Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

SWP Party Notes: The Return

Donna Ferentes said:
Well, I think my sense of perspective may involve not spending too much time on things that are relatively unimportant.
Click to expand...
You might think that you do that, but it sure doesn't look like that. See your reply to PC's post on his time in the SWP.
 
butchersapron said:
You might think that you do that, but it sure doesn't look like that. See your reply to PC's post on his time in the SWP.
Click to expand...
I think my reply was an example thereof.

Anyway, I must away to shed more light.
 
Donna Ferentes said:
I think my reply was an example thereof.

Anyway, I must away to shed more light.
Click to expand...

I don't get the second sentence. What does it mean? (no implied criticism here, I just don't)
 
A response to both Gumbert and Donna in one.....

What may have been possible in a northern town wasn't possible in London. It should be remembered both that the BNP's efforts at the time were centred to a far higher degree on the capital and that the kind of response that Gumbert outlines was one that the CC simply couldn't be kept in the dark about....

Just one incident out of several.....

At the time that the BNP were first beginning to build up a head of steam in the East End (and prior to Beacon's election, iirc) they'd also put some efforts into maintaining a Sunday morning paper sale in Brick Lane. Just prior to (or maybe just after) the re-launch of the ANL there was a decision to do some concentrated leafletting in the surrounding area.

There had been a number of attacks carried out in the area by BNP members, most involving Sergeant, Whicker and so on - the forerunners of C18.

SWP members met in Brick Lane. Maybe about 30-40. A number of these were women with kids in tow - a couple in prams. People divided up into teams of seven or eight. Not told to keep each other in sight. This after a warning (from AFA) that a BNP team was in the area. Result - one SWP member caught and seriously cabbaged - the people who he was with ran and left him to get a doing (which involved him getting concrete slabs dropped on his head when he was already spark out - there was a real chance he'd have been killed had the police not arrived when they did). The running isn't something I'd necessarily criticise the runners for - it was perhaps inevitable given the fact that they were in the dark and utterly unprepared.

There's no doubt that the above happened. I knew the bloke - I worked with him at the SWP printshop at the time.

Two weeks later the Southwark SWP branch was leafletting for the ANL in Bermondsey. The BNP had had some success in the area - most notably the turning over of the march organised by the NBC/Jasper/Wadsworth. Members were told to meet at the tube station, but were redirected from there to a point some 300 yards away. They hadn't been informed of the redirection in advance.

On my way to the tube station I saw a couple of van loads of fash scouting the area - the same group that had cabbaged the bloke in Brick Lane. Another member on his way to the meet saw the same group independently. When we arrived at the tube station we suggested that people not be sent off to the redirection point in ones or twos (which was what was happening) but that they be told to wait until there was a group of five or six.

This was scoffed at by the district organiser. We then explained why, citing the above, including the attack on the well-known party member. Scoffed at again, told there had been no such attack and accused of squadism. Took it upon ourselves to wait for people and escort them over in groups - accused of breaking party discipline.

At the end of the day (and after the same vans had been seen several times in the area) suggested that people not be left to make their way home individually, but that we go to the tube en-mass and depart together. Yet more derision. Two individuals attacked making their way home alone.

The following week back at work I was given a dressing down by two different leading members/CCers.

As I say, the above was far from being an isolated incident, but given that the party's response followed the same pattern each time I don't think my use of the word "criminal" is in any way an exaggeration.
 
PC, I wasn't active at that time, but was active at a time when direct action was taken and the incidents you describe are alien to my experience (ie: always stay in large groups, well informed and with one [unavoidable] exception we always took precautions).

I don't doubt the sincerity of what you say, so I guess my question is: why? Even from the CC's perspective, it doesn't help...

It also doesn't fit with other criticisms on here that the SWP/ANL often get themselves pinned into areas by the cops in large groups. So why is there that discrepancy.

I want to repeat that I'm not challenging the truth of anything you say; just asking if you've any suggestions for the difference in approach?
 
I've been part of some very direct and (outnumbered twice, but usually outnumbering) effective actions against the fash. I shat myself every single time, but still went back. I never took a beating, though I thought I would one day, but I feel naive to think that I was part of the same organisation that PC describes above.

At the same time, I saw CC members take a beating, and risk taking a beating, to do something about the fash....

