Respect conference report
Today’s Respect conference was another step on the long road to building a class struggle option to New Labour. This time it didn’t feel like we were walking down a cul de sac. Some may pine for whipped votes, cobbled together electoral slates and uplifting demagogy but the Bishopsgate Centre was bereft of them.
Conference was told that 210 (if memory serves) people registered and that there were 20 or so visitors and observers. There was a good geographical spread with strong contingents from Manchester, Bristol and Birmingham. Big up to Bromsgrove Respect which mobilised 100% of its membership.
George Galloway gave the opening speech. My hunch is that some readers will find the next couple of paragraphs tendentious and upsetting. If you are one of them why not just skip on a bit?
Respect he said was going on despite the split and it remains the most electorally and politically significant force on the British left. He thanked the leadership for its work in negotiating our retention of the name and said that we are in a potentially very fertile period for the organisation. Our aim is to have three MPs come the next general election.
Looking at the economic situation he remarked that the capitalist system as we know it has failed and that some of the businesses which are now receiving big dollops of public money should be taken into state control
Are most working class people interested in arguments about the differences between dead Russians? “No” was George’s answer. It’s a source of deep regret to me but he is probably right. In our public activity and press we have to use language that makes sense in working class communities. It’s a radical idea but it might be worth giving it a spin.
Rob Griffiths of the proper Communist Party was next up. I thought he gave a very good and constructive speech. He began by remarking that talk of the crisis of capitalism is now becoming commonplace among trade union militants. It’s no longer the preserve of the hyped up far left who’ve been devaluing the phrase by endlessly using it when capitalism obviously was doing pretty well by its own lights.
If this listener understood correctly Rob has given up with Labour. There is no longer a mass working class party giving positive reforms for working people. “Speaking as a friend to friends” he observed that the problem of the lack of working class representation is not going to be solved either by the Communist Party or Respect. I’m not sure what he was talking about when he added that neither would it be solved by what he called “the front organisation of a small left wing sect”. Your guess is as good as mine there.
He made some pretty definite proposals about things that could be done in the near future. They made a lot of sense. First up was a charter to garner signatures around demands connected to the dire economic situation. Later in the day Nick Wrack reported back to conference on a meeting he attended with Bob Crow and others at which this was discussed in more depth. Before that though Rob became all bizarre and made ludicrous suggestions about elections. Apparently there are some left wing Labour MPs we could all happily vote for. We could have non aggression pacts between left organisations. We could have a common approach in seats where the fascists have a chance of winning. All this would be preceded by a process of seeking discussions and finding areas for common action. When was the last time you heard such utopian nonsense? That’s not how the British left has achieved its hegemonic position in society!
Thanks Liam, Interesting report - why not put the whole piece up here?
Comment by Karl Stewart — 26 October, 2008 @ 12:58 pm
I am just responding to those who say don’t put too much up at once! but click and have a look at liam’s blog
Comment by Derek Wall — 26 October, 2008 @ 1:33 pm
Oy Gevalt… Tony’s up to his old tricks again
http://azvas.blogspot.com/2008/10/ijan-is-birthed-with-two-jews-kicking.html
Comment by Auntie Ziona — 26 October, 2008 @ 1:55 pm
Yes Mr Galloway has made the remark about dead Russians several times.
I wonder to what or who he is alluding?
After all the split in Respect was not about dead Russians was it? Nothing so lofty, you might wish it was. Surely it was more to do with who was top dog and how Mr Galloway might keep his political and business options open.
It is not an attemt to be anti sectarian is it as a short history of RESPECt might show
Mr Galloway is said to be very fond of certain regimes that are based on the collected works of dead Russians isnt he?
Are the English working class such Tombliboos that they cannot think about such issues? Perhaps they need to be spoken to in the baby language invented by Murdoch and TalkSport
Is Mr Galloway saying that only he knows how to talk to people and others dont and that we have to copy him?
Will Respect become like The Mother of all Talk Shows where Mr Galloway decides the topics, picks the responses, takes the praise, reads out the crappy adverts and cuts of those he does not like?
Does he mean that no politics can be injected into Respect for fear of alienating the voters?
Or that Respect will be as flexible as the Liberal Democrats saying one thing in this community and the opposite down the road?
If Mr Galloways argument was about trying to be truthful to the class or about trying to speak plainly I could understand it more. Then look at how Mr Galloway treats the truth. It is instructive to listen to Mr Galloway twisting and turning on Pakistan and the Bhuttos for instance.
Indeed one might think that Mr Galloway himself is the product of a veritable cornucopia, or a condensation, of dead foreign politicos.
Respect, always a fragile creature now it looks like a fossil.
Comment by ANiN — 26 October, 2008 @ 1:58 pm
A couple of weeks ago, this site published a statement by George Galloway which supported the bailout of the banks.
In the ensuing debate, this site’s host Andy Newman - who I understand is either a member or a supporter of the Respect Party - backed Mr Galloway’s stance and became increasingly upset and distressed with those who argued that the bailout was wrong in principle.
But, in Nick Wrack’s article from a couple of days ago, The Failure of the Market, Nick - who is introduced to us as the Respect Party’s national secretary - makes many similar arguments that the anti-bailouts have been making.
My question is: Did the Respect Party conference adopt either Nick’s view that the bailout was wrong, or Mr Galloway’s and Mr Newman’s view that it was right?
Comment by Karl Stewart — 26 October, 2008 @ 2:46 pm
Tombliboos?
Comment by steph — 26 October, 2008 @ 2:59 pm
Tombliboos?
Maybe it’s some new political jargon for the 21st century?
Comment by Karl Stewart — 26 October, 2008 @ 3:06 pm
Perhaps the front of a sect which “Rob Griffiths of the proper Communist Party” was referring to was the Morning Star’s very own “Unity for Peace and Socialism” electoral front.
I am not interested in arguments between dead Russians as much as I am interested in the matter of which Russians killed which Russians, and why.
The “proper Communist Party” was certainly not on the right side, and calls for state control show that some have learnt nothing. Indeed, the use of such old hat slogans in the left’s publications show how dinosaur-like such groups as Respect, CPB, Socialist Party, SWP etc are.
Comment by David Broder — 26 October, 2008 @ 3:18 pm
Post #5 “Tombliboos?”
Characters from In The Night garden a TV prog for babies.
Comment by Mike — 26 October, 2008 @ 3:55 pm
Did the Respect rally pass a motion praising the “admirable” and “impressive” actions of Alistair Darling for using billions of pounds of taxpayers money to prop up the thieving failed banks? How about a motion praising the Tories as “acting like communists”?
Comment by RUD — 26 October, 2008 @ 4:10 pm
“I am not interested in arguments between dead Russians as much as I am interested in the matter of which Russians killed which Russians, and why.”
Yes, that’s a much more relevant amd outward looking question and one that many ordinary people have a burning interest in - it’s not simply a bizarre obsession on the part of a tiny minority. You can’t walk into a UK workplace without overhearing heated discussions about who murdered who 90 years ago in Russia.
Comment by Ed — 26 October, 2008 @ 4:30 pm
Please someone tell me sectarian bullshit like what has been described in this post wasn’t all the conference did. I wished it much success, but not at that kind of crap. It’s all very nice to talk about unity, and non-aggression pacts, but it would be even nicer if the person saying these things could actually act the way they preach. There’s a word for slagging off others and then demand everyone make nice: hypocrisy.
Luckily, as can be seen from Liam’s blog, issues seem also to have been discussed (maybe it would have been better to post that part first…).
Is anyone concerned that fewer people showed up for this conference than the founding one?
Comment by christian h. — 26 October, 2008 @ 5:06 pm
who was discussing dead russians in the old respect? who was making predictions about the imminent collapse of capitalism? (as opposed to quite correctly, as it turned out, talking about the seriousness of the current economic situation and the way a recession would change the terrain of politics). Glad you had a good conference but ditto Christian.
Comment by johng — 26 October, 2008 @ 5:11 pm
“Is anyone concerned that fewer people showed up for this conference than the founding one?”
Any wonder!
Comment by Jim — 26 October, 2008 @ 5:49 pm
From my perspective the RESPECT national conference was BOSTIN! Carol Swords and other comrades made some really nice bagels and cake. Mark Steel looked nice in his denhim jacket and George looked dapper in his suit nicely set off by the red poppy.
The comrades in the thick of it campaigning for the Mile End East Ward Bye Election were an inpiration [one lad I talked to had been stopped and searched twice on Friday by Police while he was out canvassing alledgedly due to suspicion that he was carrying weapons… when in fact all he had was leaflets and a beard trimmer]
There were some interesting characters from Dorset they were very young and looked a bit like the spooky children from the film “The village of the dammed” but showed a greater capacity for love and didn’t appear to be telepathic.
Talking of villages I’d like to formally quash rumours circulating at the end of the conferenc that “I am the only gay in the village”…. There are at least three gay people in Bromsgrove and stangely enough I am not one!
Reports on other Blogs that the delegation from Bromsgrove has split into 3 factions are incorrect… Charlotte Badger has been disciplined by the branch committee for for drinking too much rum and wearing an eye patch and tricorn hat in public…. Abu Jamal still remains in RESPECT but has moved to nearby Redditch to be closer to the Mosque that is opening on Jinnah Avenue next to B&Q.
Finally, lots of love going out to the Tamworth RESPECT Massive… Booyaksha!
In the proletarian heartlands from Bromsgrove… to Dorset… to Tamworth… RESPECT goes from strenght to strenght!
Comment by mark anthony france — 26 October, 2008 @ 6:01 pm
#9: well, most workers don’t want to live under Stalinist regimes, and so it might be nice if socialism wasn’t associated with that…
Comment by David Broder — 26 October, 2008 @ 6:15 pm
It isn’t very clever of Galloway to make swipes at socialist organisations with his condescending quotes about the irrelevance of dead Russians to workers. The development of socialism in the 20th/21st century has been informed significantly by the experience and theories of Lenin and Trotsky.
Galloway’s politics confirm the criticism that the split was about getting rid of the revolutionary left so that the reformists will predominate and move Respect to the right. It’s a shame that Galloway and others on here are still banging that drum after the Convention of the Left. Unfortunately this has resulted in a very small, unrepresentative conference.
It’s ironic that even Murdoch’s Times is talking about the return of Marx and Galloway is trying his best to distance himself from Marxism. I think this demonstrates just how out of touch Respect Renewal’s leadership has become with the concerns of workers.
Comment by Ray — 26 October, 2008 @ 6:17 pm
Is Galloway still going on about the split? Jesus, that’s so old now.
Comment by AM — 26 October, 2008 @ 6:25 pm
Ray ( or what ever your name is)
As someone not even at the Conference, you do spout some utter, total bollocks about some thing you didn’t even witness, and therefore have no evidence to base your ‘clever’ pronouncements on
But I suppose at least you’re consistant with the constant stream of tripe that issues forth in your posts.
