See No Evil Hear No Evil Talk No Evil

[Nigel]

Victimisation of 5 Socialist Party Member over allegedly racist cartoons

http://www.stopthewitchhunt.org.uk/
http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/3801

 

[JHE]

Racist & Earist!

That's definitely racist. The monkeys are white. The people who produced the leaflet are obviously suggesting that white people - or at least white people with big ears - are monkeys.

 

[Groucho]

The UNISON bureaucracy are increasingly resorting to underhand methods to supress democracy. They are under pressure from members to fight over pensions, pay curbs and NHS privatisation. They are under pressure over the Labour link. They have a history of banning left-wing activists from standing in elections and expelling socialists fromthe union, but they appear to be getting increasingly desperate.

 

[The Black Hand]

No it is not racist, the Trade union hierarchy are just looking for a convenient stick with which to beat you. GO to the Institute of Race Relations and ask them to provide a letter to back you up on headed paper. http://www.irr.org.uk/

 

[JHE]

No it is not racist, the Trade union hierarchy are just looking for a convenient stick with which to beat you. GO to the Institute of Race Relations and ask them to provide a letter to back you up on headed paper. http://www.irr.org.uk/

Yeah, that's right, Att. What they need is a properly signed and sealed certificate of non-racistness from the proper authorities!

 

[The Black Hand]

Yeah, that's right, Att. What they need is a properly signed and sealed certificate of non-racistness from the proper authorities!

It may help, i thought i would be positive

 

[urbanrevolt]

Why not publicise it round antiracist networks as Attica suggests?
Also of course in Unison and other union branches

 

[dennisr]

That's definitely racist. The monkeys are white. The people who produced the leaflet are obviously suggesting that white people - or at least white people with big ears - are monkeys.

Indeed - they have the SP members bang to rights

Most UNISON members will be wondering what the hell the UNISON 'leadership' are talking about and up to. One of those being attacked is already facing victimisation by her own employer (the Housing Corporation) the others have all lead successful battles - Onay Kasib most recently in Greenwich.

Its an attempt at a witch hunt against the left which gives the SP every reason to go back to Unison's membership nationally - so Unison's New labour stooges will have a major fight on their hands. It a shame that Unison's "Head of Democratic Services" bleating uses 'racism' to attack socialists further bringing the genuine struggles that are required against genuine racism into disrepute by being tarred with the same brush.

The 'charges' are a farce.

 

[danny la rouge]

What am I missing here? Is it now deemed racist to draw a monkey? Why?

 

[treelover]

The first monkey on the left looks like Willam Hague!

this is the sort of crap that Jasper used to get upto (and sometimes the SWP)
and look what's happeing to him now. They are witch hunts, about power and nothing else, period...

It will make Unison look like grade A plonkers1

 

[dennisr]

What am I missing here? Is it now deemed racist to draw a monkey? Why?

stranger than fiction isn't it

from the website ( http://www.stopthewitchhunt.org.uk )

" The reality of this attack is that it is part of a wider attempt by the union leadership to clamp down the democratic rights of members and branches. So fearful are they of the growing opposition to their misrule that they are now seeking to shut down all voices of opposition in the union. They know that increasingly members are questioning why our leaders fail to give a lead in the fight against low pay, privatisation and the attacks coming from the likes of single status.

In what is supposed to be a union led by the members, in the last couple of months alone they have banned branches from campaigning for a no vote in the pension ballot and distributing NEC member Glenn Kelly’s vote No report.

They threatened Onay Kasab the Greenwich branch secretary because he wrote an article on single status saying that his branch had voted to “reject any proposals that lead to a loss of a single penny from a single unison member”, telling him this was against union policy because “it may be necessary for some members to take a drop in pay to achieve equal pay” "

and...

" These attacks on democratic rights are part of a general offensive by the leadership to hang onto power no matter what. They took fright at the recent NEC election results where several prominent right-wingers lost their seats to those who want to see a fighting union. For some in the leadership even this small gain was too much; they are now prepared to attack the rights of members to stay in power."

 

[geoff64]

Counter-attack. Anyone who thinks the cartoon's racist thinks that monkeys=black people. The only people who could think that are clearly themselves racist and must be exposed.

 

[TremulousTetra]

The first monkey on the left looks like Willam Hague!

this is the sort of crap that Jasper used to get upto (and sometimes the SWP)
and look what's happeing to him now. They are witch hunts, about power and nothing else, period...

