OH, WHEN WILL THEY EVER LEARN?
I didn’t go to the Stop the War demonstration on Monday, but there is a report of it by Richard at Lenin’s Tomb. Was there any reporting of it at all in the mainstream press?
Last Thursday I led of a discussion at Bristol Stop the War, where there were about twenty people, about the potential for a campaign against army recruitment. It was actually quite a bad tempered meeting, partly because the position we have developed in Swindon is that any anti-recruitment campaign needs to be on the wavelength of those thinking of joining the army, while it seems the majority in Bristol think that leaflets should be more about arguments against war. It was also bad tempered because the Bristol group has regular attendance by three or four supporters of the CPGB-ML, who wanted to push the idea that the anti-war movement here needs to prioritise building support for the Iraqi insurgency, and to be honest they were quite ill-disciplined last week.
I was therefore pleased that the SWP members at the meeting were generally talking a lot of sense, both over the anti-recruitment issue, and also over refuting the idea that we should narrow the anti-war movement down to those eccentric few who agree with the CPGB-ML.
But it was also apparent that the SWP were very keen on promoting the demo on Monday, for the reopening of parliament. Bristol was only putting on one coach, and they were struggling to fill it, and were offering to call into Bath and Swindon to pick people up.
I think the whole idea of the demo was ill-conceived. Firstly, for the activist core of the Stop the War Coalition there is definite demo fatigue. This probably affects the London comrades less, as they don’t have the additional hassle of arranging coaches, and the stress of raising the money to pay for them. Secondly it was on a week day, and it was therefore always going to be very hard to get people there.
But most importantly, it was on a day when parliament opened. Now, there seems to be a continual misunderstanding by the officers of the Stop the war Coalition about how newsworthy they are.
On the day Gordon Brown becomes leader of the Labour Party there is no point having a demo, because Gordon brown will dominate the news and you won’t be reported.
On the day parliament opens there is no point having a demo, because the opening of parliament will dominate the news and you won’t be reported.
Indeed at its most important, having the huge wave of direct action and civil disobedience on the day the war actually started was too late, the war dominated the news and we were hardly reported. We should have launched into the direct action after parliament voted for war, then we would have dominated the news, and we may even have been able to undermine the political confidence of the government that there was sufficient support for the war.
There are still tremendous strengths in the Stop the War Coalition, in the many local groups around the country still campaigning. But we need to be much more imaginative than constant demos through the streets of London.
This was not about an A-B march in London - it was about holding politicians to account and defying an attempt to ban the right to protest at all anywhere near Parliament. See here. The fact that 5000 odd people went shows that it was right to hold it and it did get quite a bit of coverage (for example in Metro).
Comment by Snowball — 11 October, 2007 @ 1:06 pm
5000 !
the turn out has more than doubled since Monday then. And it is marvellous that you managed to get reported in Socialist Worker, but it hardly made an echo of a ripple on real politics.
Anyway, please remember that when the march was originally called it was not anticipated that there would be any attempt to ban it, so it did not start out as an attempt to defy the ban, it acquired that characteristic later.
It seems however Snowball that you are locked into a mindset that every decision by the SWP leadership is correct, and there is not need for tactical and strategic assessment after the event.
Comment by Andy — 11 October, 2007 @ 1:12 pm
BTW Snowball, when you say: “it was about holding politicians to account and defying an attempt to ban the right to protest at all … … The fact that 5000 odd people went shows that it was right to hold it “
You shouldn’t mistake your subjective assesment of the march’s purpose with the objective reality of its impact on grown-up politics - which was virtually zero.
Comment by Andy — 11 October, 2007 @ 1:23 pm
Good points, Andy.
“And it is marvellous that you managed to get reported in Socialist Worker, but it hardly made an echo of a ripple on real politics.”
LOL but, sadly, how very true.
Squealer, are you ever objective?
Comment by Madam Miaow — 11 October, 2007 @ 3:30 pm
Oh, what an intemperate answer to ‘Snowball’, shading into
downright unnecessary rudeness from Madam Miaow.
