Respect: its hierarchy and internal workings

[TremulousTetra]

Is this how @ists treat prospective members?

Frats Rmp3

 

[rednblack]

i don't think there's many @ groups desperate enough to take you

 

[TremulousTetra]

No, only pedants welcome.

 

[Steve Booth]

Alternatives to Electoralism

Hi Resistance MP3,
in post number 460 you asked: "The debates like the ones in this thread show not everybody is prepared to be as accepting of other ideologies/peoples weaknesses as you are. But what is the alternative in the electoral sphere to seeking a progressive coalition?"

I think there are lots of problems with electoralism - see the various traditional anarchist arguments against it. I've tried to put these to one side during these discussions and take the 'Respect' idea on as it stands.

Above in other postings I've tried to set out how I think that in tangling itself up with the negative image of Islam, Respect narrows its appeal whereas a Socialist Alliance type party would have been broader.

As an alternative to the purely electoral approach, I'd suggest the horse and cart approach. To follow only the electoral road sets the cart in front of the horse, in my opinion.

I think you could start by campaigning on community issues in each area, eg 'No Incinerators'. Anything that is real and lasting has to come from a solid bedrock of popular support. For example you could then build up things like credit unions or mutual help associations eg where young people help old people by painting the outside of their houses or repair their paths. These things would be one way. As a kind of aside from the whole community up-building activity, as and when elections happened, you could then stand 'Respect' candidates, and would probably get a decent percentage of votes assuming the community activities were followed consistently over a long period prior to the election.

I appreciate that this is something totally different from the purely political party type of activity Respect represents. Part of the problem with electoralism is that once every five years somebody comes round and says 'Vote for me' but once they've been voted in, they don't really care about ordinary people and just push through their own interests. Voting is essentially an ephemeral activity. If it came up from a solid community footing, it would be something else, I am sorry but I don't see that the Respect coalition really fits that pattern. To me it looks like another here today gone tomorrow operation.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Hi Resistance MP3,
in post number 460 you asked: "The debates like the ones in this thread show not everybody is prepared to be as accepting of other ideologies/peoples weaknesses as you are. But what is the alternative in the electoral sphere to seeking a progressive coalition?"

I think there are lots of problems with electoralism - see the various traditional anarchist arguments against it. I've tried to put these to one side during these discussions and take the 'Respect' idea on as it stands.

Above in other postings I've tried to set out how I think that in tangling itself up with the negative image of Islam, Respect narrows its appeal whereas a Socialist Alliance type party would have been broader.

As an alternative to the purely electoral approach, I'd suggest the horse and cart approach. To follow only the electoral road sets the cart in front of the horse, in my opinion.

I think you could start by campaigning on community issues in each area, eg 'No Incinerators'. Anything that is real and lasting has to come from a solid bedrock of popular support. For example you could then build up things like credit unions or mutual help associations eg where young people help old people by painting the outside of their houses or repair their paths. These things would be one way. As a kind of aside from the whole community up-building activity, as and when elections happened, you could then stand 'Respect' candidates, and would probably get a decent percentage of votes assuming the community activities were followed consistently over a long period prior to the election.

I appreciate that this is something totally different from the purely political party type of activity Respect represents. Part of the problem with electoralism is that once every five years somebody comes round and says 'Vote for me' but once they've been voted in, they don't really care about ordinary people and just push through their own interests. Voting is essentially an ephemeral activity. If it came up from a solid community footing, it would be something else, I am sorry but I don't see that the Respect coalition really fits that pattern. To me it looks like another here today gone tomorrow operation.

Believe it or not I agree with a lot of that. SW always talked about the CP in the thirties following a modle smething like that. I think my RESPECT branch are trying to be more 'community'.

I think you've argued your case well. I hope for us all, one day RESPECT will satisfy some of the targets you lay down. But our lot would probably forget, yaping, and paint the windows glass a well as the outside of the house. I

Farts to TD , but Frats to you steve.

Rmp3

 

[charlie mowbray]

Resistance MP3"Just to clarify. I think that the inability of a post revolution society to exist in one country will be overcome by a transitory period of a workers state. In these workers states the organizing democratic organs will be workers councils. Anyone with any organising power [ie architect] in society will be accountable/sackable to these councils and to workers. AND the council’s will be accountable to the workers that elect them and sack them if necessary. Workers council members would come from among the workers."
So how is this a state- this system of workers councils, that every class struggle anarchist subscribes to, as far as I am aware. It certainly didn't exist under the Bolshevik government, however.
A post revolution society in one country would have very difficult problems unless the social revolution spread- surely you are aware that the Bolsheviks themselves grasped this?
And yes, any time you shed your Leninism, you're be welcomed warmly into the anarchist movement. Make that move, make it soon, you know it makes sense!!

 

[TremulousTetra]

Resistance MP3"Just to clarify. I think that the inability of a post revolution society to exist in one country will be overcome by a transitory period of a workers state. In these workers states the organizing democratic organs will be workers councils. Anyone with any organising power [ie architect] in society will be accountable/sackable to these councils and to workers. AND the council’s will be accountable to the workers that elect them and sack them if necessary. Workers council members would come from among the workers."
So how is this a state- this system of workers councils, that every class struggle anarchist subscribes to, as far as I am aware. It certainly didn't exist under the Bolshevik government, however.
A post revolution society in one country would have very difficult problems unless the social revolution spread- surely you are aware that the Bolsheviks themselves grasped this?

Of course I understand that the real world could be more difficult . However , as I said we cannot prophesize the future. The world today is a very different place from the world where we failed to realize that scheme in Russia AND Spain. Many of the problems faced in Russia and Spain do not exist today. There isn't a peasant question. world is far more globalized , which can be negative, but it also means that resistance can globalize much quicker too. Perhaps I’m being too optimistic, but I’m not prophesizing one way or the other. I’m simply saying that we should be pragmatic in trying our very best to achieve that scheme.

how is that scheme a worker's state? The greatest form of democracy is consensus. Where there is such thorough going agreement upon the fundamentals, there seems to be barely any deviance from the “ community-line” [ communism/anarchism]. Of course there is disagreement about minutiae, but on the most important issues there is consensus. I do not believe, I hope I’m completely wrong, but I do not believe that immediately after have revolution there will be such a consensus. I believe there will be significant sections of the population in Britain who will be seeking to undermine the revolution. And so the will of the majoritywill have to be imposed upon the minority. Where today we have the dictatorship of the minority over the majority, the situation will be reversed with the workers council system being infinitely more democratic. However if there is a significant section of the population who are reactionary however democratic the workers councils are it will still be a dictatorship of the proletariat, unfortunately, and thus a state. But again, I repeat I’m not prophesising, I hope I’m completely wrong and we can go straight to communism/anarchism. This is the S. W. argument.

And yes, any time you shed your Leninism, you're be welcomed warmly into the anarchist movement. Make that move, make it soon, you know it makes sense!!

Well you can tell from the comments in this thread why I might be skeptical about that assertion. It seems to me that the right to secede from a view, has to be the absolute starting point for real unity. [also see the comments of the Anarchist in the Chechnya thread “real old hippy” Whose views I fully endorse.] IMHO many anarchists on U. 75 don’t even seem to be able to accept that two people can read an article and get different things from it, Let alone respect for difference in thought. From many it seems to be “ my way or the highway”. For me this is the very unfortunate. This is not what I have been taught in socialist worker. SW support people in struggle. The idea that SW should only support people with an SW perspective is ridiculous.

Fraternal greetings ResistanceMP3

 

[Groucho]

http://www.respectcoalition.org/?ite=418

RESPECT draft constitution now available for endorcement/amendment etc at conference.