Climate emergency

The Climate Emergency Rally is one of several major events organised for next Saturday (5 December), in the run up to the big Copenhagen climate talks. The rally organisers invite supporters to 'challenge the government to take emergency action on climate change'.

The rally starts at noon at Speakers Corner, Hyde Park in central London. Speakers include Michael Meacher MP, Simon Hughes MP, John McDonnell MP, Caroline Lucas MEP, Maria Sauveron (Bolivian ambassador) and Chris Baugh (Public and Commercial Services Union). Musical interludes will be provided by Seize the Day.

Protestors from a wide range of organisations and backgrounds are gearing up for the biggest UK demonstration on climate so far. “The Wave” is the centrepiece of the day's activities, with demonstrators leaving Grosvenor Square at 1pm to surround parliament at around 3pm. The Climate Emergency Rally precedes “The Wave”; rally-goers will feed into it as it leaves Grosvenor Square.

Demands from Campaign Against Climate Change include banning domestic flights, a million new green jobs by the end of next year, and an end to agrofuel use. The campaign declares: 'We want to make sure there is no chance that the Government will ‘spin’ the climate demo as simply in support of their position at the Copenhagen Talks – whilst we want to demand a fair and effective international agreement we also want to demand much more action on climate from the UK government, here at home'.

Left unity

The next open meeting of Tyne and Wear Left Unity is on Thursday. This initiative emerged out of a major meeting of 60 people in Newcastle back in July. The impetus comes partly from a desire for electoral co-operation, but it - I believe correctly - isn't limited to the electoral sphere. It is largely accepted that in the coming months the prospects aren't great for left-wing electoral challenges - though the longer view may be different - and the focus is as much on promoting and connecting various campaigns.

I attended the last meeting, a few weeks ago, and it is still too dependent on the existing Left (and too male-dominated), while short of many younger activists. There needs to be a conscious effort to reach out and involve wider layers, drawn from climate change, anti-war and other campaigns.

I believe the unifying focus needs to be the left's urgent need to shape a political response to the crisis of capitalism. This encompasses a range of campaigning issues and raises them to a higher political level. It may later find an electoral expression, but more immediately it means public meetings and protests being utilised to raise concerete challenges to the priorities of free market capitalism.

The statement agreed previously declares: 'We are a coalition of individuals, activists and groups who oppose the present economic system that causes poverty, war, racism, unemployment, destruction of the environment, and a lot more. We believe in working for a society based on human need not private profit. Together we are stronger, we can coordinate our actions, share our knowledge and experiences, learn from discussion, debate and even disagreement to make our fight against capitalism even stronger, our voice louder and our supporters greater.'

Tyne and Wear Left Unity - Open Meeting
Thursday 3 December, 7pm
St John's Church Hall, Grainger Street, near Central Station, Newcastle
All welcome - tea/coffee available

What if London was like Gaza or West Bank?

Written and Directed by: Alexandra Monro + Sheila Menon.
Mentor: Jim Threapleton. Music: The Thirst

'No Way Through highlights mobility restrictions imposed in the West Bank, that are limiting its habitants access to health care, thus violating a fundamental human right.'

War criminal

It seems Peter Brierly may be responsible for Europe's political leaders going cold on the notion of a President Blair. The longtime Military Families Against the War supporter, whose son Shaun died in Iraq in 2003, refused to shake Tony Blair's hand recently, telling the former PM that he has blood on his hands. The story of how this incident frightened French President Sarkozy and German Chancellor Merkel is HERE. The account emerged as the Iraq inquiry was getting underway this week.

Poetry for Palestine

As chair of Tyneside Palestine Solidarity Campaign, I'm involved in organising this poetry fundraiser (see below). We recently had a successful evening when we showed documentary film about Palestine's history and discussed the issues. Newcastle University's Friends of Palestine Society has a film showing tomorrow and a fundraising gig on 7 December. I think it's important to organise a range of film, cultural and social events as well as using the more traditional-style meetings.

Wednesday 9 December - doors open 7.30 pm
The Bridge Hotel, Castle Garth, Newcastle
Tickets £4/ concessions £2 (buy on the door)

A range of local poets will be appearing in aid of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, with some music by singer-songwriter Gary Miller. Keith Armstrong, local poet, will compere the evening.

The poets appearing are Dave Alton, Keith Armstrong, Catherine Graham, William Martin, Gordon Phillips, Paul Summers. Music is provided by Gary Miller, singer-songwriter from Durham's Whisky Priests folk-rock band.

See the Facebook Event HERE.

The picture is from the student sit-in at Newcastle University, expressing solidarity with Gaza, in March.

Bring Blair and Brown to account

The Iraq inquiry has opened just after new revelations emerged about Tony Blair's lies in the run up to the invasion of Iraq, when he claimed to be uninterested in 'regime change' but simply seeking disarmament of Saddam Hussein's famously evasive weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

Stop the War supporters greeted the inquiry opening with a protest, featuring the eye-catching trio of warmongers (pictured), and are following this up with another central London protest today, this time focused on highlighting the mounting loss of life in Afghanistan.

To watch the Timeline programme Iraq inquiry: is it a whitewash? click HERE.

Revolutionaries, students and anti-capitalism

Clare Solomon has been expelled from the Socialist Workers Party for alleged 'factionalism'. The student activist at SOAS in central London has been suspended since Friday 9 October; her disciplinary hearing took place a week after my own hearing which led to my expulsion on the basis of factionalism.

The SWP leadership arguably disciplined Clare because of her support for launching the Left Platform faction. Although the faction was formally launched after her suspension, it was evident to the Central Committee by 9 October that it might help to remove her from the pre-conference discussions. The timing is no coincidence.

