On starting Southpawpunch Comments
“It’s unfortunate that I needed to launch other blogs to pick up this material I write - as I said I’d much rather have it gathered on one multi-stranded site - but I did so because I would hate to lose these comments such as when I, like any other revolutionary socialist, takes apart the rancid articles on this site (or from Modernity) that often side with the oppressors, such as in your unapologetic odes to Zionism.
I suppose it’s but symptomatic that ABC Marxism, which once would have been so common on the British far left, now sounds so foreign to you ears. I fear it’s an accommodation to the capitalist agenda, and 30 years of defeat, which means you now find revolutionary politics so risible. Thankfully beyond these shores other communists have more guts and even comrades of the SWP, despite their many errors, have similar ideas (where they can think) and are rewarded by being by far the biggest British left group.
Of course types like you often describe my politics as ‘mad’. But then I’m sure you also get the same - it’s usual for people raising points, like for greater democracy in trade unions, to be described as ‘nutcases’, ‘headbangers’ and the like by those to their right and/or the bureaucrats who, when unable to counter their arguments politically, will resort to infantile and apolitical inanities.”
-
On a 'homage' site
“I presume the site (scroll down in linked article)" was created both by ...there’s that a level of (off-key) intellectualism of an overeducated lumpen.
Taking the site, as a joke, is what I first thought of doing. (I also considered claiming the blog as my own.) And it’s perfectly correct to satirise perceptions, wrong as they may be, of people you consider to be pompous, arrogant, etc.
But then I thought, that’s not the best route. It’s a political question on whether, for example, you support Hizbollah against the IDF. To say that such a view is just that of a ‘nutcase’ (and presumably the view of 1000s of ‘nutcases’ in the SWP and elsewhere) is to absent yourself from difficult questions and replace solely needed arguments about programme with apolitical amateurism.
That’s to be expected. I realise Left blogging is just a hobby and an adjunct to a cliquey social life for a small coterie of former six-form debaters. But some of us just see it as one way to argue communist politics when it may be very tough doing so through other routes.”
-
“It’s very noticeable that none of the above criticisms are along the lines of ‘communists don’t support national liberation struggles like X because of Y’, or ’socialists should be LP members because of Z’. It’s all ‘you’re pompous, arrogant, smell etc’. Instead they are but apolitical detritus.
Next time a right wing union bureaucrat or a mainstream LP member criticises your socialist proposals because of your supposed personality or for daring to have the ‘pomposity’ and ‘arrogance’ to actually criticise their own rubbish politics, you may feel a little of the disdain I do for those Labour Party elements who are beyond dead for all revolutionary purposes and are incapable of acting politically.
There’s nothing wrong, in ‘pronouncing on’ the terrible and barely left politics of those who, for example, laud McDonnell. Arguing and discussing political points can sometimes be useful, but only when you are dealing with those with some clue.
I’m proud to actually argue my politics. You are like the wilting wallflowers who will hide your papers in your bag instead of standing near the door and trying to sell it and change minds.
And I’m pleased that my site innovates - different types of blog and has fresh ideas such as the Left Portal which could have been a useful resource if only more had a desire to actually do things rather than just ping pong ripostes on each others blogs.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The malaise of UK Left blogs
“To correct claims above, it’s indisputable that people can be sued for libel for what they post on the web.
Martin Sorrell, CEO of WPP, recently collected a settlement of £150,000 damages for libel and invasion of privacy in the UK High Court after allegations about him were posted on a blog (based in Italy?). http://www.abcmoney.co.uk/news/28200747329.htm
Where the blog is hosted will be irrelevant and libel law is a lot fiercer in the UK than in the US.
I’ve dealt with two legal approaches threatening same for content on my site. I haven’t removed the text - I can back it up - and whilst I think it unlikely that action will follow, I do think it conceivable that someone may be able to use a No-Win, No Fee arrangement to sue at some point.
On a more general point, I think there is a malaise creeping over UK left blogs. I find it very hard to read the (right-wing) rubbish at e.g. Harry’s Place but the comments are near impenetrable - hundreds of remarks that read like a play with the usual characters indulging in prescripted ritual abuse of each other. “
-
‘Dave’s part’ shows signs of going the same way and the plague of fake and multiple names (as opposed to using a consistent pseudonym) is just a cowardly abuse.
I don’t get many comments on my blog (I suspect the owners of Harry’s Place wish they got a lot less) but I wouldn’t hesitate to delete stuff that makes allegations about people with no backup. It’s just too easy to write rubbish on a website.
And when someone makes up something which is very faintly possible e.g. ‘an anti Zionist is also a proven anti Semite (as some are, of course) who did X’, it’s not ‘openness’ and a correct ‘anti-censorious’ attitude to allow such gunk to remain posted.
Instead I would demand that the person back up the allegation or I will remove it. The fact checkers employed by the US media aren’t there just to protect them from being sued, they are also there to maintain the credibility of the paper.
Imagine if a paper’s gossip column just published every titbit that each PR person whispered to them. It might be interesting to read that Paris Hilton is being considered for canonisation by the Catholic church or that Tony Blair is being fasttracked for the Nobel Peace Prize but if your paper reported that you would quickly see them as being as believable as the Daily Sport.
So to allow such rubbish on your site is just crap journalism that allows you to be used to spread lies and will turn your blog into a joke.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brown’s new Cabinet
“Who gives a stuff, really?
Geoff Blears Kelly or Tessa Straw Baroness.
You write as though there is any difference between any of these scum.”
-
“I was at a party last night at which there were several LP types who, like social inadequates, put on the News at 10 and either fluttered approvingly or turned up their noses and twittered disdain when news of each member of the cabinet was announced. One bloke did a sort of mini pirouette to release tension as he learnt his hero had not been selected.
The woman I was talking to seemed a little alarmed when she noticed that I was cocking half an ear to listen. I rescued the situation by comparing those captured by the glow of the screen, indeed LP members generally, to those blokes you used to see at the very end of train platforms noting down engine numbers.
She may have been utterly disinterested, as most are, because of the sheer remoteness of these people to her life, but likewise I find the above comments, labouring over near undetectable nuances of difference between ministers, perverse - as I said, they're all capitalist party scum.“
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Socialist Organiser and Militant
“They are good comments about the ‘identity’ of the AWL (and SO) as I regret that we in Classfighter (SO and Workers Power in the LPYS in the 80s) did near enough entirely define ourselves in relation to Militant.
But Militant then were at a high level of nasty sectarianism that I’ve not yet seen repeated - so much so I had to remove a knife from one of our comrades who felt the (doubtless exaggerated) need to bring a knife to LPYS conference to protect himself.
I never saw anything from SO that ever could compare to the level of political arrogance and nastiness of Militant. An arrogance that was shown to be based on nowt - ‘the Labour Party is turning our way’. No, comrade, the LP will shortly expel and near destroy you.
But then once I spoke to a Classfighter comrade in Coventry. She had managed to lead a take over of an LPYS branch. So what did she do? She held LPYS meetings without telling the Militant, she refused to send them minutes - in other words she acted in exactly the same undemocratic way that they did.
Maybe we all have a little Stalin inside us.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primitive slumpism
“You're right about the enduring myth of the 'slump around the corner' amongst the far Left but even if it came, there's no particular reason to think it would revive the Left.
I think 30s Leftism owed more to the aftermath of the Russian Revolution and a fear of encroaching fascism than the effects of the Depression.
Indeed Trotsky ridiculed thinking along the lines of 'the worse it is, the better for us' as 'primitive slumpism'. Irish peasants, during what is wrongly called the Irish Famine and what was a deep as a Depression as can be, didn't turn Left and combine to force the end to the exporting food but instead were atomised into just trying to keep their own family alive.
Local government has maybe trailblazed the 'Uniparty' route, as I call it. The last Left councils were gone by the late 80s and council leaders have been pretty much interchangeable managers since that point.
But I still think that capitalism will produce its own demise. There will never be full compliance when a worker can see that a boss does less than her or him but walks out the door with ten times more.
The primitive communism of kids - let’s share it all out - endures through the lifetime consciousness of most. If I could work out how to get from that and similar to smashing the Uniparty and then onward to the grassy glades of socialism, well, you’d all be in the Southpawpunch party.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stalinism v Capitalism
“That may be your view, but please be sure never to call yourself Trotskyists.
Trotsky wrote the ‘Revolution ‘Betrayed’ in 1937. It’s about Stalinism, the very system that was shortly to kill him and which had already taken many he knew. He is very clear in his conclusion that despite every murderous deviation and perversion, and despite it no longer being socialist, he still supported and defended the Soviet Union as a historic great advance.
And the masses benefited from the power of the Stalinist countries postwar - such as the African liberation movements that were supported or the mass Stalinist communist movements that could have taken control in places like Indonesia and probably best of all, the defeat of the strongest imperial power in Vietnam. These showed the ongoing benefits, despite their non socialist nature, of the deformed and degenerated workers states.
You all stick with your comfortable bourgeois democracies.”
Tuesday, 3 July 2007
Monday, 25 June 2007
The best of my comments from my site, Southpawpunch - and on other blogs
As mentioned last week, this week’s post is another joint post with my main site Southpawpunch and features what I think are the most interesting of my comments that I have left on my site (in reply to others).
As I said, "pulling them out to the main site, Southpawpunch, will make them easier to find." This post also includes some of comments that I have made this week on other blogs (at bottom).
I’ll resume with the usual format at Southpawpunch next week whilst this site will continue as the place for the best of my comments.
====================================================================================
All from Southpawpunch:
The SPGB’s internationalism
"Well, I’m not sure that I have ever mentioned the SPGB before but yes, you deserve credit for your call for a borderless world – but aren’t the only Lefts to do so.
But I think you’re wrong in ‘criticising all the self determination and national liberation movements.’ For example, the great wave of African movements, from the 50s onwards, could have brought socialism but instead at least liberated millions from direct occupation."
08/05/07
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The long 80s
"I remember, say in 1985, promising that when the Tories were finally removed (which I thought would be far into the future, say 1988?) we were going to drive round the posh area in Cheshire, where I partially grew up, playing the Red Flag out loud and generally annoying the locals.
It didn't quite turn out like that."
19/03/07
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kronstadt
"I knew my Kronstadt stuff once enough to debate - read all the Goldman etc
I can only say principles now.
If, despite being good revolutionaries, the Kronstadters were aiding the Whites, and even if they were completely unaware of this, or were doing it unknowingly - then the repression was legitimate.
If they weren't, it wasn't.
Maybe it's a London thing, in particular, but most 'anarchists' I knew were just interested in (their own) alternative lifestyle and had a very snooty (would be the correct word) attitude to anyone who didn't, say, dye their hair pink. I have met some good ones, though."
19/03/07
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Racism
"It’s interesting that ALL the UK media is now officially ‘anti-racist’ on issues like this, so Jade Goody was Public Enemy No.1 for a day, even with the rightwing press like The Sun and despite her quite mild, but none the less bigoted, comments.
If you rang any talk radio station in the UK and said, ‘I think Jade may have a point about Indians’ they would doubtless just cut you.
Now to be clear, there is acceptable racism in the media on other issues e.g. against asylum seekers, Roma, east European immigrants, Muslims, etc.
Personally I think such censorship is bad. If you want to fight with ideas you need them to be expressed, it makes stuff like EastEnders unrealistic and also, call me a liberal, but I also do think censorship is just wrong."
26/01/07
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The future of communism
"I don't know that I am advocating post Trotskyism. I am certainly not arguing for any dilution in revolutionary socialism. I am arguing that Trotskyism, let's call it revolutionary socialism in C21 won't necessary solely be based upon the 'unbroken thread' upheld by a few thousand (mainly) Westerners."
-
"I suppose two passing people with political views will inevitably agree on a few things - if you gave me 100 statements by Cameron (the Tory leader), I may agree with a couple.
I used to think that the very sharp denunciations of, for example, Pabloism, made by people I knew - 25 years ago in Stockport and Manchester, to keep in the theme of my article - could be a bit sectarian. I still do.
But another way of looking at it is a bit like something else that happened then - being smacked in the mouth ('Are you looking me, pal? - smack! Which was just a northern way of saying 'Nothing personal, mate, I just feel a bit violent').
My tooth developed a small crack that I thought nothing of but which gradually lengthened and deepened over the years.
Maybe I should have realised then that small differences can grow. Not long ago, the whole part of that tooth fell away and left a raging infection underneath.
Likewise whilst discussions at present, on whether to join the LP or not can, at worse, just lead to potshots across blogs. But if things ever do kick off they would be machine gun fire across opposing barricades."
-
(From Dave Osler - "But Southpawpunch, what shines through from your post is that you know - in your heart of hearts - that Trotskyism is finished. You just haven't got the balls to say it.")
