A debate on the SWP - real dedbate to conclude the long runn

[Kez]

I thought this thread would provide an opportunnity to fully debate the points on the validity of the SWP as a real socialist party in the UK

Is it socialist?
Is it revolutionary?
Is it a tool of the MI5?

along with this i am posting a thread on "the 'theory' of state capitalism" and a reply to it.

yours in struggle
comrade kamo

[Kez]

http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/top...um=13&topic=887 (http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=13&topic=887) here is the thread to the state socialism issue

[YKTMX]

Yes.
Yes.
That's pathetic.

[Kez]

Today i will be mostly cussing the SWP on.... trade unions

i got most of the info off the SWankersP site, but never fear i will use other sources for continuing the arguments set out below

and i start with a quote from the SWP "paper"
"It is tempting to conclude from this analysis that the trade union leaders are a thoroughly reactionary group of people, as bad, if not worse than the Tories, the bosses and the police. At least Margaret Thatcher is open about her hostility to workers’ struggles, one might urge." (SW 21.7.84)

these swine do not have a revolutionary outlooks at all!
These people do not call for booting out of the right wing out of unions, but merely to put pressure on them
during the residential social workers dispute at the end of 1983, the SWP said that that "the key to winning the dispute is to put pressure on unions officials and argue the case for solidarity." (SW 23.12.83)
Does anyone believe that by putting pressure on Sir Jackson that he would have done ANYTHING for the workers, fuckin hell no, the only way forward was to boot the bastard out and thats what happened

Socialist Worker is quite happy to play along with the union leaders’ double-crossing strategy. The front pages call on workers to DEFEND THE UNIONS, on the grounds that "what is at stake is no less than the ability of workers to direct and control their own organisations." (SW 7.12.84)

from the SWankersP site i got the following quote
By raising false hopes of this kind, the SWP’s tactics prevent militant workers from seeing the need to take matters into their own hands, by appealing directly to their fellow workers for a struggle organised by workers themselves against the union leaders.

Sometimes the SWP calls for rank and file control of picketing. But it never questions the union—leaders’ right to carry out negotiations; nor their right to say what the demands of the strike should be.

The SWP calls on rank and file workers to organise traditional trade union solidarity actions, such as blacking and collections. But it never goes further than this by calling on workers to seek active solidarity in mass strike action which unites workers across union divisions in the same struggle.

Should rank and file workers wish to influence matters of policy of this kind, the SWP encourages them to follow the complex procedures set down in the rule books - with disastrous results.

A recent issue of Socialist Worker described how SWP members at Longbridge attempted to pass a resolution at a union branch meeting urging Support for the miners, and linking this to action over their own current pay claim. An excellent idea - but the convenor simply ruled their resolution out of order.

By contrast SWP NALGO members in Bolton did manage- to get a motion passed at a union meeting instructing officials to call meetings to step up the action being taken by nursery nurses there. Success? Not quite. The following weeks’ issue of Socialist worker complained that t1branch officers have refused to call section meetings despite being instructed to do so." What a surprise.

[Kez]

ey X, instead of calling it pathetic maybe if u used ur SWP knowledge u cud argue the points and even get me to join SWP and buy (and sell) your paper, seriosuly, im open to all comments

[Sandanista]

The SWP are a revolutionary party, however those who say that its a trotskyite party are a wee bit wrong, tony cliff was thrown out of the 4th international becoz of the state capitalism theory.

However that said, the movement needs progressive thinkers, tony cliff was one of them

[bolshevik1917]

What about the newspaper article I posted, no one has commented on it...

From Scotland On Sunday 15 06 03

CIVIL war has broken out in the Scottish Socialist Party (SSP) over one of its candidates in the Scottish Parliament elections, it emerged last night.

Leaked confidential documents have revealed bitter in-fighting in the Mid Scotland and Fife region over Linda Graham, who narrowly missed out on becoming an MSP. One regional organiser complained about Graham’s "venom" towards other SSP members, while a branch chair accused her allies of acting "like animals".