The CC was also unable to tolerate the 'Money on Trial' event organised under the Mutiny banner on 24 September in east London. SWP members and non-members alike were involved in organising this, but an increasingly paranoid leadership called it a factional operation. In fact it troubled them because it was the kind of anti-capitalist event they now deride as 'nostalgia for the recent past' (an insult they also applied - in advance - to the Signs of Revolt festival which the CC's Alex Callinicos wasn't very happy about). And Mutiny showed - through sheer turnout never mind anything else - that such initiatives are well worth doing.

As recently as September Clare was elected to the SWP's national student committee. At a meeting of nearly 100 students she received the second highest vote. It will be particularly interesting to see how student activists in the party respond to this expulsion. SOAS was the first place in the country to witness an occupation in solidarity with Gaza, with over 30 other universities and colleges following. It was scene of another occupation in the summer term, in solidarity with migrant cleaners persecuted by college authorities.

Clare was centrally involved in organising both occupations. It may be regarded as perverse for the leadership to seemingly scupper one of the party's most influential student groups.

Blood on their hands

Stop the War supporters will be outside tomorrow's opening of the Iraq inquiry, demanding the warmongers Blair and Brown are held to account. Military Families Against the War will be represented, reminding the inquiry committee of the anger felt by many relatives of British soldiers killed in Iraq.

It is likely we will very soon be seeing vigils, nationwide, to mark the occasion of the 100th UK soldier killed this year in Afghanistan. The tragic toll of British troops killed in 2009 alone stands at 98 - and countless thousands of Afghans have been killed over the last eight years. This year has seen a profound worsening of the war for British forces in the Helmand Province.



Locally there are plans in place for Stop the War vigils, linking commemoration of the dead with a call for troops to be brought home, in Newcastle and Sunderland. In both cities there will be vigils very soon after the sad news is received - I'll post confirmation of details when this happens.

Image: David Gentleman
Video: Ady Cousins

Spirit of Seattle: another world is possible

The 10th anniversary of the Seattle demonstrations is fast approaching. I recall it being an electric moment, full of hope. It was a shock to hear BBC newsreaders uttering the phrase 'anti-capitalist (they sounded rather shocked themselves), as footage of thousands of protestors clashing with the police in the heartlands of capitalism was broadcast.

There would be bigger protests later and the mobilisations were set to become truly global affairs, with extraordinary feats of co-ordination like the World Social Forum (pictured), but Seattle was the great coming out party, the point at which different currents fused and formed something new. It was the end of the myth that we had reached the 'End of History'.

'There is no alternative': that was the story, the really pernicious story, we had been told. No alternative to poverty, war and the destruction brought by neoliberalism. The movement's answer was simple: Another world is possible. All sorts of differences would then emerge, as must inevitably happen, about what that world might look like and how it can be created. But the basic affirmation of hope, in what can feel like a hopeless world, inspired many of those who would create grassroots movements across the world in the following years. The anti-capitalist mobilisations also directly fed into the much larger anti-war movement that emerged after September 2001, and found its highpoint on 15 February 2003.

In the early years of this decade there was a marked growth of literature associated with the new movement. In mainstream bookshops there had previously been a few lonely Chomskys and Pilgers, but now there are shelves devoted to anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist books. Naomi Klein's No Logo was especially popular and, refreshingly, combined culture and economic critique in its analysis. In fact the anti-capitalist movement signified a renaissance in creativity when it came to political protest, like nothing seen since the 1968 events.

The Signs of Revolt festival, which has just finished in London (check out signsofrevolt.net), seems to have captured that creativity, cultural expression and political radicalism, as well as the mood of optimism evoked by Seattle. This is important, not as an exercise in nostalgia, but as a reminder of how to build a serious but also playful movement to create another world. In an era of systemic crisis, with even mainstream commentators asking searching questions about the future of capitalism, it provides poweful and urgent lessons for activists today.

Picture by Jess Hurd - World Social Forum, India, 2004

Karl Kautsky: a cautionary tale for our times

It is perhaps helpful to take a step back from current events and learn from the history of the socialist tradition about political mistakes made in the past, and the origins and significance of these. German socialist Karl Kautsky, influential a century ago, is the classic embodiment of what's known as 'centrism'. This summary draws heavily on 'The Algebra of Revolution: The Dialectic and the Classical Marxist Tradition' (p135-143) by John Rees.

Karl Kautsky became involved in Marxist politics while Marx was still alive. After Marx's death in 1883 he worked closely with Marx's lifelong collaborator Frederick Engels. He edited the journal Die Neue Zeit for thirty five years, from 1883 onwards, and it became very influential in marxist circles internationally. He popularised Marxist ideas more than anyone in the last years of the nineteeenth century and the start of the twentieth.

Referred to as 'the Pope of Marxism', he was central to the politics of the Second International of socialist organisations (which was effectively finished, in 1914, by the capitulation of most affiliates in supporting World War One).

Caught between reform and revolution

However, Kautsky was (in the words of John Rees) 'the living embodiment of the contradiction between reform and revolution'. This makes him a case study in what is typically referred to as 'centrism'. Trotsky, in his obituary of Kautsky in the late 1930s, wrote that he 'occupied himself with commenting upon and justifying the policy of reform from a revolutionary perspective'. Marx, rather more bluntly, called the young Kautsky 'a small-minded medicority'.

Around the turn of the century the German SPD's Marxist principles were threatened from the right - there was a revisionist attitude associated with Eduard Bernstein and others. Kautsky defended the left, including the great revolutionary Rosa Luxemburg, against Bernstein. This meant that at a formal or theoretical level his Marxist credentials were impeccable.

But this only goes so far. As Rees puts it, 'Kautsky could continue to appear to hold revolutionary purity in theory, although in practice the SPD fell more and more completely into the hands of the revisionists.' He describes the split between theory and practice as 'the hallmark of Kautsky's marxism'.

Evolutionary or revolutionary perspective?

