Criticism of Tony Cliff?

[Peoples' War]

I was wondering if anyone had any criticisms of Tony Cliff, his ideas, etc.

[Comrade Jandar]

Too bad Imposter Marxist was banned. He was the the resident Tony Cliff expert.

[Peoples' War]

Too bad Imposter Marxist was banned. He was the the resident Tony Cliff expert.
Why was he banned? And was he a supporter or opposed or just critical?

[Drosophila]

Why was he banned? And was he a supporter or opposed or just critical?

He was a Marxist-Leninist pretending to be a Cliff supporter. So basically he was banned for trolling.

[Comrade Jandar]

Why was he banned? And was he a supporter or opposed or just critical?

He was Tony Cliff reincarnated.

[Lucretia]

There are many criticisms of Tony Cliff, especially his theory of state capitalism, but most of them are baseless cherry-picking and quote mining of passages from his main work State Capitalism in Russia, twisted and stripped of important context so as to present them in the worst possible light, and many times to make it appear that Cliff is actually arguing the opposite of what he is really saying. The worst culprits of this are actually fellow Trotskyists.

[Sir Comradical]

Worthless theories. Case in point, refusing to take sides in the Korean war because both sides were imperialist to him or some such rubbish.


In 1950, Tony Cliff broke from the Trotskyist Fourth International on the same question of defensism, this time precipitated by the anti-communist Cold War hysteria that accompanied the outbreak of the Korean War. Cliff reneged on the Trotskyist position of unconditional military defense of the Chinese and North Korean deformed workers states against imperialist attack, which took the form of a multi-nation “police action” under the auspices of the United Nations. This was a cowardly capitulation to the British bourgeoisie and its social-democratic lackeys: it was a Labour government that dispatched British troops to Korea.

http://www.icl-fi.org/english/esp/archives/oldsite/NEWCLASS.HTM

[jookyle]

He's one of those people who were more of a trotskyist than Trotsky was.

[Stain]

Google "What was the USSR? Aufheben libcom" and read the in-depth analysis of the mode of production is USSR. It was enlightening.

[The Idler]

"What Cliff did in his theory of bureaucratic state capitalism was to re-characterise the social formation in existence in Russia solely in response to a perceived change in political control rather than of the social and economic reality, a practice completely contrary to Marxist analysis and demonstrated to be such by Cliff`s critics both outside the Trotskyist movement (e.g. the SPGB, the council communists and left communists) and within it (notably by Ted Grant and Jock Haston).

The other main theory which Cliff helped to popularise was not mentioned at all in Foot`s obituary, this being the theory of the Permanent Arms Economy. It probably did not get a mention because it has pretty much fallen by the wayside in the SWP, though it deserves some comment because for much of their existence the Trotskyist grouping around Cliff (SRG/IS/SWP) has been almost as well known for this as for anything else."
Another leader called Tony | The Socialist Party of Great Britain (http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2000s/2000/no-1149-may-2000/another-leader-called-tony)


"Why the Labour Party was IS’s main field of activity was explained by Cliff in an 11-page article “The Labour Party in Perspective” in International Socialism 9 (summer 1962):
“Marxists should not set themselves up as a party or embryo of a party of their own. They should remember that the working class looks to the Labour Party as the political organisation of the class (and no doubt when a new wave of political activity spreads among the working class millions of new voters will flock to its banner and hundreds of thousands will join it actively)."
Where The SWP Is Coming From | The Socialist Party of Great Britain (http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/education/study-guides/where-swp-coming)

[Peoples' War]

Another leader called Tony | The Socialist Party of Great Britain (http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2000s/2000/no-1149-may-2000/another-leader-called-tony)

Where The SWP Is Coming From | The Socialist Party of Great Britain (http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/education/study-guides/where-swp-coming)
Considering the SPGB is some form of ultra-sectarian neo-Kautskyite party, I don't hold much weight to what they consider to be Marxist and not Marxist.

