Q
9th March 2012, 12:13
After a split in the UK a few years back resulting in Permanent Revolution, the more recent Austrian split resulting in RKOB and recent expulsions over the Libyan war, Workers Power again has issues with disciplining its members to uphold a political "united front" to the outside world (http://cpgb.org.uk/article.php?article_id=1004748).
This time it seems that a majority in the leadership wants to follow a different course and if the minority insists on its sectarian model of what it calls "democratic centralism", it seems another split is inevitable.
While WP is unfortunate to have this many splits in recent years, this is a far wider phenomenon on the left. Is it not time for a rethink on the whole topic of democracy and unity? Why insist on having a political "united front"?
On my part, I've written (http://www.revleft.com/vb/blog.php?b=1464) quite (http://www.revleft.com/vb/blog.php?b=1465) a (http://www.revleft.com/vb/blog.php?b=1598) lot (http://www.revleft.com/vb/blog.php?b=1702) on (http://www.revleft.com/vb/blog.php?b=6350) the (http://www.revleft.com/vb/blog.php?b=6435) subject (http://www.revleft.com/vb/blog.php?b=6681). And I can also quote the article I linked here:
[W]e may presume that there was a wide-ranging discussion on the matter internally - but we cannot know, thanks to WP’s insistence on maintaining a public front of unity. This has two consequences: firstly, the appearance of a monolithic about-face - which no doubt alienates many on the left suspicious of cultism and inspires mirth in those who mock such ‘Toytown Bolshevism’ - simply makes the group look ridiculous. Secondly, it means that the wider movement was unable to participate in the debate. Who knows? - perhaps the rest of us might have been able to persuade the comrades to drop this obvious absurdity sooner, to the mutual benefit of all.
This time it seems that a majority in the leadership wants to follow a different course and if the minority insists on its sectarian model of what it calls "democratic centralism", it seems another split is inevitable.
While WP is unfortunate to have this many splits in recent years, this is a far wider phenomenon on the left. Is it not time for a rethink on the whole topic of democracy and unity? Why insist on having a political "united front"?
On my part, I've written (http://www.revleft.com/vb/blog.php?b=1464) quite (http://www.revleft.com/vb/blog.php?b=1465) a (http://www.revleft.com/vb/blog.php?b=1598) lot (http://www.revleft.com/vb/blog.php?b=1702) on (http://www.revleft.com/vb/blog.php?b=6350) the (http://www.revleft.com/vb/blog.php?b=6435) subject (http://www.revleft.com/vb/blog.php?b=6681). And I can also quote the article I linked here:
[W]e may presume that there was a wide-ranging discussion on the matter internally - but we cannot know, thanks to WP’s insistence on maintaining a public front of unity. This has two consequences: firstly, the appearance of a monolithic about-face - which no doubt alienates many on the left suspicious of cultism and inspires mirth in those who mock such ‘Toytown Bolshevism’ - simply makes the group look ridiculous. Secondly, it means that the wider movement was unable to participate in the debate. Who knows? - perhaps the rest of us might have been able to persuade the comrades to drop this obvious absurdity sooner, to the mutual benefit of all.