imageTwo amendments of note were carried at today’s Respect conference.

The first agreed “to support to affiliate to the Coalition of Resistance and to encourage our branches to do the same.

We further resolve to encourage Respect branches to support local anti-cuts campaigns and initiatives in their area.”

That was one of many good aspects of the conference and either Junius or I will provide a fuller report in due course.

The second was passed by a large majority and, as we said in the Socialist Resistance leaflet which was distributed at the event and is reproduced below, made our position in the organisation unsustainable.

As partings of the ways go this was as amicable and comradely as was humanly possible. My own view, for what it’s worth, is that politics in the British state is going to go through a very fluid period in the next few years and, as we’ve seen with the Coalition of Resistance, new times create new relationships and reshape old ones.

“Conference notes that:

  1. There will be elections to the Scottish Parliament in May 2011
  2. These elections will be conducted under a form of proportional representation in which some MSPs are elected from a list
  3. Respect has not organized in or contested elections in Scotland in the past because of the hegemony of other parties to the left of Labour
  4. This hegemony no longer exists
  5. In the context of unprecedented cuts by the Condem Coalition and disappointment with the Labour and SNP, there is now an opportunity for Respect to contest elections to the Scottish parliament with a realistic prospect of success

Conference therefore believes

  1. National officers should start preparations for Respect to contest elections to the Scottish Parliament
  2. Preparations should include immediately registering Scottish Respect as a description that can be used in Scottish elections and seeking to recruit residents in Scotland to Respect.”

This is the text of a leaflet distributed by supporters of Socialist Resistance in Respect.

We are strongly opposed to the proposition that Respect organise in Scotland, as proposed in amendment E to Motion 1 

imageSocialist Resistance has supported Respect since its inception in 2004 and previously supported the Socialist Alliance.  We supported George Galloway’s letter which sought to democratize the leadership of Respect and backed the majority in the ensuing split in the organisation in 2007. We put the resources of our newspaper at the disposal of Respect.  We understood that George and Salma , given their role in the anti-war movement had a vital contribution to make in building a political alternative to New Labour.

But were a resolution to organise Respect in Scotland to be passed at this Respect Conference this would make our situation in the organisation untenable. We are against such a resolution being adopted on a number of grounds:

1) A controversial change of a long-held policy that Respect does not organise in Scotland should not be introduced a week before the conference and with no discussion at the National Council or in the branches.

2) The only purpose in organising in Scotland would be for Respect to stand candidates in next May’s Scottish Parliament elections and in subsequent parliamentary and local elections.  Respect has no policy positions on the specific situation in Scotland, particularly the issue of devolution and self-determination an issue around which there would be several different positions. To go into a Scottish election with no debate on key political issues would be fundamentally wrong.

3) There are already two left parties in Scotland standing in elections and they intend to continue doing so, namely the SSP and Solidarity. The SLP also stands in elections in Scotland. The last thing the Scottish left needs is another left party standing in those same elections and dividing the left vote still further.

4) In Respect there have always been different views on which party to support in Scotland. We support the SSP. If this conference were to adopt a position on organising in Scotland and to fight elections SR members would be in an impossible situation. For a party to have members who advocate voting for a different party would be untenable – both for Respect and for SR.

5) Underlying this issue is an important political question; namely the right of the Scottish people to self-determination, including the right to independence. Therefore we reject the idea of English based parties organizing in Scotland.

6) We still haven’t managed to build Respect on an England-wide basis – a decision to stand for election in Glasgow will inevitably lead to the deprioritisation of Tower Hamlets.

We therefore urge the leadership and membership of Respect to avoid this course of action and to reject the proposal to organise in Scotland, avoiding both the undemocratic nature of such a decision and its consequences for the unity of the organisation.

80 responses to “Respect conference”

  1. Having made a somewhat garbled contribution in the morning session I was sadly unable to stay for the afternoon when these amendments were debated.

    While I would never subscribe to their politics I respect (sic) the contribution of Socialist Resistance especially on eco-socialism and coalition building . This blog is particularly good . And even though I entirely disagree with them on the issue, their differences with George Galloway standing for the Scottish Parliament are thoughtfully put.

    However the idea that this vote makes Socialist Resistance’s continuing membership of Respect ‘untenable’ is frankly rubbish, its only untenable if Socialist Resistance choose to make it so themselves.

    f George stands for the Scottish Parliament the fact that members of a small Trotskyist group in England disagree will be entirely irrelevant. I have heard of no one in Respect suggest that members disagreeing with George standing and who won’t have a vote in the Scottish elections (because they live in England,doh!) being disciplined in any way. Thankfully its no longer that kind of organisation. Only a short whole ago members of the Respect NC variously and publicly supported the SSP, Solidarity and SNP candidates in the Glasgow East by-election. As those expressing those views all live in England we had zero impact on the result, and our differences zero impact on Respect.

    If Socialist Resistance choose to leave Respect thats sad but its their choice, it has nothing to do with life in Respect being made ‘untenable’ for them.

    Mark P

    Like

  2. It was bound to happen whatever ones views on George standing in the Scottish Parliament . Socialist Resistance were far too quite on far too many occasions when things were going wrong inside Respect and now find themselves out on a limb on their own after many other Socialists have already departed from Respect. Politics that decended into the “cult of the personality” was never going to be attractive to many.

    Lets hope Socialist Resistance who on the whole have played a positive and creditable role in Respect (even if too quite on occasion as I have pointed out) can now play a full role in TUSC.

    Like

  3. What’s SR’s line on the Sheridan trial? Those SSP members are testified against Sheridan are finished with any serious left wingers within the workers movement because they became so factionally embittered they are helping the Bourgeoisie sentence a leading working class leader (Sheridan) to prison.

