There is an interview with Lindsey German in the Pink News in which she explains why she is standing for election. In it she bigs up her pro-LGBT credentials as you might expect. Nothing wrong with that. Then she decides to jump on the “Galloway homophobe by association” bandwagon. Here is what she has to say.

I think that our Muslim vote has been split and the more extreme elements have probably gone over to support George Galloway.
Last year there was a bit of a split in the party because we directed a lot of funds into having our own gay float.
We though that it was important to show that if you support one minority you should support all minorities.
George had an issue with putting too much money into the float which was one of the things that divided us as I felt that it was important.

It is such obvious drivel that there is no point doing a detailed rebuttal of it. Instead here is what I wrote just after the Respect 2005 conference.

Lindsey German really set the tone by accusing Socialist Resistance of being Islamophobic for raising the issue of the omission of LGBT rights from the manifesto. She shifted the whole debate from a serious weakness in the manifesto to just how Islamophobic it is to raise any criticism.

What happened was that Alan Thornett had been commissioned to write the manifesto. He included a section about supporting LGBT rights which was approved by the National Council. Somewhere between Alan’s computer and the commercial printer this section was excised. A Socialist Resistance supporter raised this at conference. He didn’t suggest that all Respect members had to become LGBT. He didn’t say that this was clear evidence of rampant Muslim homophobia. His tack was that this was an omission and that it must not happen again. For reasonable people this should not of been a problem. “Oops. That was a silly mistake” would have cleared it up. Instead we were treated to a glimpse of the verbal thuggery with which a section of the Respect leadership felt appropriate to use against criticism.  It was a clear bloc between the SWP’s leadership and George Galloway.

As a footnote the Respect presence on Pride that year was a handful of SR supporters and a few other people but at that point accusations of Islamophobia were a much more useful stick than LGBT rights with which to beat those of us who disagreed with that notion of building an organisation.

Call it petulance but that selective version of history has helped me make up my mind about who to give my first mayoral preference to.

39 responses to “Memory plays tricks on mayoral candidate”

  1. The SWP could have taught Uncle Joe a thing or two about re-writing history and, let’s face it, if the SWP cc announced that carrots were objectively pro-imperialist, most of the membership would repeat the line (and the convoluted explanation fthat came with it) without batting an eyelid.

    Like

  2. You are right Liam. It is complete drivel. Indeed what makes the whole thing such a sad joke is that after all the effort to get the float onto Pride the National Office couldn’t be bothered to put a picture and report on the website – let alone a copy of the leaflet distributed.

    Yet when GG raised this failure to trumpet what should have been an unalloyed success he was denounced – first in whispered tones behind raised hands and later more openly as pandering to homophobia.

    Sadly Lindsey’s grubby little play for a few votes pandering to Isalmophobic stereotypes is where you end up when you refuse to argue politically but instead rely on slurs and inuendo.

    Like

  3. You weren’t going to vote German anyway. This is just another attempt to discredit German and is based on no political analysis of the direction that Renewal is heading. Everyone else can see this except the ISG who have invested so much in Galloway.

    The fact that the SWP made every effort to have a Respect float on Pride while Galloway and his supporters made little or no contribution at all just blows your accusation that German did not want to be seen supporting gay rights in Respect in case it offended sections of the Muslim community.

    You obviously don’t think Galloways recent remarks about gays in Iran are symptomatic of his move towards placating those religious supporters of Renewal who do not want to have any association with gay liberation. Germans remark is in relation to Galloways aquiesance and stupidity.

    That’s your choice but if you think the ISG are going to have any influence in Renewal by excusing Galloways mistakes then the future looks bleak for Renewal.

    Like

  4. It’s not an attempt to discredit German. German is discredited by it.
    German let’s not forget, was the one who said abandoning the struggle for lesbian and gay rights was OK because it was not a “shibboleth”.
    Lesbian and gay rights were the left out of the 2005 manifesto in exactly the way described above.
    Where it all falls apart for Respect Renewal is that GG was only implementing the shameful policy originated by German. He supported ditching gay rights from the manifesto, was standoffish at best about the Pride float and his subsequent remarks about the “pink fringe” of the pro-war movement were homophobic.
    It all explains why neither side is supportable.