The protest did get media coverage, especially at the time, and
it was good to hear about the ‘thousands who disagree’. Keeping
up some that level of protest is good.
And it’s not just the SWP - Tony Benn, George Galloway, Eno,
Mark Thomas - all willing to say it’s worth keeping up that
protest.
The attempted banning wasn’t inevitable, but I thought we all knew that we aren’t supposed to protest within a mile of the Houses of
Parliament when it is sitting, so attempt at a ban was always
possible. Once they attemped to ban it was was important to
esnure it happened.
As to numbers, well I don’t trust STW or SWP estimates, but on
Monday the police were saying 2,000 and STW were saying ‘twice
that’, so it just isn’t a case of Snowball suddenly inflating
figures.
By Andy’s logic there are now no occasions on which it is worth holding an anti-war demo - at least not until the possible attack on
Iran. But the movement needs to keep alive - I agree we need
a broader range of activities - but the demo still has a place.
Comment by Matthew — 11 October, 2007 @ 3:55 pm
Over the years I have attended a fair few demos and the estimate of 2,000 is generous. As the demo left the square I did a rough count and made it in the area of 1,000. Callinicos and Bambery were to be seen at the end of the march looking far from happy. Harman too but when did he ever look happy?
Comment by Mike — 11 October, 2007 @ 4:06 pm
Yeah, Matthew, but I am prepared to forgive intemperate if it is funny, and I think Madam Miaow got away with it (she has some practice at funny). And given Snowball’s tendency to act as a one man rapid rebutal squad for any criticsm of the SWP, but then not come back to defend his position, or even to argue his own point of view (as opposed to the line) I share that general exasperation with him.
Matthew: “By Andy’s logic there are now no occasions on which it is worth holding an anti-war demo - at least not until the possible attack on Iran. But the movement needs to keep alive - I agree we need a broader range of activities - but the demo still has a place.”
This is unworthy of you - you know that I am secretary of a very active stop the war group, and I actually organised a demo at RAF Brize Norton last year (that was reported in News of the World, p2). I don’t know how you manage to leap from the idea that it isn’t sensible to have a particular demo on the day when you are almost guaranteed little media coverage, to the general idea that is in never worth having a demo.
And Anna has a better idea than most of what you need to do as press secretary which is to understand your niche in the media, and try to create news that fills that niche. Stop the War in general, and demos in particular, are not regarded as particularly newsworthy, especially given the general media tilt towards representtative democracy rather than direct protest. This means we will always find it hard to piggyback of their agenda, and have to create our own.
I have chatted this over with a nmber of committed StW activists outside the SWP, and there is a wide view that London demos are getting harder and harder to motivate people for. (but at least they are better than these big hoo-ha internatonal rallies, like the one in December.)
I note for example that Swindon Stop the War meets more regularly, invloves more people and does more activity than Greater Manchester STW, which is run by the SWP, and in a much larger conurbation. So i would conclude that the model we adopt for keeping the movement alive is at least as plausible as the SWP’s.
Comment by Andy — 11 October, 2007 @ 4:06 pm
Mike - were you there? Up for early Xmas shopping?
Comment by Andy — 11 October, 2007 @ 4:11 pm
Demo fatigue? Nonsense, you say that every time we have a demo, the last one was ages ago. The demo managed to attract many many students and young people from around the country, and it was incredibly useful for us setting up stwc in our university.
Comment by johnnyrook — 11 October, 2007 @ 6:11 pm
setting up a STW group in your university? in 2007?
I am not saying that is a bad thing, but was there no STW group there before?
What happened to the activists in it? demo fatigue?
But hey, we don’t need to worry about continuity, and retaining a long term relationship with established activists, there are always more new 18 year olds every year.
Comment by Andy — 11 October, 2007 @ 6:23 pm
Cynical old git.
You may have a point about demo fatigue, but what is your alternative? The direct action crew want to blockade airbases etc, which is a bit too exclusive and elitist in my view, but at least they argue for a clear alternative to A to B marches. What do you advocate?
Comment by Muon — 11 October, 2007 @ 6:28 pm
don’t like all this talk about ‘grown up politics’ (shudder).