    Like

  4. Spelling error on first line which should read who instead of are

    Like

  5. Mark P – how can you be a member of an organisation that stands candidates in elections and then advocate voting against these candidates?

    Are you saying it would have been okay for a card-carrying member of Respect to pop along to Tower Hamlets last May and hand out some leaflets and do some canvassing for the Labour candidates?

    Unless you are advocating that Respect becomes Leninist/Democratic Centralist or maybe that you endorse adopting the worst aspects of ‘entryist’ tactics, I really can’t see your point.

    Like

  6. By the way Mark P, according to their website Socialist Resistance’s moniker is “The Fourth International in Britain” – not England.

    Like

  7. Mark, clearly SRs position in Respect would be untenable- not least because our financial contributions to it would be used to fund campaigns against the SSP which we support.

    You say “members of the Respect NC variously and publicly supported the SSP, Solidarity and SNP candidates in the Glasgow East by-election.” but that is completely different to a situation where a Respect candidate is actually standing in the election itself. Surely you are not saying in that situation you would allow Respect members the right to publicly campaign for candidates of other parties to the detriment of the Respect candidate?

    In England at least, I suggest SR members will continue to be supportive of Respect- in campaigns and elections- and maintain a constructive relationship but I guess we will be doing it from the outside.

    Like

  8. So Anthony we were all supposed to lie to maintain Tommy’s halo while he took the NOTW to court? It is Tommy who is completely discredited in the front of the Scottish public and working clas. He was willing to destroy everything to keep his self image. He nearly destroyed the socilaist movemnet but he has destroyed himself and his wife. Those like you who helped him will have to live with that for the rest of your life.

    Like

  9. Its a fairly futile discussion as Socialist Resistance members have clearly chosen to leave Respect.

    The only point I’m making is that this is your choice rather than being forced out. I am sure George could live with your combined membership in England not supporting his candidature for the Scottish Parliament.

    The only issue really that matters for SR members living in England is do you continue to support Respect in elections you can vote in, if you do, then why on earth leave?

    Never mind, best of luck with building the Fourth International.

    Mark P

    Like

  10. As Mark P says, Socialist Resistance members are leaving Respect voluntarily. For us this resolution raises two problems we take very seriously: overturning a long-held position on Scotland without any discussion in the national council or branches through a last minute amendment to a resolution on a different topic; and deciding to organise in opposition to the Scottish Socialist Party, which we have supported for longer than Respect has existed. If Mark feels that these are futile discussions because Resistance (and, indeed, Respect as a whole) will have little impact on Galloway’s chances of getting elected, then that shows faulty priorities. The way to judge the importance of issues is not whether they make it easier or harder for George to get elected, and it says something about him and other comrades that this, rather than the development of grassroots democracy in Respect, is the yardstick they use for success.

    Like

  11. It’s pretty obvious why you couldn’t stay after this. Glad to hear it was “as amicable and comradely as was humanly possible”. All the best.

    Like

  12. good luck, hope to continue working with SR on ecosocialist projects.

    Like

  13. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Socialist Unity, Liam Mac Uaid. Liam Mac Uaid said: Respect conference: http://wp.me/p5JDA-1mC […]

    Like

  14. There is nothing wrong in principle with Respect or anyone else standing in Scotland. Whether of not Respect is viable as a project is highly doubtful, and this may as some have speculated provide George with a bridge back into the Labour Party were he to be elected, but it’s really strange to resign over this.

    The SSP is finished, and in order for the Scottish left to be revived, someone has to tread on their turf. George is probably not the man to do it, but someone has to.

    Why make an issue over Respect’s relations with an organisation that has become a bad joke, while pulling punches and letting GG et al get away with things that really were bad – such as their condemnation of TUSC, which is now beginning to get going for what looks like a serious intervention in next year’s elections:

    http://www.tusc.org.uk/docs/LocalElectionsPolicy.doc

    http://www.tusc.org.uk/docs/TUSCBulletinNo1.doc

    Dismissing and condemning a modest but real beginning of trade union intervention in politics is a damn sight worse than treading on the toes of a left-nationalist organisation North of the Border that has already shot itself right through the head, figuratively speaking.

    Like

  15. Damn shame, but I think it’s the right decision. I would have liked to see Respect endorse the SSP, but failing that Respect owed it to them at least to keep their distance. As it is, it just looks as if Respect is being dragged along behind Galloway (again).

    Like

  16. Good luck George Galloway! What next for SR? TUSC did very poorly at the last election. Could SR field their own far-Left Independent candidates?

    Like

  17. If you can’t get your politics right when you are a tiny organization trying to help rebuild the working class movement, nobody is going to take you seriously when the movement has been rebuilt. So,while it is obviously tough, the comrades in SR have made a completely correct decision.Respect should be endorsing SSP, not standing candidates against an organization which has a history of hard work in Scotland.

    Like

  18. With the SP (wholeheartedly) and the SWP (lukewarmly) supporting TUSC (and SR too, formally giving support, and groups like the CPGB and AWL wanting to get involved in TUSC), what other socialist, national, trade unionist backed, organisation is there to co-ordinate a national election platform and candidates other than TUSC?

    My view is that we should support TUSC in Scotland and England and Wales, but we should also try to develop TUSC, so that it involves the myriad local anti-cuts groups. (CoR cannot perform that function, many in it are Labour/ pro-Labour). And that it should be democratised, and pluralist within a socialist perspective and programme.

