Weekly Worker 479 Thursday May 8 2003

Letters

Not revolutionary

According to the Communist Party of Great Britain, the Socialist Alliance is dead (see 'Socialist Alliance AGM ‘postponed’', March 6). We’re saddened by your fickleness, but on a positive note the SA stood 20 candidates in Wigan and Leigh; was involved in united front organisation with the Labour Party, churches, etc; kept the Nazis in their box; put over a solid socialist case; delivered 20,000 leaflets, and continued to build a socialist organisation in the town.

We roughly averaged 100 votes in each ward - over 2,000 across Wigan on a pretty poor turnout in most wards. We made our point, making it clear that we’re not going away and taking the bombers (aka New Labour) to task. In the process, we have learned loads. Local elections are not revolutionary, but are a brilliant opportunity to challenge the status quo on a sound political basis.

Along with this we have been active both in the Wigan and Leigh United against Racism campaign and leafleted both wards where the Nazis were standing almost in their entirety. We supported a lively Anti-Nazi League picket of the Ince count, giving the Nazis a hard time.

Most importantly we have built up our organisation and lots of new people have got involved, particularly people we met round the anti-war movement. As one new member commented at the Leigh count, we will win in the end; we will outlive them!

Mark Smith
Wigan

SA polled well

Well done to all Socialist Alliance comrades, particularly in Preston, who brilliantly ruled out claims that the SA was all but liquidated.

The SA also polled well in Middlesbrough with 21%, Barnsley with 17.7%, Telford 14% and Swindon with 13%. However, the success of the British National Party showed the epidemic of disillusionment, particularly in the poor, working class areas of the north west. Divided communities eventually die. We just need to look at the old mining towns where families, lives and entire communities were torn to pieces by Thatcher’s butchery of a proud industry. Communities divided along lines of race and torn apart by hate are no different.

We need a political organisation that can unite working class people in fighting for their communities. We have made a not insignificant start, but now we really have to put aside our differences and get our act together. We need to build trust on the doorsteps through consistent, grassroots work and more pavement politics.

My own organisation, the Socialist Workers Party, must make as much of a commitment as any other - if not bigger, as we are numerically the biggest player. Revolutionaries must not stop being revolutionaries, but recognise the need for new ways of challenging the rise of fascism, and propagating real socialist politics amongst the class. It will take hard work from every one of us that wants to ensure the poisonous BNP is stopped in its tracks and driven back into the gutter.

Mike Carter
Oxford

SA is dead

When the Socialist Alliance’s last chair resigned (in protest at the wilful refusal of its own leaders to promote it within the anti-war movement), the post was left vacant. In view of its slogans - tax the rich, defend the health service, fully comprehensive education - why was the leadership of the Socialist Alliance not offered to Lord Healey, Lord Callaghan or Lord Hattersley? After all, these were nominally the policies of the 1970s Labour government.

What a contrast north of the border! Six socialists were elected members of the Scottish parliament. What was the difference? The pioneers of the Scottish Socialist Party had made the necessary commitment to put the party first before the factional interests of its constituent political tendencies. The SSP is above all a party of struggle. Twenty years of struggle, sacrifice and solidarity lie behind its victories: fighting against the poll tax, the bailiffs, evictions, water charges, nuclear bases, fighting in the courts, the jails, occupations and sit-ins. And not mere struggles alone: above all, victories - the defeat of the poll tax, the ending of distraint of debtors’ goods, the building of a new party.

The SSP comrades had amply earned their authority and their right to claim leadership. Let no one dare compare them to the sloganising carpetbaggers of the Socialist Alliance, who flippantly turn up out of nowhere at election times, insolently cadging any spare protest votes that might be going.

Some of that small minority who joined the SA because they actually wanted it to grow have launched a website (www.movementsforsocialism.com) to campaign for these ideas. We invite all Weekly Worker readers to check it out and, better still, write for it.

Roger Silverman
email

Rejoin Labour

When will the penny drop with you ‘Leninists’? Your politics and sects, even under the mask of 70s ‘Labourism’, are still unpalatable to the electorate at large. This is what your continued humiliation at the polls is telling you.