Kautsky's attitude to the marxist dialectic - which is central to marxist theory - captured this contradiction. He may have subscribed to it offically, but in effect he drained the dialectic of its genuinely revolutionary content. He wanted, as Rees writes, 'to rid the dialectic of any notion of internal contradiction, of leaps and revolutions in social development, and leave behind only a flat, featureless process of peaceful evolution.'

This 'Darwinian' version of the dialectic was at odds with Marx's dialectic; it became the philosophical justifcation for a retreat from authentically revolutionary practice. Kautsky no longer viewed the working class as - in the words of Rees - 'a class whose struggle transforms it from being an exploited class lacking in socialist consciousness and unable to control the society it produces into a class capable of consciously fighting to banish exploitation and able to run society according to its own needs'.

In Kautsky's deterministic conception of history, people are really pawns at the mercy of larger historical forces rather than active agents capable of making history. Kautsky's weaknesses informed his approach to strategy and tactics for the ostensibly Marxist SPD.

He was most noticeably inadquate when there were sharp turns in events, for example the revolution in Russia in 1905. That unexpected upsurge of revolt illustrated the need for analysis of the world informed by the marxist dialectic, capable of explaining ruptures in historical development. Rosa Luxemburg - consistently a revolutionary and a Marxist, representing the left of the SPD - fared much better in responding to the events of 1905.

Kautsky failed to grasp the significance of the rise of the trade union bureaucracy, and its role in the SPD, during the early years of the twentieth century. He underestimated the political weight of the bureaucracy, in the unions but also regarding its role inside the SPD. This pulled him to the right, so he became a bulwark for the right-wing and bureaucratised leadership against radical critics from the left.

Lessons from Kautsky

This is one of the main lessons to take from Kautsky's political trajectory: too strong an orientation on the union bureaucracies, as opposed to a powerful rank and file strategy, is liable to pull revolutionaries into compromise and conciliation with reformism. This is true regardless of someone's formal commitment to Marxism as a theory. That's another lesson: the need for revolutionary practice to remain aligned with revolutionary theory.

One of the striking features, for me, is how Kautsky had to attack the authentic revolutionary left as part of allying with more (comparatively) right wing forces in the SPD and labour movement. This was the logic of 'going soft' on the right - having to increasingly attack the left. This is what happens when there's a process of polarisation.

It seems to me, too, that Kautsky gave up on what Lukacs later talked of as 'the actuality of revolution', an insight derived from Lenin that recognises the constant latent potential for revolutionary upheaval in the contradictions and crises of capitalism. However distant revolution may seem most of the time, the fact is that it is constantly with us as a possibility.

This isn't wishful thinking - it is rooted in a dialectical understanding of the internally contradictory and constantly changing nature of society. Kautsky, like all centrists, adopted a political practice that was out of kilter with this revolutionary perspective - even if he had known Marx and Engels.

Lowkey: Obama Nation

"I see imperialism under your skin..."

Check this speech by Tariq Ali and this documentary by John Rees for more in-depth analysis.

United fronts and all that: is Tyneside SWP becoming 'party isolationist'?

Tyneside Socialist Workers Party has taken the extraordinary step of issuing a public statement - aimed at the wider Left and labour movement in the North East of England - dissociating itself with one of its own members. The statement claims, 'The Tyneside district of the SWP have become increasingly concerned at the bureaucratic conduct of Tony Dowling a member of the SWP in his role as Secretary of the NESSN.' It makes a number of rather wild and scattergun assertions, with no evidence, but here is the central allegation:

'[we were] very concerned to see firstly the bureaucratic heavy-handed approach taken by Regional Secretary Dave Harker towards the Youth Fight for Jobs Campaign; this resulted in a number of activists wishing to be taken off the network list.... We were even more concerned when Tony Dowling Tyneside Secretary mirrored that bureaucratic approach with regards to an event organised by the IWW in conjunction with the National Union of Mineworkers. To discover that Tony an SWP member refused to circulate details of the event on the grounds that he regarded the IWW as 'political' shocked our members'.

The substance of the denunciation of Tony is something very minor and trivial. The reaction is therefore utterly disproportionate. It can only be understood as a political and factional attack on an internal critic of the leadership’s perspectives. It is a highly personalised attack on someone, rather than discussing the matter politically in a tolerant, respectful climate. It is also inappropriate – indeed unprecedented – for the party to openly denounce (there’s no other word for it) one of its own members to the wider movement.

The district leadership’s complaint is that Tony allegedly declined to circulate a particular message from the IWW group on the North East Shop Stewards Network (NESSN) email network. That’s it: there’s one email Tony suppsoedly didn’t send, which the SWP district leadership thinks he should have sent. This is extraordinarily minor.

The rest is unsubstantiated blather, e.g. accusations of a ‘bureaucratic’ approach without a scrap of evidence in support. The actual accusation isn't even true, as it was the North East-wide regional secretary who took the decision (based on the network's rules).

Tony would have been unable, according to NESSN’s constitution, to circulate the message. If he had adhered to ‘party discipline’ he would have broken the rules as a NESSN officer. The network’s last AGM specifically ruled that the IWW should be designated a political group, rather than a trade union in the conventional sense, so it therefore wouldn’t be appropriate for anyone in a Secretary role to circulate its messages.

The purpose of the network is to promote, and where possible co-ordinate, trade union campaigns, movement events and working class solidarity. In a non-sectarian spirit the Secretaries do not circulate material for specific politcal groups. However, networkers have access to the full list of around 200 email addresses and can always distribute political material if they wish.

If SWP members want to change this rule they should propose it at the next AGM – that would be an entirely reasonable approach. But it is unacceptable to pressure an individual comrade with an elected role in a broader organisation – in this case the NESSN – to break that organisation’s rules. It is also opportunistic: Tyneside SWP has no particular sympathy with the IWW, but simply wants to attack a key Left Platform supporter.

