Post by RedFlag32 on Oct 9, 2006 12:34:23 GMT
www.cpgb.org.uk/worker/643/students.htm
A lesson in Stalinism
Members of the Socialist Workers Party tried to throw CPGB students out of
a public meeting. Dave Isaacson reports
In the past week, as well as continuing to sign people up at various
freshers fairs, Communist Students groups have started to hold meetings on
university campuses, in addition to intervening in left student politics.
Mark Fischer, national organiser of the CPGB, has begun to address a
series of Communist Students meetings on the topic of ‘What’s wrong with
the left?’ This is a particularly pertinent question for students who turn
up to freshers fairs to find a myriad of socialist groups attempting to
win their allegiance, and all claiming that they are the only true heirs
of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Trotsky.
Why is the left so divided, and how can this be overcome? Is it possible
for revolutionary parties to have a democratic internal culture? What
forms can we use to guard against the bureaucratisation of working class
organisations? These are among the questions comrade Fischer is answering.
At Sheffield University comrades were particularly pleased with the
turnout for their meeting. Over 20 came along - as many as, if not more
than, the other left groups like the Socialist Worker Student Society
(SWSS) and the Socialist Party’s Socialist Students get to their meetings.
Comrade Fischer has been arguing that the left needs to undergo a cultural
revolution. Most groups on the left, at best, pay lip service to notions
of democracy inside their organisations. In fact they operate as
bureaucratic centralist sects - not the parties they often claim to be. It
is therefore no wonder that the left groups are generally unappealing as
far as the mass of the working class and students are concerned.
The left is politically peripheral and has no real roots. Where are the
socialist pubs, sports clubs, cultural associations, schools and TV and
radio stations? These things would symbolise that we were a real force
within society. In the absence of this mass base many left groups chase
after various opportunistic ‘get rich quick’ schemes. They abandon in
practice any notion of a revolutionary party fighting for a revolutionary
programme, instead playing down or hiding their Marxism in various fronts:
Respect in the case of the Socialist Workers Party and the Campaign for a
New Workers’ Party in the case of the SP.
In the long run this opportunism can only hold us back - what we need is a
mass party based upon the Marxist world outlook. However, this cannot be
built in splendid isolation. If we attempt to exclude or ignore those
socialists we disagree with, then all we will do is create another
bureaucratic sect. We must engage with those on the left who claim a
Marxist party is impossible under current circumstances and opt instead
for some halfway house.
And we must also ensure that we operate in a thoroughly democratic
fashion. Differences of opinion should be considered ‘natural’ within a
party - not only that, but they should be allowed to take organisational
form (as factions and platforms) and to argue their case publicly (in
party newspapers, journals, leaflets, etc). What is important is not unity
- or conformity - in thought, but unity in democratically agreed actions.
Unfortunately much of the left - including a comrade from Socialist
Students at our meeting in Sheffield - currently take the view that the
expression of two views in one newspaper will simply confuse working class
people, the poor dolts. What sort of opinion is that to take of the class
we hope will one day become the ruling class and subsequently abolish
classes themselves?
Of course it is commendable that this comrade from Socialist Students came
along to our meeting and was willing to engage with us, as were comrades
from the Alliance for Workers’ Liberty. Dan Randall from the AWL suggested
that we ought to take a broad view of what constitutes the left, including
anarchists and those influenced by the ideas of People and Planet, etc.
This is not something that we disagree with: we want to engage with all
those who can be won to Marxism. The question is, how we do that, and we
feel that in the long run you will get nowhere if you attempt to reach the
masses by simply going over the heads of the existing left organisations.
After all, any student who gets involved in leftwing political activity
will eventually come into contact with all the other groups and want to
know why the left is as fractured and divided as it is.
At our meeting at Leeds Metropolitan University comrade Jim Padmore asked
whether we thought it was really desirable that all these left groups,
holding what we would deem the wrong positions on so many questions,
should be in the same organisation. How could those who argue that we must
strategically vote Labour and those who call for abstentions coexist
within the same organisation?
Mark Fischer argued that the struggle for a united Marxist party was not
separate from the political struggle against the wrong ideas many of the
sects hold. We do not put our political differences aside until we have
achieved unity. Indeed it would take a huge political change within most
of the left groups before they would even consider any genuine unity
around a Marxist programme.
