I’ve been reticent about posting my reaction to the result in the last tumultuous days simply out of self-preservation – like so many other people, my anxiety, anger and stress have been sky high, so I withdrew from online in an attempt to manage my symptoms better and avoid the vicious bullying and name-calling until […]
I will be abstaining in the EU referendum taking place this month. A vote for EU Austerity and Capital versus Great British Austerity and Capital is not a choice I want any part of. The entire basis of the referendum is based around a factional struggle between capitalists grounded in appeals to nationalist populism. Neither option will provide any kind of victory to the working class, in fact one way or the other, we’ll lose.
Most on the left seem completely split over the issue with various arguments called up in favour of leave, remain and abstain. All have some good arguments as well as bad.
Those arguing to leave highlight the reactionary nature of the EU as an institution, that it is in no way shape or form a friend of workers (the fact that the TUC argues it is, is testament to their pathetic capitulations). It is responsible for deposing democratically elected governments in Greece and Italy, it enforces extreme degrees of austerity, it acts as an Imperialist mechanism to extract wealth from its own periphery as well as further afield into the pockets of bankers in the core countries. Its fortress nature and hostility to immigration and asylum seekers further afield is well documented. The EU also has the illegality of public ownership enshrined in law; it is a ‘neo-liberal’ free trading union, absolutely hostile to the working class. Nobody can deny that this is true.
Framed in this way, it would seem to suggest the right thing to do is to vote to leave. I don’t think that is in fact the case. A leave vote would be perfectly justified if there was a genuine militancy, a real workers movement in the ascent who could in fact take advantage of the political and economic crisis it would lead to – without such a movement it becomes a political bluff; knowing your own hand is weak, yet hoping your opponent doesn’t realise that. However terrible the EU is (and it is!) the alternate option is no better.
What would this alternative look like? Even if the EU demanded it or not, Austerity has been the main economic doctrine of all the main parties in this country. Whether inside or outside of the EU, no break from this is likely to take place. Certain rights of movement are provided, which the entire (right dominated) out campaign is based upon scrapping i.e. it could very well ruin thousands of peoples lives. Just here in Wales turning this into a principled question means some workers would be voting for their own redundancies. These are genuine concerns for many people. Glibly dismissing them as ‘project fear’ just denies the facts.
Further to this point, for these with utopian illusions in a Corbyn led “anti-austerity” government (whatever that is…), sweeping into power as the Tory party crumbles after an out vote: they need to heed the lessons of Syriza in Greece. On the basis of Capitalism and the current state of the global economy there is no possibility that sustained large scale welfare and jobs projects can be implemented. Politicians can make as many promises as they like, it is only the working class as a movement who have the real potential to change anything. Once a militant mass movement is under way, no law, whether EU or British could get in its way. Appeals to abolish the legal restrictions the EU imposes misses the point entirely and to a certain extent goes to show the limited ambitions of the Left arguing these things i.e. what kind of rubbish knock off Socialism is compatible with legal restrictions of the UK constitutional monarchy?!
The EU is a reactionary capitalist institution, but outside of it we’re still in a reactionary capitalist institution – the UK. I oppose both. There is no benefit to working class people in terms of their living standards, development of their political strength or further development of productive forces by leaving on a Capitalist basis. In fact I suspect the opposite, that living conditions will get much worse. I don’t believe our class has the strength to take advantage of the political crisis an out vote will likely lead to. If we had real strength I’d favour provoking such a crisis.
In spite of the revival of social democracy and the doctors strike, I see a workers movement on life support which will take decades to rebuild whereas many seem to see a workers movement in real ascendancy with potential seismic shifts in militancy and consciousness potentially around the corner of each new political-crisis.
What does it say about how theoretically inept and strategically delusional the Left is that they’re goading us into a situation where everything by every measure could get much worse for working class people – not only will it lead to job losses, deportations and more austerity here, it could lead to the break up of the EU on far right nationalist terms.