Edit: Yes, I am reading those articles. It's more a critique of the SWP, and not Cliff. As well, it's seeming the SPGB is falling into the "great man theory". I will post in full later.

[The Idler]

Sectarian is not simply being critical of other organisations. It is putting the interests of a party before the interests of class. The SPGB don't put the interests of any party (Communist, Labour etc.) before the interests of the class. The SPGB don't even put the interests of the SPGB before the interests of the class. Even if the SPGB wanted to inflate party membership with a populist position at the expense of the class interests, it wouldn't work since admittance as a member requires more conditions than most other parties.

In any case, the revolution will be made by the working-class themselves, not by any party. If you only take one position from Marx, that the workers will emancipate themselves should be it, yet only the SPGB seem to take this position, like Marx, without exceptions.

The SPGB have probably been the most critical party of the great man theory including Marx, Kautsky etc. even using the term marxian rather than Marxist in Socialist Standard and its recent pamphlet on marxian economics (http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/pamphlets/marxian-economics). But since you asked about criticism of Cliff and his ideas, I thought I would share an article about Cliff and the party organised under his influence more than any other. The SPGB share some ideas with Kautsky and some differences but resist regarding any thinker as special in themselves and rigorously evaluate each idea on its merits include some of Marx's on economics. Its a scientific approach and economics is only as marxian as physics is newtonian or evolutionary theory considered darwinian, all are subject to evaluation.

[Kronsteen]

Sectarian [...] is putting the interests of a party before the interests of class. The SPGB don't put the interests of any party (Communist, Labour etc.) before the interests of the class. [...]

the revolution will be made by the working-class themselves, not by any party. [...]

The SPGB have probably been the most critical party of the great man theory including Marx, Kautsky etc.

Can you name a party which doesn't say something very similar about itself?

[The Idler]

Okay, two things, one - most parties offering socialism, Labour or Communist, say the role of the party is to be the agent of change in society, that the workers will be emancipated by the victory of the party who (they regard as being more capable) will bring socialism to them. The SPGB say the agent of change will not be the party, it will be the class and "don't vote for us unless you want and understand socialism". I cannot find another party that regularly openly says on its election literature "don't support us, unless you understand and want what we want".

Nor is there another party that has operated so long with all meetings (including executive committee, other committees, conference, adm, branch etc.) open to the general public and publicly published minutes. The approach of a sect putting their interests before the class would be to say internal matters are strictly for internal consumption and implicitly not relevant for the wider class. The reasons are an attempt to say something different to central commitee to preserve its own power over members, something different and class conscious to appease members/branches and something different and the most populist to the class generally. Incidentally, in keeping internal matters internal they undermine their own claim to be the party of the class, a claim the SPGB do not make for themselves. The SPGB also publish under Creative Commons for the benefit of the class at the expense of the party, which other parties do that? If you want to write a letter to the Socialist Standard, chances are the SPGB will publish it as they did with the Bolshevik declaration against World War I.

Regarding the great man theory, one of the things the party traditionally says is "its the case, not the face". It wasn't until the mid twentieth century that Socialist Standard articles carried any names attributing articles to authors, and pamphlets still do not. Nor did election candidates for the party appear under their full name and even then members weren't happy that the election candidate be personalised which might detract from the case or win support for any other reason than the case. One of the SPGB's particularly popular speakers was expelled in the 1950s for putting something other than the case. The Communist Party has always been happy to garner support for candidates based on the people standing for office. I cannot find any other party that takes these positions, can you find any other party that takes these positions?

[KurtFF8]

The last chapters of Western Marxism and the Soviet Union contain pretty good criticisms of Cliff (which is interesting considering that Haymarket Books is the latest to publish the book)

[Lucretia]

The last chapters of Western Marxism and the Soviet Union contain pretty good criticisms of Cliff (which is interesting considering that Haymarket Books is the latest to publish the book)

The book should be read alongside Harman's quite good review of the book in IS, which actually addresses some of these criticisms.