Parts of the Tyneside SWP statement are dishonest, for example its claim to having been enthusiastic supporters of NESSN. Tony is the only member who has been consistently involved in it during the last year. Otherwise the SWP has been remarkably lukewarm. The victimisation of Unison activists in the North East is referred to, inexplicably, but it is utterly irrelevant to all this – referring to it is merely an opportunistic attempt by the current Tyneside SWP organiser to smear Tony.

Tyneside SWP has, surprisingly, resorted to using a notoriously embittered sectarian to actually circulate the message. Clearly the organiser lacks the courage to distribute it himself. The sectarian sender of the document writes, 'The next committee meeting is in December and the next full meeting of the NESSN is in January. I think I might now start to attend these meetings'. He clearly approves of this attack, but all those who are non-sectarian and genuinely striving for left unity will be deeply troubled.

Tony is very well-respected throughout NESSN, as he is in Stop the War and other campaigns. He has a far better political relationship with activists outside the SWP in Tyneside than those attacking him do. It is reckless and sectarian for the SWP’s local leadership (with the full backing of Martin Smith, National Secretary) to publicly dissociate itself from him.

This reflects a wider turn away from sustained united front work, focusing instead on narrow ‘party building’ and short-lived SWP fronts. Local SWP members are currently trying to build an anti-war public meeting that bypasses Tyneside Stop the War completely. This, again, is unprecedented – the SWP has always worked through Stop the War in its anti-war work. The meeting has even, astonishingly, been arranged for the same evening (30 November) as the Tyneside group’s next organising meeting.

The situation has only got so awful becuase the SWP leadership allowed it to, in particular by foisting someone with a reputation for (what might politely be described as) an adversarial style on the membership. All concerns and criticisms have been ignored, and those making them have been heavily criticised.

The current abuses of democracy, the personal vilification, the use of disciplinary measures - all this should give SWP members and those who care about the future of the revolutionary tradition cause for deep concern. But just as importantly, we now see these growing problems damaging the wider campaigns and movements of which SWP activists are a part.

Red cards for dissent

A creative idea from Philosophy Football, inspired by a 1920s Trotsky quote. Mark from Philosophy Football explains it thus:

Every team needs a fourth international, though expect this particular player to pick up plenty of red cards for dissent. The quote is genuine, taken from Trotsky's 1925 'Where is Britain Going?' His analysis of the consciousness-sapping qualities of football remains a source of debate! Philosophy Football's latest T-shirt is available in sizes S-XXL, plus women's skinny rib fit , from HERE.

Is the united front a 'right wing' strategy?

This is an extract from the SWP Left Platform's perspectives:

For Lenin and Trotsky the strategy of the united front was essential to advancing the interests of the working class. A united front unites broad layers of people around shared demands and simultaneously provides the conditions for the revolutionary party to flourish and grow.

The united front is therefore integral to revolutionary strategy, unless the party is so small or the objective situation is so adverse that no such broad unity is possible. But what happens when the revolutionary party stops pursuing a united front strategy?

The lack of such a strategy can lead to revolutionaries accommodating to political forces to their right. This is because the party has no effective mechanism for changing the balance of forces in favour of revolutionaries.

At the same time the party is also prone to sectarianism and reliance on party propaganda. This is for precisely the same reason: no effective lever to change reality exists, so propaganda is all that is left.

In reality these two errors often co-exist. When propaganda manifestly fails to alter the real balance of class forces, panic sets in. Revolutionaries then collapse into accepting unity on terms dictated by other forces in the class.

The alternative to this vacillation is a structured united front, with reformists, in which revolutionaries can provide political and strategic direction to the struggle. For the SWP in recent years, Stop the War has been the most successful example of this.

The absence of united front method produces vacillation. Revolutionaries alternate between bouts of sectarian party activity (and ‘party fronts’, consisting of members plus our immediate periphery) and adaptation to conditions created by larger or stronger forces. What is missing is a systematic approach to class unity - the united front - and consequently revolutionaries’capacity for shaping events.

To put it in Marxist terms, we need a dialectical unity of opposed principles. In this case it is the unity of building an independent vanguard party with the need for working class solidarity (irrespective of party affiliation or ideological differences)in the united front. In the absence of this dialectical unity we are left with two wrong but mutually reinforcing poles: sectarianism (or propagandism) and liquidationism (or adaptation).

Signifying nothing

"Through active employment and training programmes, restructuring the financial sector, strengthening the national infrastructure and providing responsible investment, my government will foster growth and employment."

I love this line from the Queen's Speech. I've seen it in print but haven't actually heard the speech - it's so hard to imagine the Queen uttering such managerial New Labour gobbledegook. Clearly there's no attempt to match language to the person delivering it, as nobody can possibly believe Her Majesty is in the habit of using phrases like 'restructuring the financial sector' or 'foster growth and employment'.

It is such banal, empty and convoluted language, yet we've become used to it. We don't notice the total absence of meaning. New Labour politicians are in love with the discourse of vigorous action: 'active', 'foster', we'll restructure this and strengthen that. They must at all times give the impression that they are really doing things, even if most people are baffled by what they are in fact doing.

When making empty promises this vagueness is of course deliberate. Politicians can be held accountable for specific promises, but woolly talk of 'restructuring the financial sector' is far easier to opt out of. The vocabulary is sophisitcated, so they sound like reliable experts who we can trust to get on with running our world, and relentlessly positive.

But at the same time its distance from everyday speech reflects how alientated most people are from Westminster politics. And I can't help thinking it further feeds that alientation.

EXTRA: Channel 4 News has produced a clever gimmicky thing revealing how many times various words were used in the Queen's Speech. Click HERE.

Cashocracy

This is from September's anti-capitalist event 'Money on Trial', which attracted around 100 mainly young people to an evening of political discussion mixed with culture. At a time of capitalist crisis and questioning of the system, it would be great to see more events like this.