‘Trotskyist’ dogmatists constantly see militant mass movements arising from every new political crisis, which will then set the ground for socialist revolution. After 70 odd years in the wilderness, with little to no success, no mass bases, no rising tide of militancy you’d think they would actually start taking that materialist analysis of the balance of class forces seriously. Yet these concerns are just flippantly disregarded as “middle class squeamishness” and quickly replace by some fantasy that “there should be a general strike”. Well of course there should be a general strike, but are our forces going into battle strong, well rested and with better numbers or are we wandering into the abattoir blindfolded!
Most people I’ve spoken to about the referendum, who aren’t socialists and are considering a leave vote, don’t usually say anything about Austerity or EU Public ownership law. What they do say is something along the lines of ‘the Turks are coming’. Which isn’t exactly grounds for faith in some immediate post-election proletarian mass movement. In fact, I suspect that fears that a leave vote will exacerbate nationalist currents are perfectly well grounded.
I have concentrated on the leave campaign as most of the remain camp is split over two positions one is either that the EU is a friend of workers or it could be if reformed it; this is so obviously false that I will not waste my time arguing against it. The other position amounts to many of the arguments I have made above regarding the balance of class forces and the rise of nationalism except rather than abstaining they, in disgust, will vote to remain. I cannot bring myself to play their game, to put my name to the status quo; I will abstain. People should vote how they please but they should do it with the sure knowledge that this referendum is about a factional struggle by the ruling class and that either way we lose.
As Communists we should counterpose the nationalistic character of this referendum with the idea of working towards organising and coordinating a European wide militant workers movement. Our slogan should be for a European general strike to bring Capitalism down. The workers struggles taking place in France at the moment is an inspiration to us all and must be generalised across the continent towards the goal of overthrowing those who would impose Capitalist austerity upon us, whilst introducing international socialism back on the agenda. This is the real proletarian alternative to such a base and venal referendum.
It has taken me a long time to be in the right headspace to write publicly again about my experiences of the Socialist Party but, having been able to heal thanks to time and distance, I now feel compelled to write given the new political situation following the election of Corbyn last summer, as well as the impending EU referendum in a toxic climate of growing racism, poverty and mass suffering directly resulting from the ongoing capitalist economic crisis.
In part 1, I promised to address the following points:
- Why I left the Socialist Party in 2013 (you can also read my resignation letter – still with the original typos – elsewhere on my blog: https://wordpress.com/post/sakollantai.wordpress.com/322). I want to write about this experience in the light of the knowledge I have gained as a socialist feminist activist since then.
- Why Michael Crick is right about the cultic and atheistic religious practices of the party, drawing on both my own and many other ex members’ experiences, and, more importantly, why these organisational features are directly detrimental to the task of building a real mass working-class revolutionary organisation.
- What mass socialist party / organisation I advocate instead and how I imagine such an organisation might work with present Socialist Party members.
I am very concerned about the situation facing our class today and I think the left is singularly failing to develop a serious, well thought out strategy on how we can take on the system with the class behind us and with us, without relying on our own narrow networks of activists as if this can substitute itself for a real mass movement. The left is short termist in the extreme and incredibly shallow in its enthusiasm for populist soft left characters, who usually get there because they have the loudest mouths. Politics is a dirty business.Whilst it is true that a big part of Corbyn’s appeal is that he comes across as humble and sincere, Corbyn is relying on these sharks.
It’s important to remember the lessons of Syriza in Greece, a left-wing government that tries to work within the capitalist paradigm without building on a mass working class movements to take on the bosses and the capitalist class in its entirety. In government, they have proved themselves impotent whilst the Greek working class is starved and punished by the bosses’ institutions in the E.U. and elsewhere. It’s important to recognise that neither right-wing nationalists nor the E.U are the friends of working class people. Both sides loathe the masses and have nothing but contempt for us. This is why I don’t want to vote for either side in the upcoming EU referendum. I reject both but funnily enough, European socialism and unity against the bosses (no matter their flag) is not on offer on the ballot. Like millions of others in Britain, I am totally disenfranchised by the capitalist system.
