UK Parties and sectarianism.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

I know this might seem like a ridiculous topic to discuss, but it is one I find necessary. Recently I have found it hard to not feel disillusioned by the state of the left in Britain, and some of my own party's actions have been the cause of this. The protest at the Tory Conference is something that exited me and many of my comrades, and we were going to attend it as a local group, but we were unable to do this because party elders were against the fact that the protest is being set up by the SWP (as far as I could gather). This seemed counter-productive to me, we had the potential to bring a group of students and young workers to this event, but had to tell them it was off, namely because we weren't leading the protest.

This is just one recent example. Do all of our revolutionary parties operate in this way? Are they any that aim to get along with other parties should the chance arise? Or is this kind of arrogance and sectarianism as prevalent all across the left?

I only hear from my own party on matters as these, my knowledge of other parties and their characteristics is limited and in truth I joined this party without knowing a thing about revolutionary socialism, so I feel like I would benefit from the thoughts of comrades from other British parties on this forum, or indeed comrades from anywhere but can share their opinions, thoughts and advice on the matter.

[Red Monroy]

A similar discussion, with a proposed solution, is waged here (http://www.revleft.com/vb/why-age-bureaucratic-t142531/index.html). You can also view the common response of the left to make your own conclusions.

[ed miliband]

Why don't you go regardless of what the "party elders" think? They're hardly going to be tracking your every move.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

I was going to for a while but I'm backing off from activism for a bit to think about the whole situation. Its besides the point really, that was just one factor in a whole range of factors that led me to question my own party and the whole state of our movement.

Mods can close this thread if they feel necessary, I didn't realise there was an existing thread with similar questions.

[Wanted Man]

So in the CWI, "party elders" decide where you can and can't go? :lol: Why don't you just tell them to get stuffed and go anyway?

[IndependentCitizen]

This is what infuriates me about British left, it's so factionalised, no one gets along.

[blake 3:17]

The protest at the Tory Conference is something that exited me and many of my comrades, and we were going to attend it as a local group, but we were unable to do this because party elders were against the fact that the protest is being set up by the SWP. This seemed counter-productive to me, we had the potential to bring a group of students and young workers to this event, but had to tell them it was off, namely because we weren't leading the protest.

This is just one recent example. Do all of our revolutionary parties operate in this way? Are they any that aim to get along with other parties should the chance arise? Or is this kind of arrogance and sectarianism as prevalent all across the left?


Sounds pretty bad. This kind of stuff has been too common on the radical and revolutionary Left. To abstain from a political protest due to not controlling it sounds foolish.

Not everyone can mobilize for everything but to stamp out initiative is useless. In mass actions, there shouldn't be a problem with putting forward some different messages. My comrades tend to join larger actions alongside particular social movement groups we have the most in common with.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

So in the CWI, "party elders" decide where you can and can't go? :lol: Why don't you just tell them to get stuffed and go anyway?
It wasn't quite like that, I could've personally gone, no one can tell me what I can and can't do. My qualm was with the fact that our group decided against it in favour of having their own day of activity, whilst there is a relatively important national event taking place. I thought that our local group should've had a presence in a national event such as this, but it was voted against. I have trouble understanding why we wouldn't attend an important demo because we need to build our own party, surely a national demo, consisting of students, workers and trade unionists is more important than our party's influence on the event itself?

I feel that the issue was with the fact that our party wasn't leading the day of action, therefore it wasn't worthy of our time as a group of socialists. For me, this represented unnecessary sectarianism that undermines our cause entirely. In my opinion, every socialist should've been at this event.

I am talking about how parties abstain from potentially successful and prolific events if they are not leading it, rather than acting within their duty as revolutionary socialists and attending big demos. Does this represent truly revolutionary politics, or are the parties that do this actually counter-revolutionary? Every left party in the country should be protesting the conference tomorrow, in big numbers!

