National Shop Stewards Network Founding Conference

[fanciful]

Clearly if Bob Crow and the FBU did start to build a new party this would have the potential to be a different thing altogether than either Respect or the CNWP, but only the potential, it would depend how serious the forces were, how open the structure was etc. But it would certainly be interesting if not necessarily anything else.

 

[dennisr]

Clearly if Bob Crow and the FBU did start to build a new party this would have the potential to be a different thing altogether than either Respect or the CNWP, but only the potential, it would depend how serious the forces were, how open the structure was etc. But it would certainly be interesting if not necessarily anything else.

Thats the second time in one thread fanicful has had to give you the more subtle 'party line' CR - are you one of those maverick types who has not learnt to tone down the more ultra-left approach?

 

[dennisr]

Do you think that this dynamic will go anywhere or is it just hot air?

maybe - we'll see - it certainly fits in with the RMT leadership trajectory over the last few years - i would like to hope so and see the potential of genuine union involvement in the development of an independent workers voice as a very good thing

Could it be linked it into a larger national campaign?

again, we have to see how things develop - but that, in effect, is what he is saying

Do prominent individuals involved with CNWP see this as an initiative in its own interest or not?

yes indeed - this sort of development of the reason for the CNWP initiative. The SP has said it is even willing to give up its own name (if not its independent organisation within any wider group) if circumstances arose. It is where we differ from both the 'by stealth, guile and hood-winking' approach of the SWP and the 'its also hopeless unless you adopt our rev. programme and (slightly hystericaly) 'smash' reformist illusions right from the beginning' approach of the likes of WP/PR. The building of a new mass workers party - in which revolutionaries can argue for their own ideas and members can compare/contrast the different approaches and answers put forward openly and in practice within a party representing all stands of working class opinion - would be a major step forward for both the working class and (revolutionaries should also recognise) their own opportunities and ideas

Talked to SWP/RESPECT people afterwards who thought it was negative, taking votes away from them.

sadly, that does not surprise me. i think they are making big mistakes - not for the first time in how they see 'respect' (and therefore themselves) developing - this has been one of the reasons for the holding back of wider development by 'respect'. Trotsky was right about the dangers of 'popular frontism' over a united front approach

 

[fanciful]

Actually we don't have a party line on it at all, but who knows if we did maybe it'd be CR's!
(I'm waiting to be denounced by WP for abandoning democratic centralism ;@))

 

[dennisr]

Actually we don't have a party line on it at all, but who knows if we did maybe it'd be CR's!
(I'm waiting to be denounced by WP for abandoning democratic centralism ;@))

I think I prefer yours

 

[cockneyrebel]

Thats the second time in one thread fanicful has had to give you the more subtle 'party line' CR - are you one of those maverick types who has not learnt to tone down the more ultra-left approach?

As fanciful said we don't have to agree on everything! But as it goes I agree that something formed by the FBU and the RMT would be different to RESECT and the CNWP from the point of view that because it involved real forces (if it did and wasn't just a top heavy initiative) then it would mean revolutonaries could be open about their politics and vote for revolutionary politics.

Without real forces you have two options:

i) All the revolutionaries vote for revolutionary politics and you are left with no more than you had in the first place (Workers Power's position)

ii) The revolutionaries substitute themselves for the non-existant reformists and then ending up voting down stuff you agree with for an organisation which is ultimately meant to take power (SWP/RESPECT and the SP/CNWP). Which ultimately, in my view, is a totally flawed tactic which either goes nowhere or re-enforces illusions in reformism.

However if real forces in the working class set up an organisation then revolutionaries could be totally open about their positions. Whether they get anywhere, or whether the organisation ends up being left reformist, depends largely on the level of class struggle.

As for the differences on whether the RMT shop steward initiative should have non-stewards involved, is that a marker for if you're ultra left or not. Gimme some slack

It is where we differ from both the 'by stealth, guile and hood-winking' approach of the SWP and the 'its also hopeless unless you adopt our rev. programme and (slightly hystericaly) 'smash' reformist illusions right from the beginning' approach of the likes of WP/PR.

I think this is totally harsh. What you have described here is the WP approach. PRs approach is what I've outlined above i.e. yeah revolutionaries have to be open about their politics, but if there aren't real forces involved then this is pointless. And WPs approach is what led them at the last CNWP conference to say they were gonna walk out of the CNWP if the SPs reformist documents got passed. And then when it did get passed (no surprise given 90% of the people there were from SP), they then not only stayed on board but took a place on the steering committee......all that bluster and then that. Very disappointing.

The building of a new mass workers party - in which revolutionaries can argue for their own ideas and members can compare/contrast the different approaches and answers put forward openly and in practice within a party representing all stands of working class opinion - would be a major step forward for both the working class and (revolutionaries should also recognise) their own opportunities and ideas

I agree with this but if there aren't any real forces on board (RESPECT and the CNWP) then they can't and don't. But I have my doubts whether the SP or SWP would even if real forces were on board.

 

[dennisr]

I agree with this but if there aren't any real forces on board (RESPECT and the CNWP) then they can't and don't. But I have my doubts whether the SP or SWP would even if real forces were on board.

On the basis of what you have said here - our difference would simply be over how we get to a stage where a new mass workers party is formed and what the likely composition will be

 

[cockneyrebel]

I guess the differences are:

i) as you say, how we get there i.e. I don't think building a reformist organisation is desirable, but if one is thrown up from geuinue working class forces then revolutionaries should intervene to try and pull it towards revolutionary politics.

ii) that you have to be open about revolutionary politics and not vote down your own policies.

 

[nightbreed]

Does anyone know whether Socialist Worker have done a report for the NSSN meeting on the 7th?
I have checked the website and havent found anything there.

Surely the SWP arent pissed off about it still are they? I mean in the interest of not appearing completely secterian an acknowledgement would have been nice.

 

[disownedspirit]

yes indeed - this sort of development of the reason for the CNWP initiative. The SP has said it is even willing to give up its own name (if not its independent organisation within any wider group) if circumstances arose. It is where we differ from both the 'by stealth, guile and hood-winking' approach of the SWP and the 'its also hopeless unless you adopt our rev. programme and (slightly hystericaly) 'smash' reformist illusions right from the beginning' approach of the likes of WP/PR.

MILITANT is not an organisation it is a newspaper

ho ho ho ho ho ho

 

[Nigel Irritable]

MILITANT is not an organisation it is a newspaper

ho ho ho ho ho ho

A claim which was necessary because of Labour Party witch hunts against the far left, in circumstances where the right were allowed to organise as they like. What's your point exactly? That all untruths are equal, regardless of intent or consequences? Or were you just being a dick?

 

[durruti02]

i have not been to any of the following meet ups .. can anyone update us?

 

[urbanrevolt]

There was one in liverpool on Sat- didn't go, though. I might get a report off someone who did tomorrow. however.

The delegates thing is interesting- am inclined to agree that may be people should be delegated and that of someone is coming from a moribund branch then go as observers and be allowed to speak and participate but not vote.