Exit strategy: rhetoric and reality

Gordon Brown is talking up the prospect of troop withdrawals next year, handing over greater control to local Afghan forces. Foreign Secretary David Miliband is stressing that it isn't a 'war without end'. This contrasts with the talk a couple of months ago, when top generals were conjuring up visions of anywhere between 5 and 40 years (and weren't contradicted by politcians).

The shift in rhetoric is at least partially a reflection of public mood. Opinion polls have repeatedly indicated substantial majorities wanting troops brought home. It is proving untenable for the government to sustain the earlier line. This is especially so with the rapidly rising toll of UK soldiers killed in the country: 97 this year (so far) is much higher than in previous years.

But if you look beyond the headlines it is clear that little is changing. There are no promises at all - just a vague hope for removing troops from Afghanistan if viable. They are also deploying the old "We can't just walk away" rhetoric and playing up the threat from al-Quaeda if NATO troops left Afghanistan. The woolly talk of withdrawals is also accompanied by encouraging other NATO countries to put more troops in, described as 'burden sharing'.

While they may be groping towards a change of strategy, it's not yet clear this is any more than adapting rhetoric to suit changed conditions. The anti-war movement must remain clear in its recognition that this is a long war - with little sign of progress or a credible exit for US, UK and other NATO forces - and resolute in agitating for a speedy end to this wasteful and inhumane occupation.

Sartorial streetfighting

After my gruelling 5-hour disciplinary hearing on Saturday (see previous post), I'm sorely in need of something more lighthearted and frivolous. So what could be more appropriate than turning to The Guardian's fashion pages and an advice column titled - this is possibly my favourite headline of 2009 - 'What should I wear to a protest march?'

'The art of looking chic while taking to the streets has long been neglected', we are informed. Indeed. I especially like the idea of agonising over a possible colour clash between clothes and placard - not something I've ever contemplated myself, but I can see it might be an issue.

Israel's inhumane barrier

Great cartoon by The Guardian's Steve Bell. The Berlin Wall may have fallen 20 years ago, and South Africa's apartheid regime may be long gone, but Israel's apartheid wall stands as a reminder of oppression and division. Read more HERE.

Rightward pressures and unaccountability

Jane Loftus, Socialist Workers Party member, is on the national executive of the Communication Workers Union (CWU). An executive meeting on Thursday 5 November agreed unanimously - yes, unanimously - to call off the planned national postal workers' strikes. Jane Loftus voted for the deal, therefore defying the Socialist Workers Party line as well as selling CWU members short by effectively caving in to Royal Mail.

As yet there has been no comment - even in internal Party communications - by the SWP leadership. I knew about this breaking of party discipline on Friday 6, i.e. the day after it happened, but have remained silent as a matter of SWP loyalty. I even restrained from referring to the issue during my disciplinary hearing yesterday, even though the double standards are glaring. Loftus is from the conservative wing of the SWP - cosying up to the union bureaucracy - and I, by contrast, am a supporter of the party's Left Platform which the leadership is determined to defeat.

As I was expelled yesterday, it is now possible to speak out. On Friday 6 November I referred to the Loftus capitulation obliquely on this blog, by posting a piece about the dangers of even the most left-wing union militants being pulled to the right by the pressures of the union bureaucracy. She is part of a layer inside the SWP who champion an increasingly apolitcal and syndicalist 'turn to the class' position.

This re-orientation involves a shift away from serious involvement in anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist currents, which were so central to the SWP for a number of years. Interestingly, the SWP's second pre-conference bulletin (circulated this weekend) includes analysis from the Central Committee that seems to confirm it is now on board with this new perspective.

It's always vital for socialists to relate to the class struggle in all its forms, and the unions (however weakened) remain highly important. But the new orientation exaggerates the supposed industrial revival while downplaying the importance of building social movements, including Stop the War. It fails, also, to successfully make the connections between them.

Crucially, the lack of any attempt to initiate a significant broad-based response to the economic crisis has left the SWP floundering. The party is, as a consequence, having to merely intervene in struggles as the SWP (selling papers, etc) or through hastily convened front operations. At the same time it is highly vulnerable to pressures from the right, as it has no real counterweight. Hence the Loftus vote and the SWP leadership's apparent compliance.

The alternative is to reach out and genuinely strive to work with a wide range of people - inside the unions, yes, but crucially also beyond - in long-term, consistent united fronts that confront the problems of capitalist crisis. This means operating in a fundamentally politcal way, not just focusing on the overtly economic aspects of the crisis, and in so doing create the conditions for left wing renewal.

October 1992: Tony Benn on pit closures

A cracking speech which reminds me of when - and why - I became a socialist.

"The British public have been awakened, not just on the mining industry but to the whole rotten philosophy of the 1980s - that it's all about cash, and you bring in a chartered accountant and he'll tell you what to do. It isn't about that. It's about whether our society puts people in a place of dignity and serves them, or whether you just hand over your money to gamblers who don't create any wealth at all"

Now to spend more time on politics...

I was expelled from the Socialist Workers Party today, following my disputes committee hearing in Newcastle this afternoon. I joined the SWP in October 1992, shortly after my 14th birthday, and have been a member without interruption since then.

I have been suspended from the SWP for the last few weeks. The basis of the expulsion is, incredibly, ‘factionalising’. The Central Committee’s case that I was guilty of ‘factional behaviour’ rested on two private emails between members.

My suspension, disputes committee hearing and now expulsion are, fundamentally, political affairs. They stemmed from a series of political and strategic differences that have opened up within the Socialist Workers Party since about a year ago.

Instead of addressing these differences through open and democratic discussion – in a tolerant and respectful atmosphere – the national and local leaderships of the SWP chose to turn them into a disciplinary matter. Rather than engage in principled and political debate they embarked on a course of personal vilification, principally but not exclusively focused on me.

Is this what democracy looks like?