The average British worker, as well as the Guardian-reading middle class, have never found revolutionary or extremist solutions to the ills of capitalism very attractive. Even if your Marxist analysis is correct, you are not winning the arguments on your present course, and staying on the outside of the mainstream will certainly not alter this situation.

England in the late 19th century was by no means a hotbed for radical socialism, and the notoriously xenophobic English worker was (and still is) suspicious of imported political ideas from foreign revolutionaries. This is how the Fabianism/Labourism of Britain came about, and for all its faults and failures it should still point you towards the need for the refoundation of a broad workers’ party which you can all join.

The most successful Marxist group were Militant, but they wouldn’t have achieved their success by breaking away, as can be witnessed by the Taaffeite sect.

You must stop wasting time with the ‘frontism’ employed by your majority, and rejoin us within the movement and party where you are desperately needed to get down to the urgent business of overthrowing trade union legislation and ousting rightwing Labour candidates.

Chas Wilkinson
email

Good result

I am writing to let you know about my experience of being an independent candidate in the elections to my town council.

I stood as an independent because I did not agree with the description ‘Socialist Alliance Against the War’, as used on the ballot paper by the SA. If the war in Iraq were still going on, the use of such a description might have made some sense. Also, when I was a member of the Socialist Party two years ago, their nominating officer would not support me being a candidate in the county council elections. I did not want that to happen again with the SA.

After nominations closed, I was shocked to find out that it was just me against two Tories for the two seats up for election in my ward. The Labour Party had only been able to find three candidates prepared to stand for the 18 seats on my town council.

I produced a leaflet based on some of the policies put forward by the CPGB in a document that was presented to the March 2001 conference of the Socialist Alliance (Weekly Worker January 25 2001), including immediate demands on work, pensions, taxes, democracy and internationalism. Other policies included the pedestrianisation of the town’s market place, an emergency programme of house building and repair, and free school meals for all school children. I made sure that the 141 postal voters and three first-time voters got a leaflet and a covering letter from me asking for their support.

On polling day the Tories told me that when the postal ballot papers were opened the previous Friday, I had got about a third of them. It seemed that the policies on my leaflet had got a positive response. I visited the two polling stations in my ward on polling day four times for about 40 minutes each time. The response from people who were going to vote was very positive.

At the count, which covered all the elections in my town, I found that the Tories were friendlier than Labour Party members, who were most upset when they saw me wearing a red and white rosette. For moral support I took two friends and my mum to the count. At 12.45am the votes in my ward were the last to be counted. The two Tories were relieved when they learnt that they had won with 267 and 255 votes. I received 148 votes, which meant that 33% of those who had voted had given one vote to me. This is a very good result, given that my ward is one of the most Conservative wards in my town.

Following the results I was interviewed by a reporter from Radio Cambridgeshire which was broadcast twice on the Friday morning. On the basis of my results, I have decided that I would like to stand as a Socialist Alliance candidate in the county council elections, which take place in May 2005.

John Smithee
Cambridgeshire

Exclusion

I am very disappointed that the Stop the War Coalition has chosen to disallow observers from attending its executive meetings (Weekly Worker May 1). From what I hear there have always been observers at these meetings - it was only when the CPGB representative, Anne Mc Shane, tried to attend the latest meeting that this new rule was enforced. This is the kind of secretive and untransparent behaviour that has discredited much of the left and should have no place in the workers’ movement.

While I do not always agree with the positions of the CPGB, it seems clear to me that the comrades have done their utmost to build the anti-war movement. I have noticed that they did encourage their supporters and members to build and attend local anti-war meetings, help with STWC work and work hard to bring as many people as possible to the big anti-war demos. But even if they had not done so, that still would not justify their exclusion, which seems to have been led by the SWP and their comrades-in-arms in the Communist Party of Britain.

The sole reason for the exclusion seems to be the fact that the Weekly Worker is the only revolutionary paper that openly reports on developments on the left - be it the Socialist Alliance, the Socialist Labour Party or the anti-war movement. The comrades actually provide an unequalled service to the rest of the left in this respect. Everybody in the workers’ movement should defend the right of the comrades to attend these meetings - where else would I be able to find out what happens at the SA executive meetings or the meetings to prepare for the European Social Forum?