Nor do I share Peter Taaffe and the SP’s optimism about what a ‘leave’ result on June 23rd would entail. They see it as a chance to bring down Cameron and imagine that it will led to some kind of mass movement to overthrow the government – a profound misreading of the situation in Britain today in my view. The labour movement is weak and class struggle here is possibly the lowest it’s ever been whilst the far and populist racist right are in the ascendancy, as a result of the historic failure of the left to offer a credible alternative to the right in the first place. Whilst it is true that some genuine and very long standing socialists and trade unionists support Corbyn in South Wales and certainly not all of them are careerists and are instead principled working class fighters in South Wales, the right in Labour remain in charge in Wales and are determined to implement the Tories cuts and accept the logic of the market and maintain the status quo and their inflated, removed lifestyles of MPs, AMs, councillors and union officials alike whilst ruling out strike action and defiance of the anti-union laws.
Whilst there are strikes taking place in Britain, the overall level of struggle is very low. Life is just getting worse for most of us, clinging desperately to day to day survival as we are. I don’t think the working class here has the class consciousness and confidence RIGHT NOW to unite in mass struggle against capitalism and reject the evil of racism against immigrants. British nationalism is dividing the working class here extremely effectively. This is the danger we are in and it’s vital that we are able to make a realistic assessment of where we are if we as a movement are ever able to develop an effective strategy to build a mass movement against capitalism on an international basis.
Although working class people are correct in rejecting the European Union as an elitist, bureaucratic club of the European bosses (dominated by Germany and France), it is equally mistaken to fall for the divide and rule tactics of the racist UKIP and the Brexit Tories led by Boris Johnston. We need working-class unity against both sections of the capitalist club fighting it out for power in this referendum of no choice. The so-called democratic parliamentary system which gives us this referendum is based on lies on all sides and ensures that working class people will always remain powerless and exploited whilst the rich stay in charge, whatever the results. Plus people outside of England (Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland) might as well sit the thing out for all the impact their votes will have.
In the first part of this article, I promised to elaborate on why I left the party when it would appear – despite the differences I have outlined so far – that we are roughly on the same side. If I were a member of the Socialist Party now, I would be unable to express any differences of opinion that I have with the leadership regarding their analysis of current events, their programmatic demands and campaigns on say the European Union, for instance. The leadership argue that debate must be internal but when a decision agreed then everyone must publicly advocate that position publicly. Countless ex-Militant and Socialist Party members have fallen victim to this policy of ‘democratic centralism’not only in Britain but wherever their international organisation, the Committee for a Workers’ International, has or has had a presence.
For example, In the last 2 years, comrades have been forced out for daring to contradict the leadership’s analysis of the causes of the capitalist economic crisis and putting forward their own Marxian analysis; for this, they have been denounced for seeking factional rights in the organisation as is their right to do so according to the party constitution. It is an absurd situation, and indicates the level of control and censorship the leadership maintains over its members in order to maintain their positions. What is valued most in the organisation is unquestioning and unthinking loyalty to the leadership around Taaffe at all costs. Loyal members parrot the Executive Committee (E.C.) arguments and refuse to consider any of the evidence staring right in front of them that indicates that the E.C. MIGHT NOT BE 100 PERCENT RIGHT about something (say choosing to defend known domestic abusers in their organisation rather than supporting the survivors – in the sincere and honest opinions of a number of former members and independent activists from around the world) because they are ‘busy’ organising the ‘revolution’. Newer members of the organisation are duped and brainwashed, just as I was for the many years I stayed in the organisation.
Many of the older and more experienced members – often otherwise good socialist campaigners – are afraid of change and do not want to be forced out of their little socialist church where everything is safe and the leaders do the thinking for you. Unfortunately group delusion on this scale does not prepare you well for actual events, for life is not black and white and socialists are as weak, fallible and flawed as anyone else. Our movement has the right and the duty to admit mistakes; we must also do our best to make our organisations as inclusive of the most oppressed sections of the working class, not least women and people of colour as possible and open up to the working class – after all, this is Britain in 2016, not Russia in 1905!