At Leeds Met we also discussed what we mean when we say that Communist
Students is an autonomous organisation, when CPGB student comrades and
sympathisers were central to its initiation. As comrade Fischer explained,
the CPGB has not attempted to hide its role in setting Communist Students
up, nor are we agnostic about what it does and the political direction it
takes.
We are, however, absolutely sincere when we say it must be autonomous. It
is quite conceivable that CPGB members will make up a minority within
Communist Students - if you consider how many have signed up at freshers
fairs then we are already a small minority. As such it is not impossible
that we will lose this or that vote within the new grouping. Of course the
CPGB wants to win people to its ideas, but you cannot do this via
bureaucratic measures. As John Bridge argued at the CPGB’s last members
aggregate, a student organisation must be allowed to “have the gumption to
make its own mistakes” (Weekly Worker September 14).
Almost by way of illustrating how not to go about spreading the ideas of
Marxism and building a healthy organisation, the antics of SWP comrades at
Sheffield University demand reporting. Chris Bambery had been invited to
address an SWSS meeting under the heading of ‘The revolutionary ideas of
Karl Marx’. Perhaps ‘A lesson in Stalinism’ would have been a better
title.
When CPGB comrades arrived to engage in a debate with the SWP comrades and
their audience, Alan Kenny, the local SWP organiser, attempted to bar them
from the meeting. CPGB comrade Lee Rock was told he was not welcome
because he was not a student (neither is comrade Kenny actually).
Having previously been a member of the SWP and an SWSS group convenor at
Essex University, I know from attending and organising many SWSS meetings
that there is no bar on non-students attending. This ban was obviously a
political one - Lee Rock (an ex-SWPer himself) thinks the wrong thoughts
and says the wrong things. Then Alan Kenny also insisted on the removal of
CPGB member and Sheffield University student Ben Lewis from the meeting.
This time the charge was that he is too “rude” and disruptive. Another
ruse for a political ban - the SWP cannot countenance a debate with
comrades to its left.
What does this say about comrade Kenny’s view of “the revolutionary ideas
of Karl Marx”? Are these emancipatory ideas? Is this sort of bureaucratic
exclusion the first step on the path to humanity’s general freedom? Not in
my mind.
What also does this say about Chris Bambery - a member of the SWP’s
central committee and editor of Socialist Worker? Comrade Bambery often
comes across as a bullish and overconfident speaker - the man certainly
knows how to shout. But what does this bureaucratic exclusion say about
his confidence in reality? He is certainly not confident of his own
ability to win out in a free debate.
In the end three members of Communist Students entered the meeting once
Bambery had begun his opening. Comrade Kenny clearly did not want to make
a fool of himself by excluding them in front of the whole meeting and they
were able to stay. In the discussion two of them managed to speak and
raised questions about the importance of democracy in the workers’
movement. Unfortunately comrade Bambery once again displayed the lack of
confidence he has in defending his own ideas and completely ignored our
comrades’ questions.
If SWP members think they can intimidate our comrades into keeping their
mouths shut, they are seriously wrong. Unlike Stalin they have no state
machine to enforce their sterile view of politics, and in the long run
neither students, workers nor their own rank and file members will stand
for this type of approach.
Communist Students will continue to organise our own events and engage
with those put on by other left groups. Unlike the SWP we positively want
members of other left groups to attend our meetings and engage in
comradely debate. We intend to make an impact.
A lesson in Stalinism
Members of the Socialist Workers Party tried to throw CPGB students out of
a public meeting. Dave Isaacson reports
In the past week, as well as continuing to sign people up at various
freshers fairs, Communist Students groups have started to hold meetings on
university campuses, in addition to intervening in left student politics.
Mark Fischer, national organiser of the CPGB, has begun to address a
series of Communist Students meetings on the topic of ‘What’s wrong with
the left?’ This is a particularly pertinent question for students who turn
up to freshers fairs to find a myriad of socialist groups attempting to
win their allegiance, and all claiming that they are the only true heirs
of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Trotsky.
Why is the left so divided, and how can this be overcome? Is it possible
for revolutionary parties to have a democratic internal culture? What
forms can we use to guard against the bureaucratisation of working class
organisations? These are among the questions comrade Fischer is answering.
