Calling readers of the Weekly Worker: Support the Fighting Fund!

[Red Monroy]

I think I'm going to start posting the Fighting Fund column of Robbie Rix of the Weekly Worker. This paper is produced by a very small group, yet is widely read and can measure in that sense to other papers on the left, such as "Socialist Worker", "The Socialist" and "Morning Star". It is also a paper principally supported by its readership, no other group probably has such a high monthly fighting fund goal and achieves this goal most of the time.

The reason for this is the way the paper operates. It provides a vital service for the left nationally and internationally (many online readers are from the USA for example) as not many papers focus on debate between leftists in order to clarify political issues. This paper publishes debates that normally stay closed even for memberships concerned. Some call this openness "gossip" and "tabloid behaviour", I call it political scrutiny and constructive debate.

While the goal of 1250 pounds per month is normally achieved, it also isn't more times that should be. For that reason I want to call upon all supporters and regular readers to support the Weekly Worker, so we can secure its current operation and even expand in the future!


Overwhelming case

The case for supporting the Weekly Worker is overwhelming, says Robbie Rix

Our November fund increased by £157 this week, taking our total to £612. But once again I am concerned by the sluggish pace. There are less than two weeks to go and we have another £640 to raise to reach our £1,250 target.

Thanks this week go to standing order regulars MM, GD, JD, DW, SP and MKS, together with CM, who gave us a handy £30 via PayPal, and GH, who added a fiver to his subscription. But CM was the only online reader who made a donation via our website. Last week we had 13,150 visits to cpgb.org.uk and, now that these figures are on the up again, I would have expected a proportional increase in PayPal gifts.

Of course, I know times are tough. For those at work no-one’s job seems safe, while students are now faced with £9,000 fees. But each individual turning inwards and protecting what they have is, obviously, not the answer, as readers of this paper are well aware. We need a collective, organised fightback, which means strengthening all the organisations of our movement - trade and student unions, but, most of all, the fighting political groups and publications of the working class.

But which groups and publications? Why is there a special case for prioritising the Weekly Worker? Because, unlike any of the others, we unceasingly call for the unity - on a principled Marxist basis - of all revolutionary socialists and communists. We do not dishonestly claim that we are “the only paper that opposes all cuts to jobs and services” (The Socialist November 4-10). Nor that the CPGB has all the answers. On the contrary, we insist that, if the working class is to resist the latest attacks, it needs not a whole range of competing far-left organisations, each claiming that they are the party or proto-party, but a united Communist Party.

If you agree, then the case for supporting the Weekly Worker financially when, as now, we are under pressure is overwhelming.


http://cpgb.org.uk/images/bullet.gifClick here (http://cpgb.org.uk/Summer%20Offensive/so%20form.pdf) to download a standing order form - regular income is particular important in order to plan ahead. Even £5/month can help!
http://cpgb.org.uk/images/bullet.gif Send cheques, payable to Weekly Worker, BCM Box 928, London WC1N 3XX
http://cpgb.org.uk/images/bullet.gif Donate online through Paypal (see the bottom of the website's rightcolumn for the link (http://cpgb.org.uk/))

[scarletghoul]

This paper is produced by a very small group, yet is widely read
Really ? Do you have any statistics for this

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

Is begging allowed?

[ed miliband]

Really ? Do you have any statistics for this

It does seem to be quite widely read, almost like a Heat magazine for the far-left.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

I sometimes find interest in the paper.

At other times i'm put off by what is, frankly, gossip. The CPGB does cross the line a few too many times for my liking, in this respect.

[Red Monroy]

New Robbie Rix column:

Right royal

This is where you come in, says Robbie Rix

In addition to the £30 million the taxpayer will pay for the ceremony itself, the royal wedding, according to worried “business leaders”, will cost the “British economy” some £5 billion, because of the two holidays in the same week.

And I thought ‘the country’ was broke and had no alternative but to cut public spending. Well, no, some things are worth the money, aren’t they?

And it’s the same with leftwing publications - those that are proposing a clear way forward, based on the principled unity of the entire revolutionary left. In other words, the Weekly Worker - don’t you think a paper that pushes this key idea is worth the money not just to keep it going, but to make its message clearer and more widely read?

