Kevin Ovenden is a member of Respect’s leadership and works for George Galloway in Parliament. This is a video of his talk to the Socialist Resistance dayschool on the European experience of broad parties. He saved the controversial bit till the end.
Kevin Ovenden is a member of Respect’s leadership and works for George Galloway in Parliament. This is a video of his talk to the Socialist Resistance dayschool on the European experience of broad parties. He saved the controversial bit till the end.
Why is the bit at the end dubbed ‘controversial’.
I would entirely endorse Kevin’s argument. Respect is essentially a local party with a national profile. Its local base in East London and South Birmingham are both geographically significant – the Capital and a major connurbation – and demographically, predominantly Asian and Muslim.
Of course we should aspire to a national network but in less than two years there will be both a General Election, and London local elections where we defend our council seats in Tower Hamlets and Newham. Right now the overwhelmingly priority should be to centre all our activity in the 3, or 4, parliamentary seats we have a chance of winning and in the East End where we should both be defending our seats and winning new ones.
The fact that Respect indulges the fantasy of being a national party while ignoring the central importance of our two bases is the ‘controversial’ bit, not what Kevin is arguing.
Mark P
LikeLike
I would endorse that.
I thought Kevin’s talk was very good.
Respect has at the moment a tendency to combine conservatism with over-optimism.
We need to think of ourselves growing politically not geographically, and throwing ourselves into building the local strongholds will raise the real world practical issues that we need to respond to politically.
LikeLike
I think Liam is referring to Kevin’s comment that as the working class is facing an historic defeat with low levels of class struggle Respect needs to orientate itself to the centre left where breaking points from neo-liberalism will occur.
I think this would be disasterous for the left and in particular for Renewal. It would be a further shift to the right and perhaps that’s why there is a desire among revolutionaries in Respect to form a faction.
LikeLike
Kevin Ovenden: “We shouldn’t be surprised if breaking points with neo-liberalism happen a bit further to the right than we are used to or perhaps we would prefer.”
Ray as ever choses to define any attempt to grapple with the real world as a ‘shift to the right’. Well you are welcome to stay in your cosy bubble on the far left. But if there are breaks with neo-liberalism – whether trade union leaders organising migrant workers/calling for an amnesty or others in the Labour centre left rejecting marketisation and further privatisation – then any left of Labour project will need to relate positively to such developments. To not do so would be to cut ourselves of from that rejection of neo-liberalism with a holier-than-thou, we knew it all along attitude. That may be comforting but it is the politics of the propaganda sect rather than that of serious socialists.
I’d have thought you might have recognised the purchase such propagandism has on most working class people after your rather dismal outing in your previous Left List incarnation in London’s elections.
LikeLike
Then why call it, “controversial”, if it’s just run of the mill activity? It’s controversial because it’s a strategy that destroyed the left in labour and ultimately allowed the right to push through neo-liberal policies. Working with the centre left over an issue such as fighting the BNP is one thing but looking to them for answers to neo-liberalism is quite another.
The whole conception that the working class has faced a historic defeat and needs to look to (which really means) form alliances with the centre left is straight out of the Eurocomm manifesto. This isn’t facing reality it’s complete capitulation to defeat.
Respect wasn’t formed to capitulate to the ideology that the working class is dead. It was formed because there was a belief in socialism and the agency of the working class. This appears to be over for Kevin and some of the activists posting here.
LikeLike
Oh for goodness sake can’t you stick to the point for once.
The issue for a small organisation like Respect is quite simple. In under two years time 9 out of its12 councillors face local lections in Tower Hamelts and Newham. At the same time, quite possibly on the same day, its solitary MP will be contesting a new constituency and we will defending his seat with a new candidate. Realistically we stand a worthwhile chance in one, perhaps two Newham constituences to make it worth standing plus Salma Yaqoob in Birmingham.
With that very tight timeframe do we indulge the fantasy that we are a national party. Or we do we seek to build a natioonal profile out of two crucial localities.
Just for once drop all the fantasy-politics rhetoric and face up to some harsh realities and difficult choices. Get it wrong and either way there won’t be very much left to fight over.
Mark P
LikeLike
Ray
That’s it: Just stick to the dogma, don’t listen and adopt a method where everything has happened before and all that’s needed is to locate the correct historical denunciation.
It really is very simple and Mark P spells out what lies ahead of Respect over the next 22 months admirably.
My point about where the cleavages with social liberalism might occur and where the left should seek to position itself ought not to be a surprise to SWP members.
It was the party’s position three years ago as opposed to a policy of making anti-capitalism the line of division and emphasising regroupment of the existing far left. It’s still, as I understand it, your critique of the LCR majority in launching an anti-capitalist party rather making much more of an effort to engage the PCF, which would require looking further to the right than some in the LCR would prefer.