It will make Unison look like grade A plonkers1

back to our favourite topic.


on the topic of the thread, Yes, this is absolutely ridiculous. In fact most of the anti-political correctness 'evidence', usually comes from some manager using this type of issue to discipline people.

 

[cockneyrebel]

The 'charges' are a farce.

They are indeed (and Permanent Revolution have just put this campaign up on our site). But unfortunately the leadership of UNISON has been able to strike a chord with some activists and members.

The model resolution on the link actually got voted down at my branch AGM and the issue was asked to be looked into more (by both the branch committee and the black members group). The argument went something along on the lines of "I was called a monkey when I was growing up and whoever wrote the leaflet, while probably not meaning to be racist should of realised how sensitive this could be for black people and picked a different image and that the people who did it should apologise if they've caused any offense to black people even if the offense was unintentional." The members saying this did go on to say that they were against the issue being used as a witch hunt but couldn't support the motion if no kind of apology was given.

Now personally I think this was a shame as the bureaucracy is obviously just using this as a witchhunt and given the history of the image don't think it is any way racist. But while all the arguments were given about the history of the image, the fact that not everyone on the steering committee was black, that black people had helped give out the leaflet etc it still didn't win enough people over. There is a part of me that thinks that maybe the SP and the campaign might be better served by saying "while we don't think it was racist in any way, we are sorry if we unintentionally offended anyone" and the SP member in our branch seemed to agree this wouldn't have hurt. Dunno what SP members on here think about that? I can see the argument that why should any apology at all been given as the image clearly isn't racist and the attacks are totally unjustified, but as a strategic move it might of helped.

Hopefully though when this brought up again at our branch committee we can win the argument.

It a shame that Unison's "Head of Democratic Services" bleating uses 'racism' to attack socialists further bringing the genuine struggles that are required against genuine racism into disrepute by being tarred with the same brush.

Indeed.

 

[dennisr]

The argument went something along on the lines of "I was called a monkey when I was growing up and whoever wrote the leaflet, while probably not meaning to be racist should of realised how sensitive this could be for black people and picked a different image and that the people who did it should apologise if they've caused any offense to black people even if the offense was unintentional." The members saying this did go on to say that they were against the issue being used as a witch hunt but couldn't support the motion if no kind of apology was given.

Yes these four active socialists are also responsible for the slave trade.

Thanks for the support 'brothers and sisters'

 

[dennisr]

There is a part of me that thinks that maybe the SP and the campaign might be better served by saying "while we don't think it was racist in any way, we are sorry if we unintentionally offended anyone" and the SP member in our branch seemed to agree this wouldn't have hurt. Dunno what SP members on here think about that? I can see the argument that why should any apology at all been given as the image clearly isn't racist and the attacks are totally unjustified, but as a strategic move it might of helped.

To be blunt - I think the SP unison members would be idiots to make any false concession to this liberal rubbish - this would especially offend and insult the black SP unison members and activists who were also handing out this leaflet.

I wonder what things Onay has been called in his lifetime?

Hopefully though when this brought up again at our branch committee we can win the argument.

I hope so to

 

[cockneyrebel]

Dennisr don't get me wrong I argued in support of the motion with no amendments and can see what you mean about making concessions.

But the members who voted against taking it as it was weren't Prentice supporters. They were, in my view, affected by liberal ideas of identity politics but weren't coming from the cynical angle that the bureaucrats were coming from. Now while I totally disagree with liberal identity politics, I'm not not sure that saying "sorry for any unintentional offence" does necessary pander to those politics. I haven't got a set view on this as a strategic option, I just wondered what you thought.

But it has brought up a lot debate in the branch on the issue of class vs identity politics.

 

[Wilf]

Them monkeys don't seem to have a bottom half. Anti-Simian Disabalist Bastards!

 

[dennisr]

Dennisr don't get me wrong I argued in support of the motion with no amendments and can see what you mean about making concessions.

But the members who voted against taking it as it was weren't Prentice supporters. They were, in my view, affected by liberal ideas of identity politics but weren't coming from the cynical angle that the bureaucrats were coming from. Now while I totally disagree with liberal identity politics, I'm not not sure that saying "sorry for any unintentional offence" does necessary pander to those politics. I haven't got a set view on this as a strategic option, I just wondered what you thought.

But it has brought up a lot debate in the branch on the issue of class vs identity politics.

Of course mate - i didn't assume you had and understand the reason for your question.

Yes, spot on with the reasons given above - it is, absolutely the very worst type of identity politics. Embarrassing in that these people have taken on such rubbish over basic solidarity.