[Wanted Man]

It wasn't quite like that, I could've personally gone, no one can tell me what I can and can't do. My qualm was with the fact that our group decided against it in favour of having their own day of activity, whilst there is a relatively important national event taking place. I thought that our local group should've had a presence in a national event such as this, but it was voted against. I have trouble understanding why we wouldn't attend an important demo because we need to build our own party, surely a national demo, consisting of students, workers and trade unionists is more important than our party's influence on the event itself?

The issue was with the fact that our party wasn't leading the day of action, therefore it wasn't worthy of our time as a group of socialists. For me, this represented unnecessary sectarianism that undermines our cause entirely. In my opinion, every socialist should've been at this event.

I am talking about how parties abstain from potentially successful and prolific events if they are not leading it, rather than acting within their duty as revolutionary socialists and attending big demos. Does this represent truly revolutionary politics, or are the parties that do this actually counter-revolutionary? Every left party in the country should be protesting the conference tomorrow, in big numbers!

Well, I don't know about the exact character of this demo. One thing that was a major flaw of the organisation that I'm in is that we used to be really fond of hopping from one big demo (anti-war, unions, anti-cuts, etc.) without much of a purpose. We'd feel really radical, waving flags and shouting stuff, trying to give or sell our material to people, etc., but of course we were (and are) still a pretty small group. We were basically just trying to imitate other people (like the Dutch SWP section), but of course, there's little effect to that. They were quite a bit bigger, but I'm sceptical of the idea that all of these super-important marches really had effect.

In that kind of situation, it may be a good idea to take the decision to focus on other stuff. I don't know about your situation, though. Anyway, over here, there's going to be yet a new SWP-led initiative that claims to be "the resistance" to the new right-wing government, yet at their national action this month, they expect some 2,000-3,000ish people tops, and many of the unionists and bourgeois left parties that they are trying to court are still holding back from giving full support. 2,000 is more than any of the left groups could mobilise on their own, sure, I'll freely admit that, but that's not the point. The point is that I find myself wondering whether it's worth putting so much time, money and effort into that kind of conceit, and if it would not be better to try to build something from the bottom, rather than pretending to be participating in a "resistance" that manifestly does not exist yet.

But anyway, that's our situation; back to yours! Whether the big demo is worthwhile or not, it would be very strange and indeed sectarian to plan your own "day of activity". I can certainly understand that people from other groups would feel that the purpose is just to siphon people away for one's own recruitment, that they're just sore that they're not in charge, and other unprincipled stuff like that. I can imagine why it's demotivating to run into that kind of stuff. The only thing I can say to that is that I've seen so much underhanded crap going on in the left that I'd probably go insane if I had to worry about all that. All I can do is not participate in that kind of shit, and patiently work at the base level, rather than constantly trying to sabotage other groups because "the revolution is just around the corner and the proles need proper leadership" and all the other drivel that sectarians usually use.

[Devrim]

Every left party in the country should be protesting the conference tomorrow, in big numbers!

I know it is not you main point, but may I ask why?

Devrim

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

I know it is not you main point, but may I ask why?

Devrim
The same reason we should protest any big business party's conference; because they are discussing ways to strengthen their regime and trample all over workers, and it is our duty to speak against them, and use these demos as a way to promote alternatives to their system. Keeping in mind all the young students and workers who could learn so much from the left if they were to have a concrete, united and systematic set of arguments for fighting the cuts.

I first became radicalised at a demo as well, so I naturally feel that they are important events that raise consciousness and raise debate to the public.

[durhamleft]

It wasn't quite like that, I could've personally gone, no one can tell me what I can and can't do. My qualm was with the fact that our group decided against it in favour of having their own day of activity, whilst there is a relatively important national event taking place. I thought that our local group should've had a presence in a national event such as this, but it was voted against. I have trouble understanding why we wouldn't attend an important demo because we need to build our own party, surely a national demo, consisting of students, workers and trade unionists is more important than our party's influence on the event itself?