At a series of internal SWP meetings in Tyneside, a small number of members adopted an extremely hostile attitude to me and conducted discussion in an unpleasant and personalised manner. When a number of us raised concerns with the National Secretary about this conduct he unequivocally backed the most dogmatic leadership supporters. He excused even the worst excesses of their behaviour.

The situation was made worse in September when the individual most responsible for the personal vilification, and suppression of debate, was appointed full-time district organiser. This was against the wishes of many local members (including some who, politically, support the leadership). He set out to crush any internal criticism. He also continued to re-orient the party away from political and practical engagement with others on the left and in the movements, towards an increasingly sectarian ‘Party first’ model.

The Central Committee refused to countenance even the mildest of criticism of the new organiser, and instead attacked those members who dared to speak out against the mounting authoritarianism. The CC’s insistence on persisting with my disputes committee – in the face of growing evidence demonstrating that I had done nothing wrong – was a clear sign of its position.

I was suspended on the same day - 13 October - that the Central Committee was notified of a formal temporary faction, Left Platform, which I had helped initiate. The suspension was timed to prevent me participating in pre-conference debates. It followed the suspensions of two other supporters of Left Platform four days earlier. We were all accused of ‘factionalising’, an absurd charge in the circumstances.

Political perspectives

As I noted above, the use of disciplinary proceedings (on the back of a sustained campaign of slander against me) has been motivated by differences over political perspectives and strategy. The CC failed to produce a single scrap of evidence showing misconduct on my part, exposing the politically motivated nature of the whole vilification campaign. Leading members, at national and local levels, have simply been unwilling to tolerate the criticisms levelled by some of us.

Tony, my closest comrade in Tyneside, and I articulated our views in a lengthy document last December. We wrote an article for a SWP internal bulletin in April, and I wrote a contribution to another bulletin in May (these were the two internal bulletins produced in the run up to the SWP’s Democracy Commission conference). A number of positions have remained consistent for us, placing us in opposition to the trajectory of the SWP leadership.

The perspectives document of Left Platform offers the best and most up to date explanation available. In summary, there are three crucial issues: the SWP’s response to the recession, the relationship between the SWP and Stop the War, and the question of how to build the SWP in an era of frenetic campaigning activity.

The economic crisis has not triggered a significant revival in class struggle. There have been green shoots of resistance, but no generalised fightback. It is vital that socialists relate to the industrial resistance – strikes, occupations etc – that does take place. SWP activists have done this with a degree of success, and will continue to do so.

But this obviously isn’t enough. The crisis has been not merely economic but political and ideological too. It is essential that socialists respond to the crisis in all its dimensions, operating in a political not syndicalist manner. Yet the SWP leadership has shifted away from what we call a ‘political upturn’ perspective, adopted in the aftermath of the Seattle demonstrations and then 9/11, and therefore weakened our capacity for generating a dynamic political response to the crisis.

The abandoning of the political upturn stance – which acknowledged that political radicalisation, evident in anti-capitalism and the anti-war movement, outstripped any industrial revival – has been accompanied by an abandonment of the united front method. The banal ‘turn to the class’ – a phrase justifying the downplaying of the movements and a lowering of the political level we function at – is thus accompanied by a ‘turn to the party’. This appeals to conservative elements inside the SWP, who believe the united front orientation ‘went too far’ and we now need to focus on ‘branch building’.

The united front depends upon revolutionaries being willing to work constructively with others, attempting to shape strategy and tactics in wider movements of resistance, and gaining a larger audience for revolutionary socialist ideas in this context. The failure to build any united front response to the crisis has resulted in two parallel phenomena: accommodation to more right-wing forces, and a lapse into ultra-Left sectarianism.

This was illustrated by the Brighton demo on 27 September, which was far too small: built as ‘Rage Against Labour’ (dictionary definition ultra-leftism) one minute, promoted as a moderate protest led by the union bureaucracies the next (accommodating to the right). What was missing was any united front operation worth the name, which would have enabled the SWP to initiate a far bigger mobilisation and laid the basis for a stronger Left in the longer term. As a result the Right to Work Campaign has remained a SWP front.

Stop the War is the best experience we have of utilising united front strategy successfully. Despite this – and regardless of the deepening crisis around Afghanistan – the SWP leadership has systematically downplayed Stop the War as a political priority. It has wrongly juxtaposed it to the economic crisis, suggesting it is somehow an either/or choice for mobilising, when we should be pursuing both vigorously and finding ways to connect them.

Stop the War is not only politically central, due to the integral place of the ‘war on terror’ in contemporary capitalism (and the crisis of the system), but on a purely pragmatic level it offers a large pool of highly political and radical activists. The movement is simultaneously broad and radical, its activist core being generally anti-imperialist. Its protests and meetings are still amongst the largest political events to take place in this country.

Finally, the issue of party building is shaped decisively by the factors already outlined. The currently dominant idea – that we need to re-focus on ‘branch building’ after a period of emphasising united front work – is a misguided view shaped by broader political perspectives. It is influenced by a combination of two ideas: we should respond to the economic crisis as the SWP, without also initiating broader formations, and it’s time to retreat from routine participation in Stop the War.

This approach is evidently not working, judging by recruitment figures, branch meeting attendances, etc. Instead we ought to be re-committing to the united front method and applying it to the crisis as well as the war. In this context we can build the SWP.

That means adapting some of the ways in which we do things, being more creative and flexible. We have to transform how we use online tools, develop more imaginative formats for public meetings, and focus far more on organising interventions in campaigns during our branch meetings.

It also means a concerted push for recruitment – not as an increasingly isolated party, juxtaposing itself to the movements, but as an interventionist organisation comprised of the best activists. The crisis of capitalism, the ’long war’ and the growth of the BNP demand a response from the Left better than that which we have seen so far.