I am sympathetic to that position; I just don’t see why you think it no longer applies here.
In any case, we have valuable if limited foothold in a number of areas. Maintaining, deepening and realistically extending those bases is a very tough job, but a number of us feel it’s worthwhile and can contribute to the left.
LikeLike
It’s 10 out of 12 councillors up for election in 2010 Mark P – Salma Yaqoob is also up for election in Brum.
I do think it would be wrong to solely focus on those areas where Respect is strongest though Mark. One of the things that would make Respect more credible is if it can shed itself of the image that it is located and only interested in a couple of (predominantly muslim) areas. So it is important that Respect branches in places like Bristol also fight elections in their areas and contribute to the development of Respect’s profile.
As for alliances with whatever left/right point in social democracy breaks are occuring, that’s just a practical decision. It can shift due to circumstances and as much as Ray is wrong to say it is a matter of principle it is also wrong to say it is definitely around a particular current. Anything can happen in the Labour Party over the next two years as they lurch seemingly inevitably towards electoral defeat.
LikeLike
Prinkipo. I don’t disagree with strengthening in other areas, who would?
But right now we are a very small organisation which in two years time if we’ve lost our MP, a chunk of councillors, won’t add up to very much. I’m not convinced we should proceed without that as our central objective now, building on the crucial breakthrough we have. In 24 months if we have more councillors, an MP or two then the priority becomes spreading outwards, not now.
If we try to do both with the current state of Respect we face the danger of losing what we’ve got and not gaining very much to compensate. Lets face up to that choice and make the difficult decisions. In the past year at best we’ve moved forward a little, we’re certainly not well-placed currently to run the kinds of campaigns we need to in 2010 in Tower Hamlets, Newham and South Birmingham. To concentrate the minds I would suggest that is all that matters, put everything else on hold for 24 months.
Mark P
LikeLike
Prinkipo Exile
I too don’t think it’s a question of focusing solely on the three areas where we already have elected representatives.
The point you make about Bristol is important. There are local elections in Bristol next year. There is a very good branch of Respect. It has managed both to have a profile across the left (broadly defined) city wide, partly by building on the political capital embodied in Jerry Hicks, and, critically, to have a serious ongoing presence in two, perhaps three, wards.
They have a plan between now and the elections next year and into 2010 for how to take that forward. The same is true of Manchester.
I think the point is that all initiatives and all deployment of meagre national resources have to be bent around this political reality of Respect.
Of course there are members who live in other places and they should feel encouraged to take what fits from experiences such as Manchester’s and Bristol’s and attempt to build a rooted presence in their areas.
But the smaller you are, the more you have to prioritise. If in 22 months time Respect can maintain or extend its electoral base, then it would be a major contribution to strengthening the left and would enable us to play significant role in the debates and relalignments which you rightly say are going to emerge in all sorts of unexpected ways.
LikeLike
What struck me was really the lack of any fundamental re-think of where Respect went wrong.
As Kevin said he agreed with its programmatic basis – and abandonment of the public avowel of socialism and working class politics and its embracement of something else.
But that’s the whole problem.
The experience of broad parties over the last 10 years or so, is that they blow up after a couple of elections, leading to an ever deeper marginalisation of the left.
What does it take to make people learn?
LikeLike
Bill j
But perhaps that’s because we in Respect have a different view. We don’t see the split last year as the end of Respect.
We think it can play a role in the development of the left and of working class politics.
We’ll see how that plays out over the next 22 months.
LikeLike
This is a very encouraging discussion.
Obviously everyone is in favour of Resect expanding in areas like Bristol and Macnhester, where it already has a profile, and i am relatively confident of the prospects of our newly forming branch in Swindon.
In some ways it does seem like almost a year after Galloway’s letter, little has moved on. But in reality, just surviving that period as anorganisation, able to use the Respect name, and fighting the may elections as respect and holding up the vote in Easy London and Birmingham was a significant success. To coin a phrase Linda taafe used recently, “surviving with our heads held high”.
So it is fair to say that the clock starting ticking after the May elections, and we have just less than two years to get it right.
The important thing to realise is that there is already a debate opening up in the movement – witness the GMB’s decision to remove support from most of their sponsored MPs – the critique of neo-liberalism from Compass, and policy initiatives like the LEAP conference of economists from the LRC.
But respect has something that none of these other forces have – an independent electoral base founded on local activism.
That means that we do have a standing to involve ourselves in that developing debate about alternatives to neo-liberalism.
So yes, concentrate on local activism. I would like to see Resect take a leaf out of the book of the Communist party in the 1930s, when they produced pamplets like “The communist plan for Stepney”.
