belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
may well have a read of that - http://www.marxists.de/culture/them-n-us/index.htm (aah you found it yourself!)
The History of the SWP?
- Thread starter tbaldwin
- Start date
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
nwnm said:
Sadly, on checking, I've discovered that he died five years ago.
http://www.brookes.ac.uk/other/unison/2001newsletters/march2001.html
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
articul8 said:
He was factually wrong on one aspect of Dickens though - Coketown was not based on Manchester; everyone up here knows it was Preston.
neprimerimye
Well-Known Member
junius said:
No they weren't.
A number of members of the so called Right Opposition were expelled for unauthorised political collaboration with a non-member of IS Rawlings Tearse once Industrial Organiser for the RCP. A number of other members of IS then resigned. Those departing IS then split forming tow groups one of which was the RCG the other being the Discussion Group.
The RDG were not expelled from the SWP they quit. They then formed the RDG and pretended to be an external faction of the SWP. They then split.
The forerunners of the AWL, Workers Fight, joined IS when invited to do so. They then formed their own factional organisation within IS, the Trotskyist tendency, and after an acrimonious stay the two groups defused at a Special Conference of IS. WF/AWL claim they were expelled because they wanted to remain in IS. I don't care and think Cliff was a twit for letting in at all.
neprimerimye
Well-Known Member
Fisher_Gate said:
Origins of the IS is not by O'Flinn. It is actually a collection of texts from the pre-history of IS. Most coming from the pen of one Tony Cliff although there is also a piece On the Stalinist Parties by Duncan Hallas and a shorter article on Korea. With the exception of the last named article I think its all on line at the MIA.
neprimerimye
Well-Known Member
In Bloom said:
ETOL
neprimerimye
Well-Known Member
MC5 said:
Not so. The National Rank and File Organising Committee or NRFM as it was usually given was set up in the last days of the IS.
The Right To Work Campaign was originally a project of the NRFM but outlived its parent.
The former should not really be considered a front for IS/SWP in any case as the bodies that formed it did have some independent life in them at that time. Although that was changing rapidly.
The RTWC on the other hand was the first proper front body set up by the SWP, properly by the NRFM, and had no life in it despite containing members of other groups in some places.
neprimerimye
Well-Known Member
In Bloom said:What now?
It's attached to the MIA.
A brief history of the SWP.
Ultra-leftism, opportunism and state infiltration.
Hopefully next will be collapse.
Ultra-leftism, opportunism and state infiltration.
Hopefully next will be collapse.
neprimerimye
Well-Known Member
John Grean said:
Ultra-leftism and opportunism on the part of the SWP are opinions and your opinions are uninteresting.
State infiltration is an accusation. Can you substantiate?
poster342002
PROPER leftwing socialist
One thing it certainly can't be accused of now.John Grean said:
Fisher_Gate said:
I heard Matgamna talk about this at the recent AWL Summer School. Basically, WF at the time saw themselves as a very orthodox Trotskyist group, based on the ideas of James P. Cannon. They put out an appeal for unity, hoping to link up with various Trotskyists who had been expelled from the Socialist Labour League. This had a little success before the IS put out an appeal for unity of their own - perhaps hoping to link up with the International Marxist Group or even Solidarity. WF negotiated with them; Tony Cliff said that the IS was moving from its previous very broad, partly anti-Leninist position to implementing democratic centralism. The IS weren't able to agree on much with themselves, let along with WF, but WF decided to join on the grounds that they would be allowed to form a faction and there was a possibility that the group would move closer to them. Some did - the entire Manchester branch joined the Trotskyist Tendency (which WF had formed), as did various individuals around the country. But Cliff didn't agree and decided that Matgamna and the TT should either dissolve or leave. Matgamna didn't want to do either - as the TT grew, more IS members heard what they had to say and more joined - but realised that the TT would be expelled. And (but for Cliff's exact wording) they were.
Wikipedia has another history of the SWP. And another expelled group was the Workers League - nothing is left of it now, but it contained various prominent members at the time.
neprimerimye said:
I imagine he thought that they might bolster his turn to Leninism (which perhaps they did), that it would show that he was serious about left unity (which it might have done at first, but the series of expulsions beginning with them put paid to) and that with about ten members at the time, they wouldn't gain much influence (which was very wrong, and he probably did feel a twit about).
neprimerimye
Well-Known Member
Tokyo said:
You're partially right. The unity call however was not aimed at recruiting former expellees from the SLL that phase was over by 1968. Although a considerable number of ISers had spent time in the SLL as for example Jim Higgins could testify. Rather the object of the unity class was in the first instance the IMG and possibly the industrial militants of the CPGB. Opinion as to that seems divided and i've not yet read the internal documents of the period.
On a minor point the entire Manchester branch did not join the TT. Rather it was split into two branches one of which supported the Tt while the other did not. Nor was the TT expelled in any way whatever Matgamna might claim. A decision was taken at a delegate conference to defuse the two groups and that is what happened.
One day I may get around to referencing that article on wikipedia seems much as i left it. Although I notice that some SWPer has moved it away from the main entry on the sect.
neprimerimye
Well-Known Member
Tokyo said:
Fair enough it does read that way. Bit behind the game but matgamna is always a bit behind the game.
Sounds like it made sense to Workers Fight; he knew lots of former SLL members and many of them had experience, which the group (other than perhaps Matgamna) lacked.
neprimerimye said:
See the following:
https://www1.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/07/344665.html?c=on#comments
And the following quotes from the above:
SWP
As to the Socialist Workers Party, Shayler claimed he does not know who the infiltrators were / are. However, (strangely) he also said that if somebody ran a list of names by him in private, he would nod his head. He claimed that Shayler / Machon closed down the MI5 anti-SWP operation as a waste of time, a claim which fell on sceptical ears with the audience. On other matters, like the Israeli embassy bombing, the Victoria Brittan journalist harassment case, Roger Windsor, and the Harold Wilson Plot, Shayler tried to switch attention away on to the civil liberties angle, or transfer the blame across to MI6. Indeed, his rather emotional anti-MI6 position was one of the clearest aspects of Shayler's position at this meeting.
