The school attracted 100 people. Lots of them were unfamiliar faces and there was significant representation from Hands of Venezuela and the Bolivia Solidarity campaign.

Broadly speaking there was very little disagreement between the comrades who are active in solidarity work on the nature of the processes in Bolivia and Venezuela. At the moment Chavez is playing a positive role, though this may change. While there is no shortage of small Marxist groups the lack of a mass revolutionary party is a serious cause for concern. The bourgeiosie is on the defensive but will make a bid to recover governmental power, most likely through a war of attrition similar to that conducted against the Sandinistas. It’s at this point were autonomous armed revolutionary organisations have an opportunity to deepen the revolution. In Bolivia the mass organisation are in advance of the government while in Venezuela the government is sometimes in advance of the masses.

Our friends from the AWL turned up to support the contention of the International Bolshevik Tendency (I don’t know who they are either) that Chavez is a “bourgeois bonapartist”. Their courage is admirable. Not many people have the gumption to say that sort of nonsense out loud in public and accept the riducule.

The RCG did turn up. However instead of sending some experienced people to denounce us they sent a couple of young people. They hadn’t been told that their organisation had written to the Cuban goverment suggesting that they prevent Celia Hart from leaving the country. I felt a bit mean because they did look hurt. One of their fellow travellers stayed and we showed him the e mail. He said he’d got back into politics after 20 years on account of the Iraq war. He’d previously been in Mosley’s youth organisation, the National Front and the Empire Loyalists. Only change is constant.

I think that only one or two other groups on the British left could have organised an event of this sort. It’s starting point was the necessity of developing a well informed and critically thinking solidarity movement. I’m told by way of contrast that at Marxism last year discussion focussed almost entirely on criticism of Chavez’s shortcomings rather than solidarity. As is our way currents with which we disagree were given speaking rights and their points were addressed in a serious way. We are also able to put together platforms of independently minded people whose main purpose is to develop a real understanding of the processes at work and that’s what we did yesterday.

8 responses to “A modest success”

  1. LiamI believe the IBT are a split from the Sparts

    Like

  2. Their politics are more spart than the sparts, but they have the benefit of possessing some basic social skills.

    Like

  3. Well, I’m not sure if I agree with you that there is/was “very little disagreement between the comrades who are active in solidarity work on the nature of the processes in Bolivia and Venezuela”. I’m involved in the Bolivia Solidarity Campaign, and went on the April delegation to Bolivia.While some present the idea of a “process” going on in Bolivia, what is really the case is that the government is already in direct conflict with social movements – not only failing to fulfil their demands, but also attacking their demonstrations. Morales is not really a partner in the movement. Michael Lowy’s understanding of the composition of the MAS party as a social-movement coalition was basically false.Most people with contacts in Bolivia (my best contact was recently locked up for organizing a blockade) think that Morales is pretty crap. However, some in the B.S.C. say that even if Morales is a bit crap, the main thing is to “defend him against attacks by the BBC/imperialism/etc.”, not to support social movements against him. So, there is a debate going on.I could have a go at you for your position on Venezuela – (come on, we hardly turned up with the aim of supporting the IBT, and nor did you actually answer the argument). But instead, I’d like to say how pleasantly surprised I was that you allowed a decent, free, debate – indeed, in the opening discussion, several Workers’ Power/IBT/AWL comrades spoke before your lot! So thanks comrade…

    Like

  4. Liam Mac Uaid Avatar
    Liam Mac Uaid

    As for Morales it seemed clear to me that everyone accepts that he is lagging well behind the movements and that he may well not be in the job for long.About Venezuela the view SR supporters and Jorge put is supported by what I saw in the country.For us it’s an essential element of socialist democracy that opposing views are given a fair hearing otherwise it’s not a real discussion. There are lots of things people can go to if they want to be told what to think.

    Like

  5. Good event.As for Morales it seemed clear to me that everyone accepts that he is lagging well behind the movements and that he may well not be in the job for long.I suppose it depends on what you mean by ‘for long’ I suppose, but there is no prospect in the near future of Morales being overthrown by the social movements.The leadership of the social movements are firmly opposed to the Morales government – but their ability to mobilise the ‘man in the street’ is very weak indeed in comparison to what it was last year.When they called a general strike earier in the year a few hundred came out and it was a great tactical mistake.Morales is definately having a honeymoon period from the population and there are is a large wieght of excpectations upon him. Personally I don’t expect him to be overthrown any time soon and he does have the support of the majority of the country, despite what the ‘advanced’ people may say about him.

    Like

  6. Sure, of course the social movements are not very powerful when the level of popular dissatisfaction is not high – even after Goni or Mesa were deposed, it was ages before the struggle started up again. Honeymoon periods are a nasty thingAnd Morales is probably even more stable than them – however, what makes the current situation interesting is that the COB leadership and some of the social movements are planning to build a political party. While this so far has been organized badly (it was meant to be set up in time for the elections, and hasn’t been), there is obviously potential.The fact that people like Olivera, Roberto de la Cruz, Mayor Vargas and so on have been excluded from the elections is bound to open up some people’s eyes – and, indeed, accentuate the need for a workers’ party.There certainly is a lot of potential to dial into, since I don’t doubt that the Bolivian masses can be ‘reawoken’. While there are some big struggles now, I think it may be a while before such a movement can coordinate itself and mobilize mass support.

    Like

  7. I think it would be a mistake to write Morales off. it would also be a istake to assume that the leadership of the social movements are automticaly correct just becasue they are not in government.It would be rash to prematurley provoke a confrontation with the right that would tempt them to remove Morales, and remember that Lula has already used brazilian troops in removing a left governmnet In Haiti.

    Like

  8. David, I would say that when Morales was elected (with a massive majority including in the most revolutionary parts of the country, like nearly 70% in El Alto), there was an attitude of wait and see on the part of the workers and peasants movement(I really hate this postmodern talk of “social movements” and scuh like). Now that has changed into more support for him after his government has introduced some measures which, though moderate, have been seen as steps forward and have provoked the rage of the oligarchy and the multinationals.The workers need their own party, but they will not be built if their leaders do not understand the relationship between the mass movement of workers and peasants and how to relate to that (and I mean mainly the MAS).

    Like

Leave a reply to David Broder Cancel reply

Trending