home 
|
| contact
|
| action
|
| weekly worker
|
| respect
the unity coalition |
| european social forum
|
| theory
|
| resources
|
| what we fight
for |
| programme
|
| join |
| search
|
| communist university
|
| links
|
| our history
|
Weekly Worker 585 Thursday July 14 2005
Reasons to engage
No, we don't finance our organisation by selling our livers; wo
don't have a T-shirt sweatshop in Turkey and we certainly don't have
the heir to a nationwide chain of dry cleaners in our midst - these
are only some of the weird explanations others on the left have made
up to explain how we can raise £30,000 in two months (this year:
June and July). In fact, we rely to 100% on party members, supporters,
sympathisers and readers of the Weekly Worker. If you appreciate
our open and democratic press, now is the time to show us! Rush your
donations to us today.
|
We
need your help!Hillel Ticktin, editor of Critique, opened this year’s Marxism fringe with a discussion on why, amidst hyper-enthusiasm over events such as the Make Poverty History demonstration among some on the left, the task for communists is to build a Marxist party. Speaking to a full room on ‘Why saying no to war and poverty is not enough - we need a Marxist party’, comrade Ticktin lambasted the liquidationist tendency of some left elements, stressing the importance of revolutionary clarity in achieving that central aim.
However, I have to disagree with comrade Ticktin’s attitude to Respect. Yes, the task of communists is to build a Marxist party; but this must not be used as an excuse for non-intervention in such imperfect formations as Respect. Of course the party must be “principled, not opportunistic”, but in its absence it is no less opportunistic to stand outside Respect, keeping your hands clean in the hope that disillusioned elements will eventually be drawn towards you. I can certainly agree that in a certain sense Respect is “horrible” and comparable to a “Stalinist group”, but in my opinion communists should be prepared to work within all kinds of formations when the situation demands it.
Comrade Ticktin asserted that one should not “go blindly” into a front with those who “totally disagree with the fundamentals of Marxism - or even decent fundamentals”, because this “creates scope for Nick Cohen and David Aaronovitch to attack” us. This seemed to me a rather weak reason for refusing to engage. After all, the likes of Cohen and Aaronovitch will attack us whatever we do. The question is not “What does the SWP see in Respect?” It is, How can revolutionaries win forces within Respect to Marxism? l
Sachin Sharma