The issue was with the fact that our party wasn't leading the day of action, therefore it wasn't worthy of our time as a group of socialists. For me, this represented unnecessary sectarianism that undermines our cause entirely. In my opinion, every socialist should've been at this event.

I am talking about how parties abstain from potentially successful and prolific events if they are not leading it, rather than acting within their duty as revolutionary socialists and attending big demos. Does this represent truly revolutionary politics, or are the parties that do this actually counter-revolutionary? Every left party in the country should be protesting the conference tomorrow, in big numbers!
Exactly

[The Idler]

Is the British left sectarian? In a word, Yes. The Commune (http://thecommune.wordpress.com/1/) spring to mind though, they seem quite pluralist.

[blake 3:17]

The same reason we should protest any big business party's conference; because they are discussing ways to strengthen their regime and trample all over workers, and it is our duty to speak against them, and use these demos as a way to promote alternatives to their system. Keeping in mind all the young students and workers who could learn so much from the left if they were to have a concrete, united and systematic set of arguments for fighting the cuts.

I first became radicalised at a demo as well, so I naturally feel that they are important events that raise consciousness and raise debate to the public.

And that means building a movement,with real life and vitality to it, and not sectarian silliness.

There are parts of the Trotskyist left that have tried to rethink things and question certain "Leninist" norms without abandoning revolutionary theory or praxis. The currents I have been a part of and identify with have had their own problems and limitations

The rivalries between SPEW and the UK SWP would make me kookoo.

[durhamleft]

And that means building a movement,with real life and vitality to it, and not sectarian silliness.

There are parts of the Trotskyist left that have tried to rethink things and question certain "Leninist" norms without abandoning revolutionary theory or praxis. The currents I have been a part of and identify with have had their own problems and limitations

The rivalries between SPEW and the UK SWP would make me kookoo.

They are absolutely fucking infuriating to put it bluntly

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

They are absolutely fucking infuriating to put it bluntly
Yep. That is my frustration.

All of our parties are as bad as one another, and I am unable to see for what reason that is other than a collective sense of arrogance within our organizations.

The truth is, nothing will ever get done, because all of the capable political forces are scattered and divided over questions of tactical approach, boring and sometimes irrelevant ideological questions and the 'we're better than you' factor. All the while, workers have no true representative.

[blake 3:17]

The Left needs to get its act together.

[Jolly Red Giant]

Yep. That is my frustration.

All of our parties are as bad as one another, and I am unable to see for what reason that is other than a collective sense of arrogance within our organizations.

I can understand your frustration - but the reality is that all left-wing groups are not as bad as each other. No one likes working with the SWP. Any time any one does they end up tearing their hair out as a result of all the twists and turns the SWP engage in. They bounce from activity to activity without purpose or plan.

There is absolutely no point is just turing up to protest against the Tories or the LD's or at business conferences without having a thought out strategy of what you are doing and where you want it to go. If you engage in such hyper-activity (and it is a hallmark of the SWP) then you will burn yourself out very quickly.

Does this mean that no one should ever participate in SWP organised activity? Of course not. But, as someone said earlier, you need to ask yourself - what is the purpose of the protest? By all means go along to let off some anger at the Tories and sell the paper and see if there are any potential recruits. But unless there was a purpose, with a strategy in place (and following discussions with other groups), in organising such a protest, I would be hesitant about having a branch or large scale mobilisation for such an event.

[Lyev]

I can understand your frustration - but the reality is that all left-wing groups are not as bad as each other. No one likes working with the SWP. Any time any one does they end up tearing their hair out as a result of all the twists and turns the SWP engage in. They bounce from activity to activity without purpose or plan.

There is absolutely no point is just turing up to protest against the Tories or the LD's or at business conferences without having a thought out strategy of what you are doing and where you want it to go. If you engage in such hyper-activity (and it is a hallmark of the SWP) then you will burn yourself out very quickly.