I’m keenly aware that this is not just about my own particular story in Militant / Socialist Party history; there are many former members who lived and breathed this way of life and have their own stories to tell. My direct experience is of an organisation in decline, well past the heyday of Militant. I was a small child in the early 80s, so everything I know about the organisation from that time comes second-hand. When I joined as a student at Swansea University in 2000 I was recruited by Alec Thraves, the local full timer, at the time the Welsh Secretary of the Party and to do this day a member of the International Executive Committee of the CWI (Alec is named as one of the leaders in the appendices of Crick’s book). Alec impressed me with his impassioned defence of Militant’s record and as a devoted member I immersed myself in the Militant folklore from the older comrades who had made the headlines back in the day. I also remember Alec denouncing Crick’s book as a right-wing hatchet job – I never bothered reading it as a member.
Then, when I left the party in despair and disgust in 2013 I made contact with a number of the former leaders, full timers and former rank-and-file members from the 1980s up to the present day from around the world (including Scotland, Germany, Sweden, the U.S., France and Ireland). These comrades – many still active as socialists in the movement to different degrees – helped me begin to re-educate myself by sharing their own experiences of the organisation. This allowing me to better understand how my own experience of sexism, bureaucratic centralism (always misrepresented by the SP as ‘democratic’ centralism) and political ostracism resulting from my dissidence was part of a much wider and deeply rooted long-term malaise in the organisation, a malaise that comes from treating Marxism as a religious doctrine, exerting cultic control over members’ lives and according the leadership high priest-like status.
Because I critique Peter Taaffe and his ruling clique for their unwillingness to admit their human fallibility, it is only fair to admit my own fallibility (which anyone who has ever known me can tell you about). Hopefully most people who know me though generally think well of me and that does seem to be the case. When I was challenging the leadership both internally and then later externally in early 2013, I made my own mistakes and no doubt I make mistakes now. Possibly my negative view of the strength of the working class to unite in mass struggle, as a result of the many mistakes of the left, including the Socialist Party, is too one-sided. I just know our people are suffering more than ever before and it’s always been shit under capitalism; but right now the left are just not up to the tasks and responsibilities facing us and are not learning any of the main lessons of working class history so far – socialism can not be achieved through parliament. Nor have we learnt the lessons of the repeated and unfortunately predictable betrayals of all the main so-called workers’ parties, including the Labour Party, the Communist Party and the two main Trotksyist organisations in Britain – both the Socialist Party and the Socialist Workers Party and whilst it was still around, the Workers Revolutionary Party.
As a class, we are by no means in a position to take on the bosses’ class properly when the majority of the left in all its many guises to this day has massive illusions in capitalism and its main institutions including the U.K. parliamentary system, the legal system including the police and the courts and the European Union. Unfortunately, the Socialist Party is part of this process, despite their absurd claim to be ‘the’ revolutionary party. There is no open or public recognition that a major reason why we are in the shit today is because social democracy – the Labour Party and the trade unions – were made part of the capitalist state when they chose to support World War One and their ‘own’ capitalist class in that war over a hundred years ago, betraying workers’ internationalism in the struggle to unite to overthrow capitalism! The Labour Party and trade union bureaucracy have been consistent ever since in maintaining the rule of capitalism, as can be demonstrated by all the major historical events of the last century including, alongside the Communist Party, selling out the 1926 General Strike, a defeat our class here has never recovered from. We haven’t had a general strike in Britain ever since and that is the minimum which is required if we are ever to get off our knees again as a class and stop these Tory bastards, let alone have an opportunity to consider how we can fundamentally change society in our collective interests.
We live in communities crushed by the Labour, trade union and CP led defeat of the miners in 84/5 and the children and the grandchildren and the great, great grandchildren of the fantastic working class fighters of both the 1980s generation, and all our foremothers and forefathers before it, are examples of mass-working class struggle that today’s generation and all those youngsters coming up behind us need to learn from ASAP if we are ever going to have a chance to survive and live halfway-decent lives again. Whilst it is great that soft left ideas are gaining mass support around Corbyn it is not because Labour will save the working class but because the class struggle is not over despite what the Blairite right would have us think. The Corbyn phenomenon is just an early, in fact babyish, phase of the movement trying to rebuild itself again under this ferocious attack from the ruling class. To have any chance of actual success, we need to rediscover our revolutionary history and dig deeper than the official Labour movement narrative. We need to remember that these are the people who helped Crick try and smash working class socialist resistance to their system in Liverpool. For all the flaws of Militant / the Socialist Party, that doesn’t detract from the heroism of EVERY WORKING-CLASS PERSON in Liverpool who fought the Tory government’s funding cuts and built jobs, homes and services in that legendary city in the early 80s.