Comment by Richard Searle — 26 October, 2008 @ 7:03 pm
Did anyone video the main speeches? Any chance of posting them up on the net?
Comment by Strategist — 26 October, 2008 @ 7:05 pm
Very very disapointing indeed. I hoped for more from the RR conference than this…
“the front organisation of a small left wing sect”. Your guess is as good as mine there.”
Well my guess is perhaps the closest fit to this description is the Socialist Party’s Campaign for a New Workers Party. Which is most often critised for being a front. Certainly the Socialist Party are “small and left wing” - I think they are in the realm of 1000 members. I wouldn’t call them a “sect” because I think there are enough of them and they act with enough democracy to be deemed a “party”. A “sect” is an intentionally pejorative term as well which does little to build bridges in a time when that is so vital.
But let’s not beat around the bush. Rob Griffiths was refering to the SWP - who GG unforteanetly seems to still blame for everything under the sun and Griffiths thought he’d have a pop at too.
Let’s be absolutely clear to those in Respect Renewal and the CPB. The Left Alternative is not a front organisation - it is barely an organisation. It is the framework of a building block of which to build a new organisation. No one in the LA or SWP is claiming it will solve the problems of the left itself - if you believe we are saying this please read some of our released office notes and become enlightened as to quite how modest an effort it has had to become.
Also the SWP’s membership and power massively dwarves that of the rest of the far-left parties. That doesn’t mean we are the only significant part of the left. But we are the biggest party. We are the most highly functioning party in campaigns and on demonstrations. You can’t ignore or hide from that reality.
I think my gripe here is not so much that being called “a small sect” by the Communist Party and Respect Renewal (both incredibly small organisations) is like Danny Davito and Gary Coleman calling Tom Cruise too short. It’s the fact that you are deluding your members into thinking that the largest force on the left is infact smaller than you. It simply isn’t. You can contest potentially you will grow larger. But brutal reality is important in building an organisation and that is a very upside view of the left in Britain.
The electoral horizon (which is RR’s main concern) may hold brighter futures for RR than the LA. But you have a long way to go to have the numbers and strength of the SWP, that we have spent a very long time building. Good luck to you in doing that - I mean this geninely, despite Galloway’s ramblings. But don’t you have to wonder - wouldn’t we be increasing our significance faster and better if we worked and existed in unity? Every other country in Europe, where the left makes hedgeways - it happens for one reason: Unity.
I fear that the leaders of rival left organisations have more against each other than the rank and file do. Mergers and changes threaten the current power hierachies that left party leaders have. It is because of this we must always debate with but also around the leadership on reshaping the left in Britain.
Respect Renewal members would do well to express disdain with sectariania in all its forms as would we in the SWP.
Comment by Futurecast — 26 October, 2008 @ 7:21 pm
Richard Searle:
Ray was giving his opinion based on Liam’s report on the conference. Is Liam wrong when he says Galloway said working class people didn’t want to hear about dead russians? If Liam isn’t wrong then Ray seems to be justified in giving his analysis of what Galloway said. Are you saying you have to see something first hand to say anything about it? To be honest Ray’s argument seemed to make alot of sense. Why, instead of whining about Ray commenting on something he wasn’t at, don’t you give political criticism’s of what Ray said if you believe it to be so wrong? That is if you really have any political criticism’s of Ray’s comments.
Comment by anonymous — 26 October, 2008 @ 7:22 pm
Did the conference have anything to say on the war?
Has Respect abandened the mother ship?
GG was right when he advised not to stray too far from the anti war movement from which it was born
But I can help noticing Respect activists seem now to prioritise electoral campaigning to build a mass movemnt
If the war spreads to Pakistan - as Obama has promised - the struggle for peace will need all hands to the deck
Major Tom
Comment by to ground control — 26 October, 2008 @ 7:57 pm
#11: “Is anyone concerned that fewer people showed up for this conference than the founding one?”
That’s a bit of a silly question, isn’t it. Of course I would have liked a bigger conference, which would only be possible, given that this was a voting conference, if Respect was a bigger party. I’d like Respect to be a bigger party, and that’s why I’m trying to build it. The aim is not in fact to reduce the organisation to something which could have its annual conference in a phone box.
But the conference was a fair size, and this is where we are right now - relieved that we’ve survived the split (and the loss of income due to the bank account being frozen) and pleased to have reached the point of being able to have a democratic and enjoyable conference. The next year will show whether we can grow.
Comment by steph — 26 October, 2008 @ 7:57 pm
BTW, thanks for the clarification of ‘Tombliboos’!
Comment by steph — 26 October, 2008 @ 7:59 pm
ive read the report and i have a couple of questions? 1. what is the “proper communist party”? and 2. there was some discussion as to the commitment of the CPGB to Respect? what commitment how can they both be for a Marxist re-groupment with the CMP and a reformist one with Respect?
Comment by badger — 26 October, 2008 @ 8:42 pm
if only the stalin - trotsky split was just a personal bust up that left one russian dead!
unfortunately the crimes of stalinism, mostly supported by cde galloway, resulted in millions of working class people and peasents dead.
the failure and betrayal of the stalinist parties, meant that the working class did not take power in a whole host of countries, which in turn led to the rise of fascism and then massive inter-imperialist blood shed and the holocaust, and even then, after all this, the stalinists successsfully derailed the workers’ movement in europe and the anti-colonial countries away from taking power.
so we still have capitalism and imperialism, with all its horrors, in no small part down to the stalinist betrayals and out-right counter-revolutionary actions.
stalinists and ex-stalinists might want to ignore all this and say it is irrelevent. those who are serious about wanting to see a successful world socialist revolution will however want to study it and learn all the related lessons.
unfortunately stalinist ideas and methods still exist on the left today. therefore they need to be understood and studied in order to combat them successfully this time round.
the ideas of popular frontism and stageism have all reappeared on the left, sometimes adopted by ex-trotskyists even. these ‘theories’ are disasterous can only lead to defeat in the future. so sorry cdes, we wont be ignoring these debates and stalinists and reformists will not be left unchallenged by genuine marxists.
ks
Comment by karlshayne — 26 October, 2008 @ 9:04 pm
Thanks for blogging.
Comment by Culture Vulture — 26 October, 2008 @ 9:05 pm
karlshayne…but the bagels were nice.
Comment by mark anthony france — 26 October, 2008 @ 9:06 pm
anytime vulture.
Comment by mark anthony france — 26 October, 2008 @ 9:06 pm
Karl Marx is not a dead Russian. He was a German, and I can assure you Galloway regards his analysis as very much alive and kicking. It is true that he thinks the Leninist approach has nothing to offer Britain in 2008, and that the endless splits and fruitless pre-occupation with “who killed which Russians and why” ensure
traditional leftist groups speak a language to working people much more foreign than Russian. As Liam put it; he might have a point there. Galloway has never said and I know doesn’t believe that the SWP were ever guilty of that in the old pre-split Respect. As a matter of fact, I think he looks back on those old days when he was dealing with the SWP with an element of, well, nostalgia..
Comment by Molotov — 26 October, 2008 @ 9:08 pm
#30 So a meeting of 200 Eurocoms, Stalinists, reformists and a few socialists from the whole of the UK that is billed as a Respect conference is the best you can come up with as an alternative to so-called “Leninism”?
And because Liam, a member of an insignificant and so-called “Trotskyist” organisation, a cheerleader of the split and witchhunt against the SWP, thinks Galloway has a point then this confirms the irrelevance of so-called “Leninism”? I doubt even he would welcome the end of Leninism although perhaps it is politically expedient in this situation for the organisation of which he is a member in order to maintain a tiny significance in Renewal. They hold a position in Renewals leadership which, even in a small organisation like Renewal, is stretching the concept of proportional representation to it’s limits.
If Galloway wishes to pursue this folly of believing Respect Renewal are the new vanguard and dismiss the much larger left organisations such as the SWP and the SP then he does so at Renewals peril. The fact that Galloway believes Respect Renewal will have 3 MP’s by the next election is testament to the exaggerated significance and deluded self-importance he attaches to Respect Renewal.
It appears that the leadership of Respect Renewal have learnt nothing from the split and The Convention of the Left and are intent on carving up its own tiny empire on the left at the expense of unity. I now understand why leading members have resigned and are now quietly drifting away.
It wouldn’t be necessary to burst the bubble of Galloway’s self-aggrandisement if not for his divisive sectarian rhetoric at this so-called “conference”. What a wasted opportunity to ditch the sectarianism of the split.
Comment by Ray — 26 October, 2008 @ 10:29 pm
There’s a feeling of the writings on the wall about this conference, that’s if in all honesty a five hour meeting of 210 individuals - and I dare say mostly from London can even be remotely describe as a conference. I think not!
The late Ian Mikardo for many years represented the seat that Galloway hopes to take at the next election. Ian was known as the MPs bookie, I wonder what odds he would have given Galloway at being returned to the commons next time.
Comment by Jim — 26 October, 2008 @ 11:07 pm
#32.. Jim… It was a conference.. it had registrations, sessions, resolutions, votes, and a leadership election… there were significant delegations from manchester, birmingham, bristol, oxford, dorset. The organisation’s MP and councillors were present and the atmosphere was businesslike, optomistic, open, inclusive and non-sectarian. the Conference was also a useful place to organise the distribution of the latest issue of “the Respect paper” a 16 page full colour newspaper.
As for your comment about Galloway and his chances of being returned to the commons next time… well Respect Activists in the new seat of Popular and Limehouse [where Galloway has been selected to stand against New Labour’s Jim Fitzpatrick] know they have a struggle on their hands. Hence the decision of RESPECT Conference finish early to enable more human resources to be but into work in the Mile End East Ward bye election.
As Galloway has said the choice for ordinary working class people in Popular and Limehouse at the General Election “will be between two Scotsmen…one standing in the Tradition of Keir Hardie… the other in the Tradition of Ramsey McDonald”.
Jim … I feel sure that your attitude towards this impending contest will be “a plaque on both your houses”. Time will tell but I for one will be doing all I can to build RESPECT and in doing so increase the likelyhood of George Galloway’s return to the commons. It is a sign of the maturity and tactical good sense of the RESPECT Conference that it managed to achieve so much in such a short space of time
anyway I think so!
Comment by mark anthony france — 26 October, 2008 @ 11:39 pm
#20 Futurecast, I’m afraid your victimhood syndrome may be getting the better of you.
Rob Griffiths has made the same point about a front organisation run by a sect being no substitute for a real Labour Party/ mass party of labour, based on the organised working class, in a number of articles and speeches. In some of them, he has explicitly mentioned the Socialist Party and, I think, Workers Power in this regard - organisations which certainly are seen as sects by many of the labour movement activists who would need to be won for the mass working class party.