A set of policy pledges from respect for Tower Hamlets, imagineing what a respect run council and a plan for imprioving life in East London, with a proper launch and PR could set us in pole position for the council
(see London strategic voter – if we can get accross the message that Resepct is the best tacticall vote for progressive Green and Lib dem voters as well as labour voters, we are in a brilliant position)
But more than that – our Respect party has a great deal of expertise and talent, and we should be developing national spokespeople and pushing them as far as we can into the mainstream political agenda.
If we can get work togather to nget a higher media profile for Abjol Miah and salma Yaqoob then we will be well placed to get through the next key stage, the 2010 elections.
LikeLike
Quite interesting on why Respect split. Kevin doesn’t see it as the SWP culture
but Kevin sees housing campaigns, anti-racist struggles as fronts of struggle as united fronts where revolutionary socialists are active with workers who may have a whole set of positions on politics for the achievement of specific goals.
Why do we do this?
Because it is important to win on these specific campaigns and also to strengthen the organisation, fighting capacity and confidence of the working class.
An electoral challenge shuld be judged by the same criteria- does this challenge help win on specific action points, does it help strengthen working class confidence, fighting capacity and organisation?
If Respect can win signficant support in working class communities and involve those workers in its policies and practices (not telling them what to think or treat them as elkection fodder or footsoldiers) then it may become worthy of support.
This does mean raising class politics as Kevin recognises in his tale about linking workers, Bengali housewives and globalisation struggles.
But for this to happen I still think it needs to transform itself into an organisation that puts class struggle first, sinks roots in those communites and workplaces and engage in campaigns to win the campaigns not win people to Respect.
If it begins to do that then socialists should work alongside and perhaps even within it. I’m not convinced yet but I genuinely wish the comrades all the best in their honest accounting and I believe open-minded approach to matters of politics.
LikeLike
I don’t see any contradiction between strengthening the local bases and building nationally. The one will reinforce the other. At a practical level too, in election campaigns some people will go and do the rounds in the strong local bases and other won’t, but could have some activities in their own localities. We also need to present ourselves as a national organisation, in order to relate to other national groupings (unions and the left).
Any thoughts next year’s European elections?
Bill J on broad left groupings “blowing up”: I really think that the example of Portugal is generally positive (but not the only one that hasn’t blown up). In my opinion, it is not irrelevant that it was an initiative from the far left, but one with a strong emphasis on democracy and openness. They also had a big part in a victory – the abortion referendum. The need for victories was another theme of Kevin’s talk.
LikeLike
I think the need for victories, to actually begin winning campaigns ad actins that actually ake a diference to people’s lives is crucial.
LikeLike
I can’t speak for Portugal. But the situation in Britain is pretty clear. Basically whenever the left has abandoned various aspects of the socialist programme to win votes its gone pear shaped each time. Generally after another electoral flop.
It’s no way to build the left – as practice proves.
LikeLike
“I don’t see any contradiction between strengthening the local bases and building nationally” Phil W
Politically no, in an organisation as small as Respect there surely is to all practical intents and purposes.
Personally I would rather in 2010 to have 12-15 councillors across East London boroughs, 4-5 councillors in Birmingham , George Galloway secures a sensational second victory in Poplar and is joined in Parliament by Respect’s first Muslim MP. Than have 20 tiny branches scattered randomly across England, flogging a paper no one outside the far Left takes very seriously and holding lots of rallies which not many turn up to.
I’m painting the two alternatives purposely starkly but I’m (and I entirely recognise I might be in a minority) entirely disintested in a Respect that tries to fool itself as well as others into becoming a ‘national organisation’ which it patently isn’t modelled on all the nicer bits of every other Far Left party. If it continues down this route it will develop a structure entirely irrelevant to the very areas where it is strongest, consistently downplay the priority of those areas for the next 22 months and end up with a small far left party but a vastly reduced electoral representation and no base in those communities.
Single minded is what we should be for 22 months, with anything else an added bonus but not a priority. And please lets dispel the illusion once and for all that we’re a national organisation, we’re not. Honest should be the first rule of credible politics.
Mark P
LikeLike
PhilW
In one, common, Marxist explication of “contradiction” these two things are indeed contradictory, purely by virtue of not being the same thing.
More seriously, can one feed into the other? Certainly. You can construct at the level of ideas all sorts of positive feedback mechanisms.
The concrete – material – question is where you apply yourself given the actual balance of forces. What do you think you can do to affect this process?
Where do you put very scarce human and financial resources? It is an acute question.
If, say, some experienced people committed to Respect living within 45 mintues travelling distance of Tower Hamlets were to say that they saw politics there as their focus – on account of Respect’s electoral and political base – for the next two years, it would make a huge difference. It could shift things now.
