Kez
27th July 2003, 14:22
On Tuesday 1 July, the SWP organised a coup in Birmingham Socialist Alliance.
Mobilising dozens of people who have never before been involved in the Socialist Alliance – and very likely won’t be again – they voted out all the officers of the Birmingham SA and replaced them by SWPers and their allies.
The main target was Steve Godward, victimised FBU activist, vice-chair of the Socialist Alliance nationally until recently ousted by the SWP for having "minority views", and incumbent chair of Birmingham SA.
Steve has been critical of the new "popular front" turn by the SA. But other officers who support the new turn but might be expected to demand accountability and insist on debate and discussion – such as Stuart Richardson, a well-known supporter of the Resistance newspaper – were swept out too.
Socialist Alliance "independents" all across the country have been angered by the coup, and many, regrettably, are quitting the SA or cutting back their commitment.
Why is the SA being narrowed down in this way when the new turn adopted at the 10 May conference is supposed to be about building something broader, wider more inclusive?
The Birmingham coup is in tune with the national executive elections at the 10 May conference, where the SWP voted through a slate with an effective numerical majority of itself and its close allies.
In fact, the "broadening" and the "narrowing" are two sides of the same political coin.
The new turn means the SA becoming part of a broader coalition. With whom? That is not clear to anyone, probably not even the SWP leadership, but the possibilities are clear.
* The Greens and Plaid Cymru (as in the RMT).
* The hierarchy of the Muslim community and the mosques (as in the projected "Peace and Justice" coalition in Birmingham), and the Muslim Association of Britain (British offshoot of the Muslim brotherhood, the Arab world’s largest Islamic fundamentalist organisation). Alliance with these conservative or reactionary forces is quite different from allying with left-wing Muslim workers and youth.
* George Galloway MP. Galloway opposed the Iraq war. So did many other non-socialists – and Galloway is not a socialist. On his own account – in reply to the Daily Telegraph’s charges against him – he has been a close friend of the mass-murderer Saddam Hussein’s deputy Tariq Aziz, and has funded his political operations with cash from the Saudi and Emirates governments.
How can a political platform be worked out for a coalition of such forces? Not by debate on a socialist, working-class basis – but only by negotiating and horse-trading. Once the negotiations are finished, a Socialist Alliance likely to ask awkward questions can only be an embarrassment to the SWP.
So, in order to build a "broader" popular-front coalition, it is entirely logical that the SWP seeks to narrow down the Alliance.
Already, some in the Socialist Alliance have started to organise against this turn, and to continue the purposes the SA was founded to accomplish. A meeting on 25 May made the first steps towards founding a "Network for Working-Class Representation/Independent Socialist Alliance", and sketched out a draft platform as a basis for discussion and debate.
Mobilising dozens of people who have never before been involved in the Socialist Alliance – and very likely won’t be again – they voted out all the officers of the Birmingham SA and replaced them by SWPers and their allies.
The main target was Steve Godward, victimised FBU activist, vice-chair of the Socialist Alliance nationally until recently ousted by the SWP for having "minority views", and incumbent chair of Birmingham SA.
Steve has been critical of the new "popular front" turn by the SA. But other officers who support the new turn but might be expected to demand accountability and insist on debate and discussion – such as Stuart Richardson, a well-known supporter of the Resistance newspaper – were swept out too.
Socialist Alliance "independents" all across the country have been angered by the coup, and many, regrettably, are quitting the SA or cutting back their commitment.
Why is the SA being narrowed down in this way when the new turn adopted at the 10 May conference is supposed to be about building something broader, wider more inclusive?
The Birmingham coup is in tune with the national executive elections at the 10 May conference, where the SWP voted through a slate with an effective numerical majority of itself and its close allies.
In fact, the "broadening" and the "narrowing" are two sides of the same political coin.
The new turn means the SA becoming part of a broader coalition. With whom? That is not clear to anyone, probably not even the SWP leadership, but the possibilities are clear.
* The Greens and Plaid Cymru (as in the RMT).
* The hierarchy of the Muslim community and the mosques (as in the projected "Peace and Justice" coalition in Birmingham), and the Muslim Association of Britain (British offshoot of the Muslim brotherhood, the Arab world’s largest Islamic fundamentalist organisation). Alliance with these conservative or reactionary forces is quite different from allying with left-wing Muslim workers and youth.
* George Galloway MP. Galloway opposed the Iraq war. So did many other non-socialists – and Galloway is not a socialist. On his own account – in reply to the Daily Telegraph’s charges against him – he has been a close friend of the mass-murderer Saddam Hussein’s deputy Tariq Aziz, and has funded his political operations with cash from the Saudi and Emirates governments.
How can a political platform be worked out for a coalition of such forces? Not by debate on a socialist, working-class basis – but only by negotiating and horse-trading. Once the negotiations are finished, a Socialist Alliance likely to ask awkward questions can only be an embarrassment to the SWP.
So, in order to build a "broader" popular-front coalition, it is entirely logical that the SWP seeks to narrow down the Alliance.
Already, some in the Socialist Alliance have started to organise against this turn, and to continue the purposes the SA was founded to accomplish. A meeting on 25 May made the first steps towards founding a "Network for Working-Class Representation/Independent Socialist Alliance", and sketched out a draft platform as a basis for discussion and debate.