    Note that the TUSC bulletin states

    The TUSC Steering Committee

    It meets monthly and at the last meeting on 14 October 2010 it agreed a draft programme for TUSC’s local election campaign next May. This will be debated at a special conference for all TUSC supporters to be held early in 2011. At the moment we are looking a couple of dates in January/February and will announce the date and venue soon. We are inviting all those individuals, local and national groups which support TUSC and want to stand candidates to come to the conference to plan the election campaigns.

    Welcome to the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition Bulletin No1. 11 November 2010

    TUSC aims to bring trade unionists, socialists and anti-cuts campaigners together to stand candidates at elections who are committed to representing working-class interests. Resistance to the cuts is vital, but we also need a political alternative to the policies of cuts and privatisation. TUSC believes that a new working-class party is needed that campaigns for a democratic socialist society run in the interests of the millions not the millionaires. TUSC first stood canidates in the 2010 General Election and is planning to stand candidates in next year’s local elections.

    and

    Get ready for the 2011 local elections on May 5th 2011 – more than 30 million go to the polls.

    The local council elections in May 2011 will be the first opportunity voters will have to register public opposition at the ballot box to the Con-Dem government’s unparalleled attack on our public services. The elections are an opportunity to elect councillors who can actually stop many of the cuts from being implemented locally and to strengthen TUSC as a national political voice.

    A broad local elections manifesto is at the TUSC website at http://www.tusc.org.uk/policy.php

    Stand up to the Con-Dem government

    For councillors who refuse to implement the cuts!

    The TUSC steering committee has agreed the policy platform, outlined below, on which it is proposing to contest the elections to local councils that will take place next May in every area of England bar London. TUSC is also involved in discussions to organise an election challenge for the Scottish parliament and Welsh assembly elections (there are no local elections in Scotland and Wales in 2011).

    The local elections policy platform is a draft platform, which will now be opened up for discussion in trade union branches and anti-cuts campaigns before it is finalised at a conference in January. The aim is that it will then form the basis on which any prospective council candidate who wishes to can stand under the TUSC name in May’s elections.

    The draft local elections policy platform is a supplement to the core policy statement that TUSC candidates endorsed when they stood in the general election in May 2010, which still stands as the basic policy position of the TUSC coalition (see Policies on the TUSC site).

    The Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition’s draft platform for the 2011 local elections in England:

    THE LOCAL council elections in May 2011 will be the first opportunity voters will have in England to register public opposition at the ballot box to the Con-Dem government’s unparalleled attack on our public services.

    But the elections are not just a chance to make a one-day ‘protest vote’. They are also an opportunity to elect councillors who can actually stop many of the cuts from being implemented locally.

    Over the years, it is true, local councils have been stripped of many of their powers over different services. Margaret Thatcher, who began this process, famously said, “I must take more power to the centre to stop socialism” – in other words, that public services that ‘crowded out’ the private sector should be curbed or, where they exist, should be opened up to private companies to make profits from public needs. It is a matter of record that the New Labour government carried on with this approach throughout its 13 years in office – the turnover of private companies running public services reached over £80 billion in 2008, for example, 126% higher than 1995-96 under the previous Tory government.

    But councils still have enormous powers and responsibilities, controlling budgets totalling billions of pounds, spent on services from housing to schools, youth clubs, libraries, adult social care, crime reduction, sports centres, highways maintenance and refuse collection, to name but a few. They have legal powers, over some non-council provided services for example, including many of those now privatised, that they can exercise for our benefit.

    What councillors do, therefore, can still affect the quality of our daily lives. They certainly don’t have to accept every dictate from central government to cut or privatise our services. They have a choice. Even a minority group on a council, or a single councillor, can make a difference, by using their position as democratically elected local representatives to appeal to and help organise community campaigns and trade unionists to fight.

    The Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition (TUSC) is an alliance which includes individual trade unionists, community campaigners and different political parties. Yet, while we each have our own general policies and programme, all our candidates are committed to using every opportunity open to councillors – from public campaigning to presenting policy motions at council meetings – to do everything possible to protect and improve our public services. Voting for TUSC councillors will make a difference.

    All TUSC councillors will:

    * Oppose all cuts to council jobs and services – we reject the claim that ‘some cuts’ are necessary to our services.

    * Reject above inflation increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts.

    * Vote against the privatisation of council services, or the transfer of council services to ‘social enterprises’ or ‘arms-length’ management organisations, which are first steps to privatisation.

    * Use all the legal powers available to councils, including powers to refer local NHS decisions, initiate referenda and organise public commissions and consultations, to oppose both the cuts and government polices which centrally impose the transfer of public services to private bodies.

    * When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts. We will support councils which in the first instance use their reserves and prudential borrowing powers to avoid passing them on – while arguing that the best way to mobilise the mass campaign that is necessary to defeat the cuts is to set a budget that meets the needs of the local community and demands that the government makes up the shortfall.

    The much broader national and international polcty is also at http://www.tusc.org.uk/policy.php

    I’m not really bothered who does it, butI do think the socialist Left in England, in Scotland, and in Wales, should call conferences of anyone/ any organisation wishing to join in… not just SP/CWI, SWP, SSP, Solidaroty, SR, TRespect, NSSN, RtW, and TUSC – and the local anti-cuts campaigns that have emerged and are emerging in cities and towns and villages throughout the country.

    Socialists will welcome a united Left slate, whether it is under the TUSC umbrella or whatever umbrella. But let’s not forget, TUSC hads a major trade union presence, is supported by the largest Marxist groups in britain *the SP and the SWP) and has antional presence (unlike Respect). For example 10 of TUSC’s 41 general election candidates in the UK general election of May 2010 were in Scotland. (So USC standing candidates in Scotland is not a colonialist English intervention. TUSC is as Scottish as it is English as it is Welsh.