Comment by johng — 11 October, 2007 @ 6:34 pm
“I am not saying that is a bad thing, but was there no STW group there before?
What happened to the activists in it? demo fatigue?”
Well no, it’s a former polytechnic so politics there is extremely weak, there’s no other political societies and hardly any union
“But hey, we don’t need to worry about continuity, and retaining a long term relationship with established activists, there are always more new 18 year olds every year.”
That wasn’t what I argued.
Comment by johnnyrook — 11 October, 2007 @ 7:03 pm
The demo was a success on many levels.
It attracted a good turn out of London students and older people. I made the numbers a good 5000(not bad for a working Monday. Mike wre you really on the same march as me? - check out the march video on YouTube)) and I have seen many over the years.
The demo was active, bold and loud and for once went right outside Parliament (including a sitdown) with only a short march - I am sure that those who did take part agreed it was one of the best for some time - sorry some of you missed it.
You are right in saying we need to be more creative about how the STWC takes action - I would like to see more peace camps (like in the USA) and more peaceful direct action at key times.
However last Monday Gordon ‘bottle’ Brown was making a statement on Iraq and it was essential that the STWC made its own statement on the streets by the people.
On the march,outside Parliament i spoke to people from Bristol, they had a full coach and all seemed to enjoy the day.
So marches are very important to keep the momentum going and not allow Brown and New Labour to speak on Iraq unopposed. By the way, my siterinlaw lives in Germany and she saw the STWC march on BBC Euro News!
The marches must continue (but the nature of them can and should change from time to time - (why not Central London to East London where there is a lot of support for the STWC?)alongside many other forms of action that we should now consider (occupations, sitdowns, peace camps, stunts etc).
Neil Williams
Respect Supporters Blog
Comment by Neil Williams — 11 October, 2007 @ 7:15 pm
I was also at the march and made the figure about 3,000. My own view is that the aim of the demo was to keep the issue of the war on the table. Most of the mainstream media have forgotten about it and many (non-political) people I talk to still disagree with the war but hardly think about it now compared to a year or two ago. In that aim it was half successful. The demo was reported (albeit briefly) by the mainstream media, although how sucessful this was at raising the issue of the continuing war is debatable.
Comment by Dan — 11 October, 2007 @ 7:35 pm
Yes I was on the march and indeed took part in the sitdown. And I stick to my estimate of 1,000 on the march.
Students were clearly the largest segment of the demo but they struck me as relatively unorganised with few student union banners to be seen. The one that caught my eye was one belonging to a group clearly mobilsed by Workers Power. There was a group of 50 plus students at the head of the march organised by the SWP, based on the presence of a well known SWP ‘leading member among them, but no indication of where they hailed from.
Not too many trades union banners either. Although the various Stalinoids were present in some considerable numbers. Mostly because they tend to be retired folk I guess.
PS I’ve moved permanently to London Andy. The girlfriend made me do it!
Comment by Mike — 11 October, 2007 @ 7:53 pm
Before this gets too far into the usual “SWP is shite/no they’re brill” shouting match, let’s stick to the topic for a bit.
Two million people marched against the war before it started, with the majority of the British people being against it as well. The same situation in the US. There was a groundswell of grassroots activism against the war, widely supported and attracting more than just the usual dedicated activists. Even media coverage was widely available, even if dismissive.
In the end, did it matter? Not a bit.
We got our noses rubbed in the fact that in our socalled democracies, on a subject that is of the utmost importance, our opinions counted for nothing.
Maybe a general strike at the time the war vote was in might have done some good, but at the moment is quite hard to even get people to strike in their own self interest until it’s too late…
In the end the only thing that actually looks capable of getting the troops out is the Iraqi insurgency itself and all we’ve done is just window dressing.
Comment by Martin Wisse — 11 October, 2007 @ 10:12 pm
I dont understand the tone of your article. The demo was used to frame the TV news of Browns opening of parliament, the attempted restriction of the demo fired up the debate about civil liberties. The turnout was good for a monday, it fitted well with the begining of term giving students who have just signed up to stw groups a focus and if the police had tried to ban it nicking Benn would have been exellent publicity.
