|
Weekly Worker 613 Thursday February 23 2006
Subscribe to the Weekly
Worker
Hidden controversy
Standing ovation
Last
week I promised some good news in the shape of standing orders paid
to our paper. Sure enough, according to our latest bank statement,
a good number of payments have been made - thanks to comrades NP,
AD, PM, MH, KG and DB for their excellent help, not to mention the
Revolutionary Democratic Group, Socialist Party comrade PC and SWP
member NG. In all they have pushed up our total by no less than
£284.
I can also report two new standing orders this week. Comrade JS,
just recovered from illness, has taken out a monthly SO for £30
and writes: “I hope to increase this when funds allow.” Very much
appreciated, comrade. The other new regular donor is NN, who has
managed to find a useful £10 a month for the Weekly Worker.
Finally I can report cheques from two stalwarts who never forget
us, even though neither has a standing order. I refer to comrades
TR (£60) and SW (£10). Thanks to all those who have pushed our February
total up to £514 - you all deserve an ovation.
But we still need £86 in just five days. How about some of you
internet readers chipping in? We had 14,916 last week, but no online
donations. Help push us well over the £600 monthly target.
Robbie Rix
Click
here for our special financial appeal
Click
here to download a standing order form - regular income is particular
important in order to plan ahead. Even £5/month can help!
Send cheques, payable to Weekly Worker, BCM Box 928, London WC1N
3XX
Donate
online:
|
Dave Landau, a representative of the Jewish Socialist Group, attended
the Unite Against Fascism conference on February 18
There were about 350 people present, and some of them, like myself, were
delegated by organisations. However, in reality, the only thing that distinguished
delegates from individuals attending was that delegates had to pay more
money to get in.
There are no democratic structures in Unite Against Fascism, which means
there are no conference resolutions. All the decisions are taken by a
steering committee, which has never been elected by a conference. Therefore,
there is no actual need to have ‘delegates’.
In reality, it was a rally, not a conference, and there were no contributions
from the floor in the main sessions. We basically went there to listen
to speeches. Some of them were really interesting, some weren’t. There
were also a number of good workshops and discussions, so I wouldn’t say
that it was a total waste of time.
But I believe the lack of democratic structures is becoming a real problem
- and I am not saying that because I want to slag UAF off, but because
UAF will suffer because of it. We have already seen Searchlight
leaving in disgust, while many local groups never joined, because it is
such a top-down organisation.
If events like this conference had been put on with the real involvement
of grassroots organisations, I think this split could possibly have been
avoided. But this conference, as with most other UAF events, had been
arranged by the National Assembly Against Racism and the Socialist Workers
Party’s Anti-Nazi League, and in quite a sectarian way.
I and the Jewish Socialist Group believe that there is actually very
little difference between UAF and Searchlight and we are concerned
that both sides tend to talk up the ‘hideous’ sides of the other in order
to remain disunited. The worst thing of all is that in some areas there
are rival campaigns duplicating each other’s work.
We were trying to push a unity project forward at conference and handed
out leaflets to this effect. Some of the speakers picked up on this question
and supported our position, even if most of the contributions were a bit
mealy-mouthed. However, many of the local UAF and Searchlight groups
have no desire to follow this split and they are working together on the
ground in a really good and practical way.
As I say, in general there was very little debate at conference. However,
there was a sort of hidden controversy, which not all those present were
fully aware of. This was brought out in a speech by Ben Summerskill of
the gay rights group, Stonewall, who raised the issue that if we are standing
shoulder to shoulder with oppressed communities against fascism, then
there should be a “two-way street” in terms of respect for each other.
He specifically criticised Iqbal Sacranie, head of the Muslim Council
of Britain, who had said in a radio interview that homosexuality was “not
acceptable” and a health risk. Interestingly, Sacranie did not appear
on the platform of the UAF conference, although he had been advertised
as a speaker months ago. Instead, he was quietly dropped and replaced
by a more moderate MCB speaker after Stonewall and other LGBT groups had
criticised his inclusion on the top table. I very much got the feeling
that Summerskill was wholeheartedly supported for his views by the rest
of the platform.
Ken Livingstone also made an interesting speech on how to relate to muslim
forces. He basically said that working with these forces does not mean
that we cannot challenge them and fight them on a range of issues like
homosexuality. He said we would raise the same issues with the “pope and
the chief rabbi”. If you compare that to Respect’s attitude and practice,
I think Livingstone came out well to the left of them and with a much
stronger position on the question. John Rees and George Galloway would
not have been able to respond properly to Summerskill’s comments.
Print this page
|