    Like

  19. Dave – I dont think SR will support TUSC in Scotland either . Also TUSC’s trade union presence is often overstated – it has a large number of SP TU comrades backing it (who often have senior positions in unions).

    Like

  20. `But were a resolution to organise Respect in Scotland to be passed at this Respect Conference this would make our situation in the organisation untenable.’

    How silly. How utterly inflexible, formal, dunderheaded and sectarian but it has been coming for a long time. Like the SWP before them SR doesn’t do politics. I would suggest the SSP now enter Scottish Respect and work with enthusiasm for Galloway’s election whilst retaining their own program and perspective if they have one of their own which I doubt. As for TUSC, don’t make us all laugh.

    Like

  21. The arrogance of RESPECT astounds me. Opportunists with no principles. You expect it from Galloway. Well done to SR, good people. Goodnight.

    Like

  22. I’ve said some of this over on SU but I’ll add a few extra points here. Personally I’d like to start by thanking supporters of Socialist Resistance for all their work for, and commitment to, Respect over the last few years.

    The tone of the debate at today’s conference was, in my opinion, was a credit to both sides. Speakers argued their respective cases with clarity and and in a thoroughly comradely manner. (Without a doubt SR contains the most polite members on the British far left.)

    I’m sure that Respect and supporters of Socialist Resistance will continue to work together over the many areas where we are in full agreement from climate change to opposition to the cuts, imperialism and racism.

    I do not believe that it is necessary for SR supporters to leave Respect over what is, for the majority, a tactical question. But if this was a matter of principle for them then I can understand their decision to leave, even if I disagree with it and deeply regret it.

    On the question of procedure. I disagree with Duncan’s suggestion that the way this discussion was held at the conference was somehow wrong. Supporters of the amendment could have easily taken this discussion to the National Council – where I believe the argument would have been won with an even greater majority.

    After all, Respect has never has this debate at a conference (the last motion on Scotland was remitted the 2006 conference) so it would be entirely legitimate to have had the discussion there. But surely a discussion at the supreme decision making body of the organisation is the best place to have such a debate. Both sides were able to put their positions clearly in a balanced debate. (indeed, when one comrade who had put a speakers slip in the oppose the amendment turned out to have changed his mind during the debate a further speaker against was called to ensure balance).

    As for the main motion being on another issue – there was clearly a section in the Manchester motion on the role of Respect. Tactical discussions were taken on this issue – including an amendment on standing in Oldham and Saddleworth. No one objected to that amendment on procedural grounds. Nor did anyone at the conference move a procedural motion to rule out the amendment. I’m glad they didn’t as we had a thorough discussion of the issues and opposing positions.

    I also do not agree that somehow a prolonged discussion ‘in the branches’ would have clarified things further. Surely the purpose of such a debate would be for each side to be able to convince the other. But as soon as SR elevated this issue to a ‘point of principle’ such a debate would no longer be a two-way process but simply one side defending a ‘principle’ against the other.

    Having said all this, I’m saddened by the departure of SR. Should the situation change the door is always open and I hope we have parted ways as friends. I’ve served on the Respect NC since it’s first election in 2004 with comrades such as Alan Thornett, John Lister and Terry Conway. Despite our disagreements today they remain comrades of whom I have the utmost respect.

    Like

  23. This is genuinely hilarious.

    Socialist Resistance have just split from a mostly finished rump organisation because of their loyalty to a completely finished rump organisation.

    SR have about 3 members in Scotland, so the idea that this made their position “untenable” is completely dishonest. It isn’t as if they paid too much heed to their members in Scotland at the time of the SSP/Solidarity split, as most of them went with Solidarity while SR remained attached, leech-like, to the festering corpse of the SSP.

    The SSP is completely irrelevant, both politically and to SR. They were just looking for a way out of Respect.

    Like

  24. Mark P – is every organisation finished unless it is part of the SP brand – what is your assessment of Solidarity? Why is there a need for TUSC in scotland?

    Like

  25. GT:

    No, I don’t think every organisation is finished. I think that the SSP is finished, because it’s a tiny embittered rump and has no future of any kind. The fact that it’s led by who people who are currently giving Queen’s evidence is just an added bonus.

    Socialist Resistance are an elderly joke of an organisation themselves, and this posturing about how their position is “untenable” is just one more illustration of it.

    Like

  26. At no point had a proposal been made inside SR to leave Respect until this issue arose. We had agreed to put forward a group of comrades for election to Respect’s National Council to serve in the manner that they had done previously. That’s not to say that there has not existed a spectrum of views on Respect and its direction. Equally we have some comrades who think that TUSC is the greatest invention since humans learned how to control fire and others who are deeply sceptical.

    Even in small organisations, as in the real world, it is possible for people to work together who have disagreements. Our collective view had been to remain in Respect. However we are very keen to continue working with Respect supporters and any one of us would happily walk the streets of Birmingham to get Salma Yaqoob elected.

    Mark, have you ever taken part in a discussion to say something positive about anything non-SP related?

    Like

  27. Liam:

    If Socialist Resistance weren’t looking for an excuse to split, but managed to do so anyway in a fit of indignation over this trivia then they are even more frivolous than I had thought.

    As I said earlier, SR didn’t show such concern for the position of their handful of Scottish members when the SSP split. Their Scottish members generally had enough basic class instict not to line up with the people who went to the cops demanding charges against Sheridan. And they quickly ended up outside of the organisation.

    The loyalty to the corpse of the SSP resembles nothing so much as necrophilia.