That’s where you, the readers, come in. Readers like HM and MM, who donated £25 and £5 respectively using our online PayPal facility over the last week (by the way, we had 12,092 internet readers last week). Then there were our regular standing order supporters who contributed £265 between them. But nothing at all came via snail mail last week.

So our November fighting fund has increased by £295 over the last seven days, taking our running total to £907. But there are only five days left to reach our £1,250 target - we need just short of £350. Please send in your cheques and postal orders as soon as you read this. Or, better still, get out that card and let us have your donation today via PayPal.

Help us reach our target and avoid finding ourselves in a right royal predicament.

[Red Monroy]

Editor Peter Manson calls upon readers to help transform the financial base of the Weekly Worker in 2011


Rise to the challenge

Editor Peter Manson calls upon readers to help transform the financial base of our paper in 2011

http://cpgb.org.uk/images/1004183.jpg

Readers of this paper will need no reminding that the working class is facing the fiercest attack on its jobs, living standards, services and collective rights for well over half a century.

They will also be well aware of the crippling weaknesses and total inadequacy of its organisations, defensive and offensive. Trade union membership is languishing at around seven million, compared to over 13 million in 1979. Union meetings are poorly attended, elections for officials are largely ignored by members and bureaucrats have long aimed only to fend off the very worst aspects of the government and employer offensive.

As for our political organisations, they are far, far worse, especially when you consider the enormity of the tasks the working class faces. While the Labour Party is dominated like never before by its openly pro-capitalist right wing and its left completely marginalised, the few thousand subjective revolutionary socialists and communists are hopelessly atomised, and, where they are organised at all, divided amongst dozens of sects whose membership varies from the small to the microscopic.

Of course, there is no shame in being small when circumstances are adverse: when organisations are oppressed, normal political activity risks persecution and we are unable to publish, speak freely or agitate amongst the class. But it is not conditions such as these which have produced our current impotence. No, it is the stubborn sectarianism of the revolutionary leadership, none of whom are able (or willing) to admit what is needed is a single, united Communist Party - the only organisation capable of not only resisting the current attacks, but leading our class to state power and socialism.

Instead each group pretends that it alone provides the core of the revolutionary party, that it is progressing by leaps and bounds, that it is starting to dig roots in the class, whose members will surely see the light very soon and begin to flock to its ranks. At their worse, the sects go so far as to deny the existence of their rivals. For instance, the Socialist Party in England and Wales recently claimed that its own publication is “the only paper that opposes all cuts to jobs and services” (The Socialist November 4-10).

Just as bad, when these groups do decide to go for common political action with forces beyond their own ranks, they inevitably do so on the basis of the lowest common denominator. It is always assumed that appeals for unity around the basic tenets of Marxism will fall on deaf ears. Over the last decade we have had projects such as the Socialist Alliance, Scottish Socialist Party, Respect, the Campaign for a New Workers’ Party and the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition, all of which have put before the electorate platforms far to the right of the programmes to which their leaders claim to adhere.

Both the SSP and Tusc intend to stand in Scottish or local elections in May 2011 (Respect can no longer be considered any kind of ‘unity project’ for existing groups), but both will surely receive dismal returns in terms of votes, without taking a single step towards providing our class with genuine political representation. Tusc has called a conference for January 22 to build for its electoral challenge, but, like the SA and Respect before it, it has virtually no existence between elections. None of these organisations were seen as vehicles driving towards a united party, least of all a united Marxist party.

Alone among all the publications of the left, the Weekly Worker demands such unity. Not, as our detractors allege, on some unprincipled, opportunist foundations, but around the principles of Marxism which can be summed up as:


Democracy, as opposed to bureaucracy, within our own organisations and within society.
Working class independence, as opposed to strategic or governmental alliances with sections of the bourgeoisie.
Internationalism, as opposed to ‘socialism in one country’.


So, while Socialist Worker, The Socialist and the rest may claim to be unique, that description actually does apply to the Weekly Worker. Only this paper campaigns for all the groups, including the SWP and SPEW, together with all unorganised revolutionaries and communists, to unite around a Marxist programme.