"First I think Trotskyism = revolutionary socialism = communism. I don’t think you do. But finished how? You give no detail.
Few supporters of revolutionary socialism? Yes, but then maybe more than 10% of the French electorate may again vote for ostensible Trots in the first round of the Presidential election.
Finished organisationally? Yes, there is no credible international but that could possibly change.
Finished policy wise i.e. it’s wrong - No, It’s right. Clearly many areas need new thinking e.g. green issues but I think the fundamentals are as true now as before.
It doesn’t matter that the Aztec chocolate bar became very unpopular and was discontinued long ago. It still remains the finest chocolate bar and could again reconquer the confectionery shelves. You may have changed to Snickers but that doesn’t change the iron law on what delivers and what just gets you through as few pangs of hunger."
-
"It's the name of the thing we propose but still we must change it.
Socialism – Gordon Brown supports it, so does Ségolène Royal and so did Stalin. It's clearly not the same as what we support and they have custody of the name.
I agree we don't have the power to change it - if I made up a name now it would just be an eccentric quirk at Southpawpunch (but then again may get me first mention in the Oxford English Dictionary's etymology section - immortality) but the movement must."
11/01/07
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trotsky’s long dead and publications
"Your mentioning of the long dead Ukrainian is disingenuous. You’ll find no pre-war statement here or similar. I much prefer the term ‘revolutionary socialism’ to 'Trotskyism'.
As you will know, there's a big difference between publication such as yours and agitational ones that are written by communists.
Your magazine (Notes from the Border) makes an interesting stab at explaining how things are. I don't need to tell you that the point of this blog (and similar) is what are we going to do about it?
You can read page after page on what David Shayler’s real agenda is - or in Lobster you may have read endless stuff about who really shot JFK. It is interesting to have a glimpse through whatever lies may be commonly believed - and I enjoy reading the findings - but it changes little.
Personally, I am not overly concerned on the exact level of deviousness of the state – whether it is just honestly brutal or slippery malicious - it still needs to be taken on and it’s that I prefer to write about."
17/01/07
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saudi Arabia
"I think that any Saudi revolution would be different to Gulf ones, as the native Arab population would be key. So I am not sure Indians, Filipinos and others may play the role that you suggest. As you say, there are 18m Saudis and 5m foreigners in the country.
I enjoyed reading your article but note you say the regime could fall in a moment. I think it could but such comments have been made for decades. I also think that Saudi Arabia is a good example of what’s wrong with left reformism. Unless you smash the rulers in Saudi with no sign of weakness, they would certainly eliminate you permanently and ruthlessly.
I agree with you completely about the lack of any Left impact there. We all look forward to that changing. I wonder whether this has always been the case e.g. have the large CPM or CPI (Indian communist parties) ever tried (they have reasonable influence amongst south Indians, who form a fair part of their expats)?
Was there any Left organisation in the more liberal city of Jeddah before the conservative measures in the 80s that banned women from driving and forced the veil on some (although some women, near Yemen, still don’t wear it)?
There are lots of unanswered questions about Saudi e.g. what happened to the once numerous Jews? I suspect there may be a fair bit of hidden history or destroyed history. An ancient church discovered near Jubail was ‘disappeared’ not long ago."
23/11/06
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Will the cops be oppressive in a socialist state?
"It’s a fair point.
My view is that I wouldn’t care if some equivalent of the cops checked my ID in a socialist state. I don’t object to the role and in any revolutionary situation, I would expect heightened surveillance.
The ‘cops’ would be different e.g. preventing private trading. I’d support them doing this in the same way I would point out the direction a fleeing hit and run driver has gone to any present day cops chasing him.
But I do want the state to whither away and I’m sure there would be abuses until it did.
I’m confident any problems are much more likely to be solved when you have, for example, delegates who implement laws answerable to you (as a delegates, not ‘representatives’) and who are immediately recallable. There would, I think, be a lot less likelihood of crime when people have enough or are less inclined to commit anti-social behaviour (e.g. vandalism) through having worthwhile activities to occupy them."
16/11/06
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How could Lefts be in the same organisation, with such wide differences between them?
"Yes, I would support the Taliban in their fight against the occupiers. That's support for their military struggle and not for any of their reactionary policies. In the same way I would indeed give any spare RPGs I might happen to have to Hezbollah at the present time.
I am guessing you wouldn't agree with such support but that's a good example that relates to the call for unity.
I don't think there would be a problem at all being in the same organisation in the UK with such opposed views - it would make no or very little practical difference and, if the organisation was asked the question you pose, the response would be that 'we have different views on this.'
Now of course if you are in Lebanon, Israel, etc. you need a strategy. There, ideally you would work to the majority line (which would of course be best determined internationally - but not essential). I know that's not always going to happen, but I think that can be lived with, as the alternative is a lot worse.
So yes, in extremis, you could even end up on different sides of the barricades but I personally think I could work with comrades in the afternoon after exchanging shots with them in the morning!
That really would be the very worst-case scenario. I can see the holes in my arguments BUT I don't think this should distract from the very large majority of work that can be done with broad agreement.
This may sound unlikely but I think the pull of a hegemonic and accepted international (or national) organisation would make you not want to put yourself outside of that.
Although I have heard of the Socialist Green Unity Coalition I am not familiar with the detail. My view on any unity is that we should work with any socialist from left LP members leftwards.
With Greens it would depend. If there is agreement on a minimum set of policy, then yes. So no to rightwing Greens and yes to left Greens.
I don't buy the classic answer that only movements based on or from workers or their bodies like TUs can be worked with as bodies like Greens can turn right.
It is correct that Greens can go such (e.g. in Germany) but then workers parties can head even further right e.g. JVP in Sri Lanka, endless 'official communist' parties that were in power, Labour, etc. I judge them on what they argue for in the here and now, not some spurious dated 'analysis' of whom they supposedly represent."
28/07/06
====================================================================================
Southpawpunch on other blogs - this week:
Islamists
"I’m also sure that there are also various fundamentalist sects - Christian, ‘New Age’ and more that threaten death or at least very bad things to those who leave.
But none of that would interest you would it? It’s just Muslim this or Islam that in your monomaniacal obsession with just one of countless superstitious belief systems that maybe the majority of the planet participate in.”
-
You are, as always, selective in your information, Modernity. The Taliban have undertaken many vicious activities, I fully acknowledge it and support them in full knowledge of this.
But you make no mention of the much higher level of imperialist murderous activities e.g. the very rare apology this week by the US forces for a deadly 10-mile random highway-killing spree by their troops. Who do you think can kill more - Taliban AK47s or US aircraft?
And you can indeed be in the same camp as fascists and correct, as Marxists acknowledge. For example, the Indian National Army was worthy of support. They were a Japanese funded army that used captured POWs and pre-war Indian nationalists to fight to kick the British out of India.
Of course the Japanese, whilst promising a free India to the INA, intended no such thing. The INA knew that - they expected to try and come through the middle to remove both invaders - they were right to do so and were a 100 times better than the Congress collaborators in their idea of how to free India.
It can be hard having the courage to be against your own country or even the majority view of Lefts. When the heat turns up and the social chauvinism runs riot, many a former left will capitulate. But it’s ‘moral’ to stay focussed on the big picture, despite all this pressure - such as the 650,000 dead because of the invasion of Iraq."
Shiraz Socialist
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State monitoring of Lefts
"If I had to guess, I'd think that the intelligence services probably used electronic monitoring more than informants - cheaper and more reliable, but I also think that there may be more active than people think.
If there's one set of people who have an exaggerated impression of the importance of left groups, apart from the left itself, it's the cops/MI5 etc.
Information that we have on the state’s activities is slender but what I take to be true, snippets have been uncovered - such as MI5 agents in caravans in Skegness monitoring the adjoining SWP summer event and cops under the stage recording proceedings at a Militant conference.
The former WRP and groups like the Spartacists take one wrong approach to this - they were/are paranoid and have both taken mad actions because of their perception of the threat and have smeared rivals as touts.
The SWP take the other wrong approach - they laugh at the threat and malign any suggesting basic security as being toytown politicos playing at being counter-spies.
I think there is also a danger from the social gnomes who do things like become special constables and are not a million miles from the 'corbeaux' who wrote many letters to the authorities in wartime France denouncing their neighbours as communists and Jews, etc.
A modern day incarnation of these sorts of people, those who like to suck up to authority, are those in organisations like 'Vigil'. They got a lot of glowing media coverage a little while ago, their method was interesting - they infiltrated Islamist web boards and both acted as agent provocateurs and tried to entrap Islamists.
I think it only sensible to conclude that such lowlifes operate on Left boards as well. I think comrades should exercise more self-restraint. It may be hard not to respond to someone who is trying to paint you as being not left at all but you need to think that the 'militant' questioning your commitment may in fact be a sad individual looking to ingratiate themselves with the authorities by seeking to set you up.
There's a correct third route. Use basic security that may thwart some of the more amateur attempts of the state but also will help if things do ever turn left and what today seems just a lifestyle becomes a matter of life and death
I recommend a couple of article about security - http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/static/security.html
and http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/static/security.html"
Dave's Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flickr, Yahoo’s photosharing network, is criticised for censoring
"I think it's an interesting wake up call. Flickr are superb at the Bodyshop school of capitalism – ‘we’re just doing it for love and to help people and our ethics are beyond reproach.’
So on Flickr, you see endless naive posts by people very politely taking up customer service issues on their forums.
It's time people realised they are just like your phone company - you pay them for a service, they do as little as they can get away with and make a bundle off you. Your attitude to them should be the same as any other company. They’re not your ‘friends’."
Let's Take Over
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A celebration (by some) of 30 years of punk with a chance to win commemorative t-shirts
"I can do no better than reproduce what I wrote elsewhere on that band (The Clash).
‘I’ve always found the cult of Joe Strummer, on the Left, strange.
I remember people would do things like carrying Beatboxes playing Clash songs in the mid/late 80s on demos. I thought it had gone but I have seen some revival recently...
A little of the music is ace, much so-so - … the political line throughout is soft Left or third-worldist (so admittedly better than the present all non-political stuff).
My memory of the Clash, growing up, was a very few good tunes but also the laughable posing - the 'guerrilla' ' style photos in scenes of urban deprivation which even us 14 years olds could see through … and, when I did see the band, them being worse than the (lamentable) Theatre of Hate who supported them at The Manchester Apollo in 1980.
But the life - Strummer was a Chilterns dwelling Squire with kids in public school. A hypocrite.’
But I can do better in talking about punk as a whole and people who wear t-shirts like that. I can quote Jah Wobble, writing in the Independent on Sunday, yesterday. He was talking about an Alan Parker (a hack biographer of Sid Vicious).
He said that he is “is one of a coterie of blokes that eke out a living by stripping the last remains from the carcass of punk. Most of them are from the provinces and the majority of them seems to be in their late thirties/early forties and therefore would have been no more than 12 or 13 when it happened…They all gather at the funerals of punk luminaries, where they adopt the personae of old soldiers attending the wakes of fallen heroes…Rest assured Sid would have hatred them all… It is the absolute antithesis of the punk scene in 1977.’
The past has gone. Out with old and in with new. Burn it down and start again. The pleadings by others to win the t-shirts are both risible and very fucking sad.
If awarded the shirts I promise to BURN all of them straightaway, photograph the whole process and publish a comprehensive set of photos of the action on my website or a linked one.
I’ll even throw in a shot (if I can get it sent to me in time) of me, aged 15, pogoing to a long forgotten Manchester punk / new wave band to conclude the ‘Who is Southpawpunch? Poll’ on my site."
Dave's Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A call for even more Southpawpunch websites?
"Yes, Strappy as it happens I was thinking along the same lines.
Maybe ‘Southpawpunch Energy’ - switch your energy supplier to Southpawpunch and get discounted subscriptions to various left publications and a complete refund of all your energy payments once the utility companies have been expropriated.
Or perhaps ‘Southpawpunch Dating’? Are you Billy No Marx? Do women laugh at you when you invite them back to your bed-sit to have a look through old copies of Socialist Challenge? Join ‘Southpawpunch Dating’ to get the details of 3 hot trot women.
Be aware though that, as the Left ever shrinks, you may well have expelled your prospective date, already slept with her or she could be your sister."
Stroppyblog
As I said, "pulling them out to the main site, Southpawpunch, will make them easier to find." This post also includes some of comments that I have made this week on other blogs (at bottom).
I’ll resume with the usual format at Southpawpunch next week whilst this site will continue as the place for the best of my comments.
====================================================================================
All from Southpawpunch:
The SPGB’s internationalism
"Well, I’m not sure that I have ever mentioned the SPGB before but yes, you deserve credit for your call for a borderless world – but aren’t the only Lefts to do so.