Does this mean that no one should ever participate in SWP organised activity? Of course not. But, as someone said earlier, you need to ask yourself - what is the purpose of the protest? By all means go along to let off some anger at the Tories and sell the paper and see if there are any potential recruits. But unless there was a purpose, with a strategy in place (and following discussions with other groups), in organising such a protest, I would be hesitant about having a branch or large scale mobilisation for such an event.I don't think it's so simple. The whole membership of the SWP -- or in fact any organisation -- is obviously not uniform or homogeneous; there are some dickheads in the SWP. There's also plenty of dickheads in the CWI, in SPEW. I have heard anecdotes of obnoxiousness and pig-headedness about SWP members, but, likewise, in SPEW the theoretical level of some comrades is somewhat peculiar. I can understand why the organisation is accused of "broad econonism" or "labourite reformism" etc. (the only response, for example, to this (http://www.cpgb.org.uk/article.php?article_id=1003995) is simply "WTF?" - "new bourgeois workers' party"?!). Anyway, there are, of course, solid and committed rank-and-file members in every organisation, including both the SWP and SPEW. Left-unity certainly, in my opinion, will not come from dismissing this or that organisation as "unworkable" or "problematic". On the contrary, we need to strive with every effort to find common ground, not splitting sectarian hairs.

[scarletghoul]

The leftist parties here are sectarian because they are trots

[Q]

The leftist parties here are sectarian because they are trots

Please keep your trolls at bay, kthx.

[Jolly Red Giant]

I don't think it's so simple. The whole membership of the SWP -- or in fact any organisation -- is obviously not uniform or homogeneous; there are some dickheads in the SWP. There's also plenty of dickheads in the CWI, in SPEW. I have heard anecdotes of obnoxiousness and pig-headedness about SWP members, but, likewise, in SPEW the theoretical level of some comrades is somewhat peculiar. I can understand why the organisation is accused of "broad econonism" or "labourite reformism" etc. (the only response, for example, to this (http://www.cpgb.org.uk/article.php?article_id=1003995) is simply "WTF?" - "new bourgeois workers' party"?!). Anyway, there are, of course, solid and committed rank-and-file members in every organisation, including both the SWP and SPEW. Left-unity certainly, in my opinion, will not come from dismissing this or that organisation as "unworkable" or "problematic". On the contrary, we need to strive with every effort to find common ground, not splitting sectarian hairs.
Lyev - the point I was trying to make actually has nothing to do with the rank-and-file of the SWP or any other organisation, has nothing to do with who are dickheads or not and has nothing to with the politics of the organisations and the criticisms of such policies.

The problem with the SWP (and everyone else on the left will testify to it) is the approach of the SWP to mass work and to left co-operation. It is the methodology that is used by the SWP as an organisation. The lifespan of a member of the SWP is significantly shorter than most other left groups, precisely because they get burnt out quickly from the scale of activity that the SWP engage in. Indeed it is not even the scale of such activity, but the lack of focus and the lack of purpose of such activity that drains the average SWP member. This is compounded by the way the SWP twist and turn in political matters. For years the SWP dismissed the CWI's electoral strategy, then it did an about turn and flew headlong into first the Socialist Alliance (wrecking it in the process) and then into Respect (and ended up wrecking that as well).

In Ireland the SWP are adopting a more cautious approach to electoral politics (probably because of the success the Socialist Party has had here), but it is still trying to rope in some less than principled characters into it electoral group in order to have as wide a geographical spread as possible.

But the biggest problem is the SWP's (as an organisation) lack of understanding of how to operate as part of the workers movement. Like the daft stunt the SWP pulled at the BA talks, they did a similar thing in Ireland some months ago by attempting to rush through the security gates at the parliament building. They thought that by getting enough publicity the workers movement in Ireland would flock onto the streets, just like in Greece, and the SWP would lead the movement. They were telling new recruits that within six months they would be swept to power at the head of such a movement.