Why that assessment? Because the process in Tower Hamlets is more dynamic, more deeply rooted, more authentic, than starting from scratch and constructing something in the image of a small party of the left, which *does not exist*.
If they decided to throw themselves into building Respect in their area, it would have some positive impact to.
What, though, would the cost benefit analysis look like? Having played this through in more concrete variants, I’m very clear about the answer.
One of the most laughable aspects of the Left List/SWP response to the 1 May elections was the claim that they were a London-wide/national organisation, while Respect was concentrated in East London.
That kind of London-wide/national organisation we can do without. The far left already had two: the SWP and the SP. They can count between them an operation in many of the major cities. So what. Each of them are weaker now than they were 15 years ago.
A third such entity, weaker than the other two, is wholly redundant.
No. Best to engage with where you actually find yourself.
LikeLike
“Basically whenever the left has abandoned various aspects of the socialist programme to win votes its gone pear shaped each time. Generally after another electoral flop.
It’s no way to build the left – as practice proves.”
It’s interesting to think through why this might be and what implications it has.
I think it’s a combination of factors.
1) It is often associated with get rich quick impatient schemes where principle gives way to expediency. This is no way to build up trust or insight or politics as a guide to action.
2) People can smell duplicity a mile off and after the dung heap of political corruption under New Labour make that ten miles off.
3) The message becomes blunted, confused and incoherent. In an age where people quite rightly think most politicians are liars pretending to believe in something you don’t and can’t really explain isn’t good! People will say use plain English and say what you believe, for God’s sake!
4) It substitutes building a party or garnering votes for action that can win in campaigns. Instead of self-emancipation of the working class it becomes get as many votes for this or that councillor or personality as possible.
5) Cover up or refuse to comment on real problems.
The solution isn’t of course just to have the unalloyed pure message. We have to sink deep roots, cultivate networks, undertake basic solidarity work, begin to chalk up even minor victories, rebuild the most basic units of class defence. We do this alongside reformists and all sorts from the devil to his grandmother. But within such a movement we don’t hide who we are- we don’t force it down people’s throats or come across as crazed evangelists. But neither do we slither nor slide all over the place.
Some of the members of the old Respect post-division seem to be grappling with these problems in an honest way. In this I wish them luck and solidarity.
LikeLike
Bill J is very sure about how to build the left.
But after over thirty years of his micro groups existing, they have less members than they started with.
A little humility woul be in order in lecturing others who managed to get an MP elected, and have built a fragile but real base among some of the most disadvantaged working class people in brtain today.
LikeLike
Jason
I’m sorry, but you’ve given an account of what you think is wrong with no referent connected to actual events.
Others can respond. I’m not interested. Sorry, but I’ve heard this from people who are, prima facie, much more impressive.
LikeLike
Kevin, I a referring to the fact that many people distrus politicins. Evidence is easy to find. e.g. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4360597.stm
In such circumstances I amaying we need to uild pateint roots in the community if we want t succeed. I can gie you examples if you want.
I was hinking from your speech you were interested in patient community grassroots. But now you say yo’e not interested.
Apparenly I’m not impessive enough. Politica change thoghwil come from working with ordiary people not the impressive and rich who have already screwd up this world prety bad. You can remain wth the impressive people or get to mix with ordinary people n working class estates some of whom are actually very impressively involved in community action campaigns.
Fortunatey many in your organisation do seem to wan tdebate an discuss issues with ordinary people. I thought you did too. Perhaps a temporar lapse into impatience?
LikeLike
Sorry for missing letters the keyboard was sticking
The important point is to rebuild the bases of working class organisation. We can all work together on this and have the discussions along the way.
Jason
LikeLike
Jason, a word in your shell-like- never admit to having a sticky keyboard…
LikeLike
Just a quick word on electoral practicalities, which will affect Respect as much as the Greens. The 2010 General Election is now being widely tipped to take place at the same time as the Local Elections.
Turnout will be up. People who don’t normally vote at local elections will do so because they have turned out for the national election. Unlike 2005, when it was pretty clear the Tories couldn’t win, and we saw Galloway win and a big increase for the Greens in Brighton, minority parties have a much harder job this time.
The national coverage will be like in 1992 and 1997, with the media treating this as a straight Labour v Tory contest. The Lib Dems will get squeezed (as they were in the London Elections) in terms of media time and credibility. The interesting dynamic will be if people use their respective national and local votes differently in the event of a simultaneous election.
LikeLike
Peter Cranie
Good points. The squeeze on the Lib Dems is already apparent, and Clegg has been pretty disastrous for them.
One feature of politics in East London over the last year has been the total collapse of the Lib Dems. In the large C&E London Assembly constituency they were the fifth party.
