Weekly Worker 662 Thursday March 1 2007 Subscribe to the Weekly Worker

ISG split over Respect

In January, two leading members of the International Socialist Group, Alan Thornett and John Lister, left the officers’ group that heads the Respect national council. Others in and around the ISG-dominated paper/front Socialist Resistance have quit Respect altogether. Jim Moody reports

Those who have left include Liam Mac Uaid from Tower Hamlets, who chaired national SR meetings, and editorial board member, comrade Tami. She has thrown her lot in with John McDonnell’s (now floundering) campaign for the Labour leadership. In her resignation letter from SR she explains that she became convinced that Respect “is not a socialist organisation”, nor is it “based in the working class”. As a “final straw” the comrade cites our February 8 interview with Birmingham Respect candidate Yasir Idris (stroppyblog.blogspot.com/2007/02/guest-post)

Alan Thornett and the ISG were at the forefront of those who wanted to close down the Socialist Alliance and embrace popular front politics. When Respect was launched the ISG greeted it as an historic breakthrough. In effect comrade Thornett was a Socialist Workers Party toady - he eagerly promoted Respect, found nothing problematic with its Labourite politics and was rewarded for his efforts with a seat on the national council.

Recently there has been a change in tune, however. In the October 2006 Socialist Resistance comrade Thornett was no longer writing of Respect in the glowing terms of old. Indeed he admitted that the project was going sour, as far as he was concerned: “... Celebrity big brother [was] by far the biggest crisis Respect had faced in its short existence. It was not just the humiliation of Respect by the antics of George Galloway: it was the fact that Galloway was shown to be completely unaccountable when push came to shove. The refusal of the majority on the NC to make a statement clearly separating itself from the CBB fiasco made the matter worse.”

Yes, there is a particular animus against Galloway. In private Thornett speaks of him in the most disparaging terms: if Galloway told you the time of day, you wouldn’t believe him. Galloway returns the compliment with interest.

Thornett directly attributes Respect’s failure to do better in the 2006 local elections to Galloway’s CBB appearance and claims that Respect activists were similarly disenchanted. In terms of the accountability of Respect’s elected representatives, the comrade makes correct criticisms. But, frankly, it is too little and too late. The CPGB demanded accountability and democratic control over Respect’s elected representatives from the start. The ISG voted against all our motions.

To the extent he has any, Thornett’s solutions are typically technical. He complains of “the failure of Respect to build itself as a properly functioning national political organisation”, which he puts down to the SWP’s stubborn unwillingness to building Respect as a party - “a position they strongly share with George Galloway”.

But the SWP wants to build Respect. The problem is that the SWP cannot build Respect into anything sizeable without ceasing to be the SWP. The SWP views Respect purely instrumentally. Respect is there to win allies, influence people and gain votes. Respect is bound to be a sluggish, half-hearted organisation simply because it was constructed as a popular front with politics designed to appease the most conservative elements - whether it was members of the Muslim Association of Britain, Mark Serwotka or George Galloway makes no difference. The end result is a complete lack of principle and dead branches. In other words a typical unpopular popular front.

A growing problem for the SWP is the stresses and strains of keeping two ‘parties’ running in parallel - itself and Respect. The SWP considers itself to be the revolutionary party and in Respect it cherry-picks recruits. But its comrades are human and are more and more suffering from burn-out. Hence, while the SWP gains because of Respect, it also loses because of Respect.

Despite Thornett and Lister resigning from the Respect officers’ group - complaining that all real decisions are taken behind closed doors, in secret deals hatched between the likes of John Rees and George Galloway - the comrades have issued no public statement. The working class movement is therefore left uninformed about the reality of Respect and the ISG’s attitude.

There are big differences opening up within the Thornett group. For example, comrades in Birmingham remain deeply committed to Respect. The latest edition of Socialist Resistance carries a piece by Bob Whitehead claiming that Respect has an “outside chance” of increasing its council seats in Birmingham from two to four in the May 3 elections (February-March).

Meanwhile in London and in other places the ISG has begun looking for political engagement in pastures new. But campaigning around ecology and global warming is surely no substitute for a party project, no matter how flawed.

Clearly the ISG is not only divided, but disorientated. Having already lost its membership in Scotland after they refused to stay in the Scottish Socialist Party, it is now in danger of further fragmentation.

Read on: Respect The rest of the left Weekly Worker archive

Print this page