Periodic mass demonstrations are a necessary part of keeping the movement going. That doesnt exclude creative actions by local groups. If there was a mood for mass direct action great, I dont see it.
Comment by Victor — 11 October, 2007 @ 10:32 pm
Mike take a look at this YouTube video at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAVQ0tBwqdI&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Estopwar%2Eorg%2Euk%2F
Now its not 1000 is it?
Remember
Some supporters were only able to attend in Trafalgar Square during their lunch break.
Some suporters had an extended lunch break but never made it to Parliament due to the hold ups by the police. But these people took part in the demo for an hour or two and then went back to work.
I am confident with the figure of 5000.
Neil Williams
Comment by Neil Williams — 11 October, 2007 @ 10:45 pm
In the US, the main problem is that there are seveal antiwar coalitions, that don’t work together. Tha antiwar movement needs to be united, around principled slogans, to build history’s biggest antiwar demonstrations.
Comment by Renegade Eye — 12 October, 2007 @ 5:38 am
Well I watched the video Neil and that could be any number from 1000 to perhaps 2000+, or even more - it isn’t conclusive. Even if we accpet the figure of 5000, it doen’t alter the argument.
Martin Wisse is correct to put this into a wider context, which is the modest impact of the anti-war movement on wider political society, and this should give us some cause for self examination, not endless self-congratulation. The very fact that the scale of ambition being exhibited here is signing up some students at freshers (especially given the admission that this is sometimes starting new STW groups, not building on existing groups) shows how marginal we are, at a time when the majority of the population thinks the war was wron,g and wants the troops home.
Now the question of whether or not this paricular demo got news coverage is a question of fact. i didn’t see any, but perhaps I watched the wrong TV news.
But the two demos in manchester over the last year, both coinciding with Labour conferences have not been reported, indeed the last one only just scraped into the freebie Manchester Evening News! So the general point holds, that we need to understand how the news media relates to representative democracy (legitimate and newsworthy) and how it relates to demonstrations(idiosyncratic, marginal and unnewsworthy)
Comment by Andy — 12 October, 2007 @ 10:49 am
Mike
bad luck having to move to London.
Comment by Andy — 12 October, 2007 @ 10:50 am
Its absurd to suggest that the anti-war movement ‘had no impact’. Not just absurd, actually stark staring bonkers. Its framed all discussion of the war in politics and in the media.
Comment by johng — 12 October, 2007 @ 11:00 am
I think Andy is conpletely missing the point here. Not least in fact as the two manchester demos received significant publicity in Manchester and nationally - especially beforehand when the council tried to ban the Military Families Peace camp. Perhaps Andy has forgotten that the media very rarely or ever repost demonstrations so the fact that they report Stop the War demos a little bit shouldn’t be underestimated.
However, my more significant point is that demonstrations are not simply about getting reported by the BBC - they are more important in bringing together the people who demonstrate. Now I didn’t go on Monday’s demo but everyone I have spoken to who did - from young students to pensioners - came back bouyed up by the mood feeling more confident. They were not suffering demo fatigue - far from it. That demo for them was an energiser - a small example of collective action - and we should not underestimate the importance of that. otherwise we fall for the mainstream media lie that all that really matters are the ‘official’ politics of Westminster and demonstrations and other forms of collective actions don’t make a difference.
Comment by Clive Searle — 12 October, 2007 @ 11:02 am
I totally see why it was necessary to have a presence at Westminster on that date. But looking at the video and realising that it was on the pavement, whereas the the roads were closed for the big showstoppers, makes it look to the rest of the world like a backward step.
Never advertise your own stasis.
Perhaps, instead of being stuck in the same old same old, an imaginitive approach might have made a virtue of a smaller but significant turnout than the previous tens and hundreds of thousands rather than another walk around London where you are specifically demonstrating your numbers.
One woman reading a list of the war dead was able to make national news. While I’m glad the demo made the participants feel better, and you did put down a marker, a thousand plus protesters should have achieved more in wider terms.