Their fall in Tower Hamlets has been calamitous. This is one new element in the mix in both the parliamentary constituencies. Another is the increase in the “natural” Tory vote, given the numbers moving in to luxury housing, principally on the Isle of Dogs.
Respect will have to create an East London dynamic, as I imagine the Greens will in Brighton and Norwich.
LikeLike
RobM… haha… quite witty for that time in the morning..I think it might be wordpress and not the keyboard because when I write it on word and paste works but not directly on to wordpress
They are good points and I think underline how much more a party left of Labour will need to be really distinctive and new- two years is probably enough time off to do some serious work rooting our politics in the working class, rebuilding shattered organisations and networks to really begin to imaginatively revitalise left-wing politics. For a start by asking people what they want and letting our politics develop from that. This is what socialism should mean.
LikeLike
‘Respect will have to create an East London dynamic, as I imagine the Greens will in Brighton and Norwich.’ – Kevin Ovenden
Add South Birmingham and I really like the sound of that. Peter Cranie’s points about London, and Brum (?), local elections taking place on the same day as the General; Election in 2010 should further concentrate Respect’s thinking. Its time to step off the pretence of a national party and concentrate our efforts on a grid of activity for 22 months to at worst keep hold of what we’ve got in East London and Brum and at best make some gains there. Anything less and we’re finished.
Mark P
LikeLike
I’m all for the think national act local perspective that every body seems to be arguing for here. Certainly, unless Respect can consolidate what it already has then it cannot go on to fresh fields. However, this should not become a mantra that prevents Respect from recognising opportunities when they see them. It is all too easy to fall into a conservative frame of mind.
As far as what Kevin said in his speech is concerned, and I don’t want to put words into anyone’s mouth, I would interpret it thusly:
There are elements in the Labour party emerging that perhaps in the past we wouldn’t even have considered making a united front with but we musn’t rule it out. On the other hand we should remember what a united front is. It is a limited agreement for practical ends designed to expose the inadequacies of the people you are making the united front with. It is not an unprincipled bloc and should not be fetishised. For instance, if the price of a united front was for Respect to become a bit less anti-imperialist, a bit more indulgent of global climate destruction, to adopt a little bit of the neo-liberal agenda then that is known as unprincipled manoeuvring. Insider trading if you will. I would oppose as I’m sure Kevin would. Respect should be no-one’s personal fifedom.
LikeLike
As usual Mark’s ‘stark’ realities mentioned earlier have the great advantage of concentrating the mind. Respect has got to tread some fine tactical lines in the coming months – with an absolutely correct focus on our strongerholds in East London and Brimingham. There the focus there must be to consolidate and deepen our base, sharpen our organisation and impose ourselves more securely into the political landscape.
For those of us outside these areas – or their close proximity – we also have a role to play. The strength of Respect in cities such as Manchester and Bristol will also be critical – if we are able to recruit more members and supporters we can begin to help provide some of the financial and other resources needed to ensure we can compete more effectively in Birmingham, Newham and Tower Hamlets. For example – a bus load from Manchester could help to leaflet a good chunk of the constituency so freeing up Birmingham members for the more time-comsuming task of canvassing.
So perhaps I would somewhat disagree with Mark’s tone when he talks about whether we are a ‘national party’ or not (though I agree that we are clearly not). But it is important for Respect members everywhere and anywhere to feel part of a ‘national strategy’ – even if that strategy is to rightly concentrate resources in just a few areas.
Respect members in their own locations will need to develop their local strategies for the next 20-odd months – so that in May 2010 we can have the greatest impact to which every member will have contributed in whatever way they can, wherever they live.
LikeLike
Clive has put it very clearly. From that proceeds a grid of activity and getting on with it. There are built in tensions deriving from Respect’s uneveness. But Clive’s synopsis provides a path through them for the next 22 months.
For those from the IS tradition you may remember being regaled by Tony Cliff about having just one member in engineering in the early 1960s (it was Roger Cox or Geoff Carlson, I think). He was at a factory called ENV. So, everything they had to say about the engineering industry was refracted through its interface with ENV. My understanding is that Ted Grant was capable of that kind of singlemindedness.
I mention this only as a titbit for those who might come from those milieux but feel somehow that an almost obsessive localism is a break from the traditions of the more successful (relatively) Trotskyist currents in Britain.
LikeLike
“So perhaps I would somewhat disagree with Mark’s tone when he talks about whether we are a ‘national party’ or not (though I agree that we are clearly not). But it is important for Respect members everywhere and anywhere to feel part of a ‘national strategy’ – even if that strategy is to rightly concentrate resources in just a few areas.” – Clive Searle
Nice one. Yes I have a habit of posing stark realities nothing much wrong with that if it shakes things up and forces facing difficult choices rather than doing things just because thats what we feel is expected of us (the curse of living on planet placard for too long I’m afraid).