In this instance, I do actually know what went on at the STWC executive meeting. I would like to share the information with readers of the Weekly Worker. Unfortunately, there is not that much to report on, as executive meetings of the STWC regularly only last for 90 minutes. With an average attendance of 40, you can imagine that there is not much room for debate and frank discussion. Although chair Andrew Murray (CPB) announced from the platform of the last anti-war demo on April 12 that there would be a second People’s Assembly, he kept his mouth pretty much shut about this at the meeting. In fact, none of the attendees argued for making the assembly a regular forum for the anti-war movement. It looks like it has been dropped from the agenda. Instead, an ‘activists conference’ will take place in the next few weeks.

Some people argued that there should be local People’s Assemblies. This was also met with a less than enthusiastic response. The SWP and CPB in particularly were not keen on the idea and stated that local groups could do what they want and “cannot be prevented from setting them up”, as Lindsay German from the SWP stated. Not much leadership there. Instead, the leading clique on the executive pushed for local rallies, teach-ins and another day of action. It looks like at the end of September there will be another European-wide demonstration, this time focusing on the occupation of Iraq and Palestine.

Unfortunately, rather than building organisational structures to develop the anti-war movement into a force that could take on other political questions, the executive has opted to follow the SWP tactic of jumping from one activity to the next.

Marsha Hedley
email

Allah akhbar

While SWP comrades were a little shy about calling for an outright victory for the regime of Saddam Hussein against US imperialism, they certainly made no secret of their support for the “victory to the resistance”, as they declared on numerous posters. For “resistance” read ‘Saddam Hussein’.

Now that Saddam has gone they have switched their support to the islamic fundamentalist shi’ites, who were suppressed by Saddam Hussein and tried to overthrow him more than once. All my enemy’s enemies are my friends. Even if they fight each other. Even if they are all reactionary.

At the recent Berlin meeting to prepare for the next European Social Forum in Paris in November 2003, Jill Hubbard, from Globalise Resistance Scotland described the “incredible mood on the London anti-war demonstrations: the whole crowd shouted, ‘Resist, revolt, fuck capitalism’ and then all of us went on to shout, ‘Allah akhbar’.” I doubt that  others were quite so foolish. While comrade Jill seemed to have got a little overexcited, she admirably displays the SWP’s attitude towards reactionary anti-imperialism.

Tina Becker
Haringey

Distortion

In seeking to defend the SWP, Bobby Blazer is impressive in his ability to distort everyone else’s arguments, while failing to address any of their criticisms (Letters, May 1).

I would of course be delighted to see a genuine coalition to stop the war in Cambridge - my point (Letters, April 24) was the SWP here are actively damaging any attempts at coalition, as well as doing very little in the way of anti-war activity themselves.

I observed that our local SWP resorted even to character smears in their attempt to exploit (rather than help build) the movement, and that they relied on critics being dismissed as a danger to ‘unity’. Blazer does not attempt to address my criticisms, but instead accuses me of a “narrow sectarian attitude”. This only underlines my arguments. At a time when the state is adopting ever more draconian legislation and methods, the anti-war movement and the British left cannot afford to allow at best questionable, at worst Stalinist, organisational methods to pass unchallenged.

In crediting the role of Bush and Blair in building the anti-war movement, I was drawing attention to the huge change in the objective conditions obvious to anyone with any experience of anti-war movements in the past. I do not belittle the activities of thousands of anti-war campaigners, but point out that it was the objective conditions that made such a mass movement possible.

While claiming credit for organising the demonstrations, the SWP organisers of the national Stop the War Coalition should also be asking what more could we have done to build on these new conditions. Why, for example, was there no concerted attempt at political strike action, as occurred to some extent in Spain and Greece?