However, I am not talking about paper sales, because there was only one incident that I know of when I was a member that involved a papersale (and I was in WSM and the incident was in Bristol), and I believe it was handbags.
 
I suppose my last question for PC is, 'Is there a 'more measured' assessment of the situation someone else might have made in your situation?'

ie: would someone else have had a different take on your experiences?

All of these in the spirit of discussion, you understand.
 
I was at the second event PC talks about (I think Ive got the right one), and, in retrospect, I think there were three reasons why security was barely considered at the time.

Firstly, there was talk (or talk of talk) of there being `no go zones` for `non whites` and anti fascists in various parts of the east end. The (correct) rejection of that notion was taken to extremes;

Secondly, fear about the strength of AFA, which had to be criticised on ALL counts, including their `paranoia` over the possibility of attacks;

& finally, sheer bloody mindedness and stupidity.
 
I think there was certainly an attempt to instill a feeling that `these streets are OUR streets, not theirs` in members, which could also go some way as to why people were quite happy to walk home alone(ish) at the time.

(btw, donnas coment is a quote from I Claudius, which was being discussed while you were on your long sojourn)
 
belboid said:
I was at the second event PC talks about (I think Ive got the right one), and, in retrospect, I think there were three reasons why security was barely considered at the time.
Click to expand...

Were you? At the leafletting in Bermondsey, I mean. We didn't know each other at the time, so you may well have been....but we may have our wires crossed here.

Firstly, there was talk (or talk of talk) of there being `no go zones` for `non whites` and anti fascists in various parts of the east end. The (correct) rejection of that notion was taken to extremes;

Secondly, fear about the strength of AFA, which had to be criticised on ALL counts, including there `paranoia` over the possibility of attacks;

& finally, sheer bloody mindedness and stupidity.
Click to expand...

Not an unreasonable analysis/answer to some of flimsier's questions. But to flesh it out a little....

I joined the SWP in 1984. During the very first day school I attended the subject of the ANL/fascism/the NF came up. I can remember Bambery really going into one about the squaddists, how they'd ensured the continuation of the NF by the continued direct confrontation with them at Chapel Market. At the time I swallowed those notions more or less whole - but with the benefit of hindsight the level of invective does strike me as peculiar....

And I suppose that the stuff I've related happened only six or seven years later - memories aren't that short...

I've spoken to people in RA who were in the SWP and expelled over the "squadist" stuff. Their take in regard to the expulsions went along the lines of "there were quite a few of us who were in contact with one another over the NF/fash stuff, who'd meet up, talk to each other and obviously discuss issues wider than just anti-nazi stuff. Working class members in the SWP from different areas in the country were forming networks - there was an embryo of an organisation that wasn't directly in the control of the CC. Whatever the criticisms of them, they aren't stupid - they knew what we were going to do before we did. They knew that the logic of where we were going was a separate organisation - or a challenge to the leadership of the SWP. That's why we were expelled."

There were far more people who left/got expelled than ended up in RA. I think it was quite a traumatic experience for the SWP - although lumped in with the Womens Voice thing, it's still talked about with far more venom.

It needs to be remembered that the squads were, initially, more than sanctioned by the CC - members of the NC helped organise them, in fact, with full knowledge of the party leadership. I think there was - and probably remains - a real fear of members talking to each other in forums that aren't under the control of the leadership (witness the discouragement of members posting on boards such as this).

And I think that openly acknowledging the extent of the BNP attacks (in London at least) at the start of the 90s was something that caused the leadership to worry that the "squad" stuff might repeat itself.

flimsier - as regards a more "measured" response, it's worth mentioning that the other bloke who was with me on the ANL leafletting in Southwark joined around roughly the same time as me but left only last year. At the time he was far more vociferous and critical. I didn't leave simply over that one thing - or even over anti-fascism, specifically. It was a series of issues and incidents.
 
past caring said:
And I think that openly acknowledging the extent of the BNP attacks (in London at least) at the start of the 90s was something that caused the leadership to worry that the "squad" stuff might repeat itself.
Click to expand...