I think the SP should make a specific issue of the insult to black members who were actually handed out the material - I think they are mistaken in tippy-toeing around and avoiding the reactionary anti-class sentiments this attack is built on. I don't know if this is to avoid the witch hunt being extended to named black members.

To put it very bluntly though - the very idea of having completely innocent people 'apologising' for something they are not guilty of purely to get the dubious 'honour' of a vote from some petty, selfish, smug moron who could not see class politics if it came and slapped them around the face with a soggy kipper sticks in my throat. Especially when those people under attack include ones who have from my personal experience of standing alongside them directly fought racism and bigotry for decades - alongside defending and fighting for the rights of all workers in the union.

Do I ask black people to apologise for the crimes committed by black people in my backyard before I 'condecend' to give them my support?

Would it be 'understandable' if I demanded an apology in advance or refuse to give my support from some trade unionist on a lewisham unison picket line using a picture of a thief to expose some local bosses underhand methods on a strike leaflet because I spend my life being called a thief because of my own background (which you know about)?

These people insult and shame themselves with their ridiculous 'arguements' and pandering to it would legitimise such idiocy

 

[cockneyrebel]

I don't know if I'd say it was embarrassing. The people speaking against just accepting the motion were all black if I remember rightly. Now that doesn't make their views any more right, I think the identity politics they putting forward were wrong and said so. But from what they said I think it comes in part from wrong politics and partly from being sensitive to the issues of racism that they have suffered in the past. So I think it's a bit harsh describing their concerns as embarassing. Especially given the rubbish state of the union movement and pitiful state of the far left in the UK, is it any wonder that people don't take on class based politics more readily?

Agree with what you're saying about it being insulting to the black members handing the leaflet out though and that's one of the thing we're now trying to stress in the branch. One good thing to come out of this is that it has given many of us (including many black workers) the chance to stress a class based approach.

To put it very bluntly though - the very idea of having completely innocent people 'apologising' for something they are not guilty of purely to get the dubious 'honour' of a vote from some petty, selfish, smug moron who could not see class politics if it came and slapped them around the face with a soggy kipper sticks in my throat. Especially when those people under attack include ones who have from my personal experience of standing alongside them directly fought racism and bigotry for decades - alongside defending and fighting for the rights of all workers in the union.

Do I ask black people to apologise for the crimes committed by black people in my backyard before I 'condecend' to give them my support?

Again I think this is a bit harsh. For sure there are a couple of people who fit the above description but others who certainly don't and are just mistaken. Calling them smug and selfish would just drive them further away from what we're trying to say. All some people were saying at the AGM is that they disagreed with the witch hunt but they were very sensitive about the use of an image of a monkey because of their past experiences. I think they were being genuine in this and it wasn't the same as the games the Prentice lobby are trying on.

As for apologising, it depends what you mean. I think you can say you've done nothing wrong on one hand, but on the other hand say sorry if someone found what you said insensitive. Not to win votes in some cynical way, just to try and get a message across and build solidarity. But maybe you're right, as said I don't pretend to have a concrete answer on this one. I certainly wouldn't want to give ground on this, I just thought it might be a better tactical way of going about things. But as you say it might have the danger of pandering to stuff, I was just thinking you could phrase it in a way so that it didn't.

PS This is Lambeth UNISON not Lewisham!

 

[urbanrevolt]

Well I think we should unreservedly defend the activists being framed.It is a political attack and any suggestion of racism from the bureacracy is a deliberate and vile smear.

IF though black members in any way make the sort of points CR is raising - i.e. we've been called monkeys and racist shit and given that one of the people criticisised was black you should've thought then I think CR's approach is right WHILST RE-EMPHASISING 100% unconditional support for the victimised activists.

Given the cynical and totally reactionary use of political correctness by the Unison bureacracy it is important to make ultra-sure that we are very careful.

Having said that, I don't think we should at all concede that the SP were even a tiny bit racist or insensitive.

We should be for maximum support, for union motions of support, for rank and file networks to say hands off the activists- link it in with Michael Gavan, Karen Reissmann and Yunus Baksh (the latter though not the first tow of this three also being witch-hunted by Unison as well as the bosses) and begin to pave the way for strike action.

On racism- let's have Unison taking up the cases of members on low oay and who are subject to subtle and not so subtle racism, let's have a commitment to fighting against all deportations, let's have a committment for workers' control and scrutiny of all employers' policies of employment. etc.

Call the bureacracy's bluff on racism on the other hand and demand action to fight for better services- housing, hospitals, schools for all people- Black being disproportionately disadvantaged.