Crisis, struggle and political alternatives

The annual conference of the Historical Materialism journal takes place at SOAS in two weeks' time. Speakers include: Gilbert Achcar, Robin Blackburn, Paul Blackledge, Alex Callinicos, Ben Fine, Lindsey German, Owen Hatherley, John Holloway, Fredric Jameson, Kim Moody, Leo Panitch, John Rees, Sheila Rowbotham, Alfredo Saad-Filho and Hilary Wainwright.

Here's what the organisers say:

'The annual Historical Materialism conference is organised by the editorial board of Historical Materialism in association with the Deutscher Memorial Prize committee and the Socialist Register. The conference has become an important event on the Left, providing an annual forum to discuss recent developments on the agenda of historical-materialist research and has attracted an increasingly high attendance over the past four years...

One of the principal objectives of the conference has been to build bridges among the various Marxist communities, including the breaking down some of the linguistic and intellectual barriers which continue to hamper the circulation and expansion of critical-Marxist thought. The sixth annual Historical Materialism Conference, under the banner of ‘Crisis, Struggle and Political Alternatives’, promises to continue and take forward this objective.

The conference is organised around three plenary sessions (the Deutscher lecture, the launch of the Socialist Register 2010, and Historical Materialism’s plenary) and a host of workshops dedicated to specific themes.'

You can't silence dissent

"It's clear that the arrest and detention of Joe Glenton isn't really about the letter of the law. It's actually about the principles that he holds... It really is a very pathetic attempt by the government to do something to intimidate people.

While Joe Glenton may be detained indefinitely, there are many, many more soldiers who feel the same way that he does - and there are very many protestors who feel the same way he does. You can't silence everyone."

Freedom for Palestine

We had a powerful and insightful event on the history and politics of the Israeli occupation of Palestine last night. At Newcastle's Side Cinema, in an evening organised by Tyneside Palestine Solidarity Campaign, we watched extracts from 'The Road to Gaza' plus the short documentary Timeline: Palestine. There was then discussion about the issues they raised, including some input from people who have recently visited the region. The local playwright and poet Peter Mortimer, for instance, talked about his two months in the Shatila refugee camp, which served as the basis for his wonderful 'Children of Shatila' theatre project which came to Tyneside recently.

There are now two further Palestine film and cultural events lined up in Newcastle:

Thursday 26 November, 6.30pm
'Visit Palestine' film showing
New MLK, next to the Global Cafe in the Students' Union, Newcastle University
Organised by Newcastle Uni's Friends of Palestine Society

Wednesday 9 December, prompt 8pm start (doors open 7.30pm)
Poetry for Palestine
The Bridge Hotel, next to Castle Keep, Newcastle
Organised by Tyneside Palestine Solidarity Campaign

Recession and resistance in Ireland

This is well worth watching - scenes from Irish trade unions' big day of action, and clips of interviews with those protesting. The focus was on the impact of recession, with thousands of people demanding workers are not made to pay for the bosses' crisis.

Defend Joe Glenton

It was a privilege on Tuesday night to speak alongside Clare Glenton at Sunderland Stop the War's public meeting, attended by over 40 people. When Clare arrived she told us of her husband Joe's arrest the previous night. When she spoke in the meeting there was clearly huge admiration for her own and Joe's commitment to oppose a war they believe passionately is unjust and wrong. People were impressed, also, at Clare visiting us at a time of such pressure and strain.

Clare referred to the support her husband had received from fellow soldiers, which is evidently a major source of encouragement for Joe. The solidarity of the anti-war movement is also crucial, which will be expressed in a protest in London later today.

Lindsey German, convenor of Stop the War Coalition: "In the last few days a range of military personnel have been speaking in the media in defence of this appalling war. I doubt any of them have been arrested. This is about the persecution of a soldier who believes in telling the truth in accordance with his conscience. He is saying what the majority of the population believe; this war is unwinnable and immoral. The anti-war movement will be doing everything possible to get Joe released."

Emergency Protest: Thursday 12 November, 5pm, Ministry Of Defence, Whitehall

Email: Secretary of State for Defence Bob Ainsworth: defencesecretary@mod.uk or ainsworthr@parliament.uk
Write: Secretary of State for Defence, Floor 5, Main Building, Whitehall, London, SW1A 2HB • FAX: 020 7218 6538
Messages of Support: defendjoeglenton@gmail.com

Students occupy at London college

Yesterday evening students at the London College of Communication began an occupation of the college's main lecture theatre. Students are protesting against course cutbacks. They are asking for various kinds of support from students and activists elsewhere. See HERE for more.

The prophet and the proletariat: Harman on imperialism and Islam

'The prophet and the proletariat', published in International Socialism in the 1990s, was one of Chris Harman's best works of political analysis. In it he examined the complexity of Islamist political movements, looking at everything in its proper historical context. He especially drew out the relationships between Western (in particular US) imperialism, national liberation movements and Islamist ideologies. In doing so he avoided simplification and caricature.

The analysis also informed political strategy in ways that proved indispensable, providing a powerful example of how correct theory can inform effective political practice for revolutionary socialists. In the aftermath of 9/11 the SWP, and its sister organisations, got it absolutely right. The British SWP set about initiating a mass movement in Stop the War, which could be broad at the same time as having a radical anti-imperialist core. The movement helped popularise previously obscure arguments.

The SWP's analysis of modern, post-Cold War imperialism was developed by Harman, John Rees, Alex Callinicos and others to help us understand a world in which just one superpower remained, but in which this American hegemony didn't guarantee the end to conflict many had predicted. It was essential to giving revolutionaries the strategic orientation needed when a new era of turmoil, instability and war began in September 2001. Revolutionary practice - shaping a mass movement with uncompromising anti-imperialism at its heart - was underpinned by perceptive revolutionary theory.

Harman's nuanced and sophisticated critique of political Islam - and his exposition of the suddenly all-too-relevant historical contexts conditioning it - was vital. He enriched our understanding and helped us steer clear of potential dangers, which not everyone avoided, and armed us with ideas for winning broader support in the movement.

