. I am not surprised if my position on these issues strikes a chord.'") sub-labour party bureaucrat who is not part of the revolutionary left.

Because of a couple of social issues you aren't willing to call him a comrade.

When the time comes, and a revolution is at hand, you cna't say you won't fight with someone because of their beliefs on aboriton etc.

[ls]

Because of a couple of social issues you aren't willing to call him a comrade.

When the time comes, and a revolution is at hand, you cna't say you won't fight with someone because of their beliefs on aboriton etc.

So you think being a soc-dem and advocating participation in the bourgeoisie parliament is just ok? As is being religious (and ethnoreligious too come election time).

I suppose you think the labour party is socialist too.

[Revy]

George who?;)

I thought the British left had moved on. RESPECT is no longer a viable alternative. The coddling of religious reactionaries was bad enough. But it's been two years since the popular front split between a faction allied to Galloway and Yaqoob , and a faction allied to the SWP (Left Alternative or Left List, which later ceased to exist).

No to a new RESPECT, no to a "New Old Labour", yes to a socialist alliance or new broad socialist party.

[Spawn of Stalin]

So you think being a soc-dem and advocating participation in the bourgeoisie parliament is just ok? As is being religious (and ethnoreligious too come election time).

I suppose you think the labour party is socialist too.
I can understand the argument that he is an MP, but saying that a religious person can not be revolutionary is just twisted. When it comes to the fundamental demands of socialism, George Galloway is the same as many people here, so he can believe in whatever non-existent God he likes for all I care.

[ls]

I can understand the argument that he is an MP, but saying that a religious person can not be revolutionary is just twisted. When it comes to the fundamental demands of socialism, George Galloway is the same as many people here, so he can believe in whatever non-existent God he likes for all I care.

But he lets it pervade into his politics, he is pro-life and anti-euthanasia which is reactionary, come on now.

[Spawn of Stalin]

Yes, he has some reactionary views, but so do most of us in the eyes of many, a few days ago someone on this very forum said that Marxist-Leninists are no better than Nazis. Let's have our revolution, then sort out our petty differences.

[ls]

Yes, he has some reactionary views, but so do most of us in the eyes of many, a few days ago someone on this very forum said that Marxist-Leninists are no better than Nazis. Let's have our revolution, then sort out our petty differences.

George Galloway advocates working in the bureaucracy of the trade unions among all kinds of ridiculous things just like that, he is never going to be revolutionary to the extent we can use and disregard him.

[blake 3:17]

Is, you're doing a really good job at convincing me tht Galloway is alright. I much prefer impure reformists that actually get things done, than pure revolutionaries that don't accomplish anything.

Edited to add:
George Galloway advocates working in the bureaucracy of the trade unions among all kinds of ridiculous things just like that, he is never going to be revolutionary to the extent we can use and disregard him.

Do you really think working class politics can be advanced without any support or coalition with labour bureaucracy? There's no shame in working together where you can. I'm not currently up on English trade union politics, but a left split from Labour would be very beneficial. What about union support for the BDS campaign? Isn't support from at least a section of the union leadership essential for its success?

[ls]

Is, you're doing a really good job at convincing me tht Galloway is alright. I much prefer impure reformists that actually get things done, than pure revolutionaries that don't accomplish anything.

Edited to add:

Do you really think working class politics can be advanced without any support or coalition with labour bureaucracy? There's no shame in working together where you can. I'm not currently up on English trade union politics, but a left split from Labour would be very beneficial. What about union support for the BDS campaign? Isn't support from at least a section of the union leadership essential for its success?

Well then you belong in with a group like the SWP/CPGB/RESPECT or even the Labour Party itself, along with a significant bunch of others posting in this thread.

I don't intend on continuing this pointless conversation. Labour is socialist, so are all the other meak-left parties, so are the trade unions. :rolleyes:

[The Ungovernable Farce]

There's a massive difference between working with rank'n'file social democrat activists (not that there's many left) and working with self-serving careerist social democrat politicians like the egomaniac Galloway. Most social democrats are just class-conscious workers who happen to be wrong about a lot of stuff, we can work with them, but politicians like Galloway are just another faction of the bourgeoisie. They are part of the problem.