But now let’s get to the heart of why I had to finally leave the Socialist Party – sexism on the male-dominated left of which unfortunately the SP is but just one example. I’m going to be blunt for brevity. All three of the Trotskyist organisations have (or in the WRP’s case, had) major problems with women members in particular reporting experiences of sexism, abuse and cover-ups by powerful male leaders. So many voices – and there are many of us, although not all of us have gone public yet – can’t be discounted the way an individual can be. I will always stand with my sisters including Caroline Leneghan (please read her International Women’s Day statement from 2013 as well as my resignation letter from the SP) and many other female comrades I know personally who have shared their experiences of abuse from members of the Socialist Party with me but at this stage do not want to be named. Encouragingly, other women are starting to come forward (and long may this continue). Recently, the CWI has been rocked by domestic violence and rape cover up scandals, leading to very public splits in Sweden and in Australia ( get links).
I know that I promised to write about what working class revolutionary organisation I would like to see develop and how independent socialists, anarchists and working-class revolutionaries might / could / possibly work with present day Socialist Party members who are willing to engage in a dialogue about the health of their organisation, acknowledge that problems do indeed exist and recognise the contributions of the rest of us, not least their ever-growing list of ex-members. I will do so in part 3, where I will also return in more detail about the sexist culture of the Socialist Party and its various other unfortunate organisational characteristics, to put it far more politely than they deserve.
So, until Part 3 then,
Viva La Revolution
March of Militant – a review of both Crick’s book AND Peter Taaffe’s latest review of it in The Socialist. Part 1
I rarely write about politics these days. I’ve become a semi-recluse – my disengagement and frustration with the left of Britain is the highest it’s ever been. I rarely comment publically, such is my cynicism and despair, yet when I came across a review of the re-issue of Michael Crick’s 1986 classic ‘The rise of Militant’ complete with a post-Corbyn as Labour leader update – I couldn’t resist finally reading it – and now I feel compelled to review both it and Peter Taaffe, the General Secretary of the Socialist Party (formerly Militant)’s response to it and offer my own analysis of the prospects of the left ‘reclaiming’ Labour from the right and the possible future of the socialist left and what role the SP might play in this.
I was a dedicated member of the SP for over 12 years (between 2000 – 2013) and always defended Militant’s record in the Labour Party, even though I’ve never joined the Labour Party and never will. I think one of the main lessons from the experience of Militant in the Labour Party is that despite the impressive achievements of Liverpool Council in defying the Tory government and securing housing etc. (details) the Labour Party as an institution can not be made into a genuine socialist party and that parliament is a hostile, ruling class institution which is fundamentally antagonistic to the interests of the working class.
Left wing politicians in parliament get sucked into the privileged life of representative politics and whilst I respect the integrity of many Militant activists, within the organisation there is a reluctance to acknowledge, let alone address, the ego-driven and self interested personalities of leaders such as Derek Hatton and how the internal ‘democracy’ of the party prevents any accountability of the leadership to both members and the working class as a whole. Of course Crick uses the character of Hatton as a stick to beat Militant with, but it is unsatisfactory in my opinion for Peter Taaffe to refuse to acknowledge the problems and mistakes of both Hatton and the Militant leadership in his recent review of the 2016 edition of Crick’s book. Yes I admire how Militant and the Labour left around them fought so bravely for the working class but this unwillingness to admit fallibility, based on the personality cult of Peter Taaffe himself is unsettling and has pushed many marxist activists, including myself, away from the organisation.
