Respect After Galloway
- Thread starter tollbar
- Start date
rebel warrior
Soca Warrior
mutley said:
I'll do one by midnight tonight...
rebel warrior
Soca Warrior
I hope this poll is ok - otherwise I'll get shot...
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=152045
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=152045
poster342002
PROPER leftwing socialist
And that's RESPECT's rightful inheritance, now, I suppose?rebel warrior said:
poster342002
PROPER leftwing socialist
Well I don't know about you, but mine is socialism.rebel warrior said:
poster342002
PROPER leftwing socialist
What about muslim working class people who feel oppressed by their religion and "community leaders"?ResistanceMP3 said:
What line does the SWP take concerning the bus workers' strike in Iran?
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
it might be worth listening to these two to see why this article is so exciting.
Iranian Revolution 1978-79, 1984, MARSHALL, Phil
Iran 25 years after the revolution, 2004, Jafari Peyman , Discussion & Summing up.
http://mp3.lpi.org.uk/resistancemp/fulllist.htm
edited to add
Muslims are offen portrayed as a homogenous bloc under the control of their religious leaders. This article http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=8313 begins to undermine that caricature. And the issue is a superb wedge to drive between the Muslims extremists and the vast majority of ordinary Muslims who only seek what we all seek, Justice. For this article poses the question if a fundamentalist religious state is the solution why are ordinary Muslims rebelling against it? in standing shoulder to shoulder with Moslems I think the SWP has earned the right and should at every opportunity discuss this article with Moslems we work in respect with.
fraternal greetings. ResistanceMP3
Iranian Revolution 1978-79, 1984, MARSHALL, Phil
Iran 25 years after the revolution, 2004, Jafari Peyman , Discussion & Summing up.
http://mp3.lpi.org.uk/resistancemp/fulllist.htm
edited to add
Muslims are offen portrayed as a homogenous bloc under the control of their religious leaders. This article http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=8313 begins to undermine that caricature. And the issue is a superb wedge to drive between the Muslims extremists and the vast majority of ordinary Muslims who only seek what we all seek, Justice. For this article poses the question if a fundamentalist religious state is the solution why are ordinary Muslims rebelling against it? in standing shoulder to shoulder with Moslems I think the SWP has earned the right and should at every opportunity discuss this article with Moslems we work in respect with.
fraternal greetings. ResistanceMP3
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
BarryB said:
Sorry it's a bit late (still catching up with the posts from when I was away...)
BarryB certainly has a point - and some of our SWP friends on these boards may be too young to remember it, or have had it airbrushed out of the collective memory of their party, so it is worthy of a reminder.
The SWP had a dreadful position on Bosnia and Kosovo that tail-ended the brutal oppression of muslims by Serbian nationalists (as did some labour left-wingers, such as Tony Benn, and groups like the RCP). However, Workers Aid for Bosnia, for example, did a lot of good work in highlighting the oppression of the Bosnian muslims and setting up practical campaigns and solidarity - as well as the ISG, it involved a number of Labour and Trade Union activists, some of the smaller trotskyist groups and, of course, a number of secular muslims.
Socialist Resistance did not exist then. It was actually Socialist Outlook/ISG/USFI, the largest component of today's Socialist Resistance that took up the challenge, alongside other left-wingers. You can read about the track record of the SWP in the following ISG pamphlet (from 1994 I think) that has been reproduced on the ISG web-site:
http://www.isg-fi.org.uk/archives/press/wib/wib00.htm
More specifically the following section deals with the wrong positions of the SWP and how it led them into tail-ending the oppression and persecution of muslims in Bosnia:
http://www.isg-fi.org.uk/archives/press/wib/wib11.htm
(with the snappy sub-title of "Yugoslavia: the Acid Test - How Socialist Worker and Living Marxism capitulate to Western imperialism and Serbian nationalism in the Balkans".
cutandsplice
putting things together
ResistanceMP3 said:
Respect is completely based on the view that muslims can only be approached through their 'leaders.'
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Fisher_Gate said:
Hopefully all our resident SWP members are still reading the ISG pamphlet on this and learning a little about their past and what a principled position is - but I am a little surprised that no-one has rushed to defend their line in the four days since I posted this little snippet, especially given the vehemence with which they have attacked BarryB and Nigel Irritable over their alleged stance on islamaphobia on these boards.
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
Are the RUC likely to be contesting Holyrood, or is this just about George ?
If he got in on a list seat he wouldn't be competing with Labour, who will be likely to win in the constituencies - he would have to squeeze out the SSP or Greens.