The reality is that such a strategy and methodology is a recipe for paralysis. It will disorientate their organisation and lead them to make even more off the wall decisions. Six months ago the SWP had the prospect of winning two seats in the Irish Parliament - that is now gone and they only have an outside chance of one seat (which I don't think they will win). Yet not that long ago they thought their People Before Profit Alliance could win seats in double figures. PBP could win two but the best chance is a candidate who is actually a former member of the CWI who runs as an independent.

Finally on the issue of 'Left Unity'. The reality, in the UK as well as elsewhere, is that a new left party will not be built solely (or even primarily) from existing left forces. It will be built in the heat of class struggle by new layers of workers drawing political conclusions. Yes, all existing left groups (with the possible exception of the IMT in some countries) will participate and will play a role - including the SWP. However, the antics of some (again most likely the SWP) will actually hinder some of this work. In the meantime, in preparation for such developments, left organisations need to find a way to work together in a constructive and principled way. But one organisation going off half-cocked organising protests with no other purpose other than having somewhere to go and shout slogans etc. etc. etc. might (and I stress might) delay the process somewhat.

[Devrim]

Finally on the issue of 'Left Unity'. The reality, in the UK as well as elsewhere, is that a new left party will not be built solely (or even primarily) from existing left forces. It will be built in the heat of class struggle by new layers of workers drawing political conclusions.

To me this is very obvious, yet it seems to escape many on here.


Yes, all existing left groups (with the possible exception of the IMT in some countries) will participate and will play a role - including the SWP. However, the antics of some (again most likely the SWP) will actually hinder some of this work.

I tend to think that many of them will just be completely swept away by events. It is not something that we have much in terms of historical precedent to judge from though. The period is very different from that before the first revolutionary wave after the first world war when the left had built itself up for years within the mass 'Marxist' social democratic parties. Those parties don't exist today.

Possibly the best indicator of what we can expect is when the working class started to assert itself again in the late 60s early 70s, and there was a massive explosion of new left groups, and ideas, many of which had been effectively buried for decades. I am thinking particularly of the re-emergence of anarchism here.

I also agree that some of these groups will actually hinder this work.

I wonder why you particular single out 'the IMT in some countries'.

Devrim

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

This thread has confirmed what I already thought, the majority of non-SWP leftists in the UK don't like the SWP.

[Jolly Red Giant]

To me this is very obvious, yet it seems to escape many on here.
And not just on here



I tend to think that many of them will just be completely swept away by events.
I would agree.



I wonder why you particular single out 'the IMT in some countries'.

I just have a feeling that the IMT will dig in over New Labour in Britain and possibly a couple of other areas as well (Pakistan comes to mind). The IMT could well be a group that faces difficulties over the emergence of new parties in the future. The articles about Ireland clearly demonstrate that they have no understanding of the reasons for the swing to the LP in the polls.

[Devrim]

I just have a feeling that the IMT will dig in over New Labour in Britain and possibly a couple of other areas as well (Pakistan comes to mind). The IMT could well be a group that faces difficulties over the emergence of new parties in the future. The articles about Ireland clearly demonstrate that they have no understanding of the reasons for the swing to the LP in the polls.

When a communist party starts to emerge, I would expect to find the IMT to be condemning it as a sect. Effectively groups like this will probably end up providing 'left cover' for social democrats. I can also imagine other groups doing a more radical (more radical than the IMT isn't very difficult) versions of the same thing.

I was just curious as to why you mentioned them in particular.

Devrim

[thejambo1]

the british left is a total waste of time,it is full of factions and petty minded people and the whole thing is so very depressing. we are in the hardest times since thatcher and all we get is this bullshit. really uninspiring stuff and not good.:(

[durhamleft]

This thread has confirmed what I already thought, the majority of non-SWP leftists in the UK don't like the SWP.