However, while we know that these aims are shared by a significant section of left activists, too few translate their appreciation of the Weekly Worker’s role into concrete support. But, in order to rise to the challenge of the forthcoming period, we need a better, more widely read paper. We need to produce extra supplements, upgrade our website, invest in new computer technology and begin to introduce colour.

It goes without saying that all that requires money - especially in circumstances when our costs are continuing to rise. Recession or not, prices for printing, rent and postage have all gone up. Indeed on April 6 2011 postal rates are due for a significant hike (around 12% across the board). But one thing that has not risen over the recent period is the number of our regular financial donors. In fact the amount we receive in monthly standing orders has edged down in 2010, compared to recent years. Mainly the result of a number of generous comrades who have either died or been unable to sustain their previous level of support.

We urgently need to transform our financial base by getting in new standing orders and increasing the ones we already have. Hence this appeal to all readers, supporters and sympathisers of the Weekly Worker. Commit yourself a new or increased monthly standing order in 2011. We are aiming to raise at least an additional £300 a month in guaranteed income.

Over the coming weeks, our comrades will be contacting hundreds of you making that request in person. But please do not wait for your phone to ring. Fill in the form in the back of the print version of the paper or download it from the website. Alternatively please ring, write or email to let me know if you instruct your bank directly.

[Q]

We are aiming to raise at least an additional £300 a month in guaranteed income.
If I'm not mistaken they've had difficulties raising the 1250 pound target in recent months, adding 300 to that, while apparently necessary with the extra costs, looks like they're in for hard times.

Adding £5 to the lot.

[Red Monroy]

If I'm not mistaken they've had difficulties raising the 1250 pound target in recent months, adding 300 to that, while apparently necessary with the extra costs, looks like they're in for hard times.

Adding £5 to the lot.
Thanks to you and others, the goal was met last month! Thank you comrade and I hope other Revleft members take an example and will support the Weekly Worker if they can too. Even small amounts make the difference!

Robbie Rix's column this week:


Brown envelope

Robbie Rix asks readers to send their cheques in before the holidays

A flurry of last-minute donations saw us pass our £1,250 fighting fund target for November. Thanks go to all those who helped us reach a total of £1,292.

Two comrades deserve special mention - they both came up with a £50 gift. PS, describing himself as a "regular internet reader", used our PayPal facility, along with DT (£30) and EJ (£5). The other £50 donor was RI, who modestly enclosed his cheque in a brown envelope with a slip of paper informing us it was a donation. Mind you, RG's cheque for £25, also in a brown envelope, came without any covering note at all - I'm sure he will let us know if it wasn't for me!

As well as a tenner from RL - another contribution via snail mail - I received a total of £115 in standing orders. All of which added £285 over the last week of the month.

I would very much like to end the year on a successful note too. But, with the holiday disruption to the post, it could be that cheques and postal orders might miss the December 31 deadline. Please post early! Better still, get out that piece of plastic and make your donation via our website (where last week we had 12,237 visitors).

Support the paper that fights for Marxist unity. Help keep us in good shape for the challenges of 2011.

[Red Monroy]

This week's issue also calls for support on the Workers Fund Iran:


Support Workers Fund Iran!

Send a solidarity Christmas card and support the crucial work of WFI

http://cpgb.org.uk/images/1004196.jpg

Workers Fund Iran was set up in December 2005 and aims to relieve poverty amongst Iranian workers (both employed and unemployed), who are victims of the crippling effects of sanctions and the neoliberal economic policies of the Iranian regime.

WFI is a charity, strictly independent of any political organisation/group inside or outside Iran, and its members represent an array of different tendencies within the Iranian labour movement. The campaign is supported by an impressive list of sponsors, including Cliff Slaughter, professor István Mészáros, Terry Brotherstone, Liz Leicester, Hillary Horrocks, Simon Pirani, Christine Cooper and Anton Mactonian.

Make a donation (minimum: £10) to Workers Fund Iran and you will receive a glossy, full-colour Christmas card with an Iranian motif.