    Like

  28. “Mark, have you ever taken part in a discussion to say something positive about anything non-SP related?”

    To which he responds:

    “The loyalty to the corpse of the SSP resembles nothing so much as necrophilia.”

    People like you and discourse like that is why the left in the UK is such an embittered collection of irrelevant sects. You’re an unfunny joke.

    Did you feel pleased with yourself when you came up with that little line? “Ho ho, I am so clever!”

    Like

  29. Why don’t you go to the cops and make a complaint about me Jack?

    Like

  30. Oh ffs, get a grip on reality would you. Again, we’re constrained by contempt of court legislation, so frustratingly enough we can’t properly talk! But what would you suggest people do, get done for contempt of court? Would that make you happy?

    Done with this pish. I’ll be spending my time thinking of ideas for the 24th, and ideas about direct action against benefit cuts, and thanking fuck that my mum knows better than me and doesn’t look at this pish that gets written about her.

    Like

  31. Lynsey, I am unaware of any law making a failure to go to the copshop of your own volition to make a complaint against someone a “contempt of court”. Perhaps you can point out the relevant provision to me?

    Like

  32. Does this mean that SR will back SSP in Scotland?
    Who should we, as ENGLISH voters, vote for in elections? Respect is a tiny party! Should we vote for the Green Party?

    Like

  33. TUSC does not exist on the majority of ballot papers! Who should we vote for?

    Like

  34. Surely it’s time SR think about working in the Labour Party again?

    Like

  35. Money talks, bullshit walks Avatar
    Money talks, bullshit walks

    Mark’s assertion that the SSP is a corpse might be more credible if they didn’t have double the cash base (and therefore members/activists) Solidarity does – http://averypublicsociologist.blogspot.com/2010/08/2009-party-accounts.html

    Of course the CWI know that, which is why they have launched “Socialist Party Scotland” to a “packed” meeting of over 50 people. Some of them may have even been under 30.

    If the SSP is a rump the CWI in Scotland are a hair on that rump.

    Like

  36. SR will never work in the Labour Party. There is a better chance of them joining the Green Left!

    Like

  37. Socialist Resistence England, Respect Tower Hamlets and Sparkbrook are finished!

    Like

  38. “Lynsey, I am unaware of any law making a failure to go to the copshop of your own volition to make a complaint against someone a “contempt of court”. Perhaps you can point out the relevant provision to me?”

    Being deliberately obtuse; NEW TO THE INTERNET.

    Like

  39. Joining the English Greens is a not bad idea, Caroline Lucas is more of a socialist than George Galloway has ever been.

    Mark P has a worrying obsession with death and necrophilia, it’s actually kind of disgusting and a therapist would be more interested in hearing it than this blog would. Also, LOLCWI

    Like

  40. Mark you make me laugh. Do you ever take a step back and wonder if you are wasting your life being so bitter and sectarian. You act as if I’m offended by your bizarre necrophilia chat. I’m not, I’m just sad that the left is composed of people with a pathetic level of argument as you. The whole discussion of whether Galloway should do this has had to be predicated on a ritualistic insulting of the SSP – we are dead, delusional, corpses (who the FI want to shag?!) etc. etc.

    Funny how this dead organisation keeps arguing back. Maybe we are zombies? The point is, like it or lump it, we haven’t gone away. For a unified left in Scotland, you can say we’re dead and irrelevant as much as you like, it doesn’t make it true. Sooner or later people will have to come to terms with our continued existence and influence.

    Mark, what would you do if a former comrade accused you publicly in the nation’s biggest selling newspaper of perjury (getting paid tens of thousands of pounds for his trouble)? What’s your magic solution?

    Like

  41. what would you do if a former comrade accused you publicly in the nation’s biggest selling newspaper of perjury (getting paid tens of thousands of pounds for his trouble)?

    Nothing much.

    Like

  42. “We still haven’t managed to build Respect on an England-wide basis – a decision to stand for election in Glasgow will inevitably lead to the deprioritisation of Tower Hamlets”
    So Tower Hamlets is England?

    If Respect were really making an impact, SR probably wouldn’t be leaving. As Respect is England (or Tower Hamlets)-based, it could probably continue in Respect if it really wanted to. It would probably be happier finding a more noticeable point of principle over which to vamoose, but then perhaps it is in this pickle because it has failed to make an adequate political assessment of the politics and structure it now leaves behind.

    David Ellis – a gem of a suggestion.

    Like

  43. Any chance of the British Section of the Fourth International adopting a Trotskyist orientation, Liam?

    Big ask, but …

    Like

  44. Max says
    `TUSC does not exist on the majority of ballot papers! Who should we vote for’

    My understanding is that TUSC’s current plan (see the TUSC website and Bulltin No 1, which I set out in an earlier posting) intends fighting the Scottish Parliament elections.

    Clearly it would be a tragedy if TUSC, Respect, the SLP, SSP, Solidarity, even the CPB were to fight each other.

    Is it beyond hope to get all these groups together in a united left anti-cuts Front/ coalition. That we can have TUSC, Respect, Solidarity, SSP, local anti-cuts campaigns, plus trade unions and student protest groups fighting New Lab, Cons, LibDems, instead of fighting each other?

    I happen to think TUSC- hopefully a more bottom-up, less centrally controlled, more pluralist- fomation- would be the best unifyer, but let’s not be precious about this..

    an open conference, perhaps a delegate conference, called by Galloway, Sheridan, Crow, Nellist/ Sell, Fox.. involving SWP and Counterfire- and- crucially- trade unions and local anti-cuts groups…

    a million socialist voters in Scotland and England and Wales too, would breath a sigh of relief and hope…

    Dave Hill
    member of SR, TUSC general election candidate, supporter of CNWP and of NSSN

    Like

  45. 44. Dave Hill, In the wards where TUSC and Respect are not fielding candidates, who should the we vote for? Please don’t don’t say Labour!