But I think you’re wrong in ‘criticising all the self determination and national liberation movements.’ For example, the great wave of African movements, from the 50s onwards, could have brought socialism but instead at least liberated millions from direct occupation."
08/05/07
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The long 80s
"I remember, say in 1985, promising that when the Tories were finally removed (which I thought would be far into the future, say 1988?) we were going to drive round the posh area in Cheshire, where I partially grew up, playing the Red Flag out loud and generally annoying the locals.
It didn't quite turn out like that."
19/03/07
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kronstadt
"I knew my Kronstadt stuff once enough to debate - read all the Goldman etc
I can only say principles now.
If, despite being good revolutionaries, the Kronstadters were aiding the Whites, and even if they were completely unaware of this, or were doing it unknowingly - then the repression was legitimate.
If they weren't, it wasn't.
Maybe it's a London thing, in particular, but most 'anarchists' I knew were just interested in (their own) alternative lifestyle and had a very snooty (would be the correct word) attitude to anyone who didn't, say, dye their hair pink. I have met some good ones, though."
19/03/07
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Racism
"It’s interesting that ALL the UK media is now officially ‘anti-racist’ on issues like this, so Jade Goody was Public Enemy No.1 for a day, even with the rightwing press like The Sun and despite her quite mild, but none the less bigoted, comments.
If you rang any talk radio station in the UK and said, ‘I think Jade may have a point about Indians’ they would doubtless just cut you.
Now to be clear, there is acceptable racism in the media on other issues e.g. against asylum seekers, Roma, east European immigrants, Muslims, etc.
Personally I think such censorship is bad. If you want to fight with ideas you need them to be expressed, it makes stuff like EastEnders unrealistic and also, call me a liberal, but I also do think censorship is just wrong."
26/01/07
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The future of communism
"I don't know that I am advocating post Trotskyism. I am certainly not arguing for any dilution in revolutionary socialism. I am arguing that Trotskyism, let's call it revolutionary socialism in C21 won't necessary solely be based upon the 'unbroken thread' upheld by a few thousand (mainly) Westerners."
-
"I suppose two passing people with political views will inevitably agree on a few things - if you gave me 100 statements by Cameron (the Tory leader), I may agree with a couple.
I used to think that the very sharp denunciations of, for example, Pabloism, made by people I knew - 25 years ago in Stockport and Manchester, to keep in the theme of my article - could be a bit sectarian. I still do.
But another way of looking at it is a bit like something else that happened then - being smacked in the mouth ('Are you looking me, pal? - smack! Which was just a northern way of saying 'Nothing personal, mate, I just feel a bit violent').
My tooth developed a small crack that I thought nothing of but which gradually lengthened and deepened over the years.
Maybe I should have realised then that small differences can grow. Not long ago, the whole part of that tooth fell away and left a raging infection underneath.
Likewise whilst discussions at present, on whether to join the LP or not can, at worse, just lead to potshots across blogs. But if things ever do kick off they would be machine gun fire across opposing barricades."
-
(From Dave Osler - "But Southpawpunch, what shines through from your post is that you know - in your heart of hearts - that Trotskyism is finished. You just haven't got the balls to say it.")
"First I think Trotskyism = revolutionary socialism = communism. I don’t think you do. But finished how? You give no detail.
Few supporters of revolutionary socialism? Yes, but then maybe more than 10% of the French electorate may again vote for ostensible Trots in the first round of the Presidential election.
Finished organisationally? Yes, there is no credible international but that could possibly change.
Finished policy wise i.e. it’s wrong - No, It’s right. Clearly many areas need new thinking e.g. green issues but I think the fundamentals are as true now as before.
It doesn’t matter that the Aztec chocolate bar became very unpopular and was discontinued long ago. It still remains the finest chocolate bar and could again reconquer the confectionery shelves. You may have changed to Snickers but that doesn’t change the iron law on what delivers and what just gets you through as few pangs of hunger."
-
"It's the name of the thing we propose but still we must change it.
Socialism – Gordon Brown supports it, so does Ségolène Royal and so did Stalin. It's clearly not the same as what we support and they have custody of the name.
I agree we don't have the power to change it - if I made up a name now it would just be an eccentric quirk at Southpawpunch (but then again may get me first mention in the Oxford English Dictionary's etymology section - immortality) but the movement must."
11/01/07
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trotsky’s long dead and publications
"Your mentioning of the long dead Ukrainian is disingenuous. You’ll find no pre-war statement here or similar. I much prefer the term ‘revolutionary socialism’ to 'Trotskyism'.
As you will know, there's a big difference between publication such as yours and agitational ones that are written by communists.
Your magazine (Notes from the Border) makes an interesting stab at explaining how things are. I don't need to tell you that the point of this blog (and similar) is what are we going to do about it?
You can read page after page on what David Shayler’s real agenda is - or in Lobster you may have read endless stuff about who really shot JFK. It is interesting to have a glimpse through whatever lies may be commonly believed - and I enjoy reading the findings - but it changes little.
Personally, I am not overly concerned on the exact level of deviousness of the state – whether it is just honestly brutal or slippery malicious - it still needs to be taken on and it’s that I prefer to write about."
17/01/07
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saudi Arabia
"I think that any Saudi revolution would be different to Gulf ones, as the native Arab population would be key. So I am not sure Indians, Filipinos and others may play the role that you suggest. As you say, there are 18m Saudis and 5m foreigners in the country.
I enjoyed reading your article but note you say the regime could fall in a moment. I think it could but such comments have been made for decades. I also think that Saudi Arabia is a good example of what’s wrong with left reformism. Unless you smash the rulers in Saudi with no sign of weakness, they would certainly eliminate you permanently and ruthlessly.
I agree with you completely about the lack of any Left impact there. We all look forward to that changing. I wonder whether this has always been the case e.g. have the large CPM or CPI (Indian communist parties) ever tried (they have reasonable influence amongst south Indians, who form a fair part of their expats)?
Was there any Left organisation in the more liberal city of Jeddah before the conservative measures in the 80s that banned women from driving and forced the veil on some (although some women, near Yemen, still don’t wear it)?
There are lots of unanswered questions about Saudi e.g. what happened to the once numerous Jews? I suspect there may be a fair bit of hidden history or destroyed history. An ancient church discovered near Jubail was ‘disappeared’ not long ago."
23/11/06
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Will the cops be oppressive in a socialist state?
"It’s a fair point.
My view is that I wouldn’t care if some equivalent of the cops checked my ID in a socialist state. I don’t object to the role and in any revolutionary situation, I would expect heightened surveillance.
The ‘cops’ would be different e.g. preventing private trading. I’d support them doing this in the same way I would point out the direction a fleeing hit and run driver has gone to any present day cops chasing him.
But I do want the state to whither away and I’m sure there would be abuses until it did.
I’m confident any problems are much more likely to be solved when you have, for example, delegates who implement laws answerable to you (as a delegates, not ‘representatives’) and who are immediately recallable. There would, I think, be a lot less likelihood of crime when people have enough or are less inclined to commit anti-social behaviour (e.g. vandalism) through having worthwhile activities to occupy them."
16/11/06
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How could Lefts be in the same organisation, with such wide differences between them?
"Yes, I would support the Taliban in their fight against the occupiers. That's support for their military struggle and not for any of their reactionary policies. In the same way I would indeed give any spare RPGs I might happen to have to Hezbollah at the present time.
I am guessing you wouldn't agree with such support but that's a good example that relates to the call for unity.
I don't think there would be a problem at all being in the same organisation in the UK with such opposed views - it would make no or very little practical difference and, if the organisation was asked the question you pose, the response would be that 'we have different views on this.'
Now of course if you are in Lebanon, Israel, etc. you need a strategy. There, ideally you would work to the majority line (which would of course be best determined internationally - but not essential). I know that's not always going to happen, but I think that can be lived with, as the alternative is a lot worse.
So yes, in extremis, you could even end up on different sides of the barricades but I personally think I could work with comrades in the afternoon after exchanging shots with them in the morning!
That really would be the very worst-case scenario. I can see the holes in my arguments BUT I don't think this should distract from the very large majority of work that can be done with broad agreement.
This may sound unlikely but I think the pull of a hegemonic and accepted international (or national) organisation would make you not want to put yourself outside of that.
Although I have heard of the Socialist Green Unity Coalition I am not familiar with the detail. My view on any unity is that we should work with any socialist from left LP members leftwards.
With Greens it would depend. If there is agreement on a minimum set of policy, then yes. So no to rightwing Greens and yes to left Greens.
I don't buy the classic answer that only movements based on or from workers or their bodies like TUs can be worked with as bodies like Greens can turn right.
It is correct that Greens can go such (e.g. in Germany) but then workers parties can head even further right e.g. JVP in Sri Lanka, endless 'official communist' parties that were in power, Labour, etc. I judge them on what they argue for in the here and now, not some spurious dated 'analysis' of whom they supposedly represent."
28/07/06
====================================================================================
Southpawpunch on other blogs - this week:
Islamists
"I’m also sure that there are also various fundamentalist sects - Christian, ‘New Age’ and more that threaten death or at least very bad things to those who leave.
But none of that would interest you would it? It’s just Muslim this or Islam that in your monomaniacal obsession with just one of countless superstitious belief systems that maybe the majority of the planet participate in.”
-
You are, as always, selective in your information, Modernity. The Taliban have undertaken many vicious activities, I fully acknowledge it and support them in full knowledge of this.
But you make no mention of the much higher level of imperialist murderous activities e.g. the very rare apology this week by the US forces for a deadly 10-mile random highway-killing spree by their troops. Who do you think can kill more - Taliban AK47s or US aircraft?
And you can indeed be in the same camp as fascists and correct, as Marxists acknowledge. For example, the Indian National Army was worthy of support. They were a Japanese funded army that used captured POWs and pre-war Indian nationalists to fight to kick the British out of India.
Of course the Japanese, whilst promising a free India to the INA, intended no such thing. The INA knew that - they expected to try and come through the middle to remove both invaders - they were right to do so and were a 100 times better than the Congress collaborators in their idea of how to free India.
It can be hard having the courage to be against your own country or even the majority view of Lefts. When the heat turns up and the social chauvinism runs riot, many a former left will capitulate. But it’s ‘moral’ to stay focussed on the big picture, despite all this pressure - such as the 650,000 dead because of the invasion of Iraq."
Shiraz Socialist
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State monitoring of Lefts
"If I had to guess, I'd think that the intelligence services probably used electronic monitoring more than informants - cheaper and more reliable, but I also think that there may be more active than people think.
If there's one set of people who have an exaggerated impression of the importance of left groups, apart from the left itself, it's the cops/MI5 etc.
Information that we have on the state’s activities is slender but what I take to be true, snippets have been uncovered - such as MI5 agents in caravans in Skegness monitoring the adjoining SWP summer event and cops under the stage recording proceedings at a Militant conference.
The former WRP and groups like the Spartacists take one wrong approach to this - they were/are paranoid and have both taken mad actions because of their perception of the threat and have smeared rivals as touts.
The SWP take the other wrong approach - they laugh at the threat and malign any suggesting basic security as being toytown politicos playing at being counter-spies.
I think there is also a danger from the social gnomes who do things like become special constables and are not a million miles from the 'corbeaux' who wrote many letters to the authorities in wartime France denouncing their neighbours as communists and Jews, etc.
A modern day incarnation of these sorts of people, those who like to suck up to authority, are those in organisations like 'Vigil'. They got a lot of glowing media coverage a little while ago, their method was interesting - they infiltrated Islamist web boards and both acted as agent provocateurs and tried to entrap Islamists.
I think it only sensible to conclude that such lowlifes operate on Left boards as well. I think comrades should exercise more self-restraint. It may be hard not to respond to someone who is trying to paint you as being not left at all but you need to think that the 'militant' questioning your commitment may in fact be a sad individual looking to ingratiate themselves with the authorities by seeking to set you up.
There's a correct third route. Use basic security that may thwart some of the more amateur attempts of the state but also will help if things do ever turn left and what today seems just a lifestyle becomes a matter of life and death
I recommend a couple of article about security - http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/static/security.html
and http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/static/security.html"
Dave's Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flickr, Yahoo’s photosharing network, is criticised for censoring
"I think it's an interesting wake up call. Flickr are superb at the Bodyshop school of capitalism – ‘we’re just doing it for love and to help people and our ethics are beyond reproach.’
So on Flickr, you see endless naive posts by people very politely taking up customer service issues on their forums.
It's time people realised they are just like your phone company - you pay them for a service, they do as little as they can get away with and make a bundle off you. Your attitude to them should be the same as any other company. They’re not your ‘friends’."