How to donate

Website: https://www.charitychoice.co.uk/donation.asp?ref=154051 Cheque (payable to Workers Fund Iran): Nationwide Treasurer Trust Fund, 290 Byres Road, Lanarkshire G12 8AW, UK. Tell us the name and address that you want the card sent to.

www.workersfund.org (http://www.workersfund.org/); [email protected]

[Die Neue Zeit]

I'll chip in.

[Red Monroy]

Column of Robie Rix in issue 845:


Insult to injury

No wool over your eyes here, says Robbie Rix

What’s all the fuss about? Surely these protesting students know that the increase in tuition fees to a maximum of £9,000 a year is the “best and fairest possible deal”? Well, that’s what Nick Clegg is saying.

Some of his fellow Liberal Democrats are claiming students will actually be better off, thanks to Vince Cable kindly trebling the ceiling for fees and increasing the average debt from £21,000 to £30,000. Not only are they leaving thousands of current and future students in hock for up to 30 years; to add insult to injury, they are treating them like stupid children who can’t tot up the simplest of sums.

Unlike the desperate and totally discredited Lib Dems, the Weekly Worker does not try to pull the wool over your eyes. Yes, we have a permanent, ongoing ‘deficit’ that is repeatedly brought back into balance only through the donations of our readers and supporters. But we don’t claim that giving us a donation will somehow make you richer. What it will do, though, is help our paper continue to put out its unique, but essential message: only through the creation of a single, united Communist Party can our class resist and defeat the whole range of attacks on students, workers and retired people. What is more, only when it is armed with such a party can it go on to challenge for power.

If you want that message to go out undiminished - indeed if you think it should be amplified - then please contribute to our fighting fund. Last week saw £130 come in through standing orders - special thanks to SM (£40), SD, CG (£20 each) and ST (£15) - and a one-off donation via our website from comrade DG (£10). Then in the post I received an extra £5 from IT, which he included with his resubscription, while a Socialist Resistance comrade was obviously so impressed with the Weekly Worker that he added a pound to his sub!

And I must mention our comrades from the Union of Turkish Progressives, who donated £30 at the December 4 YürükoÄŸlu Memorial Lecture, addressed by Hillel Ticktin. Finally supporters of our paper in Leeds donated in a way I don’t often write about. They simply transferred £15 directly to our bank account. It’s easy to do via your local branch or even easier if you have an online account. Just make your payment using sort code 30-99-64 (Lloyds TSB) to account 00744310. But please don’t forget to let me know about it!

We need £1,250 any way we can get it, but we start the holiday-shortened month of December with only £161. Help us strike a blow not just against coalition attacks and lies, but for the future society of universal emancipation.

[Red Monroy]

Robbie Rix says that the left needs to begin to take its responsibilities seriously.


We will be back

This is the last paper of the year ... and what a year 2010 was. Student militancy has been inspirational and shows what is in store. The Con-Dem spending cuts, mass sackings and increased taxes will inevitably produce a fightback. Sooner or later the working class will move into action. Already senior members of the government darkly talk of banning demonstrations, using water cannon and excuse outrageous police brutality. Capitalism in crisis is becoming more and more irrational and more and more authoritarian.

But if our side is to beat the cuts and move forward the left needs to begin to take its responsibilities seriously. The existence of countless confessional sects has become objectively reactionary. Principled unity is a matter of urgency, not just a nice idea. And, of course, that is where the Weekly Worker comes in. Everything we say, do and print is designed to get comrades thinking critically and moving in the direction of unity.

Next year we have big plans. A pamphlet on the crisis is being worked on, and, of course, we will be publishing a new version of the CPGB’s third programme. This is an important event for us because we envisage the Draft programme as providing the basis to unite not only the existing left but the working class itself in a single Marxist party.

Then there is our new website. Apart from a few technical glitches it is almost ready for launch. It will, I promise, be a great improvement on what we have had up to now. Better presentation, more interaction, etc. So we expect an increased web readership - which last week was counted at 12,385.