Comment by Madam Miaow — 12 October, 2007 @ 12:06 pm
John when you put “had no impact” in quotation marks, there is a clear implication that you are quoting me, as if i said it “had no impact”.
No obviously I know full well that the Stop the war Coalition has had a tremendous impact. The question however is whether it continues to have such a big impact, and I think it is a fair assessment (to quote what I actually said): that it currently has a “modest impact …. on wider political society”.
Now I appreciate that arguing againat what I actually said and what I actually meant may not be as much fun as arguing against something more dramatic that I didn’t say and didn’t mean, but let’s try to have a real debate. If you are going to make up opinions and attribute them to me, and then describe them as bonkers, then why not try to be a bit more entertaining with the views you falsely attribute to me?
Now Clive, it is good to hear from you, and thanks for coming and joining the debate.
I agree with everything you say actually - but only up to a point!
Political organisation and demonstrations do keep the activists together, and can be a springboard for future events. That aspect of them is important. What is more, I am not denying that the event itself may have been very enjoyable and a boost for all those who went on it(this is a bit of a self selecting sample, as those went on the demo are clearly not yet suffering from demo fatigue).
Tony Cliff used to tell one of his folksy parables about the fly sitting on the ox’s head, and at the end of the day the fly says: “my, what a lot of ploughing we did today”. There is a danger that we ascribe agency to the Stop the war Coalition in shaping the debate in Iraq, whereas we have only been a relatively minor strand of opinion - and what we have actually seen is a working through of doubts about the war from the establishment itself, reflected in mainstream political opinion, and the impact of genuine military defeat in Basra at the hands of the multi-stranded and complex insurgency.
Actually we must avoid two dangers, one that you outline: “all that really matters are the ‘official’ politics of Westminster and”, but there is also a danger that we overestimate the impact of “demonstrations and other forms of collective actions” that only involve the already politically committed, and that we don’t assess the impact of those forms of activism on wider civil society.
I go on most Stop the War demos, including the Manchester ones, and it seems to me that the composition is now largely the political left (and yes they may mobilise some extra students and young people around them - but as long ago as 1969 in the IS journal Peter Sedgewick pointed out that the impact of the far left on students was a bit of a revolving door, are they the same students on the next demo?), combined with wider the peace movement (CP, CND, quakers, good people, I am not knocking them), and a few people organised via Moslem organisations.
Whereas, at our height the demos were drawing in people who were not natural protesters, and we were having a much bigger impact in civil society. Now, I don’t know the answer to this, but we have gone on doing what we feel comfortable with in our far left way - demos, rallies, days chools etc. But we haven’t found a way of maintaining involvement from the wider forces that do not consider themselves political or on the left. (BTW - the military famiiles campign is brilliant, and an exception to my general critique, so full praise to Chris Nineham and Andrew Burgin)
Comment by Andy — 12 October, 2007 @ 12:07 pm
Madam Miaow: “One woman reading a list of the war dead was able to make national news. ”
This is such a good point from Anna. When the 100th soldier died we read the names of dead for an hour in Swindon at the cenotaph with 100 pairs of empty boots, and we got on two regional TV channels, the radio and local papers. Becasue the boots were different and visual (we knicked the idea from a peace group from York, or somewhere else up north)
We are planning a similar thing with black balloons at the gates of RAF Lyneham, where the dead are brought back to.
Another good example is the pensioner from Purton near Swindon who withheld some tax in protest at the war, and whose one person protest ended up on the front page of the Independent and Daily Telegraph, as well as on TV.
We need to be much more media savvy, and it is not just a question of advertising our statis, it is the danger of us creating stasis where there should be dynamism.
Comment by Andy — 12 October, 2007 @ 12:12 pm
Andy,
I was actually responding to the point made by Martin Wisse. I should perhaps have made that clear.
Comment by johng — 12 October, 2007 @ 12:35 pm
Johng:
“Its absurd to suggest that the anti-war movement ‘had no impact’. Not just absurd, actually stark staring bonkers. Its framed all discussion of the war in politics and in the media.”