Graham claimed "reactionaries" in the party had worked to undermine her and called for them to be "driven from our party". The bust-up appears to centre on suggestions that Graham and her supporters are Socialist Workers Party (SWP) members bent on sowing disunity in the SSP. The papers were for an SSP executive committee meeting in June, calling for an internal investigation into problems in Mid Scotland and Fife.

One complaint from regional organiser Jock Penman said Graham had "crossed the line" with an outrageous attack on several party members after her defeat at the polls. He wrote: "Her venom is not just aimed at me, but at other good comrades, even whole branches."

Another complaint from Benarty branch chair Lorna Bett said the infighting had left her "physically sick". She said: "Never in my life have I seen such a vociferous, poisoned bunch of people. I never understood why people were so up in arms about the SWP joining our party. Now I know why."

Bett added: "They were like animals. They really showed their teeth. It was disgusting."

In her personal reflections on the election, Graham accused her opponents of "naked careerism, backstabbing and a personal attack culminating in a vote of no confidence in me weeks before the election".

Commenting on the situation, party leader Tommy Sheridan said: "The SSP now has over 3,000 members and it’s inevitable that the bigger we become the more diverse our membership, and everyone doesn’t always see eye to eye.

"I regret the comments made by Linda but she was probably disappointed at failing to be elected by a mere 126 votes.

"The SSP increased its vote by over 200% but we narrowly missed out in both Mid Scotland and Fife and Highlands and Islands. However I suppose the fact that an internal row now makes the news is a tribute to the development of the SSP as a political force in Scotland.

The party and the executive are well aware of the situation and inquiries are under way."

Graham said: "If there are any problems in the Mid Scotland and Fife region then the Mid Scotland and Fife region will sort them. We don’t really want any press involvement."

[JohnRedDavis]

Tony Cliff was a committed Marxist in the vein of Lenin and Trotsky who contributed greatly to the Trotskyist movement in England and around the world after Trotsky's death.

As a youth in Palestine, he had his finger broken by thugs in a labor Zionist organization for speaking up in defense of October. He also didn't confine himself to sectarian rants in coffee shops towards other socialists, he set out to change the world.

As a Leninist, he believed in the need for a revolutionary party to play a central role in the mass worker's movement to break the back of capitalism and win a better world.

As I'm sure you're acquanited with the writings of Lenin, you know that the Bolsheviks had to comprimise and enter into agreements with forces they didn't consider ideal (the peasantry, the petty bourgeoisie, Menshevik internationalists).

As anyone who has ever been on the picket line knows well, solidarity is crucial. Whether that comes from workers with revolutionary conciousnesses or from trade union officials who support a softer version of capitalism is immaterial. The goal is to win the strike and hurt the bosses--afterall, Marx argued that capitalism creates its own gravediggers (sometimes even in the form of trade union bureaucrats who can sometimes play progressive roles)

So rather than attacking the SWP's platform of worker's power and fighting for limited reforms in a pre-revolutionary era that give workers confidence, maybe you should concentrate on organizing folks in your workplace and city.

I'm certain the SWP or other socialists would be delighted to exchange ideas with you over strategies and tactics if you were something more than an internet sectarian.

In solidarity,

John

[kylie]

As anyone who has ever been on the picket line knows well, solidarity is crucial
I remember it being the SWP who left the united front for freeing Mumia Abu-Jamal, on the basis that they wanted to be allowed to sell their paper at demonstrations. A fairly petty issue on which to leave.


I'm certain the SWP or other socialists would be delighted to exchange ideas with you over strategies and tactics if you were something more than an internet sectarian.
I have noticed that in this thread and others, those who claim to support the SWP have not actually responded to the criticisms made, and the SWP itself has the tactic of ignoring articles by other parties which involve it.


(Edited by feoric at 9:27 am on June 17, 2003)

[Communist Superhero]

"I have noticed that in this thread and others, those who claim to support the SWP have not actually responded to the criticisms made, and the SWP itself has the tactic of ignoring articles by other parties which involve it. "

What critiscisms are these. That the SWP isn't revolutionary, that it isn't Socialist, that It is a tool of MI5. You want me to comment on a comrade who wrote an article expressing his oppinion.