    Like

  46. 44. Dave Hill, In the majority of wards in England where TUSC and Respect are not fielding any candidates, who should the we vote for?

    Like

  47. I personally think SR was looking for a way out of Respect.

    Like

  48. What makes you think that?

    Like

  49. 48. I’ve been talking to a couple of SR members.

    Like

  50. The elephant in the room here is the Union. Galloway’s taken it on himself to launch a Scottish subsidiary of an organisation that’s never organised in Scotland up to now; the fact that the party conference has endorsed this plan effectively turns Respect into a Unionist party. Galloway doesn’t see anything wrong with this – why should he, he’s a Unionist himself – but it’s a big change of direction for Respect, and as such deserved much more careful consideration. (As far as I’m aware the issues raised by the coming Oldham by-election are tactical rather than constitutional!) Unless of course what’s under discussion isn’t the launch of Respect (Scotland) but a one-off, one-man stunt candidacy – in which case why shackle the party to it?

    Like

  51. And?

    (Where are you getting those numbers from?)

    Like

  52. 51. I counted them. They are not from London.

    Like

  53. Before the split, a SR member told me that Respect was a fabulous waste of time!

    Like

  54. mark anthony france Avatar
    mark anthony france

    mmm only just picked up this news of the Decision of Respect Conference to organise in Scotland..as I have limited internet access. SR comrades have put a tremendous amount of effort and organisational resources behind the Respect project….
    My instinct is that their decision to withdraw that level of practical support in the light of the decision to organise in Scotland is correct…
    It is all rather messy but at least the parting of the ways doesn’t appear to have be a brutal and traumatic experience..
    I for one hope that at the level of parliamentary politics that Gerry Adams wins a seat in the Dail for Louth, that George Galloway becomes an MSP ASAP and that Salma Yaqoob wins Hall Green at the earliest opportunity.
    To be honest the situation for ‘ecosocialists’ in England and Wales necessitates, in my view, a decisive turn towards full participation in the Green Party of England and Wales … ideally with the estabishment of a paramilitary style ‘Green Shirt’ wing to recruit radicalised proletarian youth.
    Maybe a turn to the Greens will be a ‘fabulous waste of time’ also…. All I know is that as a life long labour movement activist who has experienced expulsion and victimisation from the LP and other labour movement organisations many times over past 3 decades… on top of all the usual shit that life throws at us…. today the Green Party appears shimering on the horizon as an Oasis of Calm…a bit like a good quality local government run retirement home….for ex bolsheviks.
    Shame about RESPECT as it was such a good and powerful word…. even more of a shame that the ‘British left’ never really understood the meaning at any profound level.

    Like

  55. A point Jack made is very important. “.. discourse like that is why the left in the UK is such an embittered collection of irrelevant sects.”

    Of course there are material reasons for the marginal place of the Marxist left in but sites like this, Socialist Unity and the rest of the lefty blogosphere are a bit of a shop window. I’ll be doing a gig review later in the week and those always attract people who normally would not come anywhere near a left site. What will they find? Charges of necrophilia and Christ knows what else flung around by a very diligent advocate of a far left current which is, as best I understand it, engaged in a process of trying to create a mass class struggle party with other forces on the left.

    I’ve got nothing against necrophilia so long has you’ve got the prior consent of the deceased and their next of kin and clean up afterwards but precisely how that sort of intemperate language is supposed to be part of a constructive dialogue is something that needs to be explained to me. If a supporter of SR were to consistently be so abusive in public discussions they would be instructed to stop or leave.

    Fortunately Mark’s approach is not typical of his British comrades with whom I’ve had dealings.

    Mark Anthony – the Green Party does not allow members of other organisations to join and the only purpose of entryism is to split the larger formation. As with members of Respect we have a good working relationship with the Green Left and the tour we jointly organised for Hugo Blanco was extremely successful. This collaboration will continue. We are also heavily involved in the organisation of the Coalition of Resistance conference and are finding it a very positive experience.

    The times are interesting and there’s a lot to be positive about.

    Like

  56. For those who consider the Green Party a viable option for the radical left, I’d say that they have failed the test of Millbank.

    While their are good and decent left wingers there (as elsewhere) Caroline Lucas, the first Green MP, appears to have been completely silent over the occupation of Tory HQ, we would expect a left wing MP (as for example fellow party member Derek Wall has) to immediately show solidarity with the most inspirational anti-cuts protest thus far and rally support for the students being inspired.

    The Green Party website’s only article on the demo is one from jenny jones condemning the occupation and mainly focusing on that it wasn’t policed properly?!?!
    http://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/2010-11-11-police-communication-fees-protest.html

    (bizarre that they chose not to carry instead the excellent statement by their own youth wing that this was the expression of a generation at the end of its tether!)

    Like

  57. I think you have made the right decision. When we were in the Socialist Alliance we took the Scottish Socialist Party’s break out of small-group politics as inspiration for how we could unite to put socialism on the agenda. I won’t go into what went wrong, I’ve said it often enough.
    But while the Left had respected the SSP’s position, George Galloway took the first opportunity to undermine it when he wrote in the Scottish Daily Mail inviting Tommy Sheridan to come out, and sneering at the SSP as “Trots”. That incidentally also shows how much respect (no pun intended) he had for some of the people trying to work with him in Respect. And it was not the only occasion.
    If Galloway cared about his Scottish roots so much, it was very good of him to come down to England to find a seat in Tower Hamlets, and wait till now, when that has gone, to find his way back hame.
    Also that Respect , supposedly a grass roots campaigning party, suddenly sees a weakened SSP and erstwhile friend Tommy Sheridan in trouble, and decides now is the time to parachute into Scotland in time for elections.
    You’re right to get out, comrades, and I hope you’re not the last to see it.

