Another report of "Respect" conference

Submitted by martin on 30 January, 2004 - 9:33

This report on the Galloway/ SWP coalition ("Respect") conference of 25 January was posted on the UK Left Network list by a Socialist Party member, Tim Lessels. For a report by AWL member Martin Thomas click here.

Events in London today at the 'Respect Unity Coalition' founding conference can only be described as a gross caricature of my worst fears for what I thought might happen.
My report will not hold back. I see no reason whatsoever why it should do so. I am thoroughly disgusted. I wont deal with events in chronological order. If people would like a full report back minus all political commentary I am more than happy to oblige. Sorry my report is long, and by the way I don't in any way pretend that it doesnt represent my view point because it clearly does!

The composition of the meeting was, I would estimate 70% SWP cadres, the usual SWP fellow travellers, a hand full of Muslims, bizarre petit-bourgeois types that frankly only exist in the world of Bloomsbury, a number of antiwar activists, the Socialist Alliance Democracy Platform, and then a few other left groups. The SWP and friends clearly had a massive majority which they used to full effect. Approx. 1400 people in all.

Is this what democracy looks like?

I can honestly say that the way in which motions were debated and slates were elected was a joke. This is not the way in which you build a coalition. Even a motion that simply asserted that candidates would be subject to a selection process was blocked and no discussion or vote held! Presumably because Galloway in London and allegedly John Rees in the West Midlands have already been selected! Other motions and alternative statements were not sufficiently debated in my opinion.

The Executive Committee of Respect is as you would expect. It is completely pro-SWP/Galloway. The SWP were in bullish mood and even refused to allow Marcus Strom (CPGB) and Declan O'Neil (SA) on to the slate to at least allow some opposition. It would have made no difference! They would still have had a massive majority! In reality this was a signal that the SWP will not tolerate any opposition voices, even from those within Respect.

A new spirit of unity?

Whilst the SWP readily proclaim a 'new spirit of unity' on the left their moronic heckling and hand clapping was enough to repel any serious worker or youth at the conference.

I am clearly not in the AWL and I don't agree with them on all their positions. Far from it! However, I un-categorically defend their right to be heard as they no doubt would do mine. Fraternal and democratic discussion and debate is a corner stone of the workers' movement.

The SWP comrades however were hysterical in their opposition to the AWL. They slow hand clapped an AWL comrade (Sean Matganama I believe) because he dared to question Galloway on the issue of where he gets his money and why he refuses to take a workers' wage. Open debate was not tolerated.

Hannah Sell spoke from the Socialist Party and raised what were extremely fraternal criticisms given the extreme provocation and until very recently total exclusion of the SP from all discussions.

When Mark Serwotka (PCS) spoke of the need for democracy he was applauded by the SWP, but when Hannah Sell spoke to reaffirm this point she was heckled by what can only be described as utter morons. Lee Rock (PCS London, CPGB) correctly castigated their behaviour towards the end of the day.

Any criticisms of the draft programme, of democracy, of Galloway, of the workers' wage were limited in time and treated with utter contempt.

Bizarrely the SWP cadres whipped up hysteria by calling some of those who dared to oppose them "McCarthyites!" Chris Harman (SWP CC) in fact called me one! What a joke. Any criticism, however mild and fraternal, was condemned as sectarian and 'McCarthyite'.

Popular frontism

the clearest sign yet of the SWP's opportunistic and popular frontist turn was in the indefensible way in which they voted on bloc against the following 2 motions:

- Abolition of the Monarchy, House of Lords, MI6, Secret Police, Riot Squad...

- For a workers' representative to take the average wage of a skilled worker.

(Full motions available from me on request).

This was truly disgusting. The SWP spoke against both motions and ensured they were defeated. It was at times farcical. The SWP comrades appeared to be seconding the motions saying that 'in principle' they agreed with them, but then came out against them!

They argued that the Monarchy was in effect irrelevant and that as the RUC was 'broad' it was an unnecessary demand. This raises the question who exactly would be 'put of' by this basic democratic demand? Would we want to 'unite' with them anyway? Who is it that the RUC is hoping to unite with?

On the workers' wage issue the SWP were totally uncritical of Galloway, in fact Lindsay German defended him very strongly. Because Galloway speaks at lots of meetings he 'deserves' his high wage! This is an absolute insult to Tommy Sheridan and the other 5 SSP MSPs, Joe Higgins TD in Ireland, Dave Nellist, Pat Wall, Terry Fields (the 3 former Marxist Labour MPs) and all those union officials who refuse to take anything but the average wage of a skilled worker they were elected to represent.