    Like

  5. Liam – even SUN puts up the whole printed question & answer from LG. You really ought to at least meet their low standards. But, more than that, frankly you should include the question before when LG says:
    “If you look at many ethnic minorities, particularly the Muslims in London, they’re the poorest, they have the worst education, the worst housing and some of the worst jobs.
    “We should be trying to bring their standard of living up, that’s the sort of integration I want to see.”

    But, even with the extremely poor editing of this interview (they called LG “Mr Lindsay” for god’s sake), in which it is obvious that answers have been cut & pasted out of their original context, LG’s reply is very obviously not “Islamophobic” or “pandering” etc. What she says, very clearly is that the Muslim community is no different from any other community in that the majority don’t really care if people are gay or not but that there are extremists – just like in other religious communities – who are homophobic.

    As for the specific claims: that the more “extremist”/conservative elements from the Muslim community have gone with Galloway – this is debatable but it’s certainly neither an unreasonable nor Islamophobic argument. And it can be tested by looking at the political character of the organizations and individuals who tend to support each side in the split. Ritual denunciation without proof does nothing to shed light.

    Similarly, the shock and horror that LG says there was “a bit of a split” about the cost of placing a float in the Pride Parade. I just re-read GG’s argument in his letter (and I’m sure there were other discussions prior to this. I don’t believe that letter’s contents just appeared out of the blue). His argument is clearly fourfold: 1) he casts doubt on the fact that Pride should have been prioritized over two cultural festivals, the Mela and a Latin American cultural festival. 2) he expresses concern that Pride cost so much money and didn’t raise any (though he doesn’t indicate how it might have raised the cost of the float. 3) he feels that Respect should have publicized the intervention externally to the media. And 4) he feels that elected representatives were put under an unreasonable amount of pressure to be on the Respect float.

    Now, it seems to me that it is entirely reasonable to characterize this a “a bit of a split” or a bit of an argument, since GG clearly has a number of issues with the Pride festival – including that it should have been a priority at all (else why compare it negatively to Mela and the LA festival?). Of all four of his argument, saying that Pride should have been given a higher media profile seems the most fair, frankly. Since Respect had, at its previous conference agreed to prioritize pushing out beyond it’s base/stronghold in the Muslim community (and the concrete manifestations of that were OFFU and Pride), this criticism of OFFU and Pride were an attack on that strategy and on those priorities. I don’t see how LG’s argument contradicts what GG himself has written.

    Like

  6. One last point – Liam I think it’s just wrong to compare the argument from 2005 with that in 2007 for the simple reason that these things – strategic priorities – are context driven. In 2005 what was key was to focus on ways to consolidate a base in the Muslim community. In 2007 the SWP and allies identified that the key next step was to push outwards from the Muslim community and saw what they believed to be a tendency towards retrenchment and a growing conservatism if the beachhead established wasn’t expanded.
    In a more extreme example, to highlight the point, it’s like the call for a general strike – socialist always support general strikes and fight for them where possible. It isn’t always the time to raise it as the top slogan to move forward. It’s context driven.

    Like

  7. “Call it petulance but that selective version of history has helped me make up my mind about who to give my first mayoral preference to.”

    Call it petulance, but your calling for a vote for a mayor who backs the killers of Jean Charles de Menezes helped me make up my mind about which faction of Respect to support.

    Like

  8. The allegation of extremists supporting Galloway is interesting.
    Particularly given the Airplane Plot Trial at Woolwich Crown Court,and the story to emerge after the verdict.

    Like

  9. Looking at some of the SWP comments on this thread, it appears that “shortness of memory” isn’t only afflicting Ms German.

    I was at 2005 Respect conference and remember the unpleasantness around the discussion on the omission from the manifesto of LGBT rights only too well. For German to so cynically attempt to rewrite her part in it really says it all.

    “We thought that it was important to show that if you support one minority you should support all minorities.” The sheer cheek of this statement is quite breathtaking.

    Like

  10. “For German to so cynically attempt to rewrite her part in it really says it all.”