The reason comrades don't reply to arguments like this, is because what can you say to a person who thinks the SWP is a tool used by MI5 to undermine the working class. What reply would you like me to give to that.

The SWP is very broad, and has many different people affiliated to it. I am sure there are many different ideas about communism and Marxism within it, so you will find some people who are a little more sectarian than others, you will find some people who are in support of the Cuba article in the Socialist Review and some that are not. You say that the SWP does not allow free thought yet it is clear to me that the oppinion of one comrade may not be the oppinion of another, but this is unimportant, because as JohnRedDavis pointed out, "...the Bolsheviks had to comprimise and enter into agreements with forces they didn't consider ideal..."

If one person writes an article, does not make it party line, it makes it the oppinion of one comrade. But what am I saying, quickly I must flee, before the SWP Gestapo come and bundle me away. How dare I disagree with the Socialist Review...aaaarrrrgggghhhh. By your own admission, I should be getting expelled right about now.

I can not comment for all the other comrades in the SWP, but for me, and the other comrades that I know and associate with, they are Socialists, they are revolutionaries, unless there is a big mass conspiracy to convince me that they are, and in fact it is actually just one big lie...you'd probably believe that wouldn't you Feoric!

As for the Mumia Abu-Jamal compaign, if the SWP did pull out for that reason, then it is an outrage and one that I would argue against strongly. But that is the first time I have heard that, and it is something I would like you to elaberate on. Where did you get this information from?

So, do not think, that because we are not replying to your rants about the evils of the SWP is some kind of admission of guilt. Far from it, it is bafflement and confusion, and an inate boredom of the bollox that some of you preach.

[kylie]

I was not refferring specifically to TavereeshKamo's implication that the SWP was a tool of the MI5, and yes some may disagree with some of what the SWP does. But for example post number 4 in this thread, is responded to by a suppoerter of the SWP with
The SWP are a revolutionary party.
TO be supporting the SWP, you must agree with most of what it does. I find it very unlikely that all the criticisms of it that have been posted here, are the things that you disagree with it on. If they are, then perhaps you should consider leaving them?

[Kez]

i didnt say the SWP WAS a tool of the mi5, it was just something to start a debate on the subject of the validity of SWP ideas

i am still waiting for some proper responses

[Saint-Just]

I think the biggest issue on this subject is the SWP being imperialist supporting, bourgeois leftists. I say the SWP are state capitalist because they believe in the retension of small private business post-revolution; that only large industry should be nationalised. In addition they believe in such concepts as the maximum 35 hour week.

They constantly support imperialist actions, such as the U.S. in Iraq, Yugoslavia, Zimbabwe. They believe that the ideas of Marx and Lenin are outdated and need to be revised for today. And they believe the parliamentary politics is a path we must hold post-revolution.

In my opinion all this amounts to them being only slightly more leftist than the Labour Party of the early 80's. I would still enjoy the country being led by them in that is would be superior to the neo-liberal ruling class we currently have, but that it is not a road to communism they offer and that they would not remove imperialism from our country. That their leadership would collapse since they would not engage the bourgeosie in class war and that economically they would not prove patricularly effective and our nation would not be built into a powerful socialist state.

[Sandanista]

This is from Mike Gonzalez (swplatform member of the SSP) pamphlet entitled Socialism From Below:

If society cannot be changes, by a series of gradual reforms, then change must come through a more profound transformation - through revolution. It is important though , that what we understand a revolution to be that moment when the majority of people become directly involved in shaping and running their own lives - what we describe as the self emancipation of the working class. It cannot be acheived by some other force claiming to be actin gfor them. A revolution cannot be just a seizure of power by a small group of armed people; nor can it be delivered by an invasion force.

[The Feral Underclass]

HURRAY FOR MIKE GONZALEZ!!!

[Just Joe]

The SWP aren't really what I'd call a political party. They are really just a pressure group; an extension of the ANL.

They don't stand in elections for a start. Didn't they even tell there supporters to vote New Labour?