Thankfully, whilst most SWP members its true did vote these motions down, some more critically minded SWP comrades abstained and a few voted against their opportunistic leadership. These comrades deserve respect for defying the latest turn of their leaders. A good communist learns to think critically as they say.

Year zero again?

The tone of the key note speakers (John Rees and George Galloway) was absolutely hysterical. The words historic, unbelievable, fantastic, massive, exciting etc. were used so often its hard to believe that these self proclaimed leaders are in touch with reality at all. For example, to claim that it was an 'historic occasion, the first time that the left had united' is just fanciful. does anyone believe that? 'the most potential for success on the left ever', etc. etc. etc. the idea that 2003 was the most 'amazing year ever' is also a daft assertion. A revolutionary party is supposed to be the 'collective memory of the working class'. do the SWP leaders have dementia? what calendar do they use? every year is 'year zero'.

Whilst of course recognising that there is potential for a party to the left of labour, that the antiwar movement was massive and has raised consciousness significantly, that in some unions there is a shift to the left and so on, the SWP's predictions for instant success and for the emergence of a mass party (1 million votes in june) severely lacked perspective.

Whilst this is funny when coming from the mouth of John Rees, this non stop over excitedness and ridiculous over exaggeration can only disorientate and demoralise any young comrades who at this stage still believe it to be reality. these people will be burnt out within a few years and put off socialism for life. this is a tragedy.

Socialism?

The swp have opportunistically decided that socialism cannot win electoral support. this assertion is based on the fact that they cannot win electoral support. (which is in fact a lie because they have, despite generally poor results, won a council seat in Preston alongside the 2 other Independent Socialists there).

Ironically, whilst the message that we need a 'broad' coalition and not a socialist coalition was rammed down our necks, Tommy Sheridan MSP and a comrade from the Italian Partito Della Refondazione Comunista sat on the platform - proving the exact opposite to be true!

Not only have the SWP abandoned arguing for socialism in elections, they have also abandoned standing on even a basic class programme, a workers' wage and abolition of the monarchy / house of lords. this shows what great foresight they had when, only a few years ago before they preformed a 'theoretical' summersault, they branded socialists who stood in elections as on the road to electoralism and reformism! of course that was in year minus 5 and has been erased from living memory by now!

In conclusion, the SWP have not learnt the necessary lessons from the SLP and the Socialist Alliance. Because of this I can, unfortunately only see the Respect Coalition going the same way. This is most likely yet another missed opportunity.

Whilst it is possible that some people will initially look to this coalition, unfortunately they will quickly find the same obstacles as existed in the top down SLP and centralised SWP run SA. We will take a fraternal approach to these people but we will state our position clearly to them.

My report probably wont get a standing ovation and hysterical cheering, however I prefer to stay in touch with reality and not abandon every principle I defend in the chase for instant success and celebrity status courtesy of a few lines of coverage on page 14 of The Guardian.

Only patient and committed work in the unions, on the estates and in the colleges can earn socialists respect. Instant electoral success is a complete fallacy. Whilst an electoral coalition and potentially a left wing party would be a step forward, ultimately a workers' party will come through the working class itself - not through declarations made by the Bloomsbury and Islington left.

A new workers' party, like the building of a powerful marxist tendency, is a process not a straight line. it can be protracted, highly complicated and go both forwards and backwards. such a party cannot be proclaimed out of thin air.

In the grand scheme of things and in light of the mighty events and class struggles of the future, the Respect Unity Coalition will most likely be a passing footnote in history. It seems highly unlikely that it can take us closer to a workers' party or pre-party, or even advance the case for socialism. It is a broad 'popular' coalition, headed by Galloway and controlled by the SWP that will most likely be short lived.

I look forward to future discussions and debates on this issue.

Hopefully in the near future, both in Leicester and nationally, those forces who are serious about working together in an inclusive and democratic spirit to advance the fight for socialism and a new workers' party can get together to act as a major catalyst on events.

Unfortunately, at this stage, I do not see the SWP as sharing this perspective or basic commitment to class politics, nor after today's events do I see any sign of a commitment to democracy and inclusively. I hope this will change in the future.

Comradely,

Tim Lessells

SP Leicester (personal capacity)

PS. The Socialist Party sent 10 observers and did not vote as we had decided not to join following discussions with Galloway and Rees. Therefore this would clearly have been out of order so despite clearly sympatheizing with certain positions we did not vote. The statement we distributed I will post on this list in the near future.

This website uses cookies, you can find out more and set your preferences here.
By continuing to use this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms & Conditions.