It was also difficult for the SWP leadership to acknowledge as they said that the fascists were tiny and finished. Aside from that, they were also worried that members would be scared off. A further complication was that at the time, the SWP were moving to smaller branches meaning smaller paper sales often in areas were they were not known. It was at this same time that the SWP dismantled their elected National Committee, made up of members from around the country, one less place where the attacks could be discussed. In response to what other people have said, the fascist attacks against the SWP took place over the whole country, though as Gumbert recounts different branches dealt with it in their own way. However, on the whole they did nothing. At the time AFA were keeping a record of attacks that were being reported to us and it was a very high number. As far as I remember the attacks finally petered out about 1995.

Edited for mistaken identity.
 
past caring said:
Were you? At the leafletting in Bermondsey, I mean. We didn't know each other at the time, so you may well have been....but we may have our wires crossed here.
Click to expand...
re-reading your post, particularly that it was Southbwark branch told to leaflet, hten possibly not, tho I'd definitely have come down to a similar event at around the same time.
 
Gumbert said:
...so you left?

it was happening to us in a northern town for a couple of weeks in the late eighties till one comrade phoned a 'mad' mate who brought down a crew armed with chair legs...

so, the nazis turned up and promptly got a kickin...needless to say they didnt come again and we didnt inform the cc...

so what?
Click to expand...

so you took direct action that was not sncationed by the CC, you would have been kicked out if they knew. Seems absolutely ridiculous to remain in an organsiation so vacuous and stupid.

Why bother :p
 
past caring said:
Were you? At the leafletting in Bermondsey, I mean. We didn't know each other at the time, so you may well have been....but we may have our wires crossed here.



Not an unreasonable analysis/answer to some of flimsier's questions. But to flesh it out a little....

I joined the SWP in 1984. During the very first day school I attended the subject of the ANL/fascism/the NF came up. I can remember Bambery really going into one about the squaddists, how they'd ensured the continuation of the NF by the continued direct confrontation with them at Chapel Market. At the time I swallowed those notions more or less whole - but with the benefit of hindsight the level of invective does strike me as peculiar....

And I suppose that the stuff I've related happened only six or seven years later - memories aren't that short...

I've spoken to people in RA who were in the SWP and expelled over the "squadist" stuff. Their take in regard to the expulsions went along the lines of "there were quite a few of us who were in contact with one another over the NF/fash stuff, who'd meet up, talk to each other and obviously discuss issues wider than just anti-nazi stuff. Working class members in the SWP from different areas in the country were forming networks - there was an embryo of an organisation that wasn't directly in the control of the CC. Whatever the criticisms of them, they aren't stupid - they knew what we were going to do before we did. They knew that the logic of where we were going was a separate organisation - or a challenge to the leadership of the SWP. That's why we were expelled."

There were far more people who left/got expelled than ended up in RA. I think it was quite a traumatic experience for the SWP - although lumped in with the Womens Voice thing, it's still talked about with far more venom.

It needs to be remembered that the squads were, initially, more than sanctioned by the CC - members of the NC helped organise them, in fact, with full knowledge of the party leadership. I think there was - and probably remains - a real fear of members talking to each other in forums that aren't under the control of the leadership (witness the discouragement of members posting on boards such as this).

And I think that openly acknowledging the extent of the BNP attacks (in London at least) at the start of the 90s was something that caused the leadership to worry that the "squad" stuff might repeat itself.

flimsier - as regards a more "measured" response, it's worth mentioning that the other bloke who was with me on the ANL leafletting in Southwark joined around roughly the same time as me but left only last year. At the time he was far more vociferous and critical. I didn't leave simply over that one thing - or even over anti-fascism, specifically. It was a series of issues and incidents.
Click to expand...

This very much mirrors my experience of the period of the expulsions and after. Both Deason and Holborrow were involved in 'recruiting' and organising fighting groups to attack NF demonstrations, in West London and North London full timers pulled together groups of individuals who they were confident could see off the fash and these were often across branches and districts. Initially loose connections were made and then they were sustained for quite some time not just in anti fascist work but in the rank and file groups as well. Whilst many were party members most were on the periphery and some were mates of mates.

Realtionships between those that had been involved in anti fash work who were expelled and those that stayed in the party were mostly positive and there were a number of occassions when this work continued.

The CC though were always haunted by the spectre of the squads and their ifluence in the ANL Mark 1 and the independence of the rank and file groups. Coupled with the arguements about the closure of Womens Voice and Flame there was a sharp move to 'stop the tail from wagging the dog'. It was ironic that physical hiding that the NF got at Lewisham made the ANL possible and feared by the fash. ANL and Rock gainst Racism groups would spring up very often with no SWP membership.