At Sheffield University comrades were particularly pleased with the
turnout for their meeting. Over 20 came along - as many as, if not more
than, the other left groups like the Socialist Worker Student Society
(SWSS) and the Socialist Party’s Socialist Students get to their meetings.
Comrade Fischer has been arguing that the left needs to undergo a cultural
revolution. Most groups on the left, at best, pay lip service to notions
of democracy inside their organisations. In fact they operate as
bureaucratic centralist sects - not the parties they often claim to be. It
is therefore no wonder that the left groups are generally unappealing as
far as the mass of the working class and students are concerned.
The left is politically peripheral and has no real roots. Where are the
socialist pubs, sports clubs, cultural associations, schools and TV and
radio stations? These things would symbolise that we were a real force
within society. In the absence of this mass base many left groups chase
after various opportunistic ‘get rich quick’ schemes. They abandon in
practice any notion of a revolutionary party fighting for a revolutionary
programme, instead playing down or hiding their Marxism in various fronts:
Respect in the case of the Socialist Workers Party and the Campaign for a
New Workers’ Party in the case of the SP.
In the long run this opportunism can only hold us back - what we need is a
mass party based upon the Marxist world outlook. However, this cannot be
built in splendid isolation. If we attempt to exclude or ignore those
socialists we disagree with, then all we will do is create another
bureaucratic sect. We must engage with those on the left who claim a
Marxist party is impossible under current circumstances and opt instead
for some halfway house.
And we must also ensure that we operate in a thoroughly democratic
fashion. Differences of opinion should be considered ‘natural’ within a
party - not only that, but they should be allowed to take organisational
form (as factions and platforms) and to argue their case publicly (in
party newspapers, journals, leaflets, etc). What is important is not unity
- or conformity - in thought, but unity in democratically agreed actions.
Unfortunately much of the left - including a comrade from Socialist
Students at our meeting in Sheffield - currently take the view that the
expression of two views in one newspaper will simply confuse working class
people, the poor dolts. What sort of opinion is that to take of the class
we hope will one day become the ruling class and subsequently abolish
classes themselves?
Of course it is commendable that this comrade from Socialist Students came
along to our meeting and was willing to engage with us, as were comrades
from the Alliance for Workers’ Liberty. Dan Randall from the AWL suggested
that we ought to take a broad view of what constitutes the left, including
anarchists and those influenced by the ideas of People and Planet, etc.
This is not something that we disagree with: we want to engage with all
those who can be won to Marxism. The question is, how we do that, and we
feel that in the long run you will get nowhere if you attempt to reach the
masses by simply going over the heads of the existing left organisations.
After all, any student who gets involved in leftwing political activity
will eventually come into contact with all the other groups and want to
know why the left is as fractured and divided as it is.
At our meeting at Leeds Metropolitan University comrade Jim Padmore asked
whether we thought it was really desirable that all these left groups,
holding what we would deem the wrong positions on so many questions,
should be in the same organisation. How could those who argue that we must
strategically vote Labour and those who call for abstentions coexist
within the same organisation?
Mark Fischer argued that the struggle for a united Marxist party was not
separate from the political struggle against the wrong ideas many of the
sects hold. We do not put our political differences aside until we have
achieved unity. Indeed it would take a huge political change within most
of the left groups before they would even consider any genuine unity
around a Marxist programme.
At Leeds Met we also discussed what we mean when we say that Communist
Students is an autonomous organisation, when CPGB student comrades and
sympathisers were central to its initiation. As comrade Fischer explained,
the CPGB has not attempted to hide its role in setting Communist Students
up, nor are we agnostic about what it does and the political direction it
takes.
We are, however, absolutely sincere when we say it must be autonomous. It
is quite conceivable that CPGB members will make up a minority within
Communist Students - if you consider how many have signed up at freshers
fairs then we are already a small minority. As such it is not impossible
that we will lose this or that vote within the new grouping. Of course the
CPGB wants to win people to its ideas, but you cannot do this via
bureaucratic measures. As John Bridge argued at the CPGB’s last members
aggregate, a student organisation must be allowed to “have the gumption to
make its own mistakes” (Weekly Worker September 14).
Almost by way of illustrating how not to go about spreading the ideas of
Marxism and building a healthy organisation, the antics of SWP comrades at
Sheffield University demand reporting. Chris Bambery had been invited to
address an SWSS meeting