SPEW Manifesto

[scarletghoul]

Where will you be on the ballot ?? If you were in my constituency i would try and to some campaigning, but I suspect you wontt be . Any leftist party would be welcome here, we have absoloutely nothng

[Die Neue Zeit]

SPEW is part of the TUSC ballot:

http://www.tusc.org.uk/candidates.php

[Lyev]

Sorry to have let this thread stew for a couple of days, I've been really busy recently. Thanks comrades for the interesting ideas and discussions.

This isn't something I am at all reproaching people with, but: I think it's a sad indictment of the left that with a manifesto like this we're accepting some of the weaker or more questionable points. Obviously there's not a lot of variety in the way of socialist and trade-unionist alternatives. Therefore, we just accept what there is.

Even if TUSC aren't totally perfect, they're 1,000 better than anything else. This is also exacerbated by every single other anti-worker, pro-cuts party; who else do we side with?

I feel sorry for voters who don't have a TUSC candidate in there constituency. (Not that I can vote yet, but the most progressive party where I am is Lib-Dem )

Going the transitory action platformism route of Krichevskii (not aimed at society as a whole), however, means that the workers wage demand in unions should already be in the "Purely Economic Agitation" phase and not in the latter ones.

What exactly do you mean by this?

[Proletarian Ultra]

SPEW is part of the TUSC ballot:

http://www.tusc.org.uk/candidates.php

So on the ballot, which party is listed, TUSC or SPEW?

[Die Neue Zeit]

What exactly do you mean by this?

The Transitional Program is another exhibition of broad economism, like Boris Krichevskii and the rest of the Russian "Economists" critiqued in WITBD:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/transition...x.html?t=99491

[Lyev]

So on the ballot, which party is listed, TUSC or SPEW?

TUSC, I assume. There are plenty of other parties under this banner; independents trade-unionists, SWP, one or two CPGB*, lots of SPEW candidates, and a few greens sprinkled about, I think.

*Someone might need to verify this, I'm not too sure.

[Lyev]

The Transitional Program is another exhibition of broad economism, like Boris Krichevskii and the rest of the Russian "Economists" critiqued in WITBD:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/transition...x.html?t=99491

Oh I know what the Transitional Program is, I just wasn't sure what you meant by

the workers wage demand in unions should already be in the "Purely Economic Agitation" phase and not in the latter ones.

[Raightning]

TUSC, I assume. There are plenty of other parties under this banner; independents trade-unionists, SWP, one or two CPGB*, lots of SPEW candidates, and a few greens sprinkled about, I think.

*Someone might need to verify this, I'm not too sure.

There's a list of candidates here but it seems slightly incomplete; nevertheless, it's primarily SPEW. SPEW, the SWP, Solidarity, Socialist Resistance and Green Left all have candiates running, and there are independent members of the UCU and RMT unions in a personal capacity as well as one CPB member.

The CPGB aren't in the coalition; they claim they're supporting its and campaigning for candidates but that they've been forcefully excluded by the TUSC steering committee (they aren't amiable to SPEW who they're claiming are trying to hijack the far-left for non-revolutionary purposes). Here's the article they published about its launch.

I feel sorry for voters who don't have a TUSC candidate in there constituency. (Not that I can vote yet, but the most progressive party where I am is Lib-Dem )

Same on all counts.

[Q]

This isn't something I am at all reproaching people with, but: I think it's a sad indictment of the left that with a manifesto like this we're accepting some of the weaker or more questionable points. Obviously there's not a lot of variety in the way of socialist and trade-unionist alternatives. Therefore, we just accept what there is.

This argument was also used in the No2EU platform, but this time around it is a bit too easy to use it again as SPEW has been a major driving force behind the initiative. I think it is safe to state that without SPEW there wouldn't have been a TUSC.

TUSC, I assume. There are plenty of other parties under this banner; independents trade-unionists, SWP, one or two CPGB*, lots of SPEW candidates, and a few greens sprinkled about, I think.

*Someone might need to verify this, I'm not too sure.