Let's Take Over
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A celebration (by some) of 30 years of punk with a chance to win commemorative t-shirts
"I can do no better than reproduce what I wrote elsewhere on that band (The Clash).
‘I’ve always found the cult of Joe Strummer, on the Left, strange.
I remember people would do things like carrying Beatboxes playing Clash songs in the mid/late 80s on demos. I thought it had gone but I have seen some revival recently...
A little of the music is ace, much so-so - … the political line throughout is soft Left or third-worldist (so admittedly better than the present all non-political stuff).
My memory of the Clash, growing up, was a very few good tunes but also the laughable posing - the 'guerrilla' ' style photos in scenes of urban deprivation which even us 14 years olds could see through … and, when I did see the band, them being worse than the (lamentable) Theatre of Hate who supported them at The Manchester Apollo in 1980.
But the life - Strummer was a Chilterns dwelling Squire with kids in public school. A hypocrite.’
But I can do better in talking about punk as a whole and people who wear t-shirts like that. I can quote Jah Wobble, writing in the Independent on Sunday, yesterday. He was talking about an Alan Parker (a hack biographer of Sid Vicious).
He said that he is “is one of a coterie of blokes that eke out a living by stripping the last remains from the carcass of punk. Most of them are from the provinces and the majority of them seems to be in their late thirties/early forties and therefore would have been no more than 12 or 13 when it happened…They all gather at the funerals of punk luminaries, where they adopt the personae of old soldiers attending the wakes of fallen heroes…Rest assured Sid would have hatred them all… It is the absolute antithesis of the punk scene in 1977.’
The past has gone. Out with old and in with new. Burn it down and start again. The pleadings by others to win the t-shirts are both risible and very fucking sad.
If awarded the shirts I promise to BURN all of them straightaway, photograph the whole process and publish a comprehensive set of photos of the action on my website or a linked one.
I’ll even throw in a shot (if I can get it sent to me in time) of me, aged 15, pogoing to a long forgotten Manchester punk / new wave band to conclude the ‘Who is Southpawpunch? Poll’ on my site."
Dave's Part
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A call for even more Southpawpunch websites?
"Yes, Strappy as it happens I was thinking along the same lines.
Maybe ‘Southpawpunch Energy’ - switch your energy supplier to Southpawpunch and get discounted subscriptions to various left publications and a complete refund of all your energy payments once the utility companies have been expropriated.
Or perhaps ‘Southpawpunch Dating’? Are you Billy No Marx? Do women laugh at you when you invite them back to your bed-sit to have a look through old copies of Socialist Challenge? Join ‘Southpawpunch Dating’ to get the details of 3 hot trot women.
Be aware though that, as the Left ever shrinks, you may well have expelled your prospective date, already slept with her or she could be your sister."
Stroppyblog
Wednesday, 20 June 2007
Welcome to Southpawpunch Comments - The best of my comments that I make elsewhere
I’m pleased to be making this week’s article a joint post with my new site Southpawpunch Comments. I will use my new site to publish what I think are the most interesting comments that I make on other sites.I’ve been thinking that some of what I write isn’t easily available to those who may wish to read it - unless they go to the same sites as I do.
And points I make elsewhere can be hard to find later - comments usually aren’t picked up by search engines and it can be hard keeping track of all the different threads to which I may post.
And let's be frank - many are sharp, acerbic, deal with difficult topics and are a lot bolder than the mush and mess littering both 'Marxist' and moderate sites. Maybe some of my comments are worth more than evaporating when the historical work of the reformist sites is finally done and they are forced off the stage of history.
Mainly from memory, I’ve collected a few of my previous comments (below) under the name of the blog where I first made them. (If you remember anything else you think worth including, please do let me know by sending me a link).
Next week I shall also publish some of my previous comments made on Southpawpunch and that are currently just hidden away in the comments boxes. Pulling them out to the main site will make them easier to find.
But in future I’ll be adding comments on a chronological basis, not by blog - I’ll post maybe a weekly article or a less frequent round-up (when I don’t say much) of my most recent comments at Southpawpunch Comments.
I won’t publish anything here until the original thread appears to have finished. Some comments that I will publish here will have minor edits - for clarity, spelling or grammar.
Of course, this is all rather one-sided. I will give a little background about the issue that was being discussed but I won’t be including the comments and the original posts of others - articles will just get far too long if I include everyone else’s text.
I also won’t be allowing comments on this site. I think debates read better when they continue where they started. I’ll publish a link (detailed links will be find on the Southpawlinks site) - if you want to make a point, or find out more, you can go to the original site.
I’d love to combine Southpawpunch, Southpawpunch Comments and Southpawpunch Life into one website with a multi-stranded front page that included all of these and more. If anyone knows how to do this, incorporating these blogs in a cheap (or free) and simple way, please do let me know.
I don’t know of anyone else who has published a site to report the comments that they make elsewhere. Can you copyright an idea like this? I’m sure many a multi-national has protected far more nebulous concepts. I intend ensuring that all the Southpawpunch sites are as innovative as the technology allows - this new site is one of the many new ideas that I try.
Tuesday, 19 June 2007
Stroppyblog
Strappybird welcomes Paris Hilton’s re-imprisonment.
"100% wrong.
Socialists don't celebrate some person being sent to jail for 45 days for driving on a suspended licence.
Socialists don't dismiss out of hand any manifestation of mental illness as 'making it up'.
Socialists don't support unfair treatment of even the super rich for reasons like this - I read it's common for people to just serve 10% of their jail time because of prison overcrowding in LA.
I don't know that much about her but someone living the life she does probably would find prison especially harsh - a million miles away from the live she normally leads so it's not that surprising that it lead to tears, like a child. Liberate Paris (and on to Berlin!)
Your political trajectory is clear - Sussex Womens Institute beckons."
13 June 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Louisefeminista looks back on 2006 and namechecks Southpawpunch as an ‘ultraleft’.
"Southpawpunch - Ultra-left adventurist or consistent revolutionary socialist who is not swayed by the vagaries of the ever-changing face of capitalist exploitation?
It’s interesting that you look back on your first year of blogging in which you have frequently looked askance at the ‘ultra left’ ‘Trotskyism’ of your ‘yoof’. From being an ostensible 4th to a ‘Labour Less Blairite’ is a long road but a path well travelled.
But how will you look back in 10 years?
‘Colleagues,
I’m sorry that this will be last annual review at the StroppyBlogLouiseFeminista Multimodal Communications Portal ™ following our successful sale to Murdoch & Sons ‘WomenTalk2Women’ platform.
It ’s time to look back. 6 promotions on the ‘Trot’ (sic) in the mid 00s enabled me to empower myself and set up in business as a ‘workers co-operative’ with Stroppy and establish ‘Revanch™ - by women, 4 women.’ No more exploitation of me by men!
The combination of woman manufactured product (sourced at 29c per hour in Uganda), women management through a workers co-operative (net profits of £1.3M each trousered last year by the co-operative - me and Stroppy) and our sassy initial marketing (following the trail of many successful Brighton gay entrepreneurs and that other Sussex woman who made a difference - Anita Roddick) we marketed initially to the BDSM crowd; greenies (all our rubber is sourced from land indigenous to native Indian tribes) and the ‘socially concerned’ through utilising our famous pledge ‘I promise to give to Oxfam every time Revanch™ makes me cum!’.
Now that I am a successful businesswoman whose microchipped sexual fulfilment tools can be found in the high street, from Mothercare to Starbucks, I have more time to return to my first love - radical politics!
So I am very pleased to confirm that, following my stellar performance as a Liberal peer, Lembit (as Prime Minister) has personally recommended me to replace his 7th wife, Lady Cheeky-Opik of Transylvania as Chair of the Blood Transfusion Service following the unfortunate theft of 2.3 million litres of donated blood serum by his 1st wife, the sister of the 7th.
So with your Revanch™ product in your bag and myself heading the Blood Transfusion Service, there really is no need for women ever to exchange bodily secretions ever again with men!!"
29 December 2006
"100% wrong.
Socialists don't celebrate some person being sent to jail for 45 days for driving on a suspended licence.
Socialists don't dismiss out of hand any manifestation of mental illness as 'making it up'.
Socialists don't support unfair treatment of even the super rich for reasons like this - I read it's common for people to just serve 10% of their jail time because of prison overcrowding in LA.
I don't know that much about her but someone living the life she does probably would find prison especially harsh - a million miles away from the live she normally leads so it's not that surprising that it lead to tears, like a child. Liberate Paris (and on to Berlin!)
Your political trajectory is clear - Sussex Womens Institute beckons."
13 June 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Louisefeminista looks back on 2006 and namechecks Southpawpunch as an ‘ultraleft’.
"Southpawpunch - Ultra-left adventurist or consistent revolutionary socialist who is not swayed by the vagaries of the ever-changing face of capitalist exploitation?
It’s interesting that you look back on your first year of blogging in which you have frequently looked askance at the ‘ultra left’ ‘Trotskyism’ of your ‘yoof’. From being an ostensible 4th to a ‘Labour Less Blairite’ is a long road but a path well travelled.
But how will you look back in 10 years?
‘Colleagues,
I’m sorry that this will be last annual review at the StroppyBlogLouiseFeminista Multimodal Communications Portal ™ following our successful sale to Murdoch & Sons ‘WomenTalk2Women’ platform.
It ’s time to look back. 6 promotions on the ‘Trot’ (sic) in the mid 00s enabled me to empower myself and set up in business as a ‘workers co-operative’ with Stroppy and establish ‘Revanch™ - by women, 4 women.’ No more exploitation of me by men!
The combination of woman manufactured product (sourced at 29c per hour in Uganda), women management through a workers co-operative (net profits of £1.3M each trousered last year by the co-operative - me and Stroppy) and our sassy initial marketing (following the trail of many successful Brighton gay entrepreneurs and that other Sussex woman who made a difference - Anita Roddick) we marketed initially to the BDSM crowd; greenies (all our rubber is sourced from land indigenous to native Indian tribes) and the ‘socially concerned’ through utilising our famous pledge ‘I promise to give to Oxfam every time Revanch™ makes me cum!’.
Now that I am a successful businesswoman whose microchipped sexual fulfilment tools can be found in the high street, from Mothercare to Starbucks, I have more time to return to my first love - radical politics!
So I am very pleased to confirm that, following my stellar performance as a Liberal peer, Lembit (as Prime Minister) has personally recommended me to replace his 7th wife, Lady Cheeky-Opik of Transylvania as Chair of the Blood Transfusion Service following the unfortunate theft of 2.3 million litres of donated blood serum by his 1st wife, the sister of the 7th.
So with your Revanch™ product in your bag and myself heading the Blood Transfusion Service, there really is no need for women ever to exchange bodily secretions ever again with men!!"
29 December 2006
Dave's Part
Despite McDonnell’s humiliation, Labour Lefts play hard to get with desperate Reds.
"When I first moved to London long ago, my idiot North West friends and relatives asked, ‘isn’t it dangerous, when you go out to clubs and the like?
And I replied, no, it’s a lot worse in small town England. Places like Lefttown.
In London, there’s no history. You’re not going to come across someone who you had a fight with in the bus station a few years ago. There’s no chance that you will meet your Ex’s now b/f who you used to know from the terraces and who is after your blood. There’s also no chance that you will meet those renegades you expelled or have your former Bennite friends pretend that night together ever happened.
And you know you’ve got to stop going to those small town clubs. But still you go.
So now you may reckon your chances with Labour Left man or woman, hanging around near the dance floor. But they are only here, most probably temporarily, because the bouncers denied them entry into Gordon’s Wine Bar.
It’s too early to tell whether they will be let back in there later or are permanently excluded but that’s where they want to be. They hate slumming it here with you and whilst they may make conversation, any number you get from them will be fake.
They even tell you to your face ‘We're not joining in for some no-mark sex’. They wouldn’t if you were God’s Gift, either (a mass Left or even communist party). They’re incurable reformists. Go and chat up someone else."
--
"I’d say Left Labour isn’t (at say 15,000) 10x bigger than the non-Labour left. Maybe 6000 in all other organisations. And the average SWP member, for example, works 3x as hard as a LP type. And how Left is the Labour Left that includes cuts-making councillors and where McDonnell’s platform was no more left than Meacher’s?
And sure, there are very few Lefts anywhere, but electoral support isn’t a perfect measure of this, e.g. richer parties have the resources to do better than they would.
And yes, Dave, the end of revolutionary socialism (like the once large Temperance movement) is more likely than John Rees, Peter Taaffe, Alan Clinton et al getting into bed together. The conditions of capitalism will always create a fightback although that doesn’t mean a thinking and organised fightback will exist.
