home

contact

action

weekly worker

european social forum

theory

resources

what we fight for

programme

join

search

communist university

links

our history

Enjoy the
Weekly Worker?
How about showing us your appreciation? Producing the Weekly Worker costs a substantial amount of money. Our only source for that financial backing comes from people like you: readers and supporters of our newspaper. You may not agree with the CPGB on every dot and comma, but we know that 1000s of comrades appreciate our open, critical and democratic press

Send cheques, payable to CPGB, BCM Box 928, London WC1N 3XX or donate online:

Weekly Worker 547 Thursday October 7 2004

Workers World Party websites

Don’t criticise the oppressed

It has been generally accepted that John Kerry emerged the victor from last week’s presidential debate with George W Bush. Mainstream commentators have spilt much ink over the body language of the two candidates: supposedly Kerry’s relaxed style compared favourably to the shifty and hunched demeanour of Bush, but on policy precious little has been said. Kerry did go on the attack over Iraq, but offered no solutions to the rapidly developing quagmire, and Bush resorted to the usual mantras about spreading democracy and fighting terrorists. Once more nothing was offered and nothing promised to the American working class.

Perhaps this yawning gap to the left in the political market partly explains why the class-struggle left is so hopelessly fragmented at this election. As each group tries to pick up a few radical votes, little thought has been given to a united challenge, leaving socialist nominees and their ‘parties’ content to carve out their own little niches. The Socialist Party USA is keen to emphasise its radical democratic credentials, whereas the bizarrely named Workers World Party puts its best proletarian foot forward. The WWP’s campaign site (www.workersworld.net/vote4workers) prominently features its presidential and vice-presidential nominees, John Parker and Teresa Gutierrez, along with Congress candidate LeiLani Dowell, above the slogan “People’s needs before profits”. It is perhaps not surprising that key campaign demands are drawn from the usual economistic shopping list beloved of the left.

To add some substance to their candidature, an article from each has been included. John Parker’s article, ‘What’s socialism got to do with it?’, begins with a general critique of capitalism, before offering a short commentary on the ‘anyone but Bush’ brigade. By voting and supporting one loyal servant of US imperialism, “we must also hold our noses for the duration of our lives to endure the stench of life under capitalism”, he concludes. He goes on to give a worthy account of how a socialist society will be based on mutual cooperation and solidarity across borders, manages to smuggle in a few positive words about the Soviet Union, and tacks a few lines about democracy on at the end.

Comrade Gutierrez in ‘Busting the myths about Cuba’ defends its bureaucratic socialism in true diplomatic internationalist style. Rebutting ruling class lies and offering solidarity to the Cuban regime precludes criticism, seems to be the thrust of this piece. Finally, comrade Dowell’s piece calls workers to support October 17’s exciting ‘Million Worker March’ (www.millionworkerm-arch.org) in Washington DC.

The WWP’s homepage (www.workers.org) is a better designed page overall. Tucked away at the side is Workers World, the bilingual weekly journal from which the group draws its name. Aesthetically the paper looks very drab without any hint of colour. Luckily the content is not too bad. The focus is very much on workers’ struggles and refreshingly the patronising tone that infests most left papers is mercifully absent, but in sum the paper conveys an economistic impression, albeit one that takes issues around LGBT oppression seriously.

What does the WWP have to say about itself? The ‘About Workers World’ section provides few answers. Once again the piece begins with the evils of capitalism, name-checks Marx, and pitches itself as a group that stands up for self-determination of nations and anti-imperialism. Part and parcel of their understanding of anti-imperialism is the guilty liberal attitude the comrades take to criticising the oppressed: “We don’t jump on the bandwagon when third world leaders are demonised,” they argue. Sadly this silence extends to their relations with other socialists standing in this election. Putting ‘SPUSA’, ‘Socialist Workers Party’, ‘Socialist Equality Party’ and ‘electoral cooperation’ into their search engine turns up the barest of mentions. If attempts were made to reach an understanding with the other groups, no mention of it exists here.

Sam Marcy, the WWP’s late guru, cannot escape mention. A good number of articles ranging from 1972-95 have been included, with a number of gushing tributes. Dubbed “some of the most important contemporary Marxist writings on the cold war”, Marcy’s work covers a field of impressive breadth. Economics, imperialism and technology sit alongside debates on the USSR and commentary on the Communist manifesto. In addition, comrade Leslie Feinberg hails Marcy as the source of “the first, and really the only, Marxist explanation of gay oppression”.

Bold claims aside and despite some of their politics, WWP is clearly a revolutionary organisation. Unfortunately its economism renders it programmatically inferior to the revolutionary democratic SPUSA, but it is worth advocating a critical vote, where the SPUSA is not on the ballot.
Phil Hamilton

Print this page