There are a couple of articles in this week’s issue of Socialist Worker on the Respect split. They both have a delusional quality to them. The editorial is called “The political reasons for the division in Respect“
It jumps straight into the historical parallel that has been on everyone’s lips because it is so obviously relevant on every level. In 1903 the Russian Mensheviks broke with the Bolsheviks, seemingly over the wording of a constitution and personal antagonism with Lenin. In reality the split centred on the Mensheviks’ retreat from the necessity of revolution.
…The split in Respect is no different from this historical pattern.
The non-SWP side are the Mensheviks and they have an explanation why pretty much all the active members of the National Council who are not in the SWP are not on their side
The presence of people with a track record on the left among those now resorting to red-baiting is not unusual.
Naturally we are all convinced that Britain is at the very centre of radical politics on the planet at the moment. This is where the 21st century’s most combative working class is blessed with the most farsighted and imaginative vanguard leadership. That’s why the SWP are the Bolsheviks and everyone else is a hopeless reformist just waiting to support the counter revolution when the time is right.
Fabricating parallels with the Russian Revolution only serves one purpose. It reassures the membership that they are the sole keepers of revolutionary truth. You can read the last few issues of Socialist Worker from cover to cover and not find out what the detailed facts of the split process were. There is no mention of George Galloway’s mild criticisms of the SWP’s methodology. You’ll see no attempt to explain why Respect’s real membership has been in decline. Bluster, distortion and presenting the SWP as the red-baited victims don’t really constitute a sophisticated counter-argument. The fact is that the vast majority of active Respect members not in the SWP’s orbit are willing to separate from them. Not just that. People who left Respect or dropped out of activity due to their frustration with the SWP’s techniques are now re-joining.
The other piece, What’s behind the crisis in Respect? by Alex Callinicos, takes a Europe wide look at the various class struggle formations. It is more sophisticated than the editorial but also refuses to deal with the critique of the SWP’s methodology. It evens throws away the opportunity to explain the SWP’s role in some of the countries to which it refers.
Right across Europe the radical left is in crisis.
The most extreme case is the Scottish Socialist Party, which has effectively collapsed since a faction within the leadership decided to drive Tommy Sheridan out.
The SWP’s part in that bit of history was significant but not referred to. Nor was the SWP’s way of working inside the SSP which also antagonised much of the organisation. Have a look at the video of Frances Curran talking about their feelings after the SSP split to get a sense of it.
Callinicos refers to Rifondazione Comunista’s very negative attitude to the was in Afghanistan and draws a general conclusion about the nature of the new parties.
In Italy the leadership of Rifondazione Comunista is participating in a centre left government that is trying to implement neoliberal policies and has committed troops to Nato’s occupation of Afghanistan
…the radical left parties are coalitions composed of distinct political forces often with very different traditions. This is an important part of their attraction, but it also makes them potentially fragile.
One way you can start to make these formations less fragile is by having a frank and open discussion about what their programme is. This is something that it not one of the dominant elements in the SWP’s tradition but the Italian experience vividly shows that unless the organisation is won to even a fairly minimal set of programmatic conditions on imperialism, collaboration with neo-liberal parties and an economic fight back the elements of the coalition will fragment. These were some of the issues that were sticking points for the LCR during the French elections and they were vindicated.
Attitudes to democratic decision-making and political accountability have proved to be very different. You can’t deny that. Some people prefer to have all the decisions made in advance by SWP caucuses and for democracy to be a formality and the rest of us don’t
The process of realigning the British left will continue despite the setback Respect has suffered. Yes but the SWP will not be part of that process under its current leadership. By bringing its brand of bureaucratic centralism into Respect it destroyed it. For several years to it will be absolutely impossible for the SWP to be trusted as an organisation by anyone who is committed to building an alternative to Labourism. The good news is that Respect Renewal will be the home for everyone else who is up for it.
Liam redux 
Leave a reply to Andy Newman Cancel reply