I’ve written a strategy - Organisational unity for starters. Sure, no-one’s listening but how is LP membership a means to a socialist world?
It may feel like onanism at present, being a Red, but maybe some foreign siren - speaking French, Italian or Spanish maybe, - will be along to rescue us Reds if we just hold out."
--
"What I meant by "It may feel like onanism at present, being a Red, but maybe some foreign siren - speaking French, Italian or Spanish maybe, - will be along to rescue us Reds if we just hold out." was the possibility that revolution or similar, in say Argentina, could come to the rescue of us very isolated British reds.
I thought that would be clear but maybe it wasn't."
26 May 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave criticises Workers Power for being ultraleft
“I think Dave is correct in his criticisms of both the language and method that Workers Power are using.
There’s nothing wrong with ‘demanding’ but it’s not the best language to use unless there are lots of you and you are powerful enough to attempt to put your words into action. The desired outcome is reasonable enough - if you had muscle - and I don’t see anything wrong in having a goal but, yes, it’s currently unachievable and it reads silly to raise it like this. I think the WP comrades might (they might not) rethink their language if this was pointed out to them.
But I think it’s telling of comrades, to look at the sort of venom they will use against those who aren’t - in the whole gamut of politics, from fascism to communism - that far away from them.
In the same way that Right Labour or Centre Labour will act in way that shows they think Left Labour is from the Ark or beyond the pale, (e.g. I’ve seen them call Campaign Group types ‘mad Trot wreckers’, scum etc) so those commenting here who have made their peace with capitalism now sound just the same as the other commentators who have never contemplated the revolutionary alternative.
We’ve probably all worked in places where people have thought our politics are ‘mad’ - where we were very politically isolated - and I mean that for all of us, from Trotskyists to Labour types. I‘ve heard terms such as ‘bunch of kids’, ‘pathetic’, ‘saddos’ ‘hilarious’ used in my workplaces by the non-political against Labour party types who have argued for a trade union.
I think of all these terms used here, criticising people for being young or suggesting something must have been written by someone young (with the implication of them being gullible) debars that person from any description of them being a communist.
Workers Power argument is wrong, possibly ultra-left. But they acquit themselves a lot better, with this over enthusiastic dreaming, compared to the jaded and sneering cynicism displayed by so many here. That’s one of the reasons I’ve generally stopped commenting here. I need to go and wash out my mouth, there’s bad taste.”
19 May 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those wanting to be (and their sock puppets) the Labour candidate in Bethnal Green and Bow at the next election, scramble to anonymously slur their rivals.
The above just says it all about Labour Party types.
Various acolytes of the 'important', here to dish the dirt on the 'opposition' or big up those that they hope will be or are in political relationships with them.
Meanwhile the hooded wannabe assassins look up to various careerist hopefuls who are scrambling overthemselves to see who can get the selection jackpot and its associated largesse.
Very little has changed since Hogarth drew it.
A pox on them all."
--
"How much effect has the (pitiful) minimum wage had in Tower Hamlets? Many of the employers would have to pay above this level anyway, in London, because of wage competition - even incl. people like McDonalds.
There are, of course, a fair number of people still working below the NMW level. As I - reported - numerous employers openly advertise non-NMW compliant jobs in ads, with little fear of enforcement so what chance for a worker toiling in a garment sweatshop of them getting his/her legal minimums?
But the big lie is about Galloway. He’s one of yours (an old style Labour left) than one of ours (a Trot) - as he’d be the first to point out.
It’s a shame that the SWP still give that opportunist cover he doesn’t deserve, and so tar all of us revolutionary socialists (he’s always mentioned to me as the number one example of what’s wrong with ‘far lefties’, like ‘Red Ken’ once was). If Trots do turn right wing, then criticise those right-wingers (such as Byers) but that’s no rebuttal to their politics 20 years previously.
What’s Labour ever done for Tower Hamlets? It’s a sea of poverty between two of the wealthiest places on the planet, the City and Canary Wharf. I don’t think you understand just how hated Labour are, and just that fact could get a Respect MP elected again.
I look forward to that, if only to put a spoke in the career aspirations of all those slugs scrabbling for selection. Or as they’d put it - feeling bound to put myself forward to see whether one might be of service?"
(Galloway claimed to be a ‘child of the 60s’)
“He is a child of the 60s in a Saturday Night, Sunday Morning way. That woman, from what I recall, was a child of the 60s in a Woodstock way. Whilst all the Easy Rider kids may have bought a Mondeo, there may still be one or two old style Labour MPs left with the Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner.
But all those films are poor. We need a Battleship Potyomkin."
(One of the failed candidates, Rupa Huq, posts further - “I am prepared to say that I am resopnsible for comment at www.rupahuq.co.uk on it all”).
“But you're not though, are you?
Your post uses a very dishonest method of casting aspersions on the selected candidate. It’s as bitter as bitter can be, doubtless the frustration of thwarted career advancement. I’ve copied your post and would consider posting it on my blog if your career sensibilities kick in and you later remove it.
You state a 'Mike Smith' (who he?) answered a survey that includes allegations of privileged access to membership lists and other inane slurs such as 'having appeared on screen in tacky underwear'. Anyone reading this will presume these comments are about the successful candidate.
After reporting all this, you sign off with the incredibly weasel words - 'Dunno if I agree with all of the above but undoubtedly Rushanara will make a brilliant candidate and MP.'
If you are going to make allegations, put your name to them. I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if they are all true and that there are similar black marks against all the candidates.
And how close are you to BGB Bitch? Are you BGB Bitch?
If I may offer you some advice, if you want to advance your LP career you obviously need to play even dirtier than your opponents, in future.
I mean you're no worse than the rest. But revolutionary socialists will always oppose you and your ilk. Those who offer no more than a few temporary reforms when there is a whole world to be won.”
16 April 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave Osler compares the Red Army Faction (often called the ‘Baader-Meinhof’ gang) and the IRA.
“It’s misleading to compare the two - the RAF and the IRA. One was a ‘communist’ fighting group, the other is/was the main component of a national liberation movement.
The former included a few who believed pretty much in the (anarchist) theory of ‘propaganda of the deed’ - their actions would be a catalyst for communism; the latter were (and are) a mass movement who believed in the Armalite and the Ballot Box to remove the remaining part of Ireland from British control.
So it’s not surprising that revolutionary socialists have different views on each organisation - we would point out the limitations of the former (as the RAF claimed wrongly to be communists) but also not be displeased by their execution of a few oppressors. We would defend the actions of the latter.
Revolutionary socialists support national liberation struggles despite the politics of those leading them. If Congress had taken up arms against the British in India, their liberal support in the UK would have fallen away but they would have achieved their aims a lot quicker - Afghanistan spent little time then under imperialist rule because of its violent resistance.
It’s always been the excuse of hand wringing spectators to say - ‘labour can’t wait’ or ‘you’re not proper socialists’ or to vaguely quote Marx out of context, ‘the emancipation of the working class must be the act of the workers themselves’. Marx (and Trotsky) were clear in their support for violent Irish nationalists.
Being a communist means supporting many things that may not be core to the class relations of society. We support the rights of gays for full equality but it isn’t because that necessarily relates to socialism - a capitalist society could treat gays completely equally.
We support gay rights simply because this equality is just. And if the only way gay equality could be achieved was to shoot e.g. those who hang homosexuals (in some countries) then we would support this violent tactic.
It’s silly to suggest that the politics of the RAF may lead to fascism. Many of the former members of the Weather Underground (the nearest US equivalent) are now greeny types.
But it’s good to know where types like you stand. As the bullets fly and the bombs explode; as Iraqis and Afghanistan’s desperately seek to expel the foreign occupier; you appear to be telling them to go read their, I don’t know what, Labour Left Briefing? And learn about socialism.
Communists don’t take that view, we take sides. We said victory to the IRA and we now say victory to the Iraqi and Afghani (and Iranian?) resistance.
My current article happens to deal with just this issue. Click my link if you want to read more."
--
"There's nothing wrong with a word like 'just' (I didn't use the word 'justice'). You're right that some Trots may think such terms are 'moralism' or similar but I demur. Some would argue that we fight against e.g. racism because to do so is to attack capitalism. Again, I demur, you could have a non-racist capitalism (but never had had).
These struggles are 'just'(and, yes, also attack present day capitalism). Marxists are the best democrats, the most fervent partisans against inequality.
Killing industrialists in 1970s Germany did little, as I stated. But some of it e.g. killing NATO functionaries was, indeed, justice.
Anyway who supported the IRA needs to support it as a whole. So on e.g. Warrington I would have taken the view that I'm sure the IRA took. It would have been regrettable either that they screwed up or the state ignored the warning. It sounds blasé to say there will be civilian casualties in war, but it's true.
And indeed you don't need to take sides in a war. You can just leave people to die in the street. You can just stroll on by. I recommend that course to you."
--
"It's funny how only Republican 'atrocities' get remembered.
You know as well as I do that IRA policy has never been killing people for 'mixing' or other such reactionary reasons. It's a complete red herring.
If an IRA volunteer did it, then I hope s/he was shot for such a sectarian act. And even if it happened (rather than just reported like that in the Daily Mail), it would be one of a few grim examples amongst many killings of perfectly ‘legitimate targets’.
And on 'legitimate targets' - why was the woman killed? I recall someone like that - maybe her - who was killed for 'assisting the enemy' or similar in the Divis Flats, I think - although she may not have done so at all.
If people do collaborate, if they do inform, it would be good to imprison them. But in a guerrilla campaign, you can only kill them (or sometimes exile, in minor cases). And that's just.
Oh how you exTrots slip away in national chauvinism as LP members and as your retirement from revolutionary politics lengthens.
But, kids, it wasn't always so. Some of these 'reds' once were in organisations with principled anti-imperialist lines. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Red_Mole.jpg
I hope any youth reading will seek to maintain the continuity of revolutionary support for those who realise that just writing petitions will get them nowhere."
--
"Indeed I do mean the Taliban and all the others even when they would (and do) fight one another.
Victory to the resistance is the correct slogan. It means victory to the resistors - as a group - against occupation.
'Troops out' would be fine, and I would use any tactic to get them out but I would rather see the imperialists defeated, like in Vietnam.
In the same way that the French resistance contained everyone from Trotskyists to Royalists, so does the 'resistance' in Iraq (although doubtless no Trots).
Communists obviously never offer political support for the Taliban but offer military support in this period. And once the occupiers are gone, the Taliban, Mahdi army, etc becomes the/a main enemy.”
12 February 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does Britain need nuclear weapons?
"Ditto Alex on GDP - and - it's a long way down the reformist path to argue about who deserves a seat on the UN.
And it's not the case that we don't not want nukes because 'Britain's place in the world is diminished'. We don't want the bosses to have weapons because they may use them against our brothers and sisters in Iran, N Korea, etc. They would use them against us, if they could, as well. Basic, ABC, revolutionary socialism.
The UK's nuclear strategy also seems very odd. They are going to stick them all on three submarines, one of which may be seaborne at any one time.
So if anyone is going to attack then just find (hard, I know, but surely not impossible) the sub and sink it and nuke Portsmouth(?) to destroy the other two.
I hope it's the French who work this out first - 35 hour weeks, decent food, better football team, women who don't buy their underwear in Asda."
11 November 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On supporting anti-imperialist resistance
"Look, what I'm arguing is pretty standard Trotskyism i.e. revolutionary socialism (and that's in London, Leeds or Luanda).
I can appreciate the arguments of genuine pacifists - you punch me in the face, I won't punch back - but find the hypocricy of the rest of you breathtaking.
You support imperalism directly or you take a 'plague on both their houses' position - which means in short, we'll look the other way while the e.g, Brits et al (and certainly not just the USA - I've no time for anti-Americanism) kick in your door.
But we've had this debate before, repeatedly. I'm sorry it's come to dominate this post - my fault - and will say no more or indeed take up the cause of Marxism on this issue, on this blog for some time. I only post in the hope that a few (young, probably) socialists may be amenable to communism and repulsed by the pro-imperialist, Labour supporting talk here.
There is an alternative - a route to human liberation. "Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."
www.davidosler.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m taken to task for arguing for the road that leads to ‘heaven on earth’.
"‘heaven on earth’ I mean it in a few ways.
As a reverse to religious doctrine - especially to those that tell you to be content with your lot on earth, as your labour will be rewarded in the afterlife.
And I do think life on earth could be ‘heavenly’ in the way that life now would seem like this to someone from 1000AD. For example, I think the scourge of AIDS would be eliminated a lot quicker with one, international medical research charged with finding the answer, rather than many competing pharmaceutical companies currently duplicating each others work in the race to find a cure that works and makes money (which is why there is not yet a malaria cure).