Stop the witch-hunt! Build th eaction necessary to win!

 

[Fedayn]

What am I missing here? Is it now deemed racist to draw a monkey? Why?

It is when it can be used in a pretty scurrilous and frankly contemptuous political attack on SP members in UNISON. I know a few of those attacked, dunno Glenn or Onay too well, but I have the privilege of knowing the top chap, and clearly secret genocidal racist, that is Brian Debus.

 

[Fedayn]

To be blunt - I think the SP unison members would be idiots to make any false concession to this liberal rubbish - this would especially offend and insult the black SP unison members and activists who were also handing out this leaflet.

Absolutely, to even attempt to take the argument onto the terrain constructed by the accusers woul be a disaster, after all you'#re effectively giving them the conscession that they want ie to accept that there was any kind of racial motive behind the cartoon.

What strikes me is that what kind of mind sees a picture of monkeys and automatically think it is in some twisted racist way referring to black people? Are we to next be told that anyone who has a teddy bear is obviously an anti-muslim maniac? Anyone who eats steak a hater of Hindus?

 

[geoff64]

incidentally, i personally know very well to what lengths UNISON appartchiks will go to discredit its opponents.

I was a local govt shop steward in the late 1990's in a london borough where the entire ex-nalgo shop steward contingent - fed up with HQ intransigence over accusations of financial and anti-democratic chicanery within the branch commitee - decided to defect to another trade union. Someone within the national hierarchy decided to distribute fake letters purporting to be from our shop stewards' network to other national branches in which we all claimed to be swp members calling for a mass defection from UNISON. Out of the 15 shop stewards, only one was an swp member, and he was on the point of leaving the party because the swp line was that he should stay in and fight alone, despite a unanimous vote by every other shop steward to leave. (So no support from region and no support from the swp that we all supposed to be members of - like we wanted their fucking input anyway.) UNISON was forced to apologise to our new union but, of course, we never knew who was responsible for the counterfeiting.

 

[dennisr]

Agree with what you're saying about it being insulting to the black members handing the leaflet out though and that's one of the thing we're now trying to stress in the branch. One good thing to come out of this is that it has given many of us (including many black workers) the chance to stress a class based approach.

Thats a good thing..

Again I think this is a bit harsh. For sure there are a couple of people who fit the above description but others who certainly don't and are just mistaken. Calling them smug and selfish would just drive them further away from what we're trying to say. All some people were saying at the AGM is that they disagreed with the witch hunt but they were very sensitive about the use of an image of a monkey because of their past experiences. I think they were being genuine in this and it wasn't the same as the games the Prentice lobby are trying on.

..and I would not be quite as frank if it was my branch and I was trying to convince those members. But, frankly, that is what I would be thinking - I still think these non-voting people are behaving like idiots.

But as you say it might have the danger of pandering to stuff, I was just thinking you could phrase it in a way so that it didn't.

I don't see any way an 'apology' could practically put any more diplomatically without insulting those black members who were handing out the leaflet.

I suppose the dangers of witch hunting and the experience of black people in the past (and potential for the same in the future) could be bought up as pat of a reply. or the role of leading BME members in the group being attacked?

The SP members under attack probably would have said 'sorry, if there was any inadvertant offence caused' - but they were a) banned from replying at the conference and b) those claiming to be offended are obvious political enemies with a very obvious axe to grind - lets be frank - they were as 'offended' as hey wanted to be for their convenience - and that alone is an insult to all those lambeth black members. Its not as if the use of 'race' to further own's own career is something these black members can be completely unaware of

PS This is Lambeth UNISON not Lewisham!

Blimey have you moved or were you always at lambeth? no wonder you have felt so demoralised at times if this is the level of understanding of those who actually attend the branch. Indeed the state of the unions is something else to behold.

 

[dennisr]

It is when it can be used in a pretty scurrilous and frankly contemptuous political attack on SP members in UNISON. I know a few of those attacked, dunno Glenn or Onay too well, but I have the privilege of knowing the top chap, and clearly secret genocidal racist, that is Brian Debus.

Indeed, Brain has almost single-handedly fought and won a whole number of asylum cases - of both his members and other local residents, and has been very active in the NACDC. He has been doing this for 15+ years. All this as a sideline while leading the year long Hackney dispute, facing removal from his own job as a result and continuing to be there defending his members every day in his borough. Personally, I don't know how he manages to fit all the work into each day. He is a person - regardless of his political affiliation - whom I have the utmost respect for.

