Chris Bambery’s Letter to Alex Callincos, July 2008
Chris Bambery’s Letter to Alex Callincos, July 2008
It is clear from last week’s CC and from events over the first days of Marxism that there
is the danger that a factional situation on the CC may arise, which, for the second time,
can paralyse the effective work of the CC. We are unlikely to agree on the causes of this
situation but I must make it clear to you that I and other members of the CC find this an
intolerable situation.
If we are to prevent this situation from developing into a full-scale crisis there needs to be
some urgent changes in the way the CC works. Let me suggest the following:
We should return to the previous practice of the CC in that if there are problems in a
particular area of work these are raised first with the CC member responsible for that
work not made the subject of a factional position which is then raised at the CC without
prior discussion.
Any communication with national office about a particular area of work should be
forwarded to the CC member responsible immediately.
We should not have a policy of micro-managing areas of work. Currently the Respect
work is routinely subject to this kind of scrutiny in way that is not true of other areas of
work.
We urgently need to end the separation of the party centre from some of the CC. It is an
anomaly that some CC members have no desk or computer at the centre. This has
encouraged the situation to arise where some CC members are separated from party
organisational work. Lindsey, Chris and John should immediately be given these
facilities at the centre.
There should be no more organisers meetings, even on individual areas of work, to which
the whole CC are not invited. This was the practice in the past and it should be reinstated
now even if not all CC members will wish to exercise this right on all occasions.
All CC members should be invited to and given the chance to report the discussions of
the CC to the national office staff.
Perhaps, I hope, if these changes are agreed and implemented immediately they will help
resolve this situation and we will be able to prevent any further damage to the SWP.
Or more briefly Bambery wants the SWP CC to return to its former federal practice whereby each individual ‘leader’ runs her/his own fiefdom autonomously.
Comment by Mike — 14 December, 2008 @ 2:38 pm
I’m very pissed off with all of the leadership right now.
But a democratically elected member cannot run a “fiefdom” anymore than Gordon Brown runs the “fiefdom” of Great Britain. That logic is laughable and juvenile.
Comment by Futurecast — 14 December, 2008 @ 5:26 pm
The logic is simply a reflection of how the SWP has been operated for too many long years.
Comment by Mike — 14 December, 2008 @ 5:42 pm
when was the last time that a factional fight arose in the CC?
Comment by Dimitris — 14 December, 2008 @ 6:47 pm
We don’t know. Factional struggles within the CC stay in the CC. Ask when was there last a real political struggle within the SWP and then you have a far more interesting question.
Comment by Mike — 14 December, 2008 @ 10:46 pm
You’re wetting yourself with all this excitement aren’t you Mike?
Comment by anticapitalista — 14 December, 2008 @ 11:08 pm
Don’t be so fucking peurile anticapitalista. I’m sadderned that neither side in this growing factional struggle seem to want to face the root sources of the current crisis within the SWP and so far as they do, Rees does touch on some aspects of the problem, they only do so for factional purposes. Unless a real balance sheet is drawn up then the SWP comes out of this weakened and thats not something I want to see happen.
Comment by Mike — 14 December, 2008 @ 11:36 pm