As Raightning correctly notes, the CPGB has been blocked from participation. I think this was a mistake that sends out the wrong signal to the movement, "you can come and play with us, but only if we like you". Several other candidates and groups have also been blocked. Here are some articles on the matter, besides the one linked by Raightning:

TUSC - give critical support despite many political shortcomings (Weekly Worker 807)
Left unity, not exclusion (807)
Vetoes and three-minute decision-making (808)
Let diversity flourish on left (811)

The basic point they're making: They unconditionally support TUSC, or try to where possible, read this and this report, but protest at their and others' exclusions and defend the right to criticize the platform on a political level. I personally see nothing wrong with that, open discussion on disagreements can only strengthen the movement and prepare the way for genuine unity.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Oh I know what the Transitional Program is, I just wasn't sure what you meant by

"Union officials on workers wages" should be on the same level of agitation as sliding scales of wages (at the union level).

[Crux]

As Raightning correctly notes, the CPGB has been blocked from participation. I think this was a mistake that sends out the wrong signal to the movement, "you can come and play with us, but only if we like you".

What movement? The subscribers to the Weekly Worker? Now I have no practical experience of the CPGB (and I suspect you don't either) but I can only assume the right call was made.

Several other candidates and groups have also been blocked.

Which ones?

[Q]

What movement? The subscribers to the Weekly Worker?

The workers movement in general (and yes, the readership of the Weekly Worker, about 15 000, is a part of that). While the CPGB may only be tiny, such an action has an implication on the entire movement and as such on the prospects for TUSC after the election.

Which ones?

Besides the CPGB, Workers Power was vetoed:

In his initial report comrade Heemskerk talked of two candidates who had not been endorsed. In one case there had been disagreement among local RMT activists, although this now seems to have been resolved. In the other case the request by Workers Power for its candidate in Vauxhall, Jeremy Drinkall, to be accepted under the Tusc umbrella was declined.

Comrade Heemskerk told the meeting that the proposal had been “vetoed” on the Tusc steering committee by RMT executive member Craig Johnson on the grounds that the Labour candidate in Vauxhall, Kate Hoey, should be given a clear run by the left. She is, after all, a member of the RMT’s parliamentary group as well as of the Trade Union Coordinating Group. The right of any Tusc steering committee comrade to “veto” any proposal had been agreed right from the start, said Heemskerk.

And Steve Freeman of Socialist Alliance:

The latest candidate to be refused is Steve Freeman of the rump Socialist Alliance, who had won the backing of his local union branch (and Southwark Respect!) to stand in London Bermondsey. It seems that the veto on this occasion was wielded by Martin Smith of the SWP (comrade Freeman was once an SWP member, after all, who led what was at the time a leftwing breakaway).

Steve sent in a letter countering the point that Martin Smith issued a veto though.

Maybe there are more, I don't know.

Edit:
I realise that people might get the impression that I'm only criticising this initiative. Let me say that I agree with others in that TUSC potentially means a great step forward for the far left to reorganise. I'm raising these points precisely because I'm taking it serious and don't want to see this project fail as happened with predecessors (SLP, SA, Respect).

[MarkP]

The workers movement in general (and yes, the readership of the Weekly Worker, about 15 000, is a part of that). While the CPGB may only be tiny, such an action has an implication on the entire movement and as such on the prospects for TUSC after the election.

Don't be silly.

The CPBG/PCC, Workers Power and Steve Freeman's Revolutionary Democratic Group have less than sixty members between them. They are a complete irrelevance to TUSC and to "the entire movement".

The likes of the CPGB and Workers Power aren't actually interested in TUSC at all. They are interested in having a bigger milieu where they can pose as more revolutionary than thou and "expose" larger left groups, thereby allowing them to pick up a new member or two. They are classic sects and TUSC if anything gave them too much credibility by bothering to write back to them.

[Sam_b]

TUSC, I assume. There are plenty of other parties under this banner; independents trade-unionists, SWP, one or two CPGB*, lots of SPEW candidates, and a few greens sprinkled about, I think.

