[ssf] Re: Re: Why SWP undermined social forums?

[@mp]

Then we entirely agree on this issue, taking into account that they (SWP
and StW) have failed in their turning a central form of political
expression (war in Iraq) into an effective weapon to bring about Blair's
administration collapse. Why? Due to trade-union leaders' corruption?
Are they corrupt and how does their betrayal influence social struggles?


Best regards

R&A

Chris Malins wrote:
> What I meant was that I do not favour the SWP emphasis on what I see 
> as petty political point-scoring wrt the war in Iraq. They seem to 
> desire to focus on scoring against Blair at the expense of 
> nationalistic sloganeering (Bring the Troops Home) and in this 
> particular conference statement, they are (somewhat unusually) 
> arguing that rather than support a movement which encourages people 
> to look at broad issues, all people should be forced to make 
> opposition to the War in Iraq their central form of political 
> expression.
> 
> I object strongly to the type of the sloganeering, and I think it is 
> absurd to accuse social forums of undermining the anti-war movement 
> and embracing the right wing because of taking the time to consider 
> economic issues.
> 
> Certainly, the hypocrisy of the accusation is evident, given that the
>  SWP continue to use their class rhetoric and hold meetings on any 
> othre issue going themselves.
> 
> Chris
> 
> @mp wrote:
> 
>> Dear Chris, if we disentangle the ironical statements:
>> 
>> what do you mean? Of course we should suggest a solution other than
>>  oscillatory two party politics, especially when dear new labour 
>> and Mr. Blunkett are already on the right. There is only right for 
>> this country unless we change the electoral system. If the SWP 
>> agrees to struggle for such a change in politics, it shows some 
>> intelligence indeed, imho.
>> 
>> But now i am more optimistic because it seems that SWP are not a 
>> homogenous bundle: the Scottish Socialist MPs (three women) who 
>> protested and were suspended of salary were showing some real 
>> opposition; Workers Party seem to split also and move towards 
>> left... at least in Cardiff.
>> 
>> Were you not a confessed capitalist by the way, in favour of 
>> capitalism here and abroad?
>> 
>> (I don't mean it to make you angry: do you think that something 
>> like anarcho-capitalism might exist?)
>> 
>> amp
>> 
>>> Lets focus on breaking the Blair government, that way if we're 
>>> really lucky we'll get the Tories back in. Any attempt to have an
>>>  intelligent political dialogue which could suggest a solution 
>>> other than oscillatory two party politics is a swing to the 
>>> right. Love the SWP.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Chris Malins wrote:
>> 
>>> Lets focus on breaking the Blair government, that way if we're 
>>> really lucky we'll get the Tories back in. Any attempt to have an
>>>  intelligent political dialogue which could suggest a solution 
>>> other than oscillatory two party politics is a swing to the 
>>> right. Love the SWP.
>>> 
>>> Dan wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hey up,
>>>> 
>>>> Just got forwarded this little snippet from the Conference 
>>>> proceedings of 2004 SWP annual conference. As usual, I really 
>>>> can't quite believe anyone would be so stupid. Sectarian? Oh 
>>>> yeah - we're sectarian if we don't do what the SWP thinks is 
>>>> right - I forget. Bloody hell - I try to get over it and just 
>>>> chill out, then I read something like this! AAAUGH!
>>>> 
>>>> “Because of the presence revolutionary socialists in the 
>>>> leadership of the Stop the War Coalition, the anti-war movement
>>>>  has come to occupy the radical space occupied in France by 
>>>> ATTAC or in Italy by the social forums and, later, the anti-war
>>>>  movement.
>>>> 
>>>> "This is why attempts by the sectarian left to supplant the 
>>>> Stop the War Coalition by social forums have failed and deserve
>>>>  to fail. Such attempts, portrayed as a programmatic shift to 
>>>> left (because social forums raise issues of economic 
>>>> exploitation as well as war), would in practice be a move to 
>>>> the right because they undermine the attempt to break the Blair
>>>>  government over the issue on which it is most vulnerable.”
>>>> 
>>>> http://www.swp.org.uk/resources/Conference2004.pdf
>>>> 
>>>> Dan
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________ ssf mailing 
>>>> list ssf at lists.aktivix.org 
>>>> http://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/ssf
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________ 
>>> http://www.sheffield.dissent.org.uk/ 
>>> http://wiki.sheffieldsocialforum.org.uk/G8 g8-sheffield mailing 
>>> list g8-sheffield at lists.aktivix.org 
>>> http://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/g8-sheffield
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ ssf mailing list 
>> ssf at lists.aktivix.org http://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/ssf
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
>