But did this achieve anything? The war happened and is still happening and the people responsible for it by and large escaped the consequences. Some say Blair had to resign because of the antiwar mood of the country, but if that’s the best we can boast about, the resignation of Blair four years after the war started, we’re in deep trouble.
Comment by Martin Wisse — 12 October, 2007 @ 12:39 pm
actually John, Martin didn’t use the words “had no impact” either.
I do think he should be cautious about assessing the impact of the British anti-war movement from his vantage point in Holland, but nevertheless we didn’t stop the war, and I have spoken to a number of people who demonstrated on february 15th and drew negative conclusions, that protesting is ignored and makes no difference.
We do need to recognise that although the anti-war movement was inspiring and shifted the terms of the debate, the state did nevethless go to war, and therefore many people experienced it as a defeat.
Comment by Andy — 12 October, 2007 @ 12:41 pm
The February demonstration - its vastness and its ultimate failure - has had knock on effects. Trying to get people active around basic trade union issues meets with cynicism and demoralisation. The demo is cited as an example of why it’s pointless fighting against local decisions, as well as the government.
Comment by Doug — 12 October, 2007 @ 2:53 pm
These are rather hackneyed arguments by now, but in the first place I know of not a single case of an anti-war movement that actually stopped an imperialist war - short of a revolutionary uprising. What was true, for example, about the anti-vietnam war movement, was that it played a role in criminalising the US conduct of the war both domestically and internationally, and therefore in the end, contributing (note the emphasis on contributing rather then determining) both to the ultimate defeat of this effort, and, on the other hand, enourmus caution for decades afterwards about any similar escapade.
Its certainly possible to argue that the collapse of Blair’s credibility had much to do with the anti-war movement. Its equally possible to argue that the anti-war movement and its impact played a significant role in ruling out the possibility of attempts to broaden the war in its early stages (long before the war became widely unpopular in the US), and I think its self evident that it would be very hard for the ruling class here to sell another US adventure (though its certainly not beyond them to try).
I think that whilst its true that many people felt demoralized by the fact that the war went ahead and saw it as invalidating mass action, its wrong for socialists to back this mood. Certainly we understand it, but we also need to counter it. There are plenty of arguments to do so. But if we start from Dougs (probably inadvertant) way of putting it: that the demo’s demoralized people (rather then the government proceeding regardless) we’re probably finished before we begin. None of this rules out a serious discussion of how we go fowards, but its neccessary to say that whatever we do will be greatly aided by the atmosphere created by the anti-war movement. One difficulty we face at the moment is that most people agree with the central argument of the anti-war movement. They think we were right. Its a paradox, but the process of winning people over is much more galvanising.
But we shouldn’t underestimate that achievement, or underestimate this for the future as the prospects of some kind of an attack on Iran (and the likely consequences of this) grow and on the other hand the war in Afghanistan gets more and more serious. Again, I’d stress, I’m not ruling out debates about strategy and tactics, just saying its a mistake and counterproductive to underplay the impact that the movement had. Not least on what Andy refers to as ‘political society’.
Comment by johng — 12 October, 2007 @ 4:15 pm
JOhn - you are arguing in a very elusive way, becasue you take a critique I am making of the current situation, and projecting it back into the past.
Equally, the impact of the heroic phase of the anti-war movement was both simultaneoulsy the positive one that your describe, and the negative one that Doug describes.
All I am doing at this stage is saying we need to take stock of where we are now, and how best we can move forward. And that requires a little less mythologising self-regard.
Comment by Andy — 12 October, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
“But did this achieve anything? The war happened and is still happening” Martin Wisse.
Bah humbug them Chartists, achieved nothing. Were still still waiting for annual Parliaments.
The anti war movement is and must be ongoing. It has achieved a lot as it speaks for the majority of the people. Ok 5,000 ain’t 2 million but is quite good by Parliamentary lobbying standards. I bet UNITE would be happy with that number next week.
Yes by all means look at various ways to keep the pressure on, but national demonstations and lobbies will always be part of our tactics so don’t diss em.
Comment by the digger — 12 October, 2007 @ 5:33 pm
Hadn’t heard the one about the fly on the ox’s head, Andy. Good one.