I don’t mean that things will be all fluffy and we will be sitting around playing lutes all day but I also mean it a riposte to those with a corrosive cynicism. There is a big picture that many have lost sight of over time. It’s a shame, sometimes, that commentators here will praise the music of their youth but are embarrassed by their politics from then.
The situation is now as it was and their politics should have remained the same. Distant as the prospect may be, advances are possible – even revolution. I may not agree with the politics of this group but they are at least trying.
And if you also think that curing AIDS, stopping all preventable diseases, taking music and art to unheard of levels are targets to be aimed for, I would suggest to you that reformism has never got anywhere near this, only revolutionary socialism would take us towards this."
www.davidosler.com
"When I first moved to London long ago, my idiot North West friends and relatives asked, ‘isn’t it dangerous, when you go out to clubs and the like?
And I replied, no, it’s a lot worse in small town England. Places like Lefttown.
In London, there’s no history. You’re not going to come across someone who you had a fight with in the bus station a few years ago. There’s no chance that you will meet your Ex’s now b/f who you used to know from the terraces and who is after your blood. There’s also no chance that you will meet those renegades you expelled or have your former Bennite friends pretend that night together ever happened.
And you know you’ve got to stop going to those small town clubs. But still you go.
So now you may reckon your chances with Labour Left man or woman, hanging around near the dance floor. But they are only here, most probably temporarily, because the bouncers denied them entry into Gordon’s Wine Bar.
It’s too early to tell whether they will be let back in there later or are permanently excluded but that’s where they want to be. They hate slumming it here with you and whilst they may make conversation, any number you get from them will be fake.
They even tell you to your face ‘We're not joining in for some no-mark sex’. They wouldn’t if you were God’s Gift, either (a mass Left or even communist party). They’re incurable reformists. Go and chat up someone else."
--
"I’d say Left Labour isn’t (at say 15,000) 10x bigger than the non-Labour left. Maybe 6000 in all other organisations. And the average SWP member, for example, works 3x as hard as a LP type. And how Left is the Labour Left that includes cuts-making councillors and where McDonnell’s platform was no more left than Meacher’s?
And sure, there are very few Lefts anywhere, but electoral support isn’t a perfect measure of this, e.g. richer parties have the resources to do better than they would.
And yes, Dave, the end of revolutionary socialism (like the once large Temperance movement) is more likely than John Rees, Peter Taaffe, Alan Clinton et al getting into bed together. The conditions of capitalism will always create a fightback although that doesn’t mean a thinking and organised fightback will exist.
I’ve written a strategy - Organisational unity for starters. Sure, no-one’s listening but how is LP membership a means to a socialist world?
It may feel like onanism at present, being a Red, but maybe some foreign siren - speaking French, Italian or Spanish maybe, - will be along to rescue us Reds if we just hold out."
--
"What I meant by "It may feel like onanism at present, being a Red, but maybe some foreign siren - speaking French, Italian or Spanish maybe, - will be along to rescue us Reds if we just hold out." was the possibility that revolution or similar, in say Argentina, could come to the rescue of us very isolated British reds.
I thought that would be clear but maybe it wasn't."
26 May 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave criticises Workers Power for being ultraleft
“I think Dave is correct in his criticisms of both the language and method that Workers Power are using.
There’s nothing wrong with ‘demanding’ but it’s not the best language to use unless there are lots of you and you are powerful enough to attempt to put your words into action. The desired outcome is reasonable enough - if you had muscle - and I don’t see anything wrong in having a goal but, yes, it’s currently unachievable and it reads silly to raise it like this. I think the WP comrades might (they might not) rethink their language if this was pointed out to them.
But I think it’s telling of comrades, to look at the sort of venom they will use against those who aren’t - in the whole gamut of politics, from fascism to communism - that far away from them.
In the same way that Right Labour or Centre Labour will act in way that shows they think Left Labour is from the Ark or beyond the pale, (e.g. I’ve seen them call Campaign Group types ‘mad Trot wreckers’, scum etc) so those commenting here who have made their peace with capitalism now sound just the same as the other commentators who have never contemplated the revolutionary alternative.
We’ve probably all worked in places where people have thought our politics are ‘mad’ - where we were very politically isolated - and I mean that for all of us, from Trotskyists to Labour types. I‘ve heard terms such as ‘bunch of kids’, ‘pathetic’, ‘saddos’ ‘hilarious’ used in my workplaces by the non-political against Labour party types who have argued for a trade union.
I think of all these terms used here, criticising people for being young or suggesting something must have been written by someone young (with the implication of them being gullible) debars that person from any description of them being a communist.
Workers Power argument is wrong, possibly ultra-left. But they acquit themselves a lot better, with this over enthusiastic dreaming, compared to the jaded and sneering cynicism displayed by so many here. That’s one of the reasons I’ve generally stopped commenting here. I need to go and wash out my mouth, there’s bad taste.”
19 May 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those wanting to be (and their sock puppets) the Labour candidate in Bethnal Green and Bow at the next election, scramble to anonymously slur their rivals.
The above just says it all about Labour Party types.
Various acolytes of the 'important', here to dish the dirt on the 'opposition' or big up those that they hope will be or are in political relationships with them.
Meanwhile the hooded wannabe assassins look up to various careerist hopefuls who are scrambling overthemselves to see who can get the selection jackpot and its associated largesse.
Very little has changed since Hogarth drew it.
A pox on them all."
--
"How much effect has the (pitiful) minimum wage had in Tower Hamlets? Many of the employers would have to pay above this level anyway, in London, because of wage competition - even incl. people like McDonalds.
There are, of course, a fair number of people still working below the NMW level. As I - reported - numerous employers openly advertise non-NMW compliant jobs in ads, with little fear of enforcement so what chance for a worker toiling in a garment sweatshop of them getting his/her legal minimums?
But the big lie is about Galloway. He’s one of yours (an old style Labour left) than one of ours (a Trot) - as he’d be the first to point out.
It’s a shame that the SWP still give that opportunist cover he doesn’t deserve, and so tar all of us revolutionary socialists (he’s always mentioned to me as the number one example of what’s wrong with ‘far lefties’, like ‘Red Ken’ once was). If Trots do turn right wing, then criticise those right-wingers (such as Byers) but that’s no rebuttal to their politics 20 years previously.
What’s Labour ever done for Tower Hamlets? It’s a sea of poverty between two of the wealthiest places on the planet, the City and Canary Wharf. I don’t think you understand just how hated Labour are, and just that fact could get a Respect MP elected again.
I look forward to that, if only to put a spoke in the career aspirations of all those slugs scrabbling for selection. Or as they’d put it - feeling bound to put myself forward to see whether one might be of service?"
(Galloway claimed to be a ‘child of the 60s’)
“He is a child of the 60s in a Saturday Night, Sunday Morning way. That woman, from what I recall, was a child of the 60s in a Woodstock way. Whilst all the Easy Rider kids may have bought a Mondeo, there may still be one or two old style Labour MPs left with the Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner.
But all those films are poor. We need a Battleship Potyomkin."
(One of the failed candidates, Rupa Huq, posts further - “I am prepared to say that I am resopnsible for comment at www.rupahuq.co.uk on it all”).
“But you're not though, are you?
Your post uses a very dishonest method of casting aspersions on the selected candidate. It’s as bitter as bitter can be, doubtless the frustration of thwarted career advancement. I’ve copied your post and would consider posting it on my blog if your career sensibilities kick in and you later remove it.
You state a 'Mike Smith' (who he?) answered a survey that includes allegations of privileged access to membership lists and other inane slurs such as 'having appeared on screen in tacky underwear'. Anyone reading this will presume these comments are about the successful candidate.
After reporting all this, you sign off with the incredibly weasel words - 'Dunno if I agree with all of the above but undoubtedly Rushanara will make a brilliant candidate and MP.'
If you are going to make allegations, put your name to them. I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if they are all true and that there are similar black marks against all the candidates.
And how close are you to BGB Bitch? Are you BGB Bitch?
If I may offer you some advice, if you want to advance your LP career you obviously need to play even dirtier than your opponents, in future.
I mean you're no worse than the rest. But revolutionary socialists will always oppose you and your ilk. Those who offer no more than a few temporary reforms when there is a whole world to be won.”
16 April 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave Osler compares the Red Army Faction (often called the ‘Baader-Meinhof’ gang) and the IRA.
“It’s misleading to compare the two - the RAF and the IRA. One was a ‘communist’ fighting group, the other is/was the main component of a national liberation movement.
The former included a few who believed pretty much in the (anarchist) theory of ‘propaganda of the deed’ - their actions would be a catalyst for communism; the latter were (and are) a mass movement who believed in the Armalite and the Ballot Box to remove the remaining part of Ireland from British control.
So it’s not surprising that revolutionary socialists have different views on each organisation - we would point out the limitations of the former (as the RAF claimed wrongly to be communists) but also not be displeased by their execution of a few oppressors. We would defend the actions of the latter.
Revolutionary socialists support national liberation struggles despite the politics of those leading them. If Congress had taken up arms against the British in India, their liberal support in the UK would have fallen away but they would have achieved their aims a lot quicker - Afghanistan spent little time then under imperialist rule because of its violent resistance.
It’s always been the excuse of hand wringing spectators to say - ‘labour can’t wait’ or ‘you’re not proper socialists’ or to vaguely quote Marx out of context, ‘the emancipation of the working class must be the act of the workers themselves’. Marx (and Trotsky) were clear in their support for violent Irish nationalists.
Being a communist means supporting many things that may not be core to the class relations of society. We support the rights of gays for full equality but it isn’t because that necessarily relates to socialism - a capitalist society could treat gays completely equally.
We support gay rights simply because this equality is just. And if the only way gay equality could be achieved was to shoot e.g. those who hang homosexuals (in some countries) then we would support this violent tactic.
It’s silly to suggest that the politics of the RAF may lead to fascism. Many of the former members of the Weather Underground (the nearest US equivalent) are now greeny types.
But it’s good to know where types like you stand. As the bullets fly and the bombs explode; as Iraqis and Afghanistan’s desperately seek to expel the foreign occupier; you appear to be telling them to go read their, I don’t know what, Labour Left Briefing? And learn about socialism.
Communists don’t take that view, we take sides. We said victory to the IRA and we now say victory to the Iraqi and Afghani (and Iranian?) resistance.
My current article happens to deal with just this issue. Click my link if you want to read more."
--
"There's nothing wrong with a word like 'just' (I didn't use the word 'justice'). You're right that some Trots may think such terms are 'moralism' or similar but I demur. Some would argue that we fight against e.g. racism because to do so is to attack capitalism. Again, I demur, you could have a non-racist capitalism (but never had had).
These struggles are 'just'(and, yes, also attack present day capitalism). Marxists are the best democrats, the most fervent partisans against inequality.
Killing industrialists in 1970s Germany did little, as I stated. But some of it e.g. killing NATO functionaries was, indeed, justice.
Anyway who supported the IRA needs to support it as a whole. So on e.g. Warrington I would have taken the view that I'm sure the IRA took. It would have been regrettable either that they screwed up or the state ignored the warning. It sounds blasé to say there will be civilian casualties in war, but it's true.
And indeed you don't need to take sides in a war. You can just leave people to die in the street. You can just stroll on by. I recommend that course to you."
--
"It's funny how only Republican 'atrocities' get remembered.
You know as well as I do that IRA policy has never been killing people for 'mixing' or other such reactionary reasons. It's a complete red herring.
If an IRA volunteer did it, then I hope s/he was shot for such a sectarian act. And even if it happened (rather than just reported like that in the Daily Mail), it would be one of a few grim examples amongst many killings of perfectly ‘legitimate targets’.
And on 'legitimate targets' - why was the woman killed? I recall someone like that - maybe her - who was killed for 'assisting the enemy' or similar in the Divis Flats, I think - although she may not have done so at all.
If people do collaborate, if they do inform, it would be good to imprison them. But in a guerrilla campaign, you can only kill them (or sometimes exile, in minor cases). And that's just.
Oh how you exTrots slip away in national chauvinism as LP members and as your retirement from revolutionary politics lengthens.
But, kids, it wasn't always so. Some of these 'reds' once were in organisations with principled anti-imperialist lines. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Red_Mole.jpg
I hope any youth reading will seek to maintain the continuity of revolutionary support for those who realise that just writing petitions will get them nowhere."
--
"Indeed I do mean the Taliban and all the others even when they would (and do) fight one another.
Victory to the resistance is the correct slogan. It means victory to the resistors - as a group - against occupation.
'Troops out' would be fine, and I would use any tactic to get them out but I would rather see the imperialists defeated, like in Vietnam.