I can’t think of him once referring to the SWP and its Left Alternative. Sorry. Your tantrum was unnecessary.
Comment by Morning Star reader — 26 October, 2008 @ 11:42 pm
33# WOW!
Comment by Jim — 27 October, 2008 @ 12:07 am
Whether it’s sectarian swipes at SP, SWP or whoever it’s not acceptable if we’re following the ethos of the Convention of the Left. The SP are our comrades we may not agree with the way they organise but the same criticisms have been levelled at both sides of Respect.
It’s one thing to have a political disagreement about tactics and strategy but to make blanket statements about so-called “Leninism” and describing larger socialist organisations as so-called “sects” does nothing to contribute to left unity. It smacks of smugness and condescension.
Comment by Ray — 27 October, 2008 @ 1:21 am
I’m sure Rob Griffiths criticisms could apply to any of the projects which are run by one tendency. I think we should focus on the point that, to be really effective for our class and our tendency (whatever it may be) we need to work together.
Comment by Charlie Marks — 27 October, 2008 @ 2:17 am
‘Sect’ is a perfectly legitimate Marxist category to use. Marx was certainly adept at throwing the term about:
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1871/letters/71_11_23.htm
Hal Draper provides a useful definition:
“A sect presents itself as the embodiment of the socialist movement, though it is a membership organization whose boundary is set more or less rigidly by the points in its political program rather than by its relation to the social struggle. In contrast, a working-class party is not simply an electoral organization but rather, whether electorally engaged or not, an organization which really is the political arm of decisive sectors of the working class, which politically reflects (or refracts) the working class in motion as it is.”
http://www.marxists.org/archive/draper/1973/xx/microsect.htm
By Drapers’s definition practically all self styled UK Leninist and Trotskyite groups, to a greater or lesser degree, fall into the category of ‘sect’ by virtue of their lack of implantation in the British working class. To say so is not to engage in abuse. It is simply to note a political reality. By contrast Respect, or to be more accurate those sections of Respect engaged and implanted in sections of the working class, have a more legitimate claim to Draper’s definition of a working class party. In Respect’s case this claim is partial, but real nonetheless.
Comment by Ger Francis — 27 October, 2008 @ 2:20 am
All this bitching on here is pathetic beyond belief.
The economy is in meltdown, the banks have been nationalised - the battle is now on to determine whose interests will now be prioritised for protection during the coming storm, the super-rich or everyone else. This is the left’s once in a generation opportunity to gain real ground. But defeat is also a very real possibility, and with it our pensions, savings & tax payments will stay looted, our essential public services will be slashed, privatised and wrecked, and our chance of a decent future will be stolen from in front of very eyes.
And what positive response do we see in the comments here? The same old load of bollocks.
Respect has set itself an ambitious but realistic task - to kick out New Labour and its useless MPs in just three seats in East London and Birmingham. With the tectonic plates moving as they are, this may be too limited an ambition, actually, not the other way round.
I do wonder what odds Ian Mikardo would have offered on George Galloway beating Jim Fitzpatrick. But would he have said, “the man’s a political colossus, George, you might as well throw in the towel and go home now”? Somehow I don’t think so.
What is needed now is work on the ground to build up the local name & profile of Respect and its 3 candidates, who are all clearly highly capable & attractive - in marked contrast to New Labour’s numpties - and 18 months to run at it like it was a triple by-election, while New Labour’s emergies will necessarily be turned to defending seats elsewhere.
If we only learn one thing from Obama, let it be: YES WE CAN!
Comment by Strategist — 27 October, 2008 @ 2:34 am
Poor old Hal Draper - the very idea of invoking his definition of a sect to legitimise Galloway and his hangers on is enough to make anyone who’s familiar with his writing and political activity quite nauseous . If he were still alive, I’m pretty sure Draper would have found a harsher definition than ’sect’ to describe RR.
Comment by Daisy — 27 October, 2008 @ 3:37 am
Instead of trying to bridge the gap, Ger responds by going even further and labelling everyone on the left, apart from those in RR, as members of sects. What next, the whole of the working class written off as sectarian for not joining RR?
Comment by Ray — 27 October, 2008 @ 4:18 am
Ray claims that I label ‘everyone on the left’ as members of sects. Not true. I was specific to ‘practically all self styled UK Leninist and Trotskyite groups’ which certainly does not constitute all of the left.
Ray interprets the term as a form of abuse and of course it is often used as one on sites like this. If it makes it a bit less provocative to him lets substitute the term ‘sect’ with the less loaded term ‘propagandist group’, which is less accurate, but also conveys the same sense of a political grouping without implantation in the working class and broader society. It is simply a fact that all groups on the far left in the UK fall into this category. Nothing illustrates this more than their complete impotence in the face of one of the greatest financial crisis in the history of capitalism. The real point of acknowledging this reality of the far left is to be better able to understand why this reality.
It would be dishonest of me to counterpose Respect to such organisations. In most of the country Respect is practically non-existent or where it does exist is nothing more than a propaganda operation. However in a few areas it has real implantation and roots in working class communities. But that is enough to demarcate it. If it were to lose this toehold Respect would very quickly be nothing more than another small leftist grouping of white, male, middle aged activists. The challenge for us is not to allow that to happen.
Comment by Ger Francis — 27 October, 2008 @ 9:03 am
Post #38 the renegade Grr Francis wrote “Respect, or to be more accurate those sections of Respect engaged and implanted in sections of the working class, have a more legitimate claim to Draper’s definition of a working class party. In Respect’s case this claim is partial, but real nonetheless.”
The problem with this idiotic claim is that it has no truth whatsoever and traets the Marxist analysis of Hal Draper dishonestly. Draper like all Marxists was of the opinion that only those tendencies that based themselves on a working class program and orientated on the working class could be considered as working class politically. Respect by contrast has a populist program and does not have a priary orientation on the working classes.
As for those elements of Respect, poor broken backed things they are, that do hold to a socialist program and do work within the class, they are renegades to the socialist cause. That said it is true, sadly, that all of the socialist groups in britain today are sects in the Marxian sense. Some more healthy than others and some are mere cults but better a socialist cult than a populist electoral machine.
Comment by Mike — 27 October, 2008 @ 9:30 am
Of course the problem with the obsessive Mike is that he thinks he is the only person in Britain who adheres to a genuine ‘working class program’. Remind me what group you are a member of?
Comment by Ger Francis — 27 October, 2008 @ 9:36 am
Them raw nerves of uneasy Truth!
Comment by Jim — 27 October, 2008 @ 10:43 am
The first batch of comments on Respect seems to have come from SWP members and their supporters. They are very revealing.
The need for a Left alternative to Labour was not won or was not transmitted correctly to the membership. This would also explain why many SWP members only got exercised about Respect when they were told there was a witch-hunt against them.
Of course there is a Left and a Right in Respect, there is in any organisation.
It may surprise Ray to hear that my only criticism of the otherwise excellent conference was the failure of the right to come forward.
George did do his bit on Dead Russians and managed to misread the feeling of the audience. Not his finest hour.
“The reformists will dominate and pull Respect to the right”
If this happens then we will know we are getting somewhere and not just talking to ourselves.
The ballot for the NEC took place at the conference and the count was done in the hall. Salma and George topped the poll. Some of those who had misgivings about the conference taking place at all were also elected. This to me emphasised the maturity and political nous Respect now has.
By the way, congratulations to the SWP on the correct decision to put Left Alternative into abeyance.
Comment by paul v — 27 October, 2008 @ 11:48 am
My allegiance is to the working class. A position that clearly differentiates those who adhere to it, including the much maligned ’sects’, from renegades like Grr.
Comment by Mike — 27 October, 2008 @ 11:48 am
“Liam, a member of an insignificant and so-called “Trotskyist” organisation”….”They hold a position in Renewals leadership which, even in a small organisation like Renewal, is stretching the concept of proportional representation to it’s limits.”
Well, if you’re talking about the ISG, by my calculation they have four out of fifty on the newly elected Respect NC, which is less than 10% of the NC. Hardly seems like over-representation to me. They were also elected as individuals on their own merit, not on some bureaucratically imposed slate system, which is a real advance on the previous situation. So I dont think this argument holds water.
See:
http://www.respectrenewal.org/content/view/395
Comment by Dumbo — 27 October, 2008 @ 12:00 pm
#47 Mike… I just seen John Prescott on telly taking about his ‘alleigance to the Working Class’…. i really think you shouldn’t get too hot under the collar about stuff. Clearly RESPECT Conference was a success and has elected a National Council with a broad geopgraphical spread including many individuals who have excellent track records as champions of the ‘working class’ and the oppressed.
There is a lot to do Mike… yet you are apparently content to snipe from the grassy knoll of you ‘moral’ high ground. The Economic Crisis is gathering apace….
Today in sunny bromsgrove I am off to my local newspaper office to try and kick start a public campaign to establish new community projects to empower and encourage the self organisation of those most affected by the crisis… Out of this I hope our RESPECT supporters group will have enough of a base built through hard work to stand credible candidates in the next local elections…
I could of course just spend all my time typing abstact ideas and engaging in ‘mortal combat’ with people I percieve as ‘renagades’ in virtual reality.
#49 Dumbo… Thanks for posting the link to the RESPECT National Council Election results and clarifying the number of ISG people on the Council. A quick scan of the names indicates that a third of the NC are women and a third of the NC are non-white… there are also some people under the age of 30 years which is a move in the right direction… On the whole I think the National Council is a reflection of the Conference… ie it is ONE STEP FORWARD… soon we can learn to WALK and before you know it WE WILL BE RUNNING!
Comment by mark anthony france — 27 October, 2008 @ 12:37 pm
#39 “By Drapers’s definition practically all self styled UK Leninist and Trotskyite groups, to a greater or lesser degree, fall into the category of ‘sect’ by virtue of their lack of implantation in the British working class. To say so is not to engage in abuse. It is simply to note a political reality. By contrast Respect, or to be more accurate those sections of Respect engaged and implanted in sections of the working class, have a more legitimate claim to Draper’s definition of a working class party”
It’s nice that you’ve read some Draper at some point in your life and don’t just feel he is a dead American speaking in an odd language with no relevance to the British working man. I think your argument is in several ways fallacious. Draper’s definition of sects
seems to depend on their political programme rather than their size, so their relative lack of implantation is not the defining charcteristic. By contrast Resect represents some sort of cross-class alliance.
#47 “Of course there is a Left and a Right in Respect, there is in any organisation”
Sometimes it’s hard to see a left. And in organisations not oriented on the working-class, whether some of the members have left-wing views in private is irrelevant. And is Galloway on the left or right here?