Comment by Madam Miaow — 12 October, 2007 @ 5:41 pm
I’ve just heard that the affiliation of HOPI - Hands Off The People OF Iran - to the StWC has been turned down by the officers of StWC. This means that HOPI’s nomination of Yassamine Mather, an Iranian socialist living in Britain,for the steering committee of StWC has been ruled out of order.
I doubt the Kim Jong-il Society would have faced any problems affiliating.
Comment by cameron — 12 October, 2007 @ 6:08 pm
I have spoken to a number of people who demonstrated on february 15th and drew negative conclusions, that protesting is ignored and makes no difference.
I don’t know how anyone could not draw that conclusion. The big anti-war demo was this decade’s pit closures campaign - we were right, we had most of the country with us, and the government still managed to ignore us and make it look as if everyone supported them apart from a fringe of Trotskyist headbangers. But radicalisation moves in mysterious ways. I think it was Jeff Nuttall who said that the British 60s counter-culture grew out of the defeat of first-wave CND and the Committee of 100; certainly the late-80s/early 90s attempts at regrouping grew out of the defeat of the miners, & I don’t think they were such a bad thing. Thought experiment for those who care about RESPECT[1]: how would it change things to think of RESPECT as growing not from the success of STWC but from its failure?
[1] Among whom I’m rather surprised to find myself. It probably won’t last.
Comment by Phil — 12 October, 2007 @ 6:23 pm
I am quite interested in whether we could have had a different end-game after february 15th, and whether it was possible to stop the war.
Had we done the direct action in response to parliament voting for war? Should we have used the month between the huge demo and the parliamentary vote lobbying MPs? - it wouldn’t have taken that much bigger a revolt in the PLP to have defeated the government.
I know there was a lot of frustration in our group that although we were having huge meetings, and were marching round our town, geting on the TV and radion and in the paper, and school children were going on strike, etc. there was a sense of “phony war” about it, as if we were treading water until the war started.
I really don’t know. But I think there was a bit of polictical paralysis by the SWP excatly when it mattered, in the same way the Militant were paralysed after the Trafalgar Square Poll-Tax demo.
Comment by Andy — 12 October, 2007 @ 6:46 pm
One of the strengths of this blog is open-minded discussion so lets not get too sensitive when a contributor has the termeity of another London demo.
My starting point is the anti-war mobilisation 2001-2003 was incredibly succesful. 2 million in 2003 was a quite extraordinary achievement. Of course the Stop the War Coalition was central to this, and its core of hardened political activists, many in the SWP a vital core. Though the vast majority who marched on 15 February came of their own accord, had never marched before, and not since either. There was a mood change way, way beyond the ranks of the organised left and their campaign organisations. And most incidentally who marched were not identifiably Left either. It is a key eror to presume that just because most on the Left are anti-war most who are anti-war are Left, they’re not. Peter Hitchens has been one of the most consistent opponents of the War for goodness sake.
So far, so good. But 15 February was a defeat. Maybe there could have been another end-game aftewards but thats the historiography of hindsight. We lost, the war went ahead and Iraq is a human tragedy of epic proportions. Were we right to march? Of course we were, but we didn’t stop the war, and if 2 million couldn’t do that its unsurprising a march a fraction the size of that can be just a tad demoralising and of course EVERY march since 15 February has been a fraction of the size of that magnificent February day. Incidentally this has important implications for those who think all is OK with the ‘united front of a special type’ strategy (copyright SWP) for Respect. If 2 million marched on 15 FEbruary Respect membership to date has been rejected by 99.8% of marchers. Some United FRont of a Special Type that eh comrades, perhaps a dose of pluaralist politics might not go amiss for a Lft-of-Labour party of ambition rather than your particular version of it.