In the same way that the French resistance contained everyone from Trotskyists to Royalists, so does the 'resistance' in Iraq (although doubtless no Trots).
Communists obviously never offer political support for the Taliban but offer military support in this period. And once the occupiers are gone, the Taliban, Mahdi army, etc becomes the/a main enemy.”
12 February 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does Britain need nuclear weapons?
"Ditto Alex on GDP - and - it's a long way down the reformist path to argue about who deserves a seat on the UN.
And it's not the case that we don't not want nukes because 'Britain's place in the world is diminished'. We don't want the bosses to have weapons because they may use them against our brothers and sisters in Iran, N Korea, etc. They would use them against us, if they could, as well. Basic, ABC, revolutionary socialism.
The UK's nuclear strategy also seems very odd. They are going to stick them all on three submarines, one of which may be seaborne at any one time.
So if anyone is going to attack then just find (hard, I know, but surely not impossible) the sub and sink it and nuke Portsmouth(?) to destroy the other two.
I hope it's the French who work this out first - 35 hour weeks, decent food, better football team, women who don't buy their underwear in Asda."
11 November 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On supporting anti-imperialist resistance
"Look, what I'm arguing is pretty standard Trotskyism i.e. revolutionary socialism (and that's in London, Leeds or Luanda).
I can appreciate the arguments of genuine pacifists - you punch me in the face, I won't punch back - but find the hypocricy of the rest of you breathtaking.
You support imperalism directly or you take a 'plague on both their houses' position - which means in short, we'll look the other way while the e.g, Brits et al (and certainly not just the USA - I've no time for anti-Americanism) kick in your door.
But we've had this debate before, repeatedly. I'm sorry it's come to dominate this post - my fault - and will say no more or indeed take up the cause of Marxism on this issue, on this blog for some time. I only post in the hope that a few (young, probably) socialists may be amenable to communism and repulsed by the pro-imperialist, Labour supporting talk here.
There is an alternative - a route to human liberation. "Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."
www.davidosler.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m taken to task for arguing for the road that leads to ‘heaven on earth’.
"‘heaven on earth’ I mean it in a few ways.
As a reverse to religious doctrine - especially to those that tell you to be content with your lot on earth, as your labour will be rewarded in the afterlife.
And I do think life on earth could be ‘heavenly’ in the way that life now would seem like this to someone from 1000AD. For example, I think the scourge of AIDS would be eliminated a lot quicker with one, international medical research charged with finding the answer, rather than many competing pharmaceutical companies currently duplicating each others work in the race to find a cure that works and makes money (which is why there is not yet a malaria cure).
I don’t mean that things will be all fluffy and we will be sitting around playing lutes all day but I also mean it a riposte to those with a corrosive cynicism. There is a big picture that many have lost sight of over time. It’s a shame, sometimes, that commentators here will praise the music of their youth but are embarrassed by their politics from then.
The situation is now as it was and their politics should have remained the same. Distant as the prospect may be, advances are possible – even revolution. I may not agree with the politics of this group but they are at least trying.
And if you also think that curing AIDS, stopping all preventable diseases, taking music and art to unheard of levels are targets to be aimed for, I would suggest to you that reformism has never got anywhere near this, only revolutionary socialism would take us towards this."
www.davidosler.com
Red Squirrel's Lair
Korakious argues against the Union of England & Wales and Scotland. I disagree.
"Your argument appears to be (‘by extension’) that if parasites like the CE of Tesco’s are unionists, them Marxists should be opposed to unionism. That’s no argument, I can think of many issues on which Marxists and millionaires are agreed - e.g. the world is round.
You are simply reversing that which you mock - ‘if the bourgeoisie wants something, there is zero chance that the working class might benefit for it.’
It’s just wrong to argue that the RBS would benefit from an independent Scotland. It is the biggest bank in Scotland but it’s also the 2nd biggest bank in the UK. It might benefit from better access to the ‘levers of power’ in an Edinburgh based state but the vast majority of its UK customers are in England. It would lose some weight if lobbying Whitehall as a foreign bank.
You make only a (flawed) case for why an independent Scotland would be better for some Scottish capitalists but none about why it would be better for Scottish (and indeed British) workers.
Nationalism, for those other than oppressed nationalities, is poison. Socialists don’t want people wrapping themselves in the Saltire anymore than the want them to drape the Union Flag.
Scots aren’t oppressed nationally; they’re not denied democratic rights anymore than someone English, and unlike how the Irish were. They don’t yet (although may yet do) have a majority support for independence that is being denied.
In these circumstances, I’m as oppressed identically in London by the rate on my RBS Credit Card, or by my Hull headquartered employer, as is a worker in Lossiemouth or Lockerbie.
It makes absolutely no sense for workers to break up a cross-national united fightback against Capital. Let’s expropriate RBS together. Indeed I also look forward to British workers unity being subsumed into European, if not World Workers Unity.”
30 April 2007
---
And then, more in the next post
“Comrade,
That was an interesting article.
-
I first wanted to say that I know the mood must be pretty downbeat in Scotland after the recent elections.
But I still feel that you have made that quantative step forward, ahead of the rest of Britain, and you should seek to maintain that. I’ve been arguing with English comrades for a while that there is no place for Lefts in the Labour Party.
When, as expected, McDonnell doesn’t get on the ballot paper (or does, and is crushed) a lot of those people, I think will say - what are we doing in Labour?
But they will also think that there is nothing outside Labour (in England and Wales) to join. They see Respect (somewhat understandably) as beyond the pale.
It’s to our disadvantage that there isn’t an English Socialist Party (or rather better a British Socialist Party, or even better a Word Socialist Party) like there is the SSP (and rather that than Solidarity).
-
On the article
You say (I) understood that (your) rationale was that if large capital is in favour of the union, then we should be against it. I don’t think I do say that but people can read your previous article and make up their own minds.
I would agree with independence as a tactic if it were demonstrably clear that the Left movement in Scotland was being held back a more right wing England but I don’t see any great proof that there is much red water between the level of political and socialist support in the two countries.
Yes, there may be a far greater concentration of Labour MPs in the Central Belt than England as a whole but I imagine the area shares the similar characteristics to say London or the North East. It was only 50 years ago or so that, I believe, Scotland had a majority of Tory MPs.
You state by first attempting to knock down the usual ‘Left Unionist’ arguments. Although you make the case for independence later it’s noticeable you can’t make the case for separation when you deal with these initial matters.
I thought your summing up of the usual case against nationalism was correct (e.g. The most common points Brit lefties...) save Lefts do support the rights of oppressed nations to secede e.g. Chechnya.
But I’d also say British capitalism (and, even more so, Scottish capitalism) is a misnomer - they are just subsets of international capitalism with the differences being deleted daily.
There’s not much, looking around my desk, that hasn’t been produced by a Multi National Company (MNC) rather than a ‘British’ company.
I very much doubt that the Scottish economy is based on ‘small to medium sized businesses’. I think it’s based on the public sector and then MNC oil, transport, banking, food and drink, media and other large companies employing the large majority of workers. I’m going to guess that even in tourism a large number of workers are employed by MNCs.
It doesn’t advance things when you say - don’t worry, if we part, the unions will stay united (well they may not - there are UK and Ireland unions but also purely Irish unions and purely Scottish unions) but that’s not an argument saying why there should be a parting - what advantage is there to trade union organisation in Scottish independence?
You claim “Nationalist groups are a small minority in the independence movement” That’s hard to swallow. What is the independence movement if it is not a nationalist movement? I accept it doesn’t indulge in anti-English rhetoric but again your noting a problem that doesn’t exist makes no movement in arguing the case for.
So what is the reason that many Scottish workers support independence? I suspect few think they may be better off in an independent Scotland. I suspect a lot feel that they are somehow disadvantaged, discriminated against or oppressed by ‘England’ and doubtless it’s mixed with some (non aggressive) national pride of a Tartan Army type.
It’s not a national feeling, but you will get a resonance of that view expressed by people in places like the North East of England or even in my home place of Manchester (‘them down in the Smoke’) where they will see their region as ignored or discriminated against by the capital dwellers.
But that’s all a big con. It’s like when the workers in a regional office complain to the management and are fobbed off. Their local bosses say, ‘don’t blame us, head office just make the decisions and we have to implement them - whether they are right or wrong.’ Scottish bosses, with independence leanings, are leading Scottish workers’ anger down a blind alley.
All national identities are ‘artificially constructed’. As I recall, English national identity was most made in the (9th Century?) by Alfred the Great. I imagine the Scottish nation was formed at about the same time - although the Shetlands and Orkneys didn’t join the country until 1468.
And just because (and only arguably) British national identity was established by a ‘conservative ruling class that was threatened by both the radical elements of the bourgeoisie’ makes it no better or worse a national feeling.
The article is correct in saying ‘the links that English, Scottish and Welsh workers have built in decades of struggle are not subject to the existence of the British repressive apparatus’.
Agreed, although presumably it could become harder (e.g. through increasing different legislation) but how does break-up move forward, in any way, such struggles?
You claim ‘Setting up an independent Scottish state would give us the chance here (provided of course that we are actively involved) to establish an apparatus that is far more representative and with considerably less authoritarian powers, thus providing considerably more fertile ground for socialists to organize and agitate.’
No such event took place when most of Ireland wasn’t just given its independence, but took it. Such a scenario, as you envisage, is possible but the most likely scenario would be just Scotland detaching as it is - with no major representational changes in either country. I’m not aware that the end of Yugoslavia or Czechoslovakia led to any more democratic regimes in any of the successor countries.
The loss of, perhaps, a seventh of the UK’s economy if Scotland seceded - and when the USA’s economy is seven times that of Britain - is no great potatoes. It may reduce Britain in the GDP rankings down two places to below France and Italy.
Once Britain would have directed the use of Australian troops. The fact that both countries now do this independently makes no difference to the actual outcome.
So Scotland could go a Scandinavian or Irish route (which isn’t neutral - they’re NATO members) but it would hardly affect the balance of forces.
As you say ‘The movement for Scottish independence must have a specifically defined goal of setting up a republic that is not servile to imperialist interests, a republic that adopts radical solutions to poverty and other social ills; a social republic if you will.”
Agreed. And if it were tactically easier to do this on a Scottish basis than a British basis, then I would support Scottish independence.
But I’m not convinced at all you have outlined that it is - a more likely outcome is to unleash the poison of nationalism."
13 May 2007
"Your argument appears to be (‘by extension’) that if parasites like the CE of Tesco’s are unionists, them Marxists should be opposed to unionism. That’s no argument, I can think of many issues on which Marxists and millionaires are agreed - e.g. the world is round.
You are simply reversing that which you mock - ‘if the bourgeoisie wants something, there is zero chance that the working class might benefit for it.’
It’s just wrong to argue that the RBS would benefit from an independent Scotland. It is the biggest bank in Scotland but it’s also the 2nd biggest bank in the UK. It might benefit from better access to the ‘levers of power’ in an Edinburgh based state but the vast majority of its UK customers are in England. It would lose some weight if lobbying Whitehall as a foreign bank.
You make only a (flawed) case for why an independent Scotland would be better for some Scottish capitalists but none about why it would be better for Scottish (and indeed British) workers.
Nationalism, for those other than oppressed nationalities, is poison. Socialists don’t want people wrapping themselves in the Saltire anymore than the want them to drape the Union Flag.
Scots aren’t oppressed nationally; they’re not denied democratic rights anymore than someone English, and unlike how the Irish were. They don’t yet (although may yet do) have a majority support for independence that is being denied.
In these circumstances, I’m as oppressed identically in London by the rate on my RBS Credit Card, or by my Hull headquartered employer, as is a worker in Lossiemouth or Lockerbie.
It makes absolutely no sense for workers to break up a cross-national united fightback against Capital. Let’s expropriate RBS together. Indeed I also look forward to British workers unity being subsumed into European, if not World Workers Unity.”
30 April 2007
---
And then, more in the next post
“Comrade,
That was an interesting article.
-
I first wanted to say that I know the mood must be pretty downbeat in Scotland after the recent elections.
But I still feel that you have made that quantative step forward, ahead of the rest of Britain, and you should seek to maintain that. I’ve been arguing with English comrades for a while that there is no place for Lefts in the Labour Party.
When, as expected, McDonnell doesn’t get on the ballot paper (or does, and is crushed) a lot of those people, I think will say - what are we doing in Labour?
But they will also think that there is nothing outside Labour (in England and Wales) to join. They see Respect (somewhat understandably) as beyond the pale.
It’s to our disadvantage that there isn’t an English Socialist Party (or rather better a British Socialist Party, or even better a Word Socialist Party) like there is the SSP (and rather that than Solidarity).