Comment by skidmarx — 27 October, 2008 @ 12:44 pm
49, I actually make it 5 ISGers (or SR supporters)but Dumbo’s point stands.
Perhaps the largest single (non)group on the NC are the exSWP members of whom there are at least 12!
R.
Comment by RobM — 27 October, 2008 @ 12:47 pm
#52 >>Perhaps the largest single (non)group on the NC are the exSWP members of whom there are at least 12!
Now that is an interesting fact!
#47 >>congratulations to the SWP on the correct decision to put Left Alternative into abeyance
If in the next 12 months (a) the SWP focuses on getting people to realise they are going to presented with the bill for the bailout through attacks on their living standards & public services, and resisting that through unions and community campaigns, whilst (b) Respect focuses on building a well-known & well-liked electoral alternative in a small number of councils and crucially in 3 Westminster seats, then there really seems to be no reason why the two groups shouldn’t see their work as entirely complementary with no points of conflict and so the bad blood of the split can be laid to rest, and Respect can get on with its task with great enthusiasm.
The next task for the Convention of the Left would be agree the right umbrella for standing candidates in the Euro elections, one which allows Respect the name recognition it needs to generate for the General Election to follow. Or better, a response imaginative enough to respond to the scale of the current crisis, a joint Green Party/Respect/rest of the left slate.
Comment by Strategist — 27 October, 2008 @ 1:15 pm
#52…. aye aye aye! the Tamworth RESPECT Massive! Booyakasha!
RobM … This thing about ex-members of the SWP … so there are 12 on the RESPECT NC…mmm. did you know there is self help group on facebook called “Former Members of the IMG Unite!” there is only 12 people in it!
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=5539289415
If an similar group was set up for the Ex SWPers it would have 1000,s joining I suspect?
I think it is fitting that Salma Yaqoob topped the poll for the RESPECT NC… To have a trained psychotherapist presiding over a traumatised grouping of “renegades” from revolutionary marxism seems somehow appropriate.
Comment by mark anthony france — 27 October, 2008 @ 1:17 pm
Out of interest, what school/approach of psychotherpay does Salma Yaqoob adhere too?
Comment by Adamski — 27 October, 2008 @ 1:23 pm
Mark: “Former Members of the IMG Unite!” there is only 12 people in it!”
Mmmm. Know a couple of former IMGers who may be interested in that group, I can certainly think of one who deffo should join and probably would appreciate the co-counselling from former comrades. Shouldn’t it be “IMGers Anonymous” btw? Maybe I should talk to Mike, the creator…. Is there a 10 step programme?
Comment by Louise — 27 October, 2008 @ 1:25 pm
#55… Adamski… I am not sure which school of psychotherapy that Salma Yaqoob adheres to… I suspect she utelises a ‘toolkit of approaches’…and is developing the concept of “RESPECT” in the fullest sense of the word as a guiding thread and universal approach to overcoming trauma.
#56 Louise….oops maybe it should be “IMGers Anonymous” in which case I have just breeched the confidentiality of the group… just typical! me and my big gob!
As for the 10 point programe may I suggest:
1. Stop Crying
2. Take a deep breath
3. Drink a Glass of Water
4. Find Someone to Hug
5. Start Crying Again
7. Have a Good Nights Sleep
8. Phone a Friend
9. Join RESPECT
10.PREPEAR FOR ACTION
Comment by mark anthony france — 27 October, 2008 @ 1:43 pm
#57… point 10 should read PREPARE FOR ACTION not PREPEAR which sounds like an immature fruit.
Comment by Anonymous — 27 October, 2008 @ 1:46 pm
Skidmarx
It wasn’t hard to see a left at the Respect conference. The motions carried included many references on the need for orientation on the working-class and the trades unions. These were proposed and spoken on. There was nothing private about them.
I can only assume your mind has been taken up with the necessity to define exactly what a sect is
Comment by paul v — 27 October, 2008 @ 2:00 pm
IMGers Anonymous sounds great- wish I could jump in my Tardis, go back in time, join and leave the IMG so as to be a part of it!
Will you all have cadre names? Will you be using your old ones or will you get a new pin and a new dictionary and pick new ones?
Will you allow tendencies and factions?
Will you allow competing sections in the same house or does one have to be the official Anonymous IMGer whilst the other can apply for Anonymous Former FI Sympathiser status?
And one final question to ponder- “Facebook or My Space- who are the real Pabloites?”
Comment by RobM — 27 October, 2008 @ 3:03 pm
Well, on Draper’s definition the term also fits the CPB, and Respect for that matter. We could argue about exactly what would constitute decisive sectors of the working class, but there’s no question that Respect does not represent that sort of mass audience (and for the most part, to be fair, doesn’t claim to). If the same definition applies to the Sparts, the SWP, and the CPB, then it’s not a very useful one.
Comment by chjh — 27 October, 2008 @ 3:04 pm
I just wonder at the reaction of any unsuspecting member of the “working class” if they should happen upon this thread? That!! is Galloway’s point.
Comment by Molotov — 27 October, 2008 @ 4:07 pm
“mmm. did you know there is self help group on facebook called “Former Members of the IMG Unite!” there is only 12 people in it!”
The “International Marxist Group” ceased to be a name used after 1981 (when the name was changed to “Socialist League”) and there were 758 members in the last full census for the conference in 1979, so there ought to be the best part of 1,000 of them about (give or take a bit of turnover before then and deaths since)!
Comment by Prinkipo Exile — 27 October, 2008 @ 4:07 pm
“Respect focuses on building a well-known & well-liked electoral alternative in a small number of councils and crucially in 3 Westminster seats”
I see the target has dropped from 5 to 3. In reality the actual number will almost certainly be zero, for psephological reasons that don’t need repeating. I see “Defending Our People” has changed to “Defending Working People”; shouldn’t that be “Defending hard-working British people and their Families”?
Comment by skidmarx — 27 October, 2008 @ 4:21 pm
Don’t worry Skidmarx, Respect will also contest the two seats in Newham and every ward in the council elections there in 2010, it’s just that due to the first past the post system, the electoral arithmetic there is very much against us, so realistically we have less chance of winning.
Since you are so knowledgeable about election tactics on the left, maybe you tell us how many seats Left Alternative will contest at the next general election?
Comment by Prinkipo Exile — 27 October, 2008 @ 4:38 pm
‘maybe you tell us how many seats Left Alternative will contest at the next general election?’
Possibly even less than Respect Renewal, but then Left Alternative aren’t claiming to be the most important left current in Britain, or whatever it was that galloway said.
By the way, I’d say the chance of RR actually winning any of those seats is a big fat zero. In a party that had something apart from elctoralism to hold it together four or five saved deposits and second places would be a basis to build on, but not RR, oh no.
In Hall green, for example, Respect got just a couple of hundred votes in half the seat last council elections. If it was all like Sparkbrook and Springfield wards Salma would have a chance, but it ain’t and she hasn’t. Better think about where you all go afterwards. You’ve a while to work it out at least.
Comment by swp member — 27 October, 2008 @ 4:48 pm
#62….molotov… Occasionally… unsuspect members of the “working class” do look and threads like this and are bemused and confused…. and usually never look again!
I think your point is a really important one and in general it would be good if all contributors kept in mind the potentially damaging affects and effects of their comments… This is really difficult to do however, as sometimes this site is used as a means for comrades to communicate about arcane and essentially personal concerns with other comrades.
Over time however, if more people do contribute and the comments become more focused on the task in hand ie. how to build an united movement struggling in the context of deepening crisis towards socialist solutions, then perhaps things will become less ‘weird’.
#65 Prinkipo Exile……I concur! I do hope that Skidmarx moderates his negativity towards RESPECT…. maybe in time even he will end up handing out leaflets for RESPECT candidates again?…. By the way why are you in ‘Exile’… can’t you at least get a visa for a trip to copenhagen?
Comment by charlotte badger — 27 October, 2008 @ 4:53 pm
#66.. swp member… you are so right about how hard it will be for Salma to win in the new Hall Green Seat. In fact the key to victory may well lie in mobilising working class ‘white’ votes….. perhaps if Salma Iqbal’s [the RESPECT candidate for Springfield Ward last time round] sister can mobilise the local SWP to support Salma Yaqoobs campaign we could be in with a real chance.
I propose that all socialists in Brum assist in the Building of the new Moseley and Kings Heath Branch of RESPECT and that any socialists in Hall Green Focus their Attention on how to establish a Hall Green Branch of RESPECT in the New Year…. If campaigning activity aimed at mobilising people to defend themselves against the recession can be linked to Salma Yaqoobs campaign then SHE WILL WIN.
Time to let bygones be bygones… what do you feel about this?
Comment by mark anthony france — 27 October, 2008 @ 5:04 pm
Yeah, great report, shame you neglected to mention Motion 18, calling for the breakup of the United Kingdom and our absorbption into the EU POLICE STATE.
Aside from the rather obvious “loony left” reactions this idiotic proposal is likely to generate, people should be aware that this is actually TREASON, which is punishable by life in prison.
I wonder, do Mr Galloway and his supporters really want to go to jail?
Comment by John Morton — 27 October, 2008 @ 5:15 pm
#62 ” That!! is Galloway’s point.”
I was wondering. It’s a sign of the level of his clarity that there is such uncertainty about what “arguments between dead Russians” he takes exception to. I’d wondered if it was Stalin v Trotsky (I know the former was Georgian, but anyway).
#63 “maybe you tell us how many seats Left Alternative will contest at the next general election?”
Don’t know. But may I remark, since Andy Newman’s attack on me last week for being badly translated from the Russian seems to prefigure GG’s remarks, that you sound a bit American there.
#67 “I do hope that Skidmarx moderates his negativity towards RESPECT…. ”
That’s unlikely to happen after y’all fucked up the original Respect by trying to fuck up the SWP [”Yes you did, Brad, and Marsellus Wallis doesn’t like to be fucked by anyone except Mrs. Wallis”]. I don’t think that’s going to matter very much as the New Respect is unlikely to be with us much longer, only getting 210 instead of the projected 350 to the conference is an obvious sign of what’s going on.
I am interested in how Mark Steel started his speech. Was it “Comrades”, “Brothers and Sisters”,”Sisters and Brothers” or “Colleagues”?
Comment by skidmarx — 27 October, 2008 @ 5:35 pm
Thanks for posting up the report.
Conferences like that are a useful barometer to find out which sections of the left are still stuck in the quagmire of electoralism, representational politics, and issuing shopping lists of supposedly radical “demands” that no one listens to.
Anyone can say vote for me and you will get “free” this or “free” that … when they dont actually have to pay for it out of their own pockets. The electorate arent dumb. People are becoming more and more financially literate when it comes to politics and old school Trot deceptions like the Transitional Program of Demands are as threadbare, dishonest and see-through as never before.
