Comments on: Respect, SWP, and the shambles

By: Bob Morris

Bob Morris — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 16:27:52 +0000

Whatever the cause, it’s disastrous.

Sectarian divisions are a part of it. I saw this happen when I was active in the Green Party, and it’s happening in the antiwar movement in the US now. Ideological and tactical differences prevent major groups from working together and forming a broad-based coalition, which by definition means the groups don’t have to agree on everything.

I would also say that ideology can drive tactics, sometimes to the detriment of the tactics.

By: DJ

DJ — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 13:56:57 +0000

“We must support anyone who stands against the imperialists.”

We’ve seen proof of this approach in recent discussions here on Polizeros. But it isn’t an error limited to the left. Witness the American attitude that Israel can do no wrong. And American silence (until last week) as Pakistan’s dictator Musharraf trampled the constitution. He’s our ALLY, after all. Even now, with the Pakistan consitution susopended and the Aupreme Court forcibly replaced, the odds of the U.S. punishing Musharraf with aid cuts or loss of support are pretty slim. Because we must support anyone who stands with us against our enemies.

I see this as a pragmatic approach– get all the support you can to fight for what you want, even of the other supporters don’t seek what you want. But even as a pragmatic New Englander, such tactics make me queasy. If we sacrifice our principles for the sake of victory, what we really seek is power rather than change.

By: Dave Riley

Dave Riley — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 09:02:57 +0000

(1) The SSP didn’t split over Tommy Sheridan’s penchant for the same sexual proclivities as Murray(I assume that Murray means the use of prostitutes?). The split was engendered by Tommy Sheridan’s desire to get fellow party members to lie in jury court for him to the contrary and when they refused, he split from the party. For background read Pam Currie’s article here .
(2) There are nonetheless real political issues underscoring the divide/split in Respect and Murray does them no service in his off hand misrepresentation of them. It seems to be about democracy and accountability — and Respect moving forward from being just an ab hoc electoral coalition to becoming a party in its own right. It’s not a left/right divide in the way both Murray and the SWP pitch it. “Marxist Revolutionaries” actually do hold together parties of many thousand members and Marxist Revolutionaries are active is advancing to the Respect Renewal just as Marxist Revolutionaries are engaged in the German Die Linke and many other projects of this kind, including here in Australia.
(3) But to then psalm sing about “Lefter-Than-Thou” and “ideological purity” misses the point. It’s a tactical not an ideological question. A tactical question the US left hasn’t as yet confronted with a viable project that we can complain about as failing for one reason or another.(A fact that chat rooms like Marxmail ignore). Respect –whatever may be its problems and complications — is way way ahead of anything on offer in the USA in terms of left regroupment.

In point of fact, Bob, Murray does not “nail it” at all and it is superficial in the extreme to assume that his ‘analysis’ is the most cogent. A more considered review of the politics at stake can be had here - A Very Public Sociologist . I recommend that source rather than Murray’s….