    Like

  58. “As with members of Respect we have a good working relationship with the Green Left and the tour we jointly organised for Hugo Blanco was extremely successful.”

    And the SSP up here, which successfully organised two important public events as part of the tour as well 🙂

    Tbh that’s the kind of left unity that interests me more than uniting with careerist chancers like Galloway, and the kind of people on here that can only justify what their doing by insulting others. My participation in ecosocialist events and things like Climate Camp help keep me sane when contributions like those of Mark P make you despair at being a socialist.

    Like

  59. Well do not despair. There is hope. We just need to maximise unity around ideas and joint action rather than personalities who drop you as soon as it suits them.

    Like

  60. united front anyone????

    Like

  61. Actually the original comment from Jenny Jones condemned the protesters as criminals;

    http://www.greenfeed.org.uk/feeds/?p=104699

    Jenny Jones, member of the Metropolitan Police Authority and formerchair of the Green Party, has this morning condemned the actions of a violent minority, who smashed their way into the Conservative Party HQ at Millbank yesterday, for disrupting a valid and peaceful protest.

    Jenny Jones said:

    “In my 40 year experience of going to protests, the violent peoplearen’t real protestors at all. They are criminals who use the cover of a demo to do as much damage as they can. Real protestors want to make their point and get good headlines for their cause.”

    She continued:

    “The students are right to protest about the ConDem government changes to tuition fees and won’t have wanted to be involved in violence.”

    Responding to criticisms of the policing of the demo, Jenny Jones said:

    “The fact that the police were surprised at the violence is a marker of how well the students were organising and communicating.”

    Like

  62. At the last General Election, the Green Party didn’t stand their own candidate against Salma Yaqoob and even helped out with her campaign.
    I don’t see them doing the same again in the future.
    Respect backed a Labour candidate for Mayor of Tower Hamlets!
    And yes I know he was expelled form the LP afterwards and won as an Independent.

    Like

  63. @Bill J

    What is striking is that Caroline Lucas MP has shown no solidarity with the students being victimised, they have posted up a negative article about the protest and ignored their own student wing who put out a very good statement – http://younggreens.greenparty.org.uk/node/219

    Like

  64. Mark P says ” Socialist Resistance have just split from a mostly finished rump organisation because of their loyalty to a completely finished rump organisation.

    SR have about 3 members in Scotland, so the idea that this made their position “untenable” is completely dishonest. It isn’t as if they paid too much heed to their members in Scotland at the time of the SSP/Solidarity split, as most of them went with Solidarity while SR remained attached, leech-like, to the festering corpse of the SSP.

    The SSP is completely irrelevant, both politically and to SR. They were just looking for a way out of Respect “.

    This really is offensive, ignorant and ill informed sectarian bile on your part Mark P and I ‘m very surprised at you. I thought you would know better but clearly not.

    Perhaps you and Anthony Brain could get together sometime and form a mutual appreciation society for sad and pathetic individuals in the corner of some seedy pub somewhere on another planet.

    Like

  65. Why do think anyone who crisizes the SSP is “sad and pathetic”?

    Like

  66. I suggest you read what Anthony wrote.
    SSP members shouldn’t be using the court case to get back at their former member.

    Like

  67. No mention of SR’s split from Respect on Salma Yaqoob’s Blog.
    http://www.salmayaqoob.com/2010/11/respect-party-conference-plans-for-year.html#more

    Like

  68. No mention of SR’s split from Respect on Birmingham SR’s website;
    http://birminghamresist.wordpress.com/

    Like

  69. Why doesn’t SR stand their own people as left-wing Independents?

    Like

  70. Well, Viktor, I can assure you Birmingham SR members HAVE left Respect. We didn’t think we needed to re-post the national statement on a local website to make that clear.

    Like

  71. ‘Without a doubt SR contains the most polite members on the British far left.’ This is true in my experience!
    Also in contrast to my comrade Mark P I have always found the organisation productive to work with and am glad they are leaving Respect, mainly because I hope that it will mean the SP can work alongside them more, in TUSC if we can, in other alliances where it is more appropriate.

    Today Alan Johnson has said that the 50p tax rate for high earners should go his priorities are clear. There is as much need for a new workers party as ever, its just more difficult now Labour are in opposition, but when has something being difficult not been a reason to to it?

    Like Dave Hill I would like to see as much of the left working together for as large a campaign as possible at the local elections. It will be most productive in Labour controlled authorities, but lets not let the Scottish issues muddy everything, serious as they may be. Things seem to be coming together over the Irish Sea, we can do it here.

    Like

  72. Max, SRs withdrawal from Respect doesn’t change our guidance on how to vote. In the last election we campaigned for the most credible candidate in each seat that best unite the left, and that meant voting Labour in most constituencies but voting further left in 100 or more. Take a look at http://www.facebook.com/group.php?v=info&gid=197216874177

    Like

  73. `…but voting further left in 100 or more.’

    I’m sorry but this is what characterises SR as just another sect. How could you in all seriousness advocate a vote for 100 non-Labour candidates most of which had no chance whatsoever and were themselves just sectarian chancers. There were no more than five or six serious alternative candidates in England and the main priority by a long way remained solidarity with the mass of the working class in defeating the Tories and, as it turned out, the Lib Dems even whilst warning that New Labour’s response to the deficit would be little different, if at all, to that of Cameron or Clegg. Boy we’d all be learning some important lessons about reformism if New Labour was in power now.