So my perspective on Crick’s book is that of an ex-member who is still hard left and what is more, critical of Trotskyism and the democratic central model. My only current involvement in political organisation is the Cardiff based Marxist discussion group, which was set up by former SP members including myself (prior to this I was a member of Left Unity for approximately two years. I left LU because of their reformist illusions in both Syriza in Greece and then in Corbyn and Labour).
Therefore, although I reject co-operation with the Labour right and privately owned press to critique Militant / SP today, I share some of Crick’s critique of Militant – particularly, the hierarchical structure, the self-perpetuating leadership resulting from the slate system of elections, the unhealthy aspects of mind control and the cultic practices of this party and the sexism / white-male dominance of the party – all of which Crick observed in the 1980s and I can testify remains basically true of the organisation to this day.
BUT – TO REPEAT –
I do not share Crick’s basic political support of the Labour establishment. Indeed I’m even further left to the SP in denouncing both Labour and parliament, even with Corbyn now elected. I refuse to co-operative with the right (e.g. the Progress faction) to attack Militant / SP and since leaving the SP in 2013 I have stuck to my decision to not go to the bourgeois press as a dissident. Instead I have taken my grievances with the SP to the labour, radical feminist and anarchist movement and sought to hold them to account this way – with limited success, I must concede, as the SP’s main self-defence tactic in these cases is to suppress, isolate and ultimately ignore former members and break off groups.
The Labour right’s strategy today and the lessons of Corbyn’s election as leader – what does it signify? Is the class struggle over?
Inevitably, considering Crick’s social position as a senior journalist for various establishment media companies, the book has been reissued as an instruction manual for the Labour right to try and defeat the soft left around Corbyn. This is explicit from the front cover with an endorsement from Tom Watson, Deputy Leader of the Labour Party and one of the most prominent right wingers in the shadow cabinet, who is quoted on the 2016 re-issue of ‘Militant on the March’ recommending Crick’s book as ‘an essential must-read for all Labour activists.’ Right wing Labour Party factions such as Progress and Labour First (hypocritically, also ‘parties within parties’ like Militant were previously) were part of the 1980s witch-hunt and they too have praised the new edition. The reason why the right are scrambling to Crick again is because they made a massive miscalculation about Corbyn in the summer and ever since Corbyn’s election they are now determined, of course, to get rid of him as soon as the opportunity presents itself.
This major mistake of the right – who believed their own propaganda that their working class and middle class members and supporters are not left-wing – gave Corbyn’s group an opportunity for leadership they themselves had never thought possible. Support for left wing ideas has grown in response to the actual conditions of capitalist exploitation presented to us in the misleading language of ‘austerity’, ‘balancing the budget deficit’ and ‘unavoidable cuts’. Inevitably, and almost DESPITE the conservatism and incompetence of the left, working class and to some extent the more impoverished sections of the lower middle-class, have been forced to protest the government’s policies because of our increasingly unbearable living conditions (growing but masked unemployment, privatisation of education, benefit cuts, wage stagnation, a growing housing crisis…) . Last summer, hundreds of thousands took part in the People’s Assembly’s and the Labour and trade union aristocracy approved A to B marches against austerity and cuts. As usual, we marched from A to B and then back home again to go to work / stay at home on the dole as if nothing had ever happened the day before. A big march might make the headlines but all of the establishment know that they have nothing to really worry about so long as the left continues in cosy partnership with the parliamentary establishment (by not organising occupations, strikes and developing a clear anti-capitalist mass movement to go outside of the parliamentary paradigm).
Therefore the Potential exists for mass mobilisation of working class again – the problem is that there is no mass organisation of the working class committed to building organised opposition to cuts and the bosses and capitalism outright. For Labour to adopt this programme (limited as it is) would require the ejection of the right / some kind of split on pro-capitalist / pro – socialist lines. The reality is that Labour – despite the election of Corbyn – is still the ‘second eleven’ of the establishment. Labour councils are actively pursuing anti-working class policies throughout the country. Now we are told – by many of the left including The People’s Assembly – to go begging once again to the Labour politicians who sell us out again and again because they believe gaining power is about propping up the existing system and helping the bosses out whilst making families and young people homeless. Soft left phrases are empty when in the council you vote for the same as the Tories and Liberals. Furthermore Labour have been selling out strikes and independent working class action pretty much since they first came to power in coalition with the Tories back in the 1920s!