Anyone on the left - whether individual or party - who stands for election and can’t answer in the affirmative the question: “What have you actually done to make your community a better place to live in - economically, socially or culturally?” doesn’t deserve any votes.
Individual and parties who havent done the long term spade work in their own communities - making them noticeably better places to live in - have got a right fuckin cheek even standing for election.
All the “demands” and socialist rhetoric in the world wont change the fact that they are opportunistic charlatans who deserve to be ignored.
Were there any reports from activists who actually make a difference in their communties, without operating with a megaphone in one hand and a Vote For Me leaflet in the other?
Comment by Kevin Williamson — 27 October, 2008 @ 5:37 pm
#69 >>this is actually TREASON, which is punishable by life in prison.
I always think “punishable by HANGING, DRAWING AND QUARTERING ON TOWER HILL” has a better ring to it.
Comment by Strategist — 27 October, 2008 @ 5:48 pm
John Morton #69
Motion 18, calling for the breakup of the United Kingdom and our absorbption into the EU POLICE STATE… people should be aware that this is actually TREASON, which is punishable by life in prison.
I wonder, do Mr Galloway and his supporters really want to go to jail?
Well, it would be better publicity than Big Brother. But unless UKIP win a parliamentary majority, it ain’t gonna happen anytime soon.
Incidentally, I am opposed to the break up of the union (with the exception of Northern Ireland). But trying to win that debate by scaring people with jail is desperate stuff, albeit quite funny.
Comment by Calvin — 27 October, 2008 @ 5:59 pm
“I think your point is a really important one and in general it would be good if all contributors kept in mind the potentially damaging affects and effects of their comments…”
I actually agree with this very strongly. That’s why when I came to read the conference report I was annoyed and somewhat disappointed after the Convention of the Left to read comments about the irrelevance of “Leninism” and words like “sect” used to dismiss other socialists.
I don’t believe there is a distinction between the so-called “left” and the so-called “working-class”. Having been a socialist for over 20 years I have organised with many activists, the vast majority of them working class and deeply embedded in their workplace and community. This is still the case.
When a left organisation starts to characterise themselves as the tribunes of the working class and dismisses other organisations as out of touch “sects” or “middle-class” then it usually means they are either run by syndicalists (definitely not the case with RR) or the very people of whom they are critical.
To infer that the SP, SWP and other socialist organisations are out of touch with workers because of their size completely ignores the effect of 10 years of neo-liberal Labour and the defeats workers have faced under Thatcher. Until RR accepts that the left is trying to grow out of these conditions and regains some humility then it will continue to blow it’s own trumpet out of all proportion. Not very helpful for encouraging unity on the left.
Good luck with your organisation but please refrain from having digs at the rest of the left. It doesn’t help RR nor anyone else on the left.
Comment by Ray — 27 October, 2008 @ 6:09 pm
The claim that Respect is more significant than any other left organisation formed in the past decade boils down to its electoral prospects.
Respect is similar in size to the SLP when it was founded.
It’s smaller than the Socialist Alliance was.
The numbers attending Respect’s conference last Saturday were far smaller than the Socialist Alliance’s programmatic conference in Coventry.
Even after subtracting a few tiny sects, Respect’s politics aren’t really distinguishable from either of its predecessors.
It has inherited its claim to the mantle of “Old Labour” from the Socialist Alliance.
From the SLP the same agnostic attitude to Stalinism and its methods.
In practice covering up the historical crimes of Stalinism merely encourages neo-Stalinism.
Scargill lets in the “Stalin Society”, George Galloway denounces “Toytown Trotskyists” in the capitalist press.
Sirkorski, Francis, Ovenden, Hoveman et al. keep quiet!
RESPECT’s politics boil down to a hybrid form of Labour Leftism tailored to practising Muslims.
This approach determines the political horizons it’s set itself for the next General Election.
But given the world economic crisis, these horizons are now far too narrow.
Galloway’s politics are best seen in his Scottish ‘Daily Record’ articles every week.
Here, he operates as an independent Labour left, pressurising Gordon Brown from the left.
Galloway may not be a sectarian, but to use a vinyl analogy; sectarianism and opportunism are the A and B sides of the same record
Isolation on the basis of “purity of programme” leads to the formation of sects.
Usually because the programme is so unreal that it can’t be fought for in mass organisations.
The flip side, opportunism involves political compromises with the ruling class.
Watering down the socialist programme in favour of get rich quick schemes.
This always occurs via acommodation with the Labour bureaucracy.
Galloway is on one side of the coin, the SWP the other.
Sometimes it’s spinning so fast that you see both sides at the same time!
On one is the “People Before Profit Charter”.
A rather tame list of demands, which left trade union bureaucrats can sign without any committment to action.
On the other, miniscule angry protests against the whole capitalist system, which don’t even attempt to promote the Charter.
Neither approach tackles the real problem.
New Labour came to power through the Labour bureaucracy.
The bureaucracy of the Labour Party and the Trade Unions are part of the same organism.
It can’t be defeated by running minority electoral campaigns or blurring political programmes.
The key to politically replacing new Labour is in the unions.
Comment by prianikoff — 27 October, 2008 @ 6:23 pm
Kevin: “Were there any reports from activists who actually make a difference in their communties, without operating with a megaphone in one hand and a Vote For Me leaflet in the other?”
There was indeed consirable disquiet expressed in advance from many In Respect at the nature of this conference.
Yet again we managed to clash an internal Respect event with a major Muslim festival, and this time we managed to clash it with an absolutely crucial by-election, and some people simply didn’t exhibit the tactical and mental flexibility to ajust around these important external events.
But most problematic is the issue of a relatively small left group taking itself so seriously that it feels the need to have policy on all sorts of issues, when we are in no position to implementit, and hardly anyone cares what we decide - not even many of our own voters and supporters!
Respect only makes sense if it seen as one part of a complex jig-saw. An important point due to its real but localised electoroal base, and the small but significant groups of community activists in a couple of other places like Bristol and manchester.
But the absolute key is to see that the labour movement is involved in complex recomposition at a glacial pace. Vain glorious illusioons by some in Respect are are a distraction from the real task - which is to stay organically connected to that recomposition.
Comment by Andy Newman — 27 October, 2008 @ 6:59 pm
‘Time to let bygones be bygones… what do you feel about this?’
Mark A-F - last year Salma, Alan Thornett and probably others met up with leading swpers at the height of the split and said they wanted us to leave Respect. Well, its taken a year and a bit of wrangling, but they got what they wanted. That isn’t going to change in a hurry, and i think you’d find a lot of resistance to any ‘kiss and make up’ strategy from both sides. Salma will have to manage without Brum swp.
Comment by swp member — 27 October, 2008 @ 7:21 pm
I watched this show of Mr Galloways where he tells a caller that he opposed Saddam and Halabja.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=QgkE0JZK0Gc
Does anyone please give me links for his opposition or the letter he mentions.
Comment by Help please. — 27 October, 2008 @ 8:04 pm
Andy
The conference was organised by those in Respect (the vast majority) who want Respect to be a well run organisation. To do this we need to have structures in place for making democratic decisions. To simply say individuals can do what they like without any accountability leads us back to the problems Respect has had in its previous incarnations. To put off the conference again, when it was clear the need for a democratically elected NC and a proper forum for debate, would simply look like we were trying to avoid it.
If you were trying to avoid it please tell me why.
Comment by paul v — 27 October, 2008 @ 8:18 pm
I second Ray and 74. and others that, yes, squabbling isn’t useful. That’s precisely the reason I found this report less than helpful. I am sure there must have been some real organizing work going on at the conference, can’t we get a report on that?
I most certainly hope that you get your three seats, if only to prove that left candidates can, indeed, succeed outside Labour. (Also, we here in the US might learn something.) But if you really want support from other groups, you can’t go around calling them names; and there has to be some reciprocity.
Comment by christian h. — 27 October, 2008 @ 9:24 pm
As we’re all supposed to be getting over our obsessions with dead Russians, will Molotov and Prinkipo Exile be changing their blog-names?
Comment by chjh — 27 October, 2008 @ 10:03 pm
#80…good point chjh…. wherever possible maybe people should try to be as transparent as possible and use there own names? This will enable accountability and of course allow MI5 to reduce the effort it puts in at taxpayers expense indentifying us.
Perhaps when were all in Gaol together the essentially petty disputes here will seem somehow less important.
#68… such a shame swp member… I was not involved in RESPECT until in Salma Yaqoobs words “The SWP takes a step backwards”. Since then I have come forward and I hope that many others will too…. but this peculiar dance, comrades currently under the discipline of the SWP will have a role to play in the future.
#71…Kevin Williamson…the conference was, as has been pointed out a short event, nevertheless, it was clear that significant numbers of those present are engaged in important work in the communities where the live and work, it particular the Manchester and Bristol comrades displayed the extent to which they are embedded in vibrant campaigning work… and it was patently obvious that the comrades from Mile End East were serious,capable and in the middle of an important battle.
#73…Calvin…incidentally I am infavour of the Break up of the Union ideally starting with Northern Ireland ASAP… why don’t you and Noah join RESPECT so we can have a good row about this at the next RESPECT conference??
#76… I think i understand what you are driving at Andy. Not being privie to any discussions prior to RESPECT Conference I feel that under the circumstances the conference was a valuable event… The new National Council has to ensure that future events are organised with a keen eye for the possible negative consequences or clashes with other important events… It was unfortunate you were prevented from attending by work committments because I feel you would be the first to have appreciated the ’spirit’ and ‘good humour’ of the conference.
Finally… I hope comrades take the time to read Louises reports on this site and Harpy Marx on the UFFC Procession at the weekend…. I feel ashamed that I was not even aware the event was on…. One the claring weaknesses of RESPECT to date is it’s weakness in the Black Community in England and Louises report has made reflect on that problem at lenght.
Comment by mark anthony france — 27 October, 2008 @ 11:00 pm
Mark in post #50 wrote “There is a lot to do Mike… yet you are apparently content to snipe from the grassy knoll of you ‘moral’ high ground.”
Look you soft lad tomorrow afternoon I’ll be representing two of my fellow workers in disciplineries. Then I shall be doing my level best to sign them and others up to the union in a largely unorganised industry. It’s a fucking strange grassy knoll that puts me in the bosses firing line.
As for morals mine start with the idea that the working class must break politically from all sections of the bourgeoisie and petty bourgeoisie. Which is why I have criticised the rotten misalliance that is Respect dating from a time when it had no name even, boyo.
Comment by Mike — 27 October, 2008 @ 11:07 pm
Andy & Mark - thanks. I’m sure Respect has a lot better community activists than the control freak egotists who hog the spotlight.
Comment by Kevin Williamson — 28 October, 2008 @ 12:02 am
I’m guessing nobody thought to film the event and put up YouTube videos of it on the net. If so, I really feel that was a mistake.