    RobM: are you serious that you didn’t think it necessary to make the good folk of Birmingham aware of your abandonment of Respect and politics?

    Like

  74. David, y’know this internet thing, its not like a local radio station. I can pick up signals from as far away as Wigan. France on a good day.
    If you do know of someone in Birmingham who’s internet reception isn’t so good, and they are one of the few people NOT following SRBrum on Twitter, let me know and I will snail mail them a copy of Bob W’s letter resigning as Respect treasurer.

    Like

  75. Just an observation on this voting Labour lark.

    The original idea of Lenin’s tactic of voting Labour 90-odd years ago was to put them to the test of office, so as to hasten the disillusionment of their supporters, who believed that they stood in some way for the interests of the workers etc, and thus win them over to communism.

    Problem is, that given the two-decade long move to the right by Labour, hardly anyone had any illusions that they were really going to do anything left-wing or pro-working class anyway.

    Out of the three mainstream parties, the only one that prior to the last General Election generated any real illusions that they might do anything to counter the hegemony of reaction, was the Lib Dems. Probably because that party, in its present form, has never held power at national level – and its Liberal Party predecessor had not had a sniff for over 60 years. Its opposition to the Iraq war, and other policies to the left of New Labour, generated considerable illusions.

    A good chunk of its more recently gained supporters were actually ‘natural’ Labour supporters, refugees from a party that under Kinnock, Blair and Brown had effectively become a party of the centre-right, not the left.

    As a result of all this, the Lib Dems, being suddenly thrust into power and forced by the ‘responsibilities of office’ to renounce virtually every policy that motivated their supporters to vote for them in the first place, have now been stufffed into exactly the kind of position that Lenin envisaged when he advocated the ‘critical support’ position for Labour all those decades ago.

    Hence the rapid disillusionment, the anger, the radicalism of disillusioned Lib Dem supporters, the threats by NUS to stand against Clegg and try to force him out, to stand in Oldham, etc. And the real burning anger at ‘betrayal’ by their sincerely left-liberal/social democratic base.

    Does anyone really believe that if Labour had somehow clung to power there would have been such a disillusionment? What with? Everyone knew what they would have been like if re-elected – we had just had 13 years of it anyway. Without illusions in the first place, there can be no disillusionment!

    None of these tactics are timeless, the conditions have to be right for them to work. We really have to learn to tailor our own tactics to the actual conditions, and develop the ability to formulate such tactics ourselves. Otherwise, the left will stay weak and politically marginal, no matter how much hard work our activists do.

    Like

  76. `None of these tactics are timeless, the conditions have to be right for them to work. We really have to learn to tailor our own tactics to the actual conditions, and develop the ability to formulate such tactics ourselves. Otherwise, the left will stay weak and politically marginal, no matter how much hard work our activists do.’

    Can it really be suggested with any level of seriousness that this ultra-left infantilism is some how more novel, more up-to-date, more pertinent, more innovative than the Trot position that was worked out to oppose it and which it predates?

    It is a shame that I am left to oppose this anti-trotskyism alone on a site that is at least nominally trotskyist and then I get moderated for it? Go figure.

    Like

  77. Sorry if I’m a bit late at catching up on this.

    I was at the debate and changed my position after listening to the discussion to one of arguing for Respect to stand in Scotland.
    I still had reservations about the fact that Respect has no presence there and that seems a necessary condition for having any hope of doing well elctorally, let alone winning.
    I also have resevations about whether GG is just using this as a way of getting back into the mainstream.
    His article the next day in the Sunday Record seems to say that he isn’t a ‘socialist’? and also that he is standing on a platform of the ‘real old Labour.’ No mention of Respect Scotland.
    Curiouser and couriouser.
    Has Respect made the right decision ? I guess the election will tell.
    Certainly the existing ‘left’ in Scotland: SSP/Solidarity seems all over.
    However if SR are committed to support SSP then it does become more than just ‘tactics.’
    I can well see the SU comrades feel let down but would urge them to give their full support to Respect in England, even from the outside looking in.
    Things could be looking up a bit in TH, and the Oldham by-election could be a real eye-opener.

    Like

  78. halshall – I assume you mean “SR comrades” in your penultimate sentence.
    If Respect is starting from zero in Scotland, will Galloway be its only candidate, and will it just be a caricature of the leader-oriented sect that has belatedly forced SR to realise that the game’s not worth the candle? Even in England David Ellis seems to be the only cheerleader left of this “neither fish nor fowl” approach to social democratic organisation.

    Like

  79. Skidmarx – Yes I meant ‘SR’ comrades.

    I think this isn’t as clear-cut as some assume.
    Certainly the GG article in the Record is odd.
    He says he’s not a ‘ist’ of any kind.
    Does or doesn’t that include ‘socialist’ or indeed ‘Labourist’ ?
    Does this mean that GG didn’t think clearly before writing this or is he just being opportunist and perhaps having secret feelers about getting back into Scottish Labour ?
    After all he was there for a generation in the top ranks and must still have contacts.
    I think your right in assuming that GG is Respect’s only Scottish candidate, which does raise the question again about whether he will stay or defect back to Labour if elected.
    It isn’t clear but your probably right in that this is a pragmatic decision by Respect that gambles on his loyalty.
    Time will tell.

    Like

  80. Could Socialist Resistance clearly show on their websites, just which Left-wing MP’s and Councillors they endorse in the wards in the UK and why because this is getting confusing.

    Like

Leave a reply to RobM Cancel reply

Trending