Wednesday, May 06, 2009

SWP Democracy and the Un-Socialist Activities Recrimination Commission

I have been contacted by the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) Democracy and Un-Socialist Activities Recrimination Commission to make comments on its first report into internal democratic arrangements.

This commission was brought about at their last conference by the near collapse of the SWP caused by the split with Respect, expulsions of senior activists and the forced resignations of some of its Central Committee leaders.

The Central Committee decided to learn the lessons from the late Cde Healy and the Workers Revolutionary Party (WRP) past difficulties and set up an independent truth commission made up of specially handpicked party loyalists to investigate the reasons for the disaster and come up with a democratically arrived means of re-establishing total Central Committee control.

As part of this Commission’s investigation they decided to follow the example of East End working class heroes such as Cde Alan Sugar and carry out meaningful market research by consulting with critical class reformists and Labourite agents of bourgeois influence such as myself. The Central Committee have indeed already followed Cde Sugar techniques of public firing and humiliation of many of its members in recent times.

I personally feel very privileged to have been selected by elements of the Commission and the Central Committee to receive draft reports and to be invited to make comments. I totally understand that due to confidentiality and careerism I am unable to confirm the identity of those who choose to include me in this consultation. I am sure that their reasons for doing so were utterly honourable – after all the public school ethos is very strong in the SWP for understandable demographic reasons.

The internal Bulletin is 50 pages long and as I do have real practical, grown up political and trade union matters to deal with I will try and make comments over the next few weeks. Tonight, I will start my comments with the “Statement of General Principles” (page 3 & 4).

The reaffirmation of democratic centralism (whatever that really means?) is very illuminative since it explains that in SWP speak this means that “democratic party decisions are binding on all, especially the CC and comrades playing leading roles in the struggle (unions, united front’s etc”). So no real change there? all SWP union and united front representatives will have to implement SWP Party decisions (as interpreted by the CC) rather than any internal union or “front” democratic processes. In UNISON this will mean that SWP United Left members have binding instructions to follow SWP CC decisions regardless of any democratic UL mandate or they will be expelled.

Interesting that the commission chooses to slate somewhat their founder and past leaders “Tony Cliff, Mike Kidron and Duncan Hallas played leadership roles despite all living in North London and their lack of office management skills”.

Another comment is the suggestion that the rank and file are too knackered to control their leadership. Too much time spent standing in the rain outside Tesco selling boring and irreverent newspapers?

I note the very belated admission that there had been too much of the tendency “to put down dissenters so severely and comprehensively” and that they had allowed people to be “crushed to the point of humiliation” especially ethnic minorities at meetings. “Nor should there be the fear as – with reason in the past of exclusion, isolation or ostracism for the expression of dissenting views”.

I look forward to making further constructive critical class enemy comments on the Commission’s report. One immediate problem I am told by members is that many of the thugs and bullies who committed the offenses complained of in the first place are still paid up members of the SWP, and many are still in senior positions in the CC and National Committee.

Maybe the Thermidorian’s had the best idea?

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

john
so this means that any union steward who is a member of the swp will ahve to do what the swp want them to do rather than what is right deal for us. this cannot be right? do unions require everyone to declare what their political membership is? if not they should do.
this is so wrong.

Anonymous said...

It would be more useful for union full-timers to declare if they are freemasons and how often they go for lunches and dinners with management.

John Gray said...

Hi Anons

Yes the SWP demand that their reps do what they tell them to do. Remember the PCS pension issue where the SWP tried to make their reps oppose the deal even though rank and file elected reps supported it.

Anonymous said...

dont know of any union ftos who are in the masons

are you sure your in the right centuary

Anonymous said...

Hi John
This just shows what a sad bunch of miserable no hopers the SWP and their supporters are.They are a laughing stock and utterly irrelevent, they are like a boil on the bum of the Trade Union movement!Union Full Timers and Freemasons? What on earth are you going on about anon? Lunches with Management? Are you on our planet?.....

ModernityBlog said...

The SWP and their allies do more than enough damage in the one union that they have any strength, UCU

see http://engageonline.wordpress.com/2009/05/10/ucu-heading-towards-another-boycott-drive-jon-pike-elected-member-ucu-nec/