Of course, our expenses have risen substantially over 2010 while our income has nudged down. Something that must be rectified in 2011. So we need comrades to donate more, and more comrades making donations and taking out standing orders. I am delighted to mention the following comrades: TD (£100), CM (£20). JR (£120), BH (£5), MH (£15) and RI (£50). Your donations took our total to £461. Short of our £1,250 monthly target, but I always live in hope.

Finally, can I convey seasonal greetings to all our readers, contributors and supporters. We will be back after a two week break in the first week of 2011.

[Q]

I'll chip in.


I am delighted to mention the following comrades: TD (£100), CM (£20). JR (£120), BH (£5), MH (£15) and RI (£50).

That is you? :ohmy:

[Wanted Man]

Is begging allowed?

Yeah, it's kind of weird to allow constant attempts to guilt-trip members of a forum into giving money to some organisation's paper. Especially one that supports (http://web.archive.org/web/20071023215659/http://www.cpgb.org.uk/worker/273/indkosova.html) ethnic-cleansing organ-dealing terrorists.

[Red Monroy]

Yeah, it's kind of weird to allow constant attempts to guilt-trip members of a forum into giving money to some organisation's paper. Especially one that supports (http://web.archive.org/web/20071023215659/http://www.cpgb.org.uk/worker/273/indkosova.html) ethnic-cleansing organ-dealing terrorists.
Of course, no support of "ethnic-cleansing organ-dealing terrorists" can be seen in that article. I guess the "crime" of article lies in this quote:


The overwhelming majority of the two million inhabitants want independence. It is our duty therefore to support that democratic desire - not advise them they 'must' unite with Albania; still less remain 'united' with Serbia. The KLA has hegemony over the masses, and its support is increasing with each new terror offensive by the Serbian forces. Autonomy - whether to a greater or lesser extent - within Serbia is now out of the question. The struggle of the KLA is a struggle for democracy and self-determination. Given the concrete circumstances, it is clear that the KLA is fighting a just war against the forces of oppression. The only principled position for communists is to defend the KLA and to demand independence for Kosova. The point is explained later on in the same article:


Communists resolutely fight for workers' unity and against all forms of nationalism and separatism. As Leninists we support the right to self-determination, up to and including secession, but in general we do not call for the latter to be exercised. Thus, in our slogan for a federal republic for Britain we support the right of Scotland and Wales to self-determination. But we vehemently oppose those who call for independence for Scotland or Wales. The relationship between England, Scotland, and Wales is not characterised by violence - separation would only be reactionary and backward. Support for the right to divorce is not the same as a demand that all marriages be dissolved.

However, it is a different matter when it comes to the relationship between the British state and Ireland - which has been characterised by centuries of violence and oppression. Communists call for an independent united Ireland under these concrete circumstances. We do this not out of any misty nationalist sentiment for the emerald isle, but in the hope that separation will lay the ground for a future voluntary unity of the British and Irish nations - under conditions this time of peace, genuine equality, and democracy. The same principle applies to the relationships between East Timor and Indonesia - and Kosova and Serbia.
So, communists do argue for the greatest possible unity as a rule of thumb, that this wasn't possible in the case of Serbia's dominance over Kosovar society shouldn't surprise anybody.

But I see your party has close links to the NKPJ, a very nationalist "official communist" Serbian formation, so I'm not very impressed by your outcry.

[Wanted Man]

Of course, no support of "ethnic-cleansing organ-dealing terrorists" can be seen in that article.

Of course it can, right from the subtitle. How is that a progressive position at all? Disguise it however you want. A significant part of the Northern Irish population also wanted to remain in the UK, so perhaps you should support the UVF?


The point is explained later on in the same article:


So, communists do argue for the greatest possible unity as a rule of thumb, that this wasn't possible in the case of Serbia's dominance over Kosovar society shouldn't surprise anybody.

Yes, that's a very interesting sample of doublespeak.


But I see your party has close links to the NKPJ, a very nationalist "official communist" Serbian formation, so I'm not very impressed by your outcry.

Two wrongs don't make a right. "Close links" don't mean that one has to agree with everything they do or say. This is about your stated position. If the Weekly Worker had said, "Support Arkan's Tigers against the Bosniaks", I would have made almost exactly the same post.