If he got in on a list seat he wouldn't be competing with Labour, who will be likely to win in the constituencies - he would have to squeeze out the SSP or Greens.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Fullyplumped said:
There are no local elections in Scotland (or wales or northern ireland this year - see for the list:
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/elections/futureukelec.cfm
There is no way Respect would contest elections in Scotland - they support the SSP - though they have legally registered the Respect name in Scotland to ensure no-one else can use it. Any meanderings by GG about Scotland - are just that, meanderings and not a statement of Respect policy.
scott_forester
probably talking shite
I'd love to see George interviewing people in some political context, he is very entertaining.
There is no way Respect would contest elections in Scotland - they support the SSP - though they have legally registered the Respect name in Scotland to ensure no-one else can use it. Any meanderings by GG about Scotland - are just that, meanderings and not a statement of Respect policy.[/QUOTE]
Are you seriously saying that Respect would/Could stop GG standing. The opportunism of respect leaders would inevitiably see them stabbing the SSP in the back at some stage.I think the SSP have been following the strategy of keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
Are you seriously saying that Respect would/Could stop GG standing. The opportunism of respect leaders would inevitiably see them stabbing the SSP in the back at some stage.I think the SSP have been following the strategy of keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
The story is about the Scottish Parliamentary elections next year. The next Scottish municipal elections wil be contested under PR, so Respect could have a go - but I really don't see George standing for Glesca Toon Cooncil!Fisher_Gate said:
If Galloway wants to run for Holyrood I dont doubt that he will, with or without official Respect backing. I am sure that some of his old mates in the Labour party would give him a bit of clandestine backing if he stands in the list section as it would split the Ssp vote and that Galloway in Holyrood would either not turn up or, with his Labourite tribal instincts could always be more malleable from an LP point of view then the SSP.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Macullam said:
The question was whether Respect would/could stand. I can see no way in which that would happen. What Galloway might do is another thing, as we all well know following the BB fiasco. If he does intend to stand for election again, I would envisage him being far more interested in standing for the European Parliamentary elections for London in 2009, than Holyrood or a scottish council, assuming he sticks to what he has said and does not contest Bethnal Green and Bow in 2009/10 (or whenever Gordon calls the general election).
The Respect name in an election is the legal property of Respect not GG, and given its present membership I can't see anyway in which a majority of the membership would support standing against the SSP.
One might as well ask whether any organisation set-up by the new mass workers party conference organised by the SP in March would specifically exclude for all time standing against the SSP? At the moment the statement supporting it is specific to England and Wales. But should the SP be in a minority and new forces want to stand in Scotland what would be the approach of the SP? This is so hypothetical as to be almost meaningless, but the same thing applies to Respect in my view despite the pronouncements of its lose cannons.
The Respect name in an election is the legal property of Respect not GG, and given its present membership I can't see anyway in which a majority of the membership would support standing against the SSP.
Have you read the critique of the SSP by Calnicos. It appears that SWP support for the SSP project is becoming more and more tenuous. the SWP platform has not grown or influenced the SSP policy and direction. Leading members such as gregor gall have gone native. In terms of the Respect mebership it will do what the SWP says depending on the current line. yes there will be opposition but no serious challenge to the present leadership. The CWi will continue to be an intrinsic and influential platform within the SSP. We continue to put forward a socialist strategy and hope to influence the majority away from its current drift towards nationalism. If you read the currrent issue of socialist voice there is a report on the recent council bye elction win for the SNP in Gkasgow. Reading the report it makes you wonder why the SSP stood a candidate at all.
Have you read the critique of the SSP by Calnicos. It appears that SWP support for the SSP project is becoming more and more tenuous. the SWP platform has not grown or influenced the SSP policy and direction. Leading members such as gregor gall have gone native. In terms of the Respect mebership it will do what the SWP says depending on the current line. yes there will be opposition but no serious challenge to the present leadership. The CWi will continue to be an intrinsic and influential platform within the SSP. We continue to put forward a socialist strategy and hope to influence the majority away from its current drift towards nationalism. If you read the currrent issue of socialist voice there is a report on the recent council bye elction win for the SNP in Gkasgow. Reading the report it makes you wonder why the SSP stood a candidate at all.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Macullam said:
You are making the mistake of assuming that Respect=SWP. There is a response to the Callinicos article by Alan Thornett of the ISG and member of Respect National Council at http://www.socialistresistance.net/thornettcritiquecll.htm The theoretically bad position of Callinicos pre-dates the more recent cooling in practice of the SWP towards the SSP. I think the SWP have enough problems in Respect within England without going to war over the issue of standing in Scotland.
I did read the article in SV and don't agree with your interpretation of it. There have always been lots of individual members of the SNP who take a good left-wing stance in practice (the same applies to some individuals in Labour, Greens, Plaid Cymru and even, once upon a time, the old Liberal Party). Working with individual members of bourgeois or petty-bourgeois parties on particular issues and campaigns where we agree should not be a problem for socialists. That doesn't mean not standing against them in elections, and the article went on to make the point that the SSP were right to fight the seat and are there to stay and fight.
Similar threads