SWP infiltration questions
Many questions about MI5 infiltration of the SWP were asked at the end of the meeting. Again, Shayler ducked and weaved, claiming Annie Machon was the expert here. Fourteen agents were claimed, and Shayler / Machon supposedly challenged this degree of MI5 attention being given to the party. The number of infiltrators were said to be reduced to three.
In the contemporary light of the SWP's apparent liquidation of itself, and the turn towards the Muslim community, when put alongside the undoubted desire of the intelligence services to turn their attention towards the Muslim community; who the remaining SWP infiltrators are, and the agenda they promote in there is certainly of interest. It is an important political question. Again, when pressed as to details, Shayler knew nothing.
The two different versions of the story, (was it 25 agents or 14?) were put to him. Were they passive or actively intervening? - Again, Shayler knew nothing. Larry suggested the SWP / Respect might be used as a trojan horse operation to spy on the Muslim community. MI5 has a poor recruitment record towards the ethnic communities and crass operations against them can only alienate and antagonise people.
>>ME: If we assume the 14 state infiltrators, nevermind 25, that could include all the central commitee members and other leading members as well. Which wouldn't come as a great surprise!
Of course it is possible that the SWP have been infiltrated, but I think it misses the main point, their bad politics and regime are not the result of MI5 infiltration. It's perfectly possible to explain their turn away from class politics by their own method, which is basically to be a bit more left wing than what they see as the most left wing section of bourgeois society. So in the 1970s/80s this was to be more left wing than the CP, then it was the left reformists, then the STWC now its what they see as the "anti-imperialists" namely the Muslim community.
In other words its economism, tailing the spontaneously radical consciousness created by capitalism itself.
In other words its economism, tailing the spontaneously radical consciousness created by capitalism itself.
neprimerimye
Well-Known Member
John Grean said:
To summarise you cannot substantiate your comments.
In fact if you were to look at the personal histories, which are well known and substantiated, of the leadership of the IS in the 1900's when that body was most influential in the working class it becomes pretty clear that none of them could have been agents of state bodies. One became a turncoat and others have since dropped out of politics but none to the best of my knowledge appear in any way to have benefitted from infusions of money from unknown sources. I can only conclude on the basis of the available evidence that none were state agents.
It would also seem unlikely that the state would have bothered to infiltrate the SWP in the years since the Miners Strike especially not in order to subvert the Muslim communities as if the SWP influences the Muslim communities it is the other way around surely! Which does not mean there are no agents simply that it seems unlikely.
Relating to changing levels of consciousness is not tailism no matter how much the pure heirs of Trotskyism in the 10 man Workers Power / permanent revolution groups might want it to be. The core politics of the SWP have remained largely unchanged in the last 30 years. Relationship between spontaneity and organisation, commitment to mass involvement and socialism from bellow, role of reformism, Party and class… (I could go on.)
The only thing that has changed in recent years is the commitment to the three tasks of building and shaping the mass movements that are developing, trying to rebuild working class organisation in the Unions and communities based on these movements and building a revolutionary party. The contents of the paper reflect these three commitments. Focus on housing and other w/c issues in areas where we are strong, coverage of the mass movements in Latin America, France and at home around war and racism plus regular articles and series about revolutionary theory and organisation.
Our commitment to the fact that socialism can only come about when the masses engage in action means that we relate to those movements which involve the mass of active people with the experience and Marxist politics of our organisation. This has ensured a healthy level of experience for the organisation in struggle and a level of influence that no one else on the left has achieved/ maintained in a similar length of existence. What are the achievements of WP/PR’s strategy over the last 30 years? A section 9 conference with no outcome? Credit is due to Urban revolts role within the Sukula campaign as an individual but how has WP related to it organisationally? What influence have you gained for your ideas? The short answer is none.
The only thing that has changed in recent years is the commitment to the three tasks of building and shaping the mass movements that are developing, trying to rebuild working class organisation in the Unions and communities based on these movements and building a revolutionary party. The contents of the paper reflect these three commitments. Focus on housing and other w/c issues in areas where we are strong, coverage of the mass movements in Latin America, France and at home around war and racism plus regular articles and series about revolutionary theory and organisation.
Our commitment to the fact that socialism can only come about when the masses engage in action means that we relate to those movements which involve the mass of active people with the experience and Marxist politics of our organisation. This has ensured a healthy level of experience for the organisation in struggle and a level of influence that no one else on the left has achieved/ maintained in a similar length of existence. What are the achievements of WP/PR’s strategy over the last 30 years? A section 9 conference with no outcome? Credit is due to Urban revolts role within the Sukula campaign as an individual but how has WP related to it organisationally? What influence have you gained for your ideas? The short answer is none.
neprimerimye
Well-Known Member
levien said:
What dishonest drivel. The fact of the matter is that the inflence of the SWP within the working class is today marginal at best. The claim that no body else on the left has a comparable experience is a lie or have I imagined the history of the Militant/Socialist Party? Which I neither support or agree with btw.
The claim that the SWP are trying to regenerate working class organisation in those communities in which it works, where are they, are risable. Perhaps Levien can tell us how backing a multi millionaire businessman who would appear to think that he can buy 45 votes in Respect for cash is building working class consciousness?
The core politics of the SWP have remained unchanged for thorty years. For the good reason that the Rees-German gang have stored those politics in a long term storage facility and mislaid their receipt.
Similar threads