YES! A national strategy in which for the next 22 months the East End and South Birmingham are our focus. We aren’t a national party – well short of it- but we do have members and some active branches spread across England. The centrality of the East End and South Birmingham will depend on geographical proximity and a brutally realistic asessment of local opportunities for growth over that period.
The stark choice post 2010 is worth re-stating. A planet placard type ‘national’ organisation with small groups of activists across the country but no real purchase in these communities. OR one or more MPs, 12 or more councillors with a prospect of making a substantial impact in Parliament, London and Birmingham and the basis for developing a network of activism and influence across the country.
We need to rapidly establish a consensus on this and then a grid of activity for 22 months through to May 2010 for Respect members and the hundreds of potential supporters to pour into concentrated and effective activity. Thats the organisational basis for the ‘dynamic’ Kevin eloquently describes.
Or we could aspire to be another small, declining, Far Left ‘party’. To be honest too much time has been wasted dabbling with that ambition (sic) already lets get on with preparing for 2010.
Mark P
LikeLike
Mark P, exactly who are you arguing with?
LikeLike
Mark and Kevin are correct. By necessity Respect needs to build on the present foundations and where it is currently active has the mosty potential to build. Yes I wish Respect was in every neighbourhood and fighting in every parliamentary constituency.
However, we must look at reality and not be dreamers. If the East End and Birmingham are strong areas, we consolidate then build. Yes we help any other areas but let us not lose our focus on what we have gained. We know Respect is not the complete answer but are willing to link up with others to change society for the better.
LikeLike
I would like to agree with what everyone has said. Everyone has made some really good points here, and I think we really need to take account of everyone’s arguments. As everyone says, the time has long gone when we could afford to ignore what everyone is saying.
However, I think it needs to be pointed out that I haven’t yet pointed out that we need to listen to what everyone is saying, and I think this is a serious weakness in the discussion so far. Like it or not, I agree with what everyone is saying, and I think we need to take that into account. What everyone is saying is all well and good, but how far does it get us towards acknowledging that I agree with what everyone is saying? That’s the real question.
(with apologies to Mark P and, indeed, everyone else)
LikeLike
BTW – the Lib Dems being squueexed n a national basis at the expense of thr Tories wuold actually help Respect in Birmingham.
LikeLike
Well that’s a no-brainer. Anything that `squeezes’ the lib dem **** (David – no more of that please – LIAM) is a plus for the working class.
LikeLike
Wooh, whoo, whooh. Hold on a minute. I think I should back up a little there and apologise. When I say `anything’ I of course exclude adopting their scabby politics.
LikeLike
Well. This has been the most productive thread I can remember. Honing formulations until we get a more accurate description of where we are and what we should try to do. Whatever next!
LikeLike
Sounds good. Perhaps some of this co-operation and fraternal discussion of differences could extend into the Convention of the Left.
LikeLike
I’ve come a bit late to this thread but I am happy to have discovered something rare, a quote from Jason I mostly agree with:
“for this to happen I still think it needs to transform itself into an organisation that puts class struggle first, sinks roots in those communites and workplaces and engage in campaigns to win the campaigns not win people to Respect.”
I think Respect is probally a bit closer to achiving this then Jason does, also I wouldn’t distinguish winning campaigns and winning people quite so starkly, it is posible to concentrate so hard on campaigns that you forget to actually set yourself up as an atractive socialist home. But broadly I agree with the thrust of this point.
I (and others in this post) would probally come apart from Jason in imagining exactly what it would mean in practice but I think that this is braodly the position many inside Respect would take.
LikeLike
On the national verses particulular localities focus I broadly agree with how Clive has put it, though I think we should not forget that there will be members who are isolated from places where there is any Respect organisation. We need to give them something.
Also we should not forget the potencial of the universities and FE collages to develop a new layer of very motivated activists.
LikeLike
“We need ‘no bullshit’ politics that people can believe can achive something”. – to right Kevin
LikeLike
Tanks,Joseph. Not so rare, surely?
LikeLike
:-P, of course on issues such as the war, food crisis, imigration, council housing etc. not rare at all.
Rare though on the issue of the type of left party we need to build now.
LikeLike
Ah well may be but even there you see we both think we need a party rooted in working class communities and struggles, that can aid and help organise those struggles, and is responsive to workers’ needs. I happen to think as socialists we should be open about our politics and argue for them whilst of course not putting them as an ultimatum. However, on all sorts of practical measures to hepl organise and shore up the struggle we will agree and if Respect or a party like it actually sinks deep roots in the working class then fine and good.
I think it’s politics can be sharpened up but there’s not much point having such a debate on blogs. I may be wrong; you may be wrong. The test will be in the struggle.