It would have been very helpful if people who couldn’t attend could have simply seen & listened to what was said instead of having to try to decipher it from all the unreliable testimony and nonsense on the comments here.
Comment by Strategist — 28 October, 2008 @ 1:15 am
Cde Strategist, your in luck. It was all videod.
It will go up on YouTube. I should imagine it will take a few days to edit, render etc. before being uploaded.
That should bring some clarity to the situation for those who desire it, such as yourself, as well as send some of the ‘regulars’ into frenzy.
Comment by Richard Searle — 28 October, 2008 @ 2:00 am
#70
#63 “maybe you tell us how many seats Left Alternative will contest at the next general election?”
Don’t know. But may I remark, since Andy Newman’s attack on me last week for being badly translated from the Russian seems to prefigure GG’s remarks, that you sound a bit American there.
Be honest! You “don’t know” because the SWP Central Committee haven’t decided yet.
And apologies for missing the word “can” before “you”, I didn’t have the autotranslate to US-speak switched on.
Comment by Prinkipo Exile — 28 October, 2008 @ 7:22 am
Of course, Prinkipo, to sound authentically English, you would need to put the ‘can’ AFTER the ‘you’.
So, thats you failed the Turing test
Comment by RobM — 28 October, 2008 @ 7:32 am
#31 “that the endless splits and fruitless pre-occupation with ‘who killed which Russians and why’ ensure traditional leftist groups speak a language to working people much more foreign than Russian.”
This poster might have a point, particularly about things like this:
http://www.socialistunity.com/?s=Dimitrov
(I know he wasn’t actually a Russian, but then neither was Stalin. But the point remains)
Comment by Dumbo — 28 October, 2008 @ 10:26 am
#87 “Be honest! You “don’t know” because the SWP Central Committee haven’t decided yet.”
I try. I don’t know because I don’t know.
#53 ” Respect focuses on building a well-known & well-liked electoral alternative in a small number of councils and crucially in 3 Westminster seats”
It’s just not true that it has a popular brand. It built its electoral success in 2005 out of the success of the anti-war coalition, the same conditions don’t apply today. Even if Galloway were to stand again in the same seat he’d almost certainly get beaten, especially now that New Labour is recovering some of its losses to the right in the polls. Very few people are going to care what New Respect stands for at the next election, and given that is their overwhelming focus those who haven’t already voted with their feet won’t even have wreckage to cling to. And when I heard Galloway attacking Brand and Ross last night (congratulations to Lucia from Notting Hill for pointing out how medieval he and is buddies are) I wondered if what the “brand” now represents is the Provisional wing of the Daily Mail.
Comment by skidmarx — 28 October, 2008 @ 10:44 am
Respect represents the ‘Provisional wing of the Daily Mail’. What an ultra left buffoon you are. You obviously belong to the Life of Brian wing of the SWP which is, thankfully, unrepresentative of its general membership.
Comment by Ger Francis — 28 October, 2008 @ 10:56 am
As for what GG attacking Brand and Ross for their sexist vulgarity, he is right to do so. I didn’t hear what George said on the topic but I agree with every word of John Harris on the same issue:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/oct/28/jonathan-ross-russell-brand-radio
Comment by Ger Francis — 28 October, 2008 @ 11:03 am
#92 Ger… I concur… I didn’t hear Georges comments either but if he stood up in favour of responsible broadcasting then I am infavour. Brand and Ross did go too far. George has been known to ‘loose his rag’ on occassion as we all do but I have never heard him behave in the way that Brand and Ross did.
#90 Skidmarx…I feel that your constant interventions aimed at demeaning, belittling and attacking the work of RESPECT is not appropriate. Your obsessive anti-Galloway fixation is destructive. Please stop.
Comment by mark anthony france — 28 October, 2008 @ 11:32 am
Yes indeed, what is wrong with attacking Ross and Brand? Presumably for skidmarx it is OK to phone someone up and boast about having ‘fucked your granddaughter’. That is odious behaviour by the standards of the left, not just the Daily Mail.
Ye gods, remember the fuss made by moralists about light-hearted remarks by GG about Kylie Minogue (which she would undoubtedly regard as compliments) and then we get an attack on GG for criticising this genuinely vile behaviour by Brand and Ross, which caused real distress.
Brand does have some redeeming features - he managed to humiliate some fascist oik a few months ago - but this behaviour stinks.
Comment by ID — 28 October, 2008 @ 11:38 am
#94 ID…Yes indeed! I actually like a lot of what Brand and Ross get up to and the fact that Georgina Sachs is in a dance troupe called ‘Satanic Sluts’ and is 23 does not alter the extreme bad taste of Brand and Ross’s behaviour. George Galloway has frequently been branded as ’sexist’, ‘homophobic’, ‘abusive’ and a host of other far worse accusations…but in general he behaves as a ‘gentleman’.
Russel Brand does have redeeming features as does Jonathon Ross. Culturally and politically they seem to me to be sympathetic to the left… One day perhaps they will both be ‘celebrities’ that endorse RESPECT electorally?
Maybe RESPECT could send them both a letter asking them to be less rude in futute?
Comment by mark anthony france — 28 October, 2008 @ 11:59 am
#86 Richard, that’s brilliant news. It’s so important that this kind of event goes up on the net, and I’m really glad Respect are aware of that and have acted on it. I shall wait patiently for it.
Comment by Strategist — 28 October, 2008 @ 12:13 pm
“As for what GG attacking Brand and Ross for their sexist vulgarity, he is right to do so. I didn’t hear what George said on the topic”
That says a lot.She’s 23 and Galloway was behaving as if they were paedophiles. He also seems to think the rules against obscene phone calls extend to the messages Brand and Ross left, which is to devalue the experience of anyone who’s been on the wrong end of actual malicious harassment calls. He continually asked callers if they would like to hear such calls when their mother or daughter was in the room which does show an attitude that one of his last callers correctly identified as medieval.
If you had the faintest idea what your talking about your judgement in #91 might be of some relevance.
#94 “Presumably for skidmarx it is OK to phone someone up and boast about having ‘fucked your granddaughter’”
I wouldn’t choose to do it. But for Galloway to be joining in a Daily Mail campaign to have them sacked shows what an odious prude he is.
“#90 Skidmarx…I feel that your constant interventions aimed at demeaning, belittling and attacking the work of RESPECT is not appropriate. Your obsessive anti-Galloway fixation is destructive. Please stop.”
I imagine that you think any attacks on Galloway are not appropriate. I don’t have an obsession, it’s just that he presents an easy target and his obsession with destroying REspect by witch-hunting the SWP tends to make pointing that out a virtue. Why don’t you stop talking such nonsense?
Comment by skidmarx — 28 October, 2008 @ 1:01 pm
“his obsession with destroying REspect by witch-hunting the SWP”
“Why don’t you stop talking such nonsense?”
You really are beyond parody.
Comment by sneermarx — 28 October, 2008 @ 1:06 pm
Blimey
#97
Finding someone who still thinks there ever was a “witchhunt” of the SWP in Respect is a bit like finding a Japanese soldier in the Borneo jungle who doesn’t know that WW2 is over.
Comment by Andy Newman — 28 October, 2008 @ 1:15 pm
‘#94 “Presumably for skidmarx it is OK to phone someone up and boast about having ‘fucked your granddaughter’”
I wouldn’t choose to do it.’
Skidmarx - I don’t know who you are, but you don’t speak for me. There may be alot of sanctimonious bullshit in the air, but that doesn’t mean that the act that you describe (ie phoning a grandad etc)is just a neutral ‘choice’. It’s despicable.
Comment by swp member — 28 October, 2008 @ 1:27 pm
100# swp member… i agree
Comment by mark anthony france — 28 October, 2008 @ 2:39 pm
Also,
The daily mail campaiging to get Brand sacked (I don’t know if this is true, I haven’t checked, but let us assume it is) is not the same as trying to get a working class person sacked from their job.
Russell Brand is a massively well paid TV presenter and stand up commedian, who will still get gigs and keep the cash flowing in.
It is an entirley reasonable question whether the state owned and publicly funded broadcaster should be paying someone who has behaved so distastefully.
I regard the so called prank from Brand and Ross as repugnant, and part of a general retreat from shared values of community towards a rampant individualism.
Comment by Andy Newman — 28 October, 2008 @ 2:50 pm
#102…Andy… I agree and thats why I suggested that RESPECT writes to Russel and Jonathon and asks them to not be so rude.
There is too much rudeness, and far to much rampant individualism in society and not enough RESPECT.
Comment by mark anthony france — 28 October, 2008 @ 2:57 pm
GG is a sexist, as anyone listening to his Radio shows knows, but I think he actually blundered onto a correct point when he attacked Brand and Ross - they clearly went too far, and pointing that out isn’t wrong.
Comment by christian h. — 28 October, 2008 @ 2:59 pm
#104…christian h. I have only been a member of RESPECT for 6months and only managed to listen George Galloways Talk Radio show about 3 times… I have seen George Galloway speak 3 times… Once in Huddersfield in 2004…. Once in a video of the meeting he address in Birmingham in March this year… and once as a member of RESPECT at RESPECT CONFERENCE. At no time [in approximately 10 hours of speech] did I hear George say anything that could be construed as ’sexist’…. so without wishing to provoke any unecessary disagreement I am simple and genuinely asking you what do you mean by saying “GG is a sexist”?
Comment by mark anthony france — 28 October, 2008 @ 3:26 pm
#99 - Finding someone who still thinks there ever was a “witchhunt” of the SWP in Respect is a bit like finding a Japanese soldier in the Borneo jungle who doesn’t know that WW2 is over.
Deary me, Andy, it’s clear that there was a witchunt of the SWP within Respect, a wonky-witchunt of such dazzling ineptitude that Respect is now a sputtering organisation that has as much chance of existing in two years time as the Left Alternative has - bugger all.
Comment by Inigo_Montoya — 28 October, 2008 @ 3:53 pm
It is of course absurd to describe George Galloway as sexist.
This reduces the content of sexism to just not following the middle class linguistic codes of politically correct Islington dinner parties attended by the chattering classes.
On the substantive issues of opposing discrimination and oppression of women in the real world , then George has a very good record.
What the charge of sexism reveals is that those making the accusation have almost no purchase on how working class people actually think and talk
Comment by Andy Newman — 28 October, 2008 @ 3:56 pm
#106
Inigo MOntoya. Sorry to break this to you:
Comment by Andy Newman — 28 October, 2008 @ 4:06 pm
Comrades, we must defend the rights of millionaires to make obscene phone calls to pensioners!
Comment by Charlie Marks — 28 October, 2008 @ 4:26 pm
#107…Andy… I concur and apparently neither christian h. nor any other George Galloway baiters can come up with substantive evidence of ’sexism’
#108…Andy… I concur… the War IS Over although scaning the SWP Central Committee communique I did notice what seemed to be antiquianted somewhat medieval language.