    Um, she doesn’t say anything about the 2005 conference. You’re attempting to rewrite her comments to suit your argument.

    Like

  11. “strategic priorities – are context driven” . Up to a point and some things are non-negotiable.

    This was not a big row over tactics, principle or programme. An employee decided to edit a manifesto that had been agreed by the political leadership of Respect. That’s all. A fairly trivial incident could have been dealt with pretty quickly but instead it was used as an opportunity to warn off all potential dissidents and critic. It was an insight into a very ugly methodology.

    The rediscovery of the importance of LGBT issues only happened when GG drew attention to Respect’s lack of readiness to fight an election last summer. That’s not a good position from which to claim the moral, strategic or tactical high ground.

    Like

  12. Worth noting the way that redbedhead tries to re-cast German’s button-pushing use of the word “extremist” by calling it “extremist/conservative”.

    If she’d meant conservative, she could’ve said conservative. She’s supposed to have an understanding of the bourgeois media and of the impact of the langauge used about minorities.

    She chose to say “extremist”. You can’t cast it any other way. And it’s dishonest for you to try.

    This *is* pandering to Islamophobia; I would once again urge people to read the words of the only Muslim to write on left wing blogs about what Lindsey has said. Go to SU and read “TH Respect Survivor” and then ask yourself why a young Muslim activist, an SWP member only last year, is so angry at what’s been said and feels so betrayed by German.

    Like

  13. Er……I know she doesn’t mention the 2005 Conference. She wouldn’t….

    Like

  14. Tony – ‘extreme’, not ‘extremist’. Not that I’m disagreeing with you – in a country like this, at a time like this, it’s (at best) grossly irresponsible for any white politician to label Muslims [s]he disagrees with as ‘extreme’.

    Like

  15. tonyc – I disagree. But, of course, as with everyone who disagrees with you, I suppose you will again call me a liar. Because only you hold the chalice of honesty or decent intentions.

    And, as for TH Respect Survivor – I read their input and it frankly sounds like a rant of someone who is wound up with factional energy. He/she wildly distorts what is written in the interview. Do I dispute that they feel angry? No. Do I think that what they say is true. Also, no.

    But more than all this, it is a bit hypocritical that you all get so worked into a froth over this particular interview when the RR people (I won’t claim that you tonyc did personally because I don’t remember) were not at all concerned about Galloway’s problematic (not homophobic) portrayal of the case of Mehdi Kazemi, about GG’s use of his column to discuss Kylie Minogue’s ass. In other words – he is an imperfect being who doesn’t always say the exact right thing. But the general approach is, and should be, which side is he on? Is he resisting imperialism? Is he trying to use his position to further the struggle against injustice? etc.

    However, with LG, because of the split, you apply different criteria. The approach to the election on SUN is a bit like political trainspotting. What error did LG or Respect/Left List make today. Ooh, they didn’t put “vote Ken 2nd preference” on their leaflet – let’s headline that! (even though it is all over their material, in every interview, etc. etc). And it’s in the arguments people make – like TLC and TH Respect Survivor that because LG is imperfect she doesn’t deserve the vote. What? So, Ken is better politically than L. German? This is sectarianism, frankly.

    Like

  16. Liam – I won’t pretend to be able to speak in detail about the specifics of how the row you mention played out. Someone else will have to take up that one and I’m prepared to admit having misspoken.

    However (there’s always a however): “The rediscovery of the importance of LGBT issues only happened when GG drew attention to Respect’s lack of readiness to fight an election last summer.”

    Since the float and the “pressure” to get councillors on it happened some months earlier, I think your timeline is off. And I think this is significant because of what I said earlier about a conception directed towards the need to reach out beyond the base.

    Like

  17. Quite honestly, the arguement that we have to agree with TH Respect Survivor because he’s a muslim is not the basis for a political arguement. By the same token that would mean everyone would have to agree with my opinion about Galloways remarks about gays in Iran because I happen to be a gay man. We’re socialists and as such we should be argueing from that perspective.

    It is irrefutable that German has always challenged islamophobia and supported gay rights. For anyone to argue otherwise is just mischief making of the most sectarian kind. But don’t let that stop you having another go at discrediting the Left List because that’s what this is all about.