I presume that Bobby Blazer’s comments on the BNP were directed at other writers in the Weekly Worker rather than myself (as I never mentioned them), but again he insults the writers with a misrepresentation. In criticising the SWP-organised ANL, Jeremy Butler rightly argues that the only real answer to BNP populism is a genuine working class politics that addresses the real concerns of the BNP’s target voters.

I am not a member of the CPGB, but congratulate them on providing a forum for debate within the left. However, this is only possible if participants are prepared to engage in genuine political debate - something too many members of the SWP seem afraid to do.

Sarah Glynn
Cambridge

Mr Bobby

Bobby Blazer never “considered joining” the CPGB, as he claims (Letters, April 17).

This comrade has featured several times in our pages, passing himself off as an ‘honest Joe’ who - after weighing up the relative merits of the Communist Party and the SWP in Wales - decided to join the latter, as it is “clearly the most non-sectarian organisation on the left”.

In fact, comrade Blazer is an SWPer in Wales who attempted a few low-level provocations in the periphery of our organisation. He joined our supporters’ e-list shortly after making contact and claiming sympathy and interest. Immediately, he began retailing standard sectarian bilge and announcing his intention to join the SWP.

He repeatedly ignored requests for a contact telephone number. When he finally supplied one, it was false. I’m sure that if we could be bothered to check, we would find out that ‘Bobby Blazer’ is a false name. If it isn’t, it should be.

Mark Fischer
London

Get a life

Thanks for publishing my last letter (Weekly Worker May 1).

I am stung into rewriting, as the last edition was surely a record for the most amount of attacks on other left groups in one edition! There appeared to be little of substance to anything outside the sad world of the far left. Is it not time that the Weekly Worker got a life and discussed real issues facing working class people, both in UK and around the world?

Jim Boogles
email

Fighting BNP

I would like to attempt to answer a few issues raised in two letters printed in last week’s Weekly Worker (May 1): Marilyn Flanders’ ‘Dead end’ and John Smithee’s ‘Welcome?’

The best way to confront racism and racists is to end capitalism. The first step towards this goal has to be an independent, democratic working class party.

Such a party would also offer an alternative, and an answer to people like comrade Smithee’s racist relative. Comrade Flanders asserts that the answer lies in the labour movement. If she means the working class, then we are in agreement; if she means the Labour Party, we are not.

There are undoubtedly stalwart socialists within the Labour Party. However, the Labour Party is not and never has been a socialist party. It is a bourgeois workers’ party: workers identify with the Labour Party, but it is led by the bourgeoisie and serves their interest. Due to the inherent lack of democracy, the party faithful have no power.

The Labour Party is not an independent party of the working class. Nor is the Socialist Alliance. As comrade Flanders astutely points out, at present the SA is merely an electoral front for the SWP. It is composed of disparate, bickering sects.

However, that does not change the fact that we need to work towards a party of the working class. The SA is best regarded as a project. Doubtless the end product will bear little relation to the present incarnation. Anyone who genuinely desires socialism must be prepared to work towards a unified party.

Jeremy Butler
Guildford

Galloway

Your defence of Galloway surprises me (‘Gloves come off’ Weekly Worker May 1). While Scargill was a proletarian combatant, Galloway got to be a proxy to Saddam, who slaughtered thousands of our comrades, the Iraqi communists.

I knew he was paid before this was documented by The Daily Telegraph. A TV tape showed him admiring Saddam, whom he once blemished as a dictator. The money Galloway received from the Iraqis was coined from the blood of the Iraqi people.

Fuad Nimri
email

May Day

With reference to ‘A day of celebration and hope’ (Weekly Worker May 1), this was an excellent article on the history of May Day.

The only thing I found lacking was an analysis of the paradox (or perhaps the common bond?) between the present-day May Day demonstrations in capitalist countries and the state-endorsed marches in the so-called socialist countries.

It is indeed true that international workers’ day has been all but forgotten here in the USA. Only a few leftist parties are enthusiastic about May Day. These include the Communist Party USA, the Progressive Labor Party, the Maoist Revolutionary Communist Party and the Socialist Party USA. Interestingly, of the many Trotskyist organisations who comprise most of the radical community here, few make a big deal about May Day.

Timothy Lauby
USA