Onay was one of the leading lights in the anti-racist movements in Greenwich. He is a key trade unionist in the Kurdish support movement. He has been the leading light of the recent successful Grenwich local authority dispute (not the first time either - and the same comments apply as below regarding low paid members of his union branch)

Glenn has successfully fought for and led the improvement of living standards of his lowest paid members in the face of vicious management in his borough nd personal victimisation from those managers. Black members will have been overly represented among the poorer paid local government workers.

To even have to be forced to raise these points to impress some idiots who thinks they have some special 'right' to some special 'apology' for doing nothing is insulting. 'Rights' are fought for not handed to you - and these people are fighters who should therefore be defended. These are people who have earned support.

 

[dennisr]

We should be for maximum support, for union motions of support, for rank and file networks to say hands off the activists- link it in with Michael Gavan, Karen Reissmann and Yunus Baksh (the latter though not the first tow of this three also being witch-hunted by Unison as well as the bosses) and begin to pave the way for strike action.

On racism- let's have Unison taking up the cases of members on low oay and who are subject to subtle and not so subtle racism, let's have a commitment to fighting against all deportations, let's have a committment for workers' control and scrutiny of all employers' policies of employment. etc.

Call the bureacracy's bluff on racism on the other hand and demand action to fight for better services- housing, hospitals, schools for all people- Black being disproportionately disadvantaged.

Stop the witch-hunt! Build th eaction necessary to win!

Yes, thank you for the party line comrade

Of course such demands are being raised - and yes, these individuals will be already be building such solidarity and pointing to a way forward for members.

In fact, I think it is raising these basic issues which would genuinely polarise the apprant recent debate in lambeth branch. Raise the reasons why these people are actually being attacked - it has nowt to do with racism and everything to do with calling for trade union bureaucrats to either get off their backsides an fight for their members (add list of demands here ) or stand aside

 

[scumbalina]

Victimisation of 5 Socialist Party Member over allegedly racist cartoons

http://www.stopthewitchhunt.org.uk/
http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/3801

Blimey

Dunno how involved you are, but we're putting together the next issue of Now or Never! (paper) at the moment and it might be cool to have a bit about this in there if you're up for it, if it's nowt to do with you and you were just posting an interesting link let me know and I'll get in touch with the Socialist Party

 

[cockneyrebel]

Blimey have you moved or were you always at lambeth? no wonder you have felt so demoralised at times if this is the level of understanding of those who actually attend the branch.

I’ve moved, fairly recently as it goes. To be honest the Lambeth branch is 100 times better than Lewisham. For instance rather than getting 40 people to the AGM (like Lewisham), Lambeth gets 400. But apparently about 15-20 years ago it used to get about 3,500!

Also there are other lefties in the Lambeth branch (including an active SP member, I’m sure you’d know him) and an active stewards network. It’s quite inspired me since I’ve moved workplaces! Lewisham just didn’t function at all and was run by a clique of right wingers who had been there about 30 years. It’s a different world in this branch.

The branch committee supported the SP resolution, it just got overturned at the AGM by the members. But even then I didn’t find this demoralising because it wasn’t from the cynical stance of UNISON’s bureaucracy but from (in my view) misguided faith in identity politics. As well of from experiences of racism in the past. I also think we can win people around on this.

That’s why I was keen to try and find a way of saying that no-one meant to offend anyone while at the same time not giving any ground. Maybe you’re right and this isn’t possible.

But the info above is all useful.

Indeed the state of the unions is something else to behold.

I agree. The old CPGB in the early 20s raised the issue of re-claiming and re-building the unions. I think that is even more vital now than then.

However the far left is an even more pitiful state than the unions.

But we are able to do stuff here at least, like the meeting we’re building against privatisation and big rent rises. However it will be interesting to see how active those who were against the resolution are in this campaign. So far the people offering their spare time seem to be those who supported the SP resolution......

PS I think you’re being a bit harsh on urban. That isn’t the “party line” (we don’t have one on this as far as I know!), but just his writing style……

 

[dennisr]

PS I think you’re being a bit harsh on urban. That isn’t the “party line” (we don’t have one on this as far as I know!), but just his writing style……

its the writing style i was having a gentle pop at (although that is probably a case of throwing stones in glass houses given my own - I did acknowledge the sound point he was making about getting back to the core issues though

that was an interesting viewpoint (your post) - and good to hear - must be a breath of fresh air after lewisham (i remember your posts on banging your head against a virtual brick wall - it does get to a point when you have to say - better to save if for better things)