-
On the article
You say (I) understood that (your) rationale was that if large capital is in favour of the union, then we should be against it. I don’t think I do say that but people can read your previous article and make up their own minds.
I would agree with independence as a tactic if it were demonstrably clear that the Left movement in Scotland was being held back a more right wing England but I don’t see any great proof that there is much red water between the level of political and socialist support in the two countries.
Yes, there may be a far greater concentration of Labour MPs in the Central Belt than England as a whole but I imagine the area shares the similar characteristics to say London or the North East. It was only 50 years ago or so that, I believe, Scotland had a majority of Tory MPs.
You state by first attempting to knock down the usual ‘Left Unionist’ arguments. Although you make the case for independence later it’s noticeable you can’t make the case for separation when you deal with these initial matters.
I thought your summing up of the usual case against nationalism was correct (e.g. The most common points Brit lefties...) save Lefts do support the rights of oppressed nations to secede e.g. Chechnya.
But I’d also say British capitalism (and, even more so, Scottish capitalism) is a misnomer - they are just subsets of international capitalism with the differences being deleted daily.
There’s not much, looking around my desk, that hasn’t been produced by a Multi National Company (MNC) rather than a ‘British’ company.
I very much doubt that the Scottish economy is based on ‘small to medium sized businesses’. I think it’s based on the public sector and then MNC oil, transport, banking, food and drink, media and other large companies employing the large majority of workers. I’m going to guess that even in tourism a large number of workers are employed by MNCs.
It doesn’t advance things when you say - don’t worry, if we part, the unions will stay united (well they may not - there are UK and Ireland unions but also purely Irish unions and purely Scottish unions) but that’s not an argument saying why there should be a parting - what advantage is there to trade union organisation in Scottish independence?
You claim “Nationalist groups are a small minority in the independence movement” That’s hard to swallow. What is the independence movement if it is not a nationalist movement? I accept it doesn’t indulge in anti-English rhetoric but again your noting a problem that doesn’t exist makes no movement in arguing the case for.
So what is the reason that many Scottish workers support independence? I suspect few think they may be better off in an independent Scotland. I suspect a lot feel that they are somehow disadvantaged, discriminated against or oppressed by ‘England’ and doubtless it’s mixed with some (non aggressive) national pride of a Tartan Army type.
It’s not a national feeling, but you will get a resonance of that view expressed by people in places like the North East of England or even in my home place of Manchester (‘them down in the Smoke’) where they will see their region as ignored or discriminated against by the capital dwellers.
But that’s all a big con. It’s like when the workers in a regional office complain to the management and are fobbed off. Their local bosses say, ‘don’t blame us, head office just make the decisions and we have to implement them - whether they are right or wrong.’ Scottish bosses, with independence leanings, are leading Scottish workers’ anger down a blind alley.
All national identities are ‘artificially constructed’. As I recall, English national identity was most made in the (9th Century?) by Alfred the Great. I imagine the Scottish nation was formed at about the same time - although the Shetlands and Orkneys didn’t join the country until 1468.
And just because (and only arguably) British national identity was established by a ‘conservative ruling class that was threatened by both the radical elements of the bourgeoisie’ makes it no better or worse a national feeling.
The article is correct in saying ‘the links that English, Scottish and Welsh workers have built in decades of struggle are not subject to the existence of the British repressive apparatus’.
Agreed, although presumably it could become harder (e.g. through increasing different legislation) but how does break-up move forward, in any way, such struggles?
You claim ‘Setting up an independent Scottish state would give us the chance here (provided of course that we are actively involved) to establish an apparatus that is far more representative and with considerably less authoritarian powers, thus providing considerably more fertile ground for socialists to organize and agitate.’
No such event took place when most of Ireland wasn’t just given its independence, but took it. Such a scenario, as you envisage, is possible but the most likely scenario would be just Scotland detaching as it is - with no major representational changes in either country. I’m not aware that the end of Yugoslavia or Czechoslovakia led to any more democratic regimes in any of the successor countries.
The loss of, perhaps, a seventh of the UK’s economy if Scotland seceded - and when the USA’s economy is seven times that of Britain - is no great potatoes. It may reduce Britain in the GDP rankings down two places to below France and Italy.
Once Britain would have directed the use of Australian troops. The fact that both countries now do this independently makes no difference to the actual outcome.
So Scotland could go a Scandinavian or Irish route (which isn’t neutral - they’re NATO members) but it would hardly affect the balance of forces.
As you say ‘The movement for Scottish independence must have a specifically defined goal of setting up a republic that is not servile to imperialist interests, a republic that adopts radical solutions to poverty and other social ills; a social republic if you will.”
Agreed. And if it were tactically easier to do this on a Scottish basis than a British basis, then I would support Scottish independence.
But I’m not convinced at all you have outlined that it is - a more likely outcome is to unleash the poison of nationalism."
13 May 2007
Shiraz Socialist
In response to Alliance for Workers Liberty arguments on Palestine/Israel - and then onto the Malvinas/Falklands.
"I was also as a member of Socialist Organiser a bit before this time I do remember how this programme that you claim Sean Matgamna was supporting had it fact changed a lot from supporting the Hunger Strikes etc and national self determination to eventually the two state stuff that it is now.
So Matgamna would now see the national rights of the 43% of NI that is Catholic and the population of the South being subverted by the Protestant population of the North (in broad terms). Maybe they would support a White State in parts of South Africa, too.
And so with Israel. Is there any other state in the Middle East that comprehensively discriminates against a section of its population (the Arabs) with many theocratic underpinnings, is built on land stolen from those still alive and displaced, regularly attacks neighbours with overwhelming brutality and still seeks to conquer new territory (e.g. with the wall). Even a Shia'a in Saudi or in Saddam's Iraq would be unlikely to get his house bulldozed or denied the right to internal travel
To allow Israel to continue would have been like sending NI on a course from the late 60s in which the B Specials weren't disbanded but furnished with jet fighters, in which Republicans had their houses burnt down and were kicked across the border or shot, where the SDLP was banned and Iain Paisley's church took over the education system.
With no concessions at all to the anti-semites and those who really would want to push the Jews into the sea, a democratic and secular (and hopefully socialist) state is what we should argue for.
--
Always supporting national groups' or more famously the Kelpers in the Malvinas - hence my exit from SO.
Indeed Lenin did as you say, he supported the national rights of the Irish minority in the (then) UK of GB and Ireland to achieve national independence, not 26/32 independence. Remember the comments of Trotsky (and Lenin) on 1916.
I don't think for a moment that you think that people who argue like me are anti-Semitic or anti 'Unionist people' but you are very flawed when you argue there are 'people' we don't much like - e.g. Israelis, White South Africans as though there is some bigotry.
Naturally we don't like Israeli bosses or indeed Arab rulers but have every degree of worker solidarity and think equally of Jewish workers as of the Arab 'in the street'. I am sure that 'two-state' people do, too.
But in the same way that we would have supported every progressive struggle of Dixie whites against their employers in the USA, we would have also needed to oppose our class brothers and sisters when they acted as a 'national group' (and of course, in concert with their 'own' national group rulers) in asserting their 'independence' from (in their eyes)a different national group, e.g. burning out blacks or lynching them.
--
It’s kind of interesting how a few innocuous comments provoke such debate.
Kelpers aren’t a nation in themselves but British and the conflict was Britain and it’s desire to maintain its colony v Argentina. It wasn’t 1500 Kelpers v Argentina. The Malvinas are like if some Spanish Costa, full of Fish ‘n’ Chip pubs, suddenly declared itself a detached part of Essex.
As you are no doubt proud, the AWL is far removed from most of the left on these issues. Have you ever thought that your distance from the rest of the pack is not clever foresight but an ever increasing flawed deviation from the collective wisdom of most revolutionary socialists?
So Workers Liberty’s current front web page starts well - Stop the Israeli assault on Gaza and Lebanon! But then, in an incredible article, directs most of its fire on Hamas and Hezbollah. What’s the current Palestinian and Lebanese v Israeli death toll since the first prisoner capture?!
The article includes ‘Hamas would rather play with the lives of Palestinian people’ Any organisation that follows a military strategy “plays with the lives of … people”. Only a pacifist can have a problems with this although all note it with regret. Israel is hardly going to take notice of polite requests and whilst it would be welcome, Palestinians can’t wait for mass action by Israeli workers in their support.
The article also states, “Once again senseless small-scale provocative guerrilla action by the militias of Hamas and Hezbollah.” Capturing Israeli soldiers is a good strategy. Past experience suggest the Israelis will pay a high price of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners in exchange. Or should Palestinian prisoners be left to rot?
As you head where Jane Ashworth (There’s a name I never thought I would hear again) and the like have trail blazed the path for you, spare a thought for people like me who never mention their once membership of SO because I then have to spend a further ten minutes explaining they were very different then and distancing myself from your current politics."
Monday, July 17, 2006
"I was also as a member of Socialist Organiser a bit before this time I do remember how this programme that you claim Sean Matgamna was supporting had it fact changed a lot from supporting the Hunger Strikes etc and national self determination to eventually the two state stuff that it is now.
So Matgamna would now see the national rights of the 43% of NI that is Catholic and the population of the South being subverted by the Protestant population of the North (in broad terms). Maybe they would support a White State in parts of South Africa, too.
And so with Israel. Is there any other state in the Middle East that comprehensively discriminates against a section of its population (the Arabs) with many theocratic underpinnings, is built on land stolen from those still alive and displaced, regularly attacks neighbours with overwhelming brutality and still seeks to conquer new territory (e.g. with the wall). Even a Shia'a in Saudi or in Saddam's Iraq would be unlikely to get his house bulldozed or denied the right to internal travel
To allow Israel to continue would have been like sending NI on a course from the late 60s in which the B Specials weren't disbanded but furnished with jet fighters, in which Republicans had their houses burnt down and were kicked across the border or shot, where the SDLP was banned and Iain Paisley's church took over the education system.
With no concessions at all to the anti-semites and those who really would want to push the Jews into the sea, a democratic and secular (and hopefully socialist) state is what we should argue for.
--
Always supporting national groups' or more famously the Kelpers in the Malvinas - hence my exit from SO.
Indeed Lenin did as you say, he supported the national rights of the Irish minority in the (then) UK of GB and Ireland to achieve national independence, not 26/32 independence. Remember the comments of Trotsky (and Lenin) on 1916.
I don't think for a moment that you think that people who argue like me are anti-Semitic or anti 'Unionist people' but you are very flawed when you argue there are 'people' we don't much like - e.g. Israelis, White South Africans as though there is some bigotry.
Naturally we don't like Israeli bosses or indeed Arab rulers but have every degree of worker solidarity and think equally of Jewish workers as of the Arab 'in the street'. I am sure that 'two-state' people do, too.
But in the same way that we would have supported every progressive struggle of Dixie whites against their employers in the USA, we would have also needed to oppose our class brothers and sisters when they acted as a 'national group' (and of course, in concert with their 'own' national group rulers) in asserting their 'independence' from (in their eyes)a different national group, e.g. burning out blacks or lynching them.
--
It’s kind of interesting how a few innocuous comments provoke such debate.
Kelpers aren’t a nation in themselves but British and the conflict was Britain and it’s desire to maintain its colony v Argentina. It wasn’t 1500 Kelpers v Argentina. The Malvinas are like if some Spanish Costa, full of Fish ‘n’ Chip pubs, suddenly declared itself a detached part of Essex.
As you are no doubt proud, the AWL is far removed from most of the left on these issues. Have you ever thought that your distance from the rest of the pack is not clever foresight but an ever increasing flawed deviation from the collective wisdom of most revolutionary socialists?
So Workers Liberty’s current front web page starts well - Stop the Israeli assault on Gaza and Lebanon! But then, in an incredible article, directs most of its fire on Hamas and Hezbollah. What’s the current Palestinian and Lebanese v Israeli death toll since the first prisoner capture?!
The article includes ‘Hamas would rather play with the lives of Palestinian people’ Any organisation that follows a military strategy “plays with the lives of … people”. Only a pacifist can have a problems with this although all note it with regret. Israel is hardly going to take notice of polite requests and whilst it would be welcome, Palestinians can’t wait for mass action by Israeli workers in their support.
The article also states, “Once again senseless small-scale provocative guerrilla action by the militias of Hamas and Hezbollah.” Capturing Israeli soldiers is a good strategy. Past experience suggest the Israelis will pay a high price of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners in exchange. Or should Palestinian prisoners be left to rot?
As you head where Jane Ashworth (There’s a name I never thought I would hear again) and the like have trail blazed the path for you, spare a thought for people like me who never mention their once membership of SO because I then have to spend a further ten minutes explaining they were very different then and distancing myself from your current politics."
Monday, July 17, 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