[h0m0revolutionary]

Is, you're doing a really good job at convincing me tht Galloway is alright. I much prefer impure reformists that actually get things done, than pure revolutionaries that don't accomplish anything.



Yes, and Respect has accomplished?

Here's a list off the top of my head of notable achievements of the Respect ghostship:

- Took money (£10,000) off Islamic Party of Britain executive member Dr Muhammad Naseem, who calls for the execution of homosexuals
- Removed LGBT and aboriton rights form their 2005 manifesto (this was endorced by the SWP faction at conference too)
- Allied with Campaign Iran, who at Stop the at conference 2007, said Iran is a "progressive and democratic regime" and said homosexuals should fine condolence in the fact that while they are killed for their sexuality in Iran, at least they can have a sex change!

Homophobia aside, there is a whole myriad of reactionary bollocks the Respect "coalition" came out with - and continue to do so.

The Respect initiative never tried anything other than sectioning off the working class. Seeking to accommodate muslims only at the expense of other demographics. I mean what self-respecting jew is going to champion support for Hezbollah and Hamas? What white worker is going to join an orginisation that fetishisies muslim businessmen?

[The Ungovernable Farce]

Also, as someone who was (for my sins) involved with the whole wretched project from its founding right up to the ignominious Galloway/SWP split, I think it's important not to pass over the Big Brother embarrassment too lightly. His defenders will say that it's nothing that important and just a stupid TV show, not a question of principle (this was the official line of the SWP leadership at the time, then they had to change their minds 180 degrees a few months later when they fell out with him), but I don't think that's actually true. He didn't just go on Big Brother as an individual, he was (and is) the public face of Respect, and so his egomaniac decision reflected on the party as a whole. The day he went into the house you could hear the deafening sound of facepalming from trots up and down the country. He should've consulted the rank-and-file before taking any decision that'd majorly affect the public image of the party as a whole, but he made no attempt to do so, and as far as I'm aware he was never been made accountable to the party for it afterwards. What does that say about his idea of revolutionary organisation and leadership? Does he act like a "worker in Parliament", fully controlled by his grassroots comrades at all times, or does he act like a top-down autocrat with no obligation to listen to anyone but himself - in other words, exactly like any other politician, distinguised only by his monumental ego? As far as I'm concerned, whether leaders are accountable to those they claim to represent is a question of principle, and Galloway's clearly on the wrong side of it.

He's not all bad, tho - as far as I'm concerned, the whole illusion that you can achieve anything by electing nice socialist politicians to Parliament is completely wrong anyway, so if by being such a useless shitbag, he stops people being able to have reformist illusions in him, I suppose he plays a progressive role in some ways.

[BobKKKindle$]

RESPECT had potential, but I do think it was undermined, in large part by Galloway, and I also think that the SWP should have recognized that the project was degenerating at an earlier stage and withdrawn their support as soon as they could. It's worth pointing out that whilst the 2005 Manifesto did not include any references to gay rights, and did not explicitly condemn homophobia, this was widely criticized at the conference after the elections, which suggests that we need to draw a distinction between the leadership of the organization and its membership, who, whilst they probably should have ensured that gay rights were included to begin with, clearly do not condone attempts to gain the support of conservatives by dropping what should be an elementary principle for all socialists and progressives - namely the right of each and every individual to have consensual sex with whoever they like without encountering discrimination from the state or society.


I mean what self-respecting jew is going to champion support for Hezbollah and Hamas?I don't think that either the SWP or RESPECT "champions" Hamas or Hezbollah, but if you're talking about backing the resistance of people in Lebanon and Gaza, then there are plenty of Jewish people who share that position, both in the UK and Israel.

[The Ungovernable Farce]

I don't think that either the SWP or RESPECT "champions" Hamas or Hezbollah, but if you're talking about backing the resistance of people in Lebanon and Gaza, then there are plenty of Jewish people who share that position, both in the UK and Israel.
Nowt to do with the actual topic of this thread, but what else would you call running completely uncritical interviews (http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=8204)? Oh, and slightly more on-topic, giving space in your paper for Galloway to come out with nauseating crap like "I glorify the Hizbollah national resistance movement, and I glorify the leader of Hizbollah, Sheikh Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah. (http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=9334)"? Fuck, being an opportunist is embarrassing.