Despite this, some socialist groupings (including splits from the two main Trotskyist groups) are fervent Corbyn supporters and advocate re-entry into Labour to defend Corbyn and the left and as part of a mission to finally achieve the ‘reclamation’ of the Labour Party as a mass workers party with some kind of limited socialist programme, to be achieved through the ballot box. The SP and their main rival, the Socialist Workers Party, publicly but critically support Corbyn but are adopting a ‘wait and see’ sort of approach – aware perhaps that attempted re-entry into Labour is difficult because:
- For the SP – to advocate re-entry now means abandoning the position held by them for over 20 years and which led to the split with the Grantites in the first place.
- The Labour Party right –are not going to let Militant or any other ‘Trotskyist / communist / hard-left’ types re-enter. They are actively trying to learn from their mistakes with Militant in the 70s and 80s.
- To maintain credibility on the hard-left. The SP are a declared revolutionary party so to retain outwardly Marxian credentials, they must distance themselves from the parliamentarism and outright reformism of Momentum.
- The SP will never let go of their organisational and political model to appease either their right-wing or ‘soft’left critics in Labour. Taaffe / the SP favour a federal type model -and interestingly, Taaffe, in his review of Crick’s book, also notes that the federal social democratic model is also supported by Paul Mason(!):http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/22604k).
The Labour right are not giving up their party (and therefore their places in parliament) to mild lefts like Corbyn, without a fight. Yet Corbyn and his supporters are weak and conciliatory, attempting to ‘unite’ the party – a doomed strategy. Although Corbyn has recently defended his past of supporting Militant during the 80s witch hunt, his concessionary approach to the right so far indicates that he is unlikely to risk their wrath by encouraging the SP to re-join.
However, according to the rabidly right-wing Telegraph in just Feb this year, in a typically hysterical headline: ‘Labour civil war: Momentum’s ‘Militant-style’ blueprint for gaining influence for Jeremy Corbyn’ a leaked Momentum document includes plans for 20,000 members, eight paid time staff (all of which is perfectly within the factional traditions of the party – the Labour right only have problems with left factions, unsurprisingly) and (sic in particular) the proposal that “the National Committee may decide by resolution to admit into membership any person whom it believes has been unfairly excluded from membership of the Labour Party,” (as quoted by The Telegraph).
If Momentum were to be successful in achieving any of the above (which is unlikely given the undemocratic structures of the party and more to the point, the absolute conviction of the Labour right and in reality many of its ‘soft’ left, that Labour must be a ‘responsible party of government’ which means in practice setting cuts budgets and maintaining the status quo), this could be the potential basis for current Socialist Party or indeed any other ‘hard lefts’ (including myself if I was so inclined – which I am not) to re-join. Indeed, a number of socialist lefts, including the Independent Socialist Network (previously a ‘faction’ of the Trade Union and Socialist Coalition) are committed to this entryist work in the Labour Party and talk up such ‘opportunities’.
The problem, however, is that despite the fears of the right wing media establishment and the Blairites, Momentum is weak and lacks the stomach and convictions to fight for their limited reformist programme. – in reality, their decision to stay with Labour during the Blair and Brown years reflects their devotion to parliament and willingness not to rock the boat enough to get kicked out of the party). As the SP itself has acknowledged in its newspaper, Corbyn and Momentum are not succeeding in stopping Labour implementing cuts and have no serious strategy to kick out the right (for example, http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/22197). Momentum public meetings have so far – predictably, I might add – have manoeuvred and blocked any SP intervention in meetings to determine policy, including adopting a no cuts policy at council-level.
End of Part 1
In Part 2 of this review / comment piece, I will address why I left the party and how Crick is accurate about the cultic and atheistic religious type practices of Militant / the Socialist Party today and what mass socialist party / organisation I advocate instead and how I imagine such an organisation might work with present Socialist Party members today.