There is no real Socialist Party with any chance in the UK at the moment.

[Cassius Clay]

Hmm I'm not sure what it is about the SWP but they sure are despised, spoke to a couple of CPGB members and they hated them.

Long time no see Just Joe! I know we don't agree on everything but good to see you back.

[Sandanista]

Yeah but the CPGB are fascist stalinist bastards

[Kez]

i still dont get why the SWP dont have a theory page...most puzzling when Lenin sed we shud "patiently explain" where can SWPers get their theory from? duz their group not have any form of analysis other than the occasional pamphlet (which members must sell to at least 100 people or be booted from the group)?

[JohnRedDavis]

As a point of clarification, the SWP doesn't have a "theory" page because they don't exist as simply an internet rant website.

They publish a weekly newspaper called "Socialist Worker", a monthly magazine called "Socialist Review" and a quarterly theoretical journal called "International Socialist Journal." Picking up a copy of any of those three publications ought to assuage your fears over the SWP's theoretical bankruptcy.

Perhaps if the SWP were interested in recruiting bored schoolboys with internet connections, they would place more emphasis on their website (though their newspaper is posted online each week.) However, because they're more interested in recruiting people (in the flesh!) who don't neccessarily have five hours free time each day and a modern computer, they also publish things on paper.

Hope that clarifies things for you. And by the way, don't try factory or picket-line agitation with "e-pamphlets"--the bosses don't normally keep laptops available for striking workers to read Marxist propaganda.

--John

[Sandanista]

Excellent point john, i dunno ive never been asked to or even tried to sell the worker or pamphlets, ive never been threatened with the boot, talkin pish bout that one

[YKTMX]

Quote: from JohnRedDavis on 8:23 pm on June 23, 2003
As a point of clarification, the SWP doesn't have a "theory" page because they don't exist as simply an internet rant website.

They publish a weekly newspaper called "Socialist Worker", a monthly magazine called "Socialist Review" and a quarterly theoretical journal called "International Socialist Journal." Picking up a copy of any of those three publications ought to assuage your fears over the SWP's theoretical bankruptcy.

Perhaps if the SWP were interested in recruiting bored schoolboys with internet connections, they would place more emphasis on their website (though their newspaper is posted online each week.) However, because they're more interested in recruiting people (in the flesh!) who don't neccessarily have five hours free time each day and a modern computer, they also publish things on paper.

Hope that clarifies things for you. And by the way, don't try factory or picket-line agitation with "e-pamphlets"--the bosses don't normally keep laptops available for striking workers to read Marxist propaganda.

--John


Exactly.

I'm sick of defending the party against you people anyway. Kinda like Cassius and Stalin, I guess. Anyway, if you are all so scpetical, why don't you do something about it and come to Marxism, instead of listening to CPGB members (*snigger*).

[Cassius Clay]

Erm the CPGB are not 'Fascist-Stalinists bastards'. First of all I've never heared them produce race hate, second of all visit their webiste they ain't fans of Joe Stalin, third of all I'm sure they all know who their fathers are. And finally what kind of a argument is that?

YouKnowTheyMurderedX what are you talking about may I ask?

Anyway I know little about the SWP and was only saying what I was told. I tend to make up my own mind about things so only time will tell I guess.

Oh yes and I think you'll agree that the New Communist Party is where it's at so to speak.

[Kez]

The website link for international SWP site is the ***** of the American SWP? the same american SWP that helped divide the international and split it up with its manoevers and game playing with its european counterparts, trying to install pro-cannon (cannon being leader of US SWP) and trying to dislodge any real marxists from the european parties.

Also, many of you know that the SWP has supported many imperialist wars, wud any of the lackeys of the SWP like to say why the SWP in Britain shamefully supported the so-called mujaheedin in their war against the Kabul government, on the phoney excuse of supporting the "right to self-determination", these so-called mujaheedin "freedom fighters" (also backed by the CIA), were a gang of reactionary bandits based on the most reactionary sections of Afghan society: the feudal landlords, money-lenders, mullahs and lumpen proletarian riff-raff.