#109.. Charlie… I firmly disagree this you on this manner unless of course your statement was intended as ironically humorous.
On the general question of RESPECT Conference… Today I gave a report back from conference to a pensioner and her unemployed middle aged son in the Rubery area of Birmingham…. previously they were reluctant to lend support to and organisation that they percieved as being a strange mixture of left wing and muslim extremism. After some discussion they now identify themselves as RESPECT supporters and will attend a local meeting with Mark Steel on 12th November.
Comment by mark anthony france — 28 October, 2008 @ 5:07 pm
Whilst not wanting to intrude in the infighting of rival resepct factions (strange this is still going on frankly)sexism is not “not following the middle class linguistic codes of politically correct Islington dinner parties attended by the chattering classes.”
I would expect to read this sort of comment in the Daily Mail or The Sun- it ignores the material reality of billions of women who face sexism every day in the world.
Comment by Jason — 28 October, 2008 @ 5:31 pm
#94,100 etc….
The Ross, Brand issue is an interesting debate that’s worthy of a seperate thread.
To be honest, I don’t think the main point is what they actually did, but the political position being taken up by their antagonists.
The whole thing seems to be driven by right-wingers who are intent on a purge at the BBC and an attack on public broadcasting.
Now, however gross Ross and Brand sometimes can be, this is not a bandwagon that any socialist should jump on. The implications are in fact quite repressive, because they totally ignore some very important things.
Whatever you think of him, Russell Brand is on the LEFT and his most vociferous critics on the right. He made some very apposite criticisms of the “Mail” when comparing his own rather tasteless and offensive behaviour to their support for mass murderers. There’s just NO CONTEST.
Another important point is that the BBC is being subjected to a totally different Morality test to the commercial media.
Just watch Satellite TV for a while. A large chunk of it is dominated by utter trash: Right wing news channels, modern day freak shows about unfortunates with deforming skin conditions or extra heads, true crime porn which actually turns debased killers into celebrities, sensationalist garbage history programmes, not to mention about 100 channels of pay per view porno.
The message seems to be that this 95% of trash is somehow above criticism because you pay for it, but any form of public broadcasting financed by taxation or licenses has to be bland, neutral and follow ethical guidelines acceptable to the Mail’s readership.
The main criticism I’d have of the BBC is that it’s only “dangerous” in the sense of the very mild cultural “epater le bourgeois” of Brand/Ross/ Little Britain/Enfield & Whitehouse etc… All of which are increasingly formulaic and have lost their edge. So they’re in grave danger of becoming reactionary.
No more “Play for Today”, “Culloden”, “Cath Come Home” or documentary exposees.
But in the current spat, I support Brand and Ross keeping their jobs, however much they earn, because a victory for their critics will shift the BBC even further to the right.
Comment by prianikoff — 28 October, 2008 @ 5:44 pm
#112 Prianikoff….I agree and all the points you made were part and parcel of Ken Loaches contribution to RESPECT CONFERENCE about how we have to strive to turn around the purile nature of most TV and Radio…. Ideally, RESPECT would become part of a cultural renaisance and rediscovery of excellent news, documentary, and drama production that was a feature of the pre Thatcher era.
There are some really good things in production…. the docudrama on the Tipton 3 or the thing I saw last night about Estranged Dads being reunited with their sons… and embarking on important journeys of self awarness.
Their are many media professionals and student very switched on politically but never engaged in political practice hopefully RESPECT will find a road to them.
The talk on this thread about the Brand and Ross incident was introduced as a provocative and unecessarily sectarian comment at, I think about #90 by Mr skidmarx.
It was introduced to accuse RESPECT of being the “Provisional Wing of the Daily Mail” and if memory serves me to accuse George Galloway of Sexism and Medival thought.
Ken Loach… who is a very nice man, a very very nice man… happily shared a platform with George at RESPECT Conference. I suspect he would be wary of doing the same with Mr skidmarx.
Comment by mark anthony france — 28 October, 2008 @ 5:58 pm
” not the same as trying to get a working class person sacked from their job.”
A couple of weeks ago on the News Quiz on Radio 4, responding to a question about a claim that the Beatles had been capitalists, Jeremy Hardy pointed out that they were workers. If we accept that, so are Brand and Ross. And what, children, do we call someone who tries to get his fellow workers sacked? (I’m not actually certain about the Mail, I’d assumed because of the tone of their coverage. I could be wrong. But Galloway did call repeatedly for their sacking, it would be nice if we could all just stipulate to that.I also think I’d heard the letter he read out from a fascist about “mongol races” before so maybe he’s running out of fresh materiel).
“It was introduced to accuse RESPECT of being the “Provisional Wing of the Daily Mail” and if memory serves me to accuse George Galloway of Sexism and Medival thought.”
I didn’t mention sexism, it was someone who left a message on the TalkSport show who accused Galloway of being medieval, it was read out at about 12.55. Nice to know you know what’s in Ken Loach’s mind.
#108 That’s actually quite funny.
Comment by skidmarx — 28 October, 2008 @ 7:35 pm
#114…skidmarx… my apologies if I conflated something you said with something someone else said… I will have to make sure to scroll up and check before banging away at the keyboard…. On the subject of Brand and Ross…. My position is that what they did was over the top and a reflection of unhealthy aspects of popular culture today. In 2000 I was sacked from my job as a housing caretaker after 4 and half years of service for being “abusive” to an elderly resident… I said to them “haven’t you got anything better to do than moan, moan, moan, get a fucking life and get out of my face”. I was sacked and the tied accomodation I had lived in that went with the job…. I was deemed to have become intentionally homeless when I approached the local authority for rehousing…. and recieved at my temporary address three diffrent letters from the DWP saying for three different reasons why I was not intitled to any benefit….The only point of recounting some of this sorry personal saga to you is that I suspect if Brand and Ross lost their Radio 2 gig it would not impose any significant hardship…. I do not know if they are in a TU but if they are I hope they recieve better support in any disciplinary than I got from my Union.
Sure the dramatic rise in ‘complaints’ about Brand and Ross probably have a strong ‘moralistic’ component nevertheless, I agree with George… Sack Them.
The message this sends is not automatically a reactionary one.
Comment by mark anthony france — 28 October, 2008 @ 8:02 pm
So, no-one knows whether the Respect Party conference either agreed with George Galloway’s and Andy Newman’s view that it was essentially right to bailout the banks, or whether the conference agreed with its national secretary Nick Wrack’s view that the bailout was wrong.
The bailout was either right or wrong - where does the Respect Party stand on the issue?
Comment by Karl Stewart — 28 October, 2008 @ 8:46 pm
Re Brand and Ross… the unfunny and undynamic duo…
There is something undoubtedly “the lad” about these two combined with schoolboy “humour” i.e. “hey, my mate has f&cked your granddaughter”… Oh how we laugh….not! Belly laugh? More like belly flop…
It also highlights the so called worth of their sterling and creative wit and vibe. And if their pay packet is connected to their brand (no pun intended) of comedy then I am in the wrong job.
I wouldn’t mind if they indulged in some parody, satire or half decent humour that had a meaning but they instead resorted into a schoolboy prank. The schoolboy japery of being rude and sweary on some bloke’s answer machine (Oooo…how rude are we? We said fuck….).
And now the 2 lads have been caught out and now are expected to apologise. The result is that Ross has while Brand hasn’t. But you can imagine both of them squirming muttering “So-r-rry” while staring at their scuffed shoes.
They are juvenile sexists who think it is ever soooo hilarious to take the piss out of a woman in a demeaning manner.
The sexist puerile joke just aint funny. They really should grow up.
I don’t think they should be sacked but they should check their terms and conditions and whether they breached anything. Maybe they should donate a very BIG wodge of their cash instead. And admit they fucked up.
Oh, and I used to like Jonathan Ross and originally wasn’t too keen on him taking over the film review programme from Barry Norman (nobody, IMHO, could take over from Barry!) but I was wrong and he does a good job.
Comment by Louise — 28 October, 2008 @ 8:53 pm
#116… Louise … I agree with you about Jonathon Ross and film 2008 and barry norman…. I do think a formal disciplinary should result in a sanction from the BBC. Sometimes I get so frustrated by the forms of ‘abuse’ that are banded around by some people posting on SU… I wish there was sanctions that could be implemented… but I understand your and Andy’s and others difficulty in acting as moderators…. There is a lot of comments on this site that is not much better than the behaviour of Brand and Ross…[and I recognise that sometimes I decend to the lowest common denomenator too].
I have advertised the SU site to a new Left Discussion forum established in Huddersfield West Yorkshire…. I hope that new visitors from that site do not get put off contributing by the juvenile sectarianism,jargon and in jokes.
What I enjoyed about RESPECT conference was it’s inclusivity, openess, tolerance and understanding. We need more of that just as we need to raise the Cultural Level in society as a whole.
Comment by mark anthony france — 28 October, 2008 @ 9:09 pm
Having started paying attention to this Brand/Ross business a bit more tonight, it looks even more fishy than I thought. The way the complaints built up over several days smacks of an orchestrated campaign by Conservative Central and the Daily Mail. A lot of the complainants probably are fans of Brucie and ‘Strictly come Dancing.’ An lo and behold, there was Cameron (strangely being interviewed outside a garbage disposal depot) earnestly making ‘transitional demands’ for the ‘democratisation’ of the BBC!
On a personal level, I tend to find Graham Norton more “sexist” than either Brand or Woss e.g. the way he approached the “Palin question” when he had Jennifer Saunders and Cyndi Lauper on a few weeks back. He also pioneered the embarassing phone call routine live on TV.
Brand is just sort of… polysexual.. and quite possibly was simply telling the truth about the far-from-innocent granddaughter of Mr Sachs, who is apparently not averse from flaunting it around herself. Perhaps a bit upsetting for gramps, but you don’t go dissin’ “national treasures” do you?
I must admit, I laughed out loud the other week when Ross relentlessly took the piss out of the obnoxious management bully Gordon Ramsay, including wiping his arse with his latest book. He deflates big celebrities who know what there in for. Quite acceptable really…
I’m far more outraged at the latest “Spooks” blatant attempts to revive the cold war, or what Sky 1-3 had on offer tonight - Immigration officers busting a bingo hall in Devices and finding illegal immigrants, Fred West and Sex Change Ops. Wow!
So I won’t be joining the baying mobs, not even moral support for them……
Comment by prianikoff — 28 October, 2008 @ 10:30 pm
Jason #111
Youo are being very disingenuous here when you say “sexism is not “not following the middle class linguistic codes of politically correct Islington dinner parties attended by the chattering classes.”