For now I’m concentrating on building up networks of resistance but certainly alongsode Respect comrades and other socialists even if we do disagree on some issues- and thankfully otherwise too much agreement would surely be evidence of sterile thinking?
LikeLike
Let’s be under no illusions here. Respect Renewal emerged as the result of an orchestrated split that was engineered by people who prior to that were leading members of the SWP happily making speeches at a succession of Marxism conferences.
The Respect Renewal project, in other words, has nothing to do with the development of a principled broad based working class movement, but everything to do with cultivating the personal egos of those individuals who decided to engineer the split.
The original Respect project and the form of democratic accountability that underpinned it, was something that I believed in and I genuinely was of the opinion that we were moving forward from the debacle that was the Socialist Alliance. Unfortunately, the formation of Respect Renewal has resulted in the further fragmentation of the left and we again find ourselves at base one.
Respect Renewal is nothing more than the personal fiefdom of its leading members who orchestrated the initial split.
LikeLike
Daniel M
The people who engineered the split in Respect were members of the SWP leadership. Those of us who were expelled from the SWP did everything we could to prevent an unnecessary split taking place.
Indeed, Rob and I were expelled precisely because we refused to acquiesce to the SWP splitting from George Galloway.
This is amply demonstrated by the correspondence at the time.
LikeLike
Jason, I posted a comment in a thread about Karen Reissmann’s sacking on SU yesterday. Today I visited SU and I can’t find the thread. Do you know what’s going on?
I’m asking you on Liam’s blog because you regularly post here and because you and many others had posted comments in support of her in the thread on SU. It’s extremely unfortunate if the thread has been removed because there was a debate going on about how to defend workers who speak out against management. If the left is going to move forward then this is precicely the method of solidarity that will help us achieve this.
LikeLike
My bad! I’ve found it. It was a thread from Nov 2007 that someone had posted to more yesterday when I added a comment.
The reason I wanted to find it was because I added a comment about an activists meeting at Marxism regarding speaking out in the workplace. I think it’s relevant to how we take our organisations forward in the workplace so I’ve included it here:
I went to the, “Public sector work – a job worth fighting for”, meeting at Marxism with Roger Kline, Karen Reissmann and Michael Lavelette.
In light of the attacks on activists for speaking out, workers at the meeting discussed how important it is for us to go on the offensive against management who are trying to silence us over the appalling and dangerous conditions created by PFI and cuts in public services. Health and safety is being compromised as a result of employers putting funding before care.
Roger Kline argued that as trade unionists we need to raise the risks caused by privatised services such as the employment of untrained or undertrained staff. Rather than just focusing on pay and other bread and butter issues if we widen the campaigns by speaking out about the effects of cuts in services and privatisation it will put management on the defensive. He believes that it’s our responsibility as workers to put the safety of the people we care for and our fellow workers above the concerns of our employers.
New Labour has put large sums of money into the NHS and education but it’s been used to line the pockets of the private sector. As workers we’re on the frontline of care and are in the best position to know when the people we care for are suffering as a result of management decisions. Instead of being treated as victims we can blow the whistle and expose this practice.
If more of us raise these concerns with fellow workers and are able to develop the confidence in our workplaces to speak out and hold management accountable locally then this could be co-ordinated into a national campaign.
A protest has been arranged for Karen’s employment tribunal hearing on Monday Sept 1st, 8.30-10am Parsonage Gardens, Deansgate, Manchester. The Social Work Action Network conference at Liverpool Hope University, 12th & 13th Sept 2008 will be a good place to connect up with other activists and discuss building networks of resistance (among other things.)
I’m sure activists here have been and will be developing ways to turn the attacks on public services around and put employers on the spot over conditions at work and the effect this has on the people we provide a service for.
LikeLike
“Those of us who were expelled from the SWP did everything we could to prevent an unnecessary split taking place. ”
I think the truth is someway from this Kevin. Its a bit of history now but your speech at the isg day school I think shows there is a clear politcal difference. Also it was clear then that RR are petrified and rightly so of losing Galloway. The chances of him winning we all know are very very remote. The as you acknowledge the game is up! I would expect RR will cease to exist if its east london base goes.
LikeLike
Ray, there’s one here http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=969#comments
and lots here
http://www.socialistunity.com/?s=reissmann
I agree that it is vital to build up the strength of campaigns so we can win them as a first step to rebuilding the working class movement.
There are many debates to be had along the way: but they make most sense and become most meaningful in the context of this essential action.
LikeLike
ll
Read the documents – Rob and I predicted, rightly, that us resigning our jobs or being expelled for not doing so would lead to a split, which we told the Central Committee of the SWP that we were seeking to avoid.