See HERE for more about the picture above. The background to it reminds us that Harman's work on imperialism and resistance was perhaps even more important for socialists in the Middle East.

Time to leave

A new BBC opinion poll reveals that Gordon Brown is failing to persuade the British public the occupation of Afghanistan is either winnable or justifiable. This is at the same time as the Independent on Sunday becomes the first mainstream British newspaper to call for the troops to be brought home, with the front page headline 'Time to Leave'. I helped run a Stop the War stall in Newcastle yesterday and can testify to this headline tapping something deep in public consciousness: we had no difficulty in getting support for our message.

This has been a particularly bloody week for the British armed forces in Afghanistan; today is a Remembrance Sunday where it's all too obvious that war is still with us, not just a feature of history we need to commemorate. Five soldiers were killed in a shooting on Tuesday, and three others have died in the last week (including a soldier in the Helmand Province yesterday).

The BBC poll is interesting, as it reveals that opposition to the war is slightly higher amongst those defined as 'working class'. Andrew Hawkins, head of the polling agency responsible for the survey, suggests it's Labour's 'core supporters' who most strongly oppose the occupation. And he remarks: 'Overall, there is the sense that Afghanistan is becoming for Gordon Brown what Iraq became for Tony Blair.'

This is no suprise to some of us. Traditional working class communities, like many here in Tyneside, are most likely to provide the military with those who are sent to fight - and people, including many soldiers themselves and relatives of soldiers, have had enough. It is also these communities that are hardest hit by recession, as money continues to pour into a wasteful, pointless military occupation.

No to NATO Demonstration
Bring the troops home from Afghanistan - Scrap Trident nuclear missiles
Saturday 14 November
Assemble 10.30am East Market Street(Behind Edinburgh Waverley)

Called by Stop the War Scotland, supported by STW UK, CND, SCND, Scottish Afghan Society & SACC

Chris Harman, revolutionary socialist

Chris Harman, a leading figure in the the Socialist Workers Party (and its forerunner International Socialists), has died after suffering a cardiac arrest in Cairo.

Chris Harman has edited all the SWP's publications at various times, most prominently Socialist Worker from 1982 until 2004, when he moved to the theoretical journal International Socialism. He had first become prominent in International Socialists in the late 1960s, as a leading student activist in LSE's Socialist Society. He later wrote an excellent book, The Fire Last Time, about 1968 and the tumultuous years which followed.

I have many of his books on my shelves - as do most longtime SWP members - but 'A People's History of the World', published in the final days of 1999 as the Seattle protestors started to write a new chapter in radical politics, is his greatest achievement. It encompasses extraordinary breadth, as the title suggests, and is consistent and rigorous in applying the marxist method to history. I won't be the only one who has found themselves returning to it many times over the last decade.

There is far, far more that can be said, but I'll leave that to the tributes from revolutionaries and socialists which will no doubt be published in coming days. Above all, I recommend turning to the Chris Harman collection at Marxists Internet Archive.

The photo was taken in Cairo last night.

73% of British public want troops brought home

Nearly two weeks ago I blogged about a Channel 4 poll which investigated public attitudes to the occuaption of Afghanistan. Now they've done a new poll, to guage the impact of the news about the 5 UK soldiers killed this week and the revelations about the Afghan elections.

It reveals a sharp increase in support for bringing the troops home. The figure for wanting troops withdrawn either immediately or within the next year has risen from 62% to an astonishing 73%. This is clearly opposed to government (and, for that matter, official Opposition) policy. It serves as the basis for renewing and strengthening the movement to end the war and occupation.

Postal workers sold out by leadership

The BBC News website reports Dave Ward of the CWU saying the union's executive unanimously agreed to suspend the post strikes until at least the New Year. This is a hugely misguided mistake by the union leadership. It allows Royal Mail bosses and the government to re-take the initiative. Any momentum that was developing has now stalled.

How grim, too, that the vote was apparently unanimous - presumably even the most left-wing or militant representatives have fallen into line. I'm reminded of the old lesson that has always guided socialists in building grassroots, rank and file organisation: whatever differences there may be at the top (between left and right), it's the difference between bureaucracy and rank and file that is fundamental. The bureaucracy's role - mediating between bosses and workers - means they are always liable to compromise.

This is obvious with TUC General Secretary Brendan Barber, who has shown every sign of desperately wanting an end to the strikes, but there's a more subtle domino effect in the way this works. I recall Tony Cliff making this point about the General Strike of 1926: the right-wing leaders pull the left-wing leaders into a compromise, who in turn pull other forces (even the most left-wing) in the regional and local official structures into acceptance of negotiation and conciliation.

If rank and file strength isn't powerful enough, or there isn't sufficient solidarity, even the best people within the structures (socialist NEC members, local officals) can be pulled by the right wing's arguments. Cliff made the same point about the pit closures in autumn 1992: the TUC General Council ultimately won the day, through the pressure exerted via the union structures. Even left-wing leaders like Scargill compromised, rather than carrying through the kind of militant mass action from below that could have won victory.

In the case of the posties it's a terrible pity that strong enough rank and file organisation, independent of the union machine altogether, wasn't in place. This is the corrective needed to left-wingers inside the structures being pulled to the right and capitulating. It reminds us of the urgent need for renewing and building rank and file strength across the union movement - and indeed beyond, as contact with political activists and movements can enormously strengthen the capacity of trade unionists to act effectively.

From Palestine to Afghanistan: imperialism and resistance

This one's for the locals!

Tuesday 10 November, 7pm
Why we say bring the troops home
Main speaker: Clare Glenton
Bangladeshi Community Centre, Hendon, Sunderland
Organised by Sunderland Stop the War

Thursday 12 November, 7pm
Under occupation: the truth about Palestine
Film extracts plus discussion
Side Cinema, 1-3 The Side, Newcastle
Organised by Tyneside Stop the War Coalition

Click on the titles for Facebook links.