    It’s sad really because, as Renewal members keep reminding us, Livingstone is very unpopular because of his neo-liberal policies which have resulted in the left needing all the support it can get in the face of stiff competition from the right.

    Like

  18. It is irrefutable that German has always challenged islamophobia and supported gay rights.

    It’s also irrefutable that, on different occasions, she’s given the impression to the naive outside observer that she opposed Islamophobia to the exclusion of supporting gay rights, or more recently vice versa. Bending the stick is good Leninist practice, apparently, but there comes a point where it’s hard to distinguish from two-faced opportunism.

    Like

  19. Mike says: “Call it petulance, but your calling for a vote for a mayor who backs the killers of Jean Charles de Menezes helped me make up my mind about which faction of Respect to support.”

    But this is bizarre because that is precisely what the SWP Left List is calling for. I don’t really think Mike can support either faction of the old Respect.

    Like

  20. Laim, if your theory about Lindsey and LGBT rights is correct, who do you think she was pandering to in 2005?

    Would it not be leading members of Respect Renewal?

    Do you really think it is unreasonable for an officer of Respect to have called up George Galloway three times to suggest he prioritising Gay pride? Something that he complained about vociferously, especially given that the Socialist Resistance motion on LGBT rights was passed unaminously at Respect’s conference. A Respect MP being accountable to Respect Conference – no wonder there was war!

    Like

  21. Matthew, Respect/Left List is calling for a vote AGAINST Boris which means giving critical support for Ken without illusions.

    Respect/Left List is standing a socialist candidate for mayor to also put forward the idea of an alternative politics and build independent working class politics.

    The London Green Party calls for more police, solving the climate crisis through small and green capitalism, and opposed the call to sack Sir Ian Blair over De Menezezs, with Jenny Jones putting the argument that Sir Ian made the mess, maybe he’s the best guy to sort it out.

    Renewal in general opposes the idea of standing a socialist candidate for mayor and many of it’s supporters say it’s not enough to call for a vote for Ken, you must suppress any criticism of Livingstone because this aids the tories, and are sewing illusions in Ken.

    Like

  22. Nice smear Adamski. I suggest you name which “leading members of Respect Renewal” are homophobic – or shut up.

    And don’t invent things like three phone calls from an officer of Respect “to suggest prioritising Gay pride” or questions of accountability to Respect conference. Good to see you’re following the tops of the SWP in mendacity, though.

    Like

  23. “you must suppress any criticism of Livingstone because this aids the tories” – more lies Adamski.

    Like

  24. “And don’t invent things like three phone calls from an officer of Respect “to suggest prioritising Gay pride”

    Er, Nas, George Galloway in his famous letter to the NC of Respect complains that he was called 3 times about attending Pride.

    So where is the lie or invention?

    Like

  25. “Quite honestly, the arguement that we have to agree with TH Respect Survivor because he’s a muslim is not the basis for a political arguement.”

    Ray, given that no one made that argument, why are you claiming they did?

    Are you completely incapable of arguing with what people actually say?

    Like

  26. tonyc said, “Go to SU and read “TH Respect Survivor” and then ask yourself why a young Muslim activist, an SWP member only last year, is so angry at what’s been said and feels so betrayed by German.”

    Ray said, “Quite honestly, the arguement that we have to agree with TH Respect Survivor because he’s a muslim is not the basis for a political arguement.”

    tonyc said, “Ray, given that no one made that argument, why are you claiming they did?

    Are you completely incapable of arguing with what people actually say?”

    Yes you did and no I’m not.

    Like

  27. To be honest, let’s not forget the whole Galloway “sodomy for 16 year olds” debacle, now, I’m not trying to say (on the basis of this quote) that Galloway is homophobic, just in the same way, you can not claim LG is either ‘pandering’ to Islamophobia or has become Islamophobic.

    Like

  28. Ray: read your little syollogism again. Tonyc is right and you are not. Why do you leave out TH Respect Survivor’s membership of the SWP, thus distorting the argument? It’s a dishonest method and you should drop it.