Of course not - sexism is the oppression, belittling and undermining of real women in their daily life, and their discrimination, lower pay and worse career prospects; bearing the brunt of childcare and housework, etc.
But to confuse that real oppression, and the necessary and progressive struggle against it with the sort of po-faced middle class moralism that uses linguistic codes to belittle, exclude and disempower working class people is a big mistake.
<
Comment by Andy Newman — 28 October, 2008 @ 10:59 pm
Brand and Ross have been stiched up by poe faced BBC editors and MI5. The obsenity of the billionaires on the other hand .. well. Welcome to the ever so moral police state.
Comment by Politics — 29 October, 2008 @ 12:18 am
#121 Politics….Humour…is and always will be a contentious issue…. and this is made more problematical on blogs like this where you have no way of accessing the other components of communication…. earlier I was in bed watching our little portable TV and came across When Borat Came to Town…. at first I was fooled by the ‘mocumentary’ format… then I was amazed at the thought provoking nature of the humour and also strangely nostalgic for the forms of social interaction displayed by genuine Roma from the village of Glod in Roumania… as they reminded me of my heritage…
Everything… depends on context.
Politics… with RESPECT I do not feel that the Brand/Ross controversy was engineered or necessarily taken advantage of by MI5….This is, yes, a media manufactured event, but one that does go to the heart of real issues felt by many people in society…. most young people are immune to all forms of abuse… having worked in a Secondary School comming out of special measures I have observed the most appaling attitudes from teacher, support staff and pupils….. When older people [and that includes me, George Galloway and Andrew Sachs] get irritated by purile and frankly ‘decadent’ entertainment … this is not to seek to impose an ‘ever so moral police state’….. it is just to try to stop things ‘falling apart’…. RESPECT is important in society…. RESPECT in all of it’s meanings should be promoted, those meanings discussed. The Freedom of Artist expression is something precious… put it should have constraints now [even in an environment where the Daily Mail can set the agenda] and it will have constraints negociated and determined more fully and democratically within the Socialist Society we all seek to build.
Comment by mark anthony france — 29 October, 2008 @ 1:22 am
#122 Exactly the point. Sacha B.Cohen works when he exposes bigotry. He ceases being funny when he makes fun of people who are naive, poor, oppressed and don’t deserve it. The people of Glod rightly felt manipulated and mocked and were then exploited by carpetbagging lawyers.
I’ve never felt that either Ross or Brand do that, even if they are overpaid and often in questionable taste.
Andrew Sachs is most famous for his portrayal of a Spanish waiter who says “Que” all the time, while being clipped around the head by a middle class English prat. Oh, and his cover of Joe Dulce’s “Shaddap you face”. His grandaughter performs under the stage name Voluptua with the London-based horror-themed burlesque troup ‘Satanic Sluts Extreme’.
There’s no doubt whatsoever that the Tories are trying to make political capital out of this incident. They’re fairly desperate at the fact their poll lead is dropping rapidly, have absolutely no ideas on the world econommic crisis and have been caught with their trousers down over accepting bribes from Russian Oligarchs.
No doubt the Labour loyalists and Tories in MI5 are engaged in competitive leaks with each other. It will only take a fist fight at their riverside Lubianka for it to break into open war between the factions.
The good news is that Adam Carter has been blown up and hopefully, his revolting former sidekick Ros will suffer the same fate shortly.
Comment by prianikoff — 29 October, 2008 @ 8:29 am
Interesting..
Comment by prianikoff — 29 October, 2008 @ 8:56 am
#124…prianikoff… yes it was wasn’t it.
Comment by abu jamal — 29 October, 2008 @ 9:17 am
But completely inaccurate. The first half of the conference was taken up with discussion on the economic crisis and there were a several substantive motions. Still, what a surprise that the WSWS tells big porkies … they had a good teacher in that regard.
Comment by ID — 29 October, 2008 @ 9:25 am
Yeah Healy told porkies in his “Security and the FI” nonsense.
The fact that wsws repeats them means they lack any real credibility in my eyes.
But Alan Freeman DOES seem to be pushing an unashamedly Keynsian position and I’ve always thought Gowan was a rightward moving academic.
Callinicos seems only marginally better in this description.
The report of what Galloway has said in various forums seems factual.
Comment by prianikoff — 29 October, 2008 @ 9:36 am
BTW going back to the Ross and Brand saga.
I was just wondering if David Cameron is still sore?
“June 2006, when Conservative party leader David Cameron appeared on the show, Ross began a line of questioning relating to ex-Conservative Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, culminating in the question
“Did you or did you not have a wank thinking of Margaret Thatcher?” “
Comment by prianikoff — 29 October, 2008 @ 9:38 am
#124 That’s quite funny. Especially the end when Callinicos answers the SEP question “but everyone else on the platform ignores it”.
#115 “Sure the dramatic rise in ‘complaints’ about Brand and Ross probably have a strong ‘moralistic’ component nevertheless, I agree with George… Sack Them.
The message this sends is not automatically a reactionary one.”
There is no reason given why the second statement doesn’t contradict the first.
My sympathies for your job loss, people do fucking moan sometimes. I think that socialism is not primarily a moral question, it is an organisational one; thus the question is not “Will Ross and Brand suffer if they lose their jobs?”, it is “Will working class organisation be weakened by joining in the attacks on them?” I think Priankoff has shown the political context that suggests that it would be.
Greg Proops started a history of baseball on the world service on the World Service with the words of the head of the player’s union in the early 70s when there was a major strike. He said that according to the marxist theory of economics, a worker’s exploitation is defined as the amount of surplus value his emloyer extracts compared to the workers’ wages, and on this definition in the early 70s the American baseball player was the most exploited worker in the world. I do think it is outrageous that you and Galloway are choosing to attack Brand and Ross because they are convenient popular targets because of the amount they earn.
Comment by skidmarx — 29 October, 2008 @ 10:34 am
“The report of what Galloway has said in various forums seems factual.”
Pity about the rest of the report though. I can’t comment too much on the bits about the SWP, though I don’t think it wise to trust WSWS as a source of facts, judging by their ‘blank space’ regarding the first session of Respect conference, titled ‘Responding to the Crisis’.
Of course, another factor may be their history where ‘The Crisis’ is concerned. Maybe their misreporting may not be so much conscious, as reflecting a prejudice that any treatment of economic crisis that does not fit the pattern of the way Healy used to treat it amounts to ignoring the subject altogether. But that is speculation.
Comment by ID — 29 October, 2008 @ 10:50 am
#129..skidmarx…. Thanks for your sympathy over my job loss in 2000. As for my position advocated in comment #115 I changed it after reading louises comments and realised that I was reacting in Anger…
If the whole Ross and Brand saga does open up a debate in society about creating more respectful forms of communication then something good will come of it.
Comment by mark anthony france — 29 October, 2008 @ 11:00 am
This is how I see Respect.
There are two currents.
One thinks the only thing that matters is getting candidates elected. Anything that might hamper or distract us from this is to be avoided. Internal democracy, decision making, political debate, what we want Respect to become, all should be subordinated .
The other side also understands the importance of getting candidates elected but feels without some organisation behind the candidates, where they can hear and discuss political matters and take part in the decision making, we leave ourselves open to the sort of damaging behaviour that happened in Tower Hamlets .
The first current has a very powerful argument on its side. We have a tiny membership, around 500 I think. Our main public profile is around elections - it is an organisation built to contest elections after all. Having conferences, discussing policy, elections to bodies inside the organisation can only be divisive.
On the other hand (I’m biased here of course) if we go down that road we wouldn’t need a membership organisation at all. We could simply let our “stars” decide and we could all follow on behind. Not much good for the organisation and in the longer run not much use for them either.
I believe the conference on Saturday went someway along the road to bridging the gap. New members were enthused by reports from places where we have no members. Mark France went down a storm with his story of writing to the local press and in the process becoming the voice of Respect in his area. Someone else thought we should take the socialist bit out of respect- not much support there. Difficult questions, even for experienced socialists were raised, our attitude to the People of Iran for instance. All this gets us thinking and can only help when we are canvassing or leafleting.
Finally, if you think this is an attack on our “stars” I will remind people that without Galloway’s brilliant performances over the Iraq war, it’s doubtful there would have been a Respect. Likewise when I was talking to my very old mum up in Brum she told me she had seen a Respect person on the telly “one of those who wear a scarf over their head” and thought she was very nice and talked a lot of sense.
Comment by paul v — 29 October, 2008 @ 11:49 am
132 paul v… I feel you may be broadly right about the ‘two currents’ in RESPECT….I have faith born of a completely idealistic and voluntaristic character not grounded in material reality… that things we rapidly alter in ways we cannot imagine at present and that many people will come towards RESPECT… Many will associate with RESPECT…some of this multitude will join… and where ever possible we will create lively, functioning, democratic, active branches…
Groups of people meeting regularly in local communities to coordinate practical work to improve their communities….
I visited a mate and his mom yesterday afternoon…. they now consider themselves Respect Supporters… the mate is coming to see Mark Steel and help with our Recruitment Stall…. I hope he gets inspired and gets the confidence to committ at some level to continued activity…I will gentle encourage him….
His mom has also seen “one of those who wear a scarf over their head”.. and she thinks she was very nice and talked a lot of sense…. These comments are the source of my Hope.
Comment by mark anthony france — 29 October, 2008 @ 12:13 pm
Karl
One of the motions passed at conference contained the phrase- To campaign for the public ownership of the financial institutions.
The full list can be seen on Liam Mac uaids blog.
Comment by paul v — 29 October, 2008 @ 2:42 pm
#134
“The full list can be seen on Liam Mac uaids blog.”
Not so sure about that, but the full list of policy motions passed is now on the Respect website.
http://www.respectrenewal.org/content/view/413/
Comment by ID — 29 October, 2008 @ 4:11 pm
I was mildly surprised by this section of the motion on trade union work;
“Respect should seek to organize on a fraction basis in unions where big enough and where not to align/engage with other left groupings to maximize the influence of the progressive left in the trade union movement”
This means you should only support the Socialist Teachers Alliance, for example, until such times as Respect can operate independently in the NUT? Surely this can’t be the prefered attitude of people who’ve been involved in the STA for upwards of 30 years?
Comment by Geoff Collier — 29 October, 2008 @ 4:33 pm
#138…Geoff Collier…. I think the STA is safe for now…. unlike parliament which has some interesting visitors invited by George Galloyway on november 5th
Wouldn’t it be brilliant to have old Black Panther activist out campaigning for RESPECT in Mile End East on Bonfire Night???
Check out who George is inviting to parliament that day!
http://www.respectrenewal.org/content/view/410/1/
Comment by mark anthony france [aged 16] — 29 October, 2008 @ 4:32 pm
Comment by mark anthony france [aged 16] — 29 October, 2008 @ 4:36 pm