Post ANL1 attacks on the left by the fash still went on but only on branches that were seen as soft targets.Those that contained a hardcore of members who had been vey active against the fash and the rank and file for example in the Harleseden,Kilburn, Willesden branches ( Bamberry announced at one National Conference that he was sick of seeing the same members on the news or on newspapers from those branches on pickets and demos , Andy Strouthous called members of my branch animals and thugs at one branch committee)) we had no trouble with the fash and it was accepted that this was 'our' area and not theirs.


The immmediate period before ANL2 was launched I attended an AFA meeting at Manchester Town Hall.I went to guage the political support for AFA and was very surprsied that there were nearly 400 in the room a large minority of whom were what I would have considered SWP periphery and ex members. If it had been 40 it would have indicated that the party leadership was right but 400 indicated that the line of 'there is nothing to worry about , physical anti fascism is dead we are the alternative for those who want to fight back ' was clearly way off the mark.

Around the same time it was announced that the NF were to hold a meeting in manchester. Ironically due to the party having pushed the 'political 'opposition over the physical opposition Bamberry had to come up to manchester to tell the Poly students that he wanted the fash to be given a 'kicking'. So we had the local apparatchniks and fodder who had looked at those who had supported such a tactic previuosly with such disdain now enthusiatically telling us over their Britvic oranges and lemonades of their admiration and enthusiasm for physical violence aginst the fash.
 
Donna Ferentes said:
???
Click to expand...

Apparatchniks drink of choice at the time, it evetually moved to lime an dlemonade, then lime and soda water, cranberry juice and now pomegranite juice. But not in the vault of the Headless Chicken.
 
Herbert Read said:
so you took direct action that was not sncationed by the CC, you would have been kicked out if they knew. Seems absolutely ridiculous to remain in an organsiation so vacuous and stupid.

Why bother :p
Click to expand...
i know what happened, the comrade who 'phoned' the mad bloke drop it in casually that we were being harrased by nazis on saturdays...

so these dodgy lurkers turned up, when the nazis turned up it all went mashy to the stunned perplexion of the rest of us...

the comrade who 'phoned' apologised and didnt turn up for paper sales for a couple of months and the rest of us were edgy as fuck at the sales for a few weeks after...

read into it whatever position you want...but from my perspective it was a fuck up, a total fuck up...that probably did more harm than good. and me being someone who wants to build a mass movement rather than do individual stuff (but i'm sure you'll give me some examples of your latest heroisms when we next meet up), it didnt and still doesnt tacticly do it for me....

so, while your at it herbert mate liberate me some sawdust from milfords cos my mates gilded mousecage needs refurbishing.... :)

then we can have that pint...
 
Gumbert said:
i know what happened, the comrade who 'phoned' the mad bloke drop it in casually that we were being harrased by nazis on saturdays...

so these dodgy lurkers turned up, when the nazis turned up it all went mashy to the stunned perplexion of the rest of us...

the comrade who 'phoned' apologised and didnt turn up for paper sales for a couple of months and the rest of us were edgy as fuck at the sales for a few weeks after...

read into it whatever position you want...but from my perspective it was a fuck up, a total fuck up...that probably did more harm than good. and me being someone who wants to build a mass movement rather than do individual stuff (but i'm sure you'll give me some examples of your latest heroisms when we next meet up), it didnt and still doesnt tacticly do it for me....

so, while your at it herbert mate liberate me some sawdust from milfords cos my mates gilded mousecage needs refurbishing.... :)

then we can have that pint...
Click to expand...

Any chance you could repeat this in English?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

brogdale
The 2025 Labour Party Deputy Leadership contest
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
165
Views
5K
PTK
PTK
ska invita
New Left Party 2025 ('Your Party' to be led by Corbyn and Sultana) discussion
132 133 134 135 136
Replies
4K
Views
122K
Wilf
Wilf
Aaronf
Who's the worst political party?
2 3
Replies
67
Views
2K
locallondoner
L
tim
Starmer boots three more disidents out of the Parliamentary Labour Party.
Replies
7
Views
446
tim
tim
S
How should the non-party political left respond to the rise of the far right?
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
188
Views
8K
smokedout
S
Back
Top Bottom