Monday? Another startling sign of our weakness and lack of imagination. 2000? 5000? Either figure is a pale imitation of what went before. Almost all-white to, mainly students, nothing against students but hardly the vibrant, diverse, rooted movement of 5 years ago. The anto-war argument remains strong, the Stop the War organisatoon rapidly running out of ideas and quickly retreating into the comfort zone of traditional leftist campaigning from whence it once broke out from. The idea, as seriously suggested by an SWP member at my Respect branch meeting that Stop the War forced Brown to postpone the General Election would be laughable if it wasn’ty so potently delusional. We have to sometimes face facts, a march of a few thousand round the lasrgely empty strets of central London is not going to change the world, still less a government, if it cheers up a few lonely sould all well and good though if a demo is what you need to boost your political morale I’m not entirely sure you’re part of any movement likley to ever be in touch with the real world.
OK that last bit is a bit harsh, there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with a LOndon Demo though likewise lets have an admission there’s nothing intrinsically right with them too. Take that as our starting point and then discuss the political alternative for a mass, popular politics. Now that is a debate worth having, and it is a damning indictment of the Far Left’s paucity of imagination that it seems incapable of such a conversation.
Comment by Mark P — 12 October, 2007 @ 7:37 pm
15TH FEBRUARY 2003 was a huge success not just in Britain but also globally in terms of having a MASSIVE demonstration coordinated on the same day throughout different time zones.It was unprecendented.It still is.It is pointing to what can be achieved through international coordination and organisation via the World Social Forum.Some say 1/2 million in Britain, some say 15 /30 million world wide.We should always celebrate that incredible achievement.
I was on the 15th Feb demonstration in London and yes it felt like there were lots of people who had never been on a march before and quite possibly have never been on one again.Why that is the case is open to question and debate because the following march on MARCH 22nd(I think it was)there were about 500.000 after the war had started but the atmosphere was far more determined and focussed.
Once the war started the Lib Dems caved in and supported it and that was their marching days over.
Obviously we can all have our own take on it but I have met many people who have this very naive view that somehow because we marched in such numbers somehow the powers that be should have not gone to war.Dream on!
I would say the anti war movement has brought the sitation of Palestine to far more people and there is a definite increase in the number of people who are active on the question.
The question is how do you sustain a very diverse movement,locally,regionally,nationally and internationally. Does it take for Iran to be bombed or attacked by US and British imperialist forces to wake people up again once the shit hits the face as it will do?……..Yes.
It is so easy for people to give up and it’s not so easy keeping the movement going day after day ,month after month,year after year
But refining our approach,developing new thinking,ideas and actions,taking risks,being media savvy and being succesful in getting coverage support.
Be realistic.I have never subscribed to this myth that the anti war movement speaks for the majority.I dont think we have and I dont think we do.
Britain is a deeply reactionairy capitalist, conservative, militaristic, imperialist and Royalist country and that is very much ingrained within the thinking and mentality of the majority white working class and middle class.
It all depends what you expect..we can make our protest and demonstrate and keep on demonstrating…last Monday’s demonstration was lively. There were cetainly more than I expected but we really could have done with a few hundred colourful flares going off in Parliament square just to brighten things up.
It’s about being organised…you dont always know how the Police are going to to try to control you and on Monday they hemmed us in, tried to herd us about like sheep,push us about,shut us in,box us in but people “fought back” and gained a sense of collective strength by taking the street outside our so called home of de..mock crassy , which is more than can often be said of the average A TO B demonstration with the same old speakers …yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyawn!
Main shame was that the Police unbanned it. Shit I went all the way down to London specifically to see Lyndsey German,Tony Benn and Andrew Murray get arrested! We were cheated!
Comment by P — 12 October, 2007 @ 11:52 pm
Neil there were, in my estimation, 1,000 of us on the rather silly march. Rather more in the square beforehand but to be hoinest I thought the whole thing a bit of street theatre for the media and not a serious political event.
Andy. Londons not so bad. A bit more dosh would improve it mind.
Comment by Mike — 12 October, 2007 @ 11:58 pm
What’s wrong with a bit street theatre..at least it communicated something. Trouble with so much of the Left is they are so fucked up by their own deep predomonatly male anal retentive cynism……………….dish out the laxatives pleeeeeeeeeeeeease!
Comment by P — 13 October, 2007 @ 12:06 pm
Street theatre is a by-product of consuming political laxatives.
Comment by Mike — 14 October, 2007 @ 1:02 am