    Johnny Rook: let’s not forget the Zinoviev letter while we’re about it. Or the president of Iran calling for Israel to be wiped off the map. Or anyone of a number of facts that are anything but.

    Like

  29. Galloway wrote that, “It would be a serious mistake to read off someone’s commitment to equality from their willingness to be dancing on the back of a truck on the Pride parade.”

    While out near St Pauls on Thursday late afternoon I came across the Renewal campaign bus blaring out loud music (Desmond Dekker). If loud music and dancing hasn’t stopped those leading members of Renewal from supporting their campaign bus what was it that detered them from joining the Pride float?

    Galloways arguement is the same nonsense that the Stalinist left used to come out with before they belatedly embraced gay liberation. In other words, dancing and loud music aren’t legitimate reasons for excusing leading Respect members from promoting Respect at a 100,000+ strong celebration for the largest oppressed minority in the UK. It’s simply an excuse to pander to homophobia among those who refused to attend Pride. If those leading members that Galloway excused in his letter are now in Renewal then the arguement that it has shifted to the right is further supported.

    Like

  30. TonyC is making claims.

    After what she did to Respect, after what she has assisted the state to do to Galloway, and after her disgusting comments to Pink News, she does not deserve the label “revolutionary”, let alone my vote.

    I don’t apply a purity test to people who describe themselves as “socialists” like the AWL does.

    But I won’t reward the wrecking behaviour of someone who has used her position to lie and distort and undermine the left.

    I’m not prepared to have voting privileges held up as a shibboleth by people who won’t even defend George Galloway.

    Comment by tonyc — 17 April, 2008 @ 10:14 pm

    Like

  31. Ray: “Galloways arguement is the same nonsense that the Stalinist left used to come out with before they belatedly embraced gay liberation.”

    Well many in the IS used to argue that homosexuality was a product of alienation that would disappear under socialism.

    That old homophobe John Sullivan even satirised the conveersion of the IS/SWP to supporting gay rights in a scurrilous poem I wont repeat.

    I beleive the IS/SWP and the offical CP adopted gay rights at around the same time

    Like

  32. Clever rebuttle there Andy! Cos the IS were still formulating their position on gay liberation in the 70’s that justifies Galloways comment in his letter of 2007. Is that what you’re argueing? It certainly seems so.

    Like

  33. No Ray, my point is that you claim the official communist parties made a belated commitment to gay rights, my point is that they adopted gay rights at the same time as the Trot left.

    Like

  34. in a fit of ennui i somehow ended up on Engage (I blame Mark Elf actually). Bit shocked to read about Sian Berry’s position on the boycott. Mainly because I know some Green Party people very strong on Palestinian rights…

    http://www.engageonline.org.uk/blog/article.php?id=1833

    Like

  35. Hi Liam.

    Given that the ISG is backing Sian Berry in these elections, and that we have been told Renewal has no agreed line on the mayoral election, I’m sure you’ll be as surprised as me to find that Hanif Abdulmuhit is claiming that:

    Respect is asking its voters to back Ken for Mayor

    http://www.abdulmuhit.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=84&Itemid=1

    Like

  36. johng,

    If you read the comments of the link you cite, you’ll read that Sian is saying that she does support the boycott and that she did not make the comments attributed to her.

    Matt

    Like

  37. I’m not prepared to have voting privileges held up as a shibboleth by people who won’t even defend George Galloway.

    The oaf who wrote that, is he Georges son or something.\Since whan has support for a corrupt stalinist been an acid test.

    Like

  38. Liam: you are obviously correct that this is an example of extreme hypocisy on the part of Ms German and the SWP…but the simple fact is that the ISG/”Socialist Resistance” went along with it at the time (or, at the very least, didn’t publicly object)…and I’m *certain* that Mr G. Galloway (who you now support against the SWP) would still endorse German’s refusal to treat gay rights as a “shibboleth”.

    Like

  39. “I was very surprised to see a letter from three Tower Hamlets councillors purporting to represent my party, Respect…”

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/apr/24/localgovernment.georgegalloway

    Nevermind German, now Galloway is claiming Respect is his party. The ego has landed! Thank god he ditched us!

    Like

Leave a comment

Trending