Liam redux

Abrupt SWP change of tune about Bove and Besancenot

Here’s what Alex Callinicos had to say about the LCR’s decision to stand Olivier Besancenot as a presidential candidate in Socialist Worker in February. “The LCR could make this situation less farcical by withdrawing Besancenot and campaigning for Bove. This would probably be the best outcome, but the LCR majority are unlikely to do this…

Liam
1–2 minutes

Here’s what Alex Callinicos had to say about the LCR’s decision to stand Olivier Besancenot as a presidential candidate in Socialist Worker in February.

“The LCR could make this situation less farcical by withdrawing Besancenot and campaigning for Bove. This would probably be the best outcome, but the LCR majority are unlikely to do this because they regard Bove as an unreliable maverick.” If you click on the label for this post you can find something I wrote at the time disagreeing with this view.

Here’s what Socialist Worker is saying this week: “Olivier Besancenot is the real alternative in France’s elections”.

What is behind the change of heart? That’s not explained. From being a sectarian wrecker Besancenot has transformed into the anti capitalist hero. Bove’s disappointing poll results and the contrast with Besancenot’s successful high profile campaign I’m sure have nothing to do with it. What genuinely bewilders me is how you can have an abrupt change of attitude like this and not bother saying why. The rightness or wrongness of the position is almost a secondary issue.

For a rather cynical perspective on this turnaround have a look at Marxsite. Or you can watch this video of the LCR’s Francois Duval explaining the Ligue’s reasoning.

7 responses to “Abrupt SWP change of tune about Bove and Besancenot”

  1. scribbled Avatar
    scribbled

    To be fair to the SWP, while I disagree with their arguments, I don’t think that they have executed much of a u-turn. My understanding of their position is that they wanted the LCR to back Bové as a unity candidate but would in the end back Besancenot if the LCR insisted on standing him. I could be wrong but I think that the official Cliffite group, socialisme par en bas, is following that line while the other Cliffite group is backing Bové.I don’t think it’s fundamentally unprinicpled for them to argue that the wider party they are in should back a different candidate but then fall in line when the wider party does something else. That’s surely a tactical question.As far as their underlying approach goes, I agree that it was wrong. It is important that the French left make it clear that they are not going to support a PS government. That said I don’t think it makes much odds whether they back Laguiller or Besancenot. Both make that clear. I think it is a serious mistake that the LCR and LO didn’t even consider running a joint candidate, aimed at gathering support for a new left wing formation.

    Like

    Reply
  2. Liam Mac Uaid Avatar
    Liam Mac Uaid

    Suggesting a candidate stands down and then praising him to the heavens looks like a u turn to me. While they are entitled to change their mind some explanation of the process wold have been helpful.As for LO my understanding is that they were not interested in a joint candidature.

    Like

    Reply
  3. scribbled Avatar
    scribbled

    I think the SWP’s standard issue hysteria is clouding your view. To me, it doesn’t really look as if much has changed.From the start their view was that they wanted the LCR to stand aside but if that didn’t happen they would support the LCR candidate. The ludicrous hyperbole about the wonders of Besancenot is just what passes for support in SWP circles. They’d be saying the same about whatever candidate they were voting for.On the LO, you may be right, but the LCR also made it fairly clear that they were looking for a “unity” candidate with the reformist forces to their right rather than with the LO. If I was in France I’d vote for one of them, but I don’t think it much matters which one. Both organisations have squandered a succession of chances to reshape French politics by launching a new left formation.

    Like

    Reply
  4. AN Avatar
    AN

    I think Scribbled is essentially correct here.The prblem is the hyperbole, and once that is stripped away, the tactical switch is defensible.

    Like

    Reply
  5. chjh Avatar
    chjh

    In the original article, Alex Callinicos went on to say: The process of building a new left in France on a principled basis has undeniably suffered a big setback. But this doesn’t alter the importance of the LCR, which embodies the best of the French revolutionary tradition and has been involved in every major struggle from 1968 onwards.Splitting the LCR won’t improve the situation. On the contrary, it will weaken one of the main instruments for renewing the French left.Those who have fought unsuccessfully inside the LCR to support a unitary candidate need to stick with the organisation. This will mean campaigning for Besancenot on the understanding that this is just one battle in a much longer war.How is this a change of heart? We wanted a unitary candidate; if that didn’t come off, then we would support Besancenot. Did you not want a unitary candidate? Was it better to have five ‘far left’ candidates competing against each other?

    Like

    Reply
  6. Liam Mac Uaid Avatar
    Liam Mac Uaid

    That’s a bit of a red herring CHJH. If you watch the video you’ll see that the LCR majority was willing to make all sorts of concessions to permit a unitary candidate. Cde Callinicos’ change of attitude was welcome. But, as I’ve said, the absence of an explanation for such a public change of mind is not something that’s customary in any reflective political tradition.

    Like

    Reply
  7. chjh Avatar
    chjh

    My point was that we didn’t have a change of attitude – if there wasn’t going to be a unitary candidate, we would back Besancenot. Who got an excellent result, though in the context of bad news for the left overall.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment

Trending