A large part of me makes me suspect it is jealousy.

I hear socialist party members going on about how Stop the war is a 'popular front' for the SWP and how terrible 'right to work' is for the same reason, but I know damn well if the SPEW could have got the same sized movement going they would have.

The things keeping our parties apart are arrogant egos at the top and petty tactical differences and its fucking stupid. there is much more political difference inside the SPEW or SWP than there is between the two parties.

[Jolly Red Giant]

I hear socialist party members going on about how Stop the war is a 'popular front' for the SWP and how terrible 'right to work' is for the same reason, but I know damn well if the SPEW could have got the same sized movement going they would have.
Nothing to do with the 'size' of the movement and everything to do with approach


The things keeping our parties apart are arrogant egos at the top and petty tactical differences and its fucking stupid. there is much more political difference inside the SPEW or SWP than there is between the two parties.
Nothing to do with 'petty tactical differences' and everything to do with appraoch.

Have a read of the latest antics from the SWP (I am not going to paste the whole article, you can read it on the CWI website) -

It is not a question of seeking a ’hegemonic’ position for any one organisation. In many different fields there are already existing fighting organisations - the pensioners’ organisations, housing, education, etc.

It would be wrong and counter-productive for any organisation to seek to supersede those that already exist and who are, in most cases, doing a good job.

But a generalised struggle is absolutely necessary in this battle which seeks to link up the different strands of opposition.

The trade unions are best placed to do this. Unfortunately, right-wing trade union leaders merely pay lip service to this task. The NSSN does not seek to replace unions but to act as a lever in the struggle, as it has done in organising with the left unions on 23 October.

This is why the NSSN has called a national conference in January as the accompanying article demonstrates.

Unfortunately, the SWP representatives on the NSSN steering committee, having voted unanimously for this proposal, then distributed a leaflet on the ’Right to Work’ demonstration at the Tory Party conference proposing an alternative ’unity’ conference on 5 December! This is clearly aimed at cutting across the NSSN’s effort one month later.

This approach is quite common to the SWP. Others will organise a meeting on a specific date and they will try to counter this with a separate event, sometimes even on the same day and same venue but half an hour earlier! For example, the NSSN, including Socialist Party members of its steering committee, has tried to avoid its annual conference clashing with the SWP’s ’Marxism’ event but the SWP-led Unite Against Fascism has organised a demo to clash with Socialism 2010.

In fact UAF has not yet replied to the invite to come to Socialism 2010 to debate the serious questions of how to defeat the far right which was sent in July.

Along this road is nothing but sectarian madness and unnecessary divisions within what should be a common struggle, albeit with a debate on strategy and tactics.

We are sure that the NSSN supporters will attend all meetings and activities called against the cuts.

They, and the Socialist Party, certainly, will attend events like those called on 27 November. But we will do so in order to make firm proposals for a common struggle and to press for mobilisation behind the NSSN.

Many speak about the lessons of the poll tax - some organising meetings on ’how it was defeated’ when they actually opposed the struggle in its initial phases - but the real lessons are ignored.

It was not the official trade union leaders, the national or local leaderships of the Labour Party that defeated the tax but the huge efforts of the Anti-Poll Tax Federation in the non-payment campaign.

Something along similar lines can provide the necessary programme and organisation to defeat this present Con-Dem onslaught.

Unity is vital but not of the graveyard variety. An action programme, an action organisation to defeat the cuts, is what is required and the NSSN is best suited to this task.

[Futility Personified]

Feel free to call a humble newbie out on any inaccuracies, but as I understand it the SWP is a fairly big group that doesn't seem to regard any other groups with respect? Is there any reason for this?

[human strike]

This thread has confirmed what I already thought, the majority of non-SWP leftists in the UK don't like the SWP.

As far as I can tell, the SWP doesn't like itself.

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

As far as I can tell, the SWP doesn't like itself.

It really doesn't help itself.