*Someone might need to verify this, I'm not too sure.

There are a couple of Communist Party of Britain candidates IIRC, but not CPGB.

I myself will be out tomorrow on the 'campaign trail' leafletting for comrade Angela McCormick in Glasgow North. We're standing several candidates across the city and across Scotland, many of them SWP comrades. I think TUSC, with the backing of many union branches both north and south of the border, is a much better concept and idea than the UKIP-lite which was NO2EU, and this is reflected by Trade Unionists, CWI and SWP members joining forces.

My only disappointment is the continual courting of people such as the head of the Prison Officers Union, which I think is ridiculous.

[Raightning]

Here's a fairly good, work-in-progress list of left candidates.

[Lyev]

There are a couple of Communist Party of Britain candidates IIRC, but not CPGB.

I myself will be out tomorrow on the 'campaign trail' leafletting for comrade Angela McCormick in Glasgow North. We're standing several candidates across the city and across Scotland, many of them SWP comrades. I think TUSC, with the backing of many union branches both north and south of the border, is a much better concept and idea than the UKIP-lite which was NO2EU, and this is reflected by Trade Unionists, CWI and SWP members joining forces.

My only disappointment is the continual courting of people such as the head of the Prison Officers Union, which I think is ridiculous.

The CPGB can be quite dogmatic at times. It annoys me how they're smaller than SPEW and SWP, yet they're one of the only organisation on the British left to have not joined this coalition.

Same here, I'll be in Coventry on Sunday to try and campaign for councillor Dave Nellist who's standing against Bob Ainsworth and a BNP stooge, on top of usual Lib-Dem and Tory candidates. And, yes, although I wasn't part of SPEW at the time of NO2EU, I found their politics quite weak; TUSC is a much better platform, in the current political climate (i.e. MPs expenses, the recession etc.)

What exactly do you mean by your last paragraph? What's wrong with the Prison Officers Union?

[Crux]

What exactly do you mean by your last paragraph? What's wrong with the Prison Officers Union?

That's a can of worms right there.

[Q]

The CPGB can be quite dogmatic at times. It annoys me how they're smaller than SPEW and SWP, yet they're one of the only organisation on the British left to have not joined this coalition.

This was because they were blocked from joining, see my two previous posts that deal with this. Also, they're not the only ones blocked or not joining out of their own choice. The AWL declined the offer, the SPGB stands alone, Workers Power was blocked as well, to name just three.

Same here, I'll be in Coventry on Sunday to try and campaign for councillor Dave Nellist who's standing against Bob Ainsworth and a BNP stooge, on top of usual Lib-Dem and Tory candidates. And, yes, although I wasn't part of SPEW at the time of NO2EU, I found their politics quite weak; TUSC is a much better platform, in the current political climate (i.e. MPs expenses, the recession etc.)

I agree, TUSC is a serious improvement on No2EU.

What exactly do you mean by your last paragraph? What's wrong with the Prison Officers Union?

What Mayakovsky said.

[Sam_b]

What exactly do you mean by your last paragraph? What's wrong with the Prison Officers Union?

Because of the very nature of the job, I take the same line as most socialists take towards the police. I agree with Bob's analysis, which can be found here: http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.p...7&postcount=22

I'm leaving this post short and referring to the one above as I don't wish to derail the discussion.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Don't be silly.

The CPBG/PCC, Workers Power and Steve Freeman's Revolutionary Democratic Group have less than sixty members between them. They are a complete irrelevance to TUSC and to "the entire movement".

I think you're making up numbers here. Source?

The likes of the CPGB and Workers Power aren't actually interested in TUSC at all. They are interested in having a bigger milieu where they can pose as more revolutionary than thou and "expose" larger left groups, thereby allowing them to pick up a new member or two. They are classic sects and TUSC if anything gave them too much credibility by bothering to write back to them.

So by your standards, why has there been no critical "gossip" in the WW about TUSC recently, in spite of its flat-out rejection by the ad hoc bureaucracy of TUSC?