In their responses, the SWP leadership showed not the slightest concern about their actions splitting Respect.
As for the future of Respect – time will tell, various SWP members were telling us last November that Respect would be dead in a year. Whatever happens over the next two years or so, Respect has already survived in somewhat better shape than the Left List, which no longer exists.
Time will tell.
LikeLike
Thanks Jason, that first link is the thread I couldn’t find. The NSSN conference report thread on SU is interesting but it needs to focus on the subject and not be diverted onto the split.
It was quite refreshing that at the public sector work meeting the focus was on building opposition to management rather than dwelling on the differences between left groups. As socialists we have an opportunity to take a lead in exposing the risks caused by PFI and cuts in services. I think the focus for all of us if we want to build the left (and our own organisations) is to tap into this anger and put mangement on the retreat.
Activists like Karen are showing the way forward. It’s not an easy thing to do but, having been a health worker for many years, I know that the bitterness is there even if the confidence to fight back needs to be encouraged. That’s why it’s so important for every left organisatioin to have links in the workplace and not rely on electoral politics to build their organisations.
LikeLike
“In their responses, the SWP leadership showed not the slightest concern about their actions splitting Respect.”
After attending Marxism and experiencing the enthusiasm for getting involved in current activity the whole debate about the split seems archaic. There is so much going on nationally and internationally that dwelling on an event that occured over 9 months ago that can’t be undone isn’t going to build any organisation.
LikeLike
“That’s why it’s so important for every left organisatioin to have links in the workplace and not rely on electoral politics to build their organisations.” Ray
Sound advice from the party behind that magnificent 0.68% showing in the London Mayoral election.
Mark P
LikeLike
I agree that it is vital to build up the strength of campaigns so we can win them as a first step to rebuilding the working class movement.
There are many debates to be had along the way: but they make most sense and become most meaningful in the context of this essential action.
There is of course a genuine risk that the SWP leadership is trying to cover its tracks by the line let’s concentrate on the class struggle and the industrial front.
Nevertheless it is the right thing to do. It shouldn’t stop activists and mebers asking th ehard questions and attempting some bringing to account but concentrating on rebuilding our fighting capacity is a fruitful way to go. As long as the SWP activists build the campaigns for the sake of the campaigns, for the sake of winning and strengthening the working class organisation not merely as party front activities to recruit members. Of course in the longer term this would go a long way to begin to heal some of the divisions and the distrust many understandably and I dare say at times rightly have of the left.
It should not just be about workplaces but also housing, privatisation, anti-deportation, anti-racism, building confident campaigns mobilising people in their hundreds and even thousands to begin to regain confidence, imagination and a feeling that we can do it.
Karen and her branch fought a marvellous campaign that came close to being the best thta could be done. I did have a fairly long vonversation with John Rees on the Manchester demo saying though that one of the key areas was to pressure the Unison officials to sanction the whole branch to come out and seek out ways to build solidarity action- e.g. other branches refusing to take on extra work created by the strike, having wildcate walkouts and building up a network of support and solidarity, perhaps a national campaign on workload using the Karen Reissmann case as example and making the links in people’s minds even if the anti-uion laws prevent links being officially made culiminating in a national day of action.
The SW paper having a membership of some 2-3000 and a readership of some 10-30 000 could have played a catlythic role in this and the whole organisation should have been put on a war footing to win for Karen. It may have not been possible even then but despite John nodding and agreeing no such course was charted.
Nevertheless it was locally a fantastic campaign that despite losing was worth fighting and perhaps made some trsuts think twice before attempting it again. We’re now seeing some similar campaigns in the CWU e.g.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=11534144449
Simon Furze & Kyle Hill have both been suspended from Royal Mail.
Simon is the lead rep in his workplace and a political activist. Kyle is a union member and activist who works with Simon.
We believe that this is victimisation of union activists by Royal Mail management.
We believe that Royal Mail management see this as their oppurtunity to permanantly get rid of two very good union activists.
We’re saying no to victimisation of union activists and that Royal Mail should reinstate both workers. Get involved in our campaign!
WHAT YOU CAN DO
1. Get hold of the petition when its completed and take it round your workplaces/colleges/schools.
2. Send messages of support either individually or from your union branch to the email address below.
3. Get all your friends to join this group!
Send messages of support to cwuleicestershire@hotmail.com
We need to build up networks of activity to argue for the necessary action not as mindless activisim runing round like headless chickens but try imaginative campaigns that can actually mobilise people and spread the action despite and eventually in defiance of the anti-union laws.
If and when real campaigns with deep roots are built then such victimised workers or other campaigners can indeed usefully stand in elections to strengthen the campaigns and class struggle and put forward the argument for a new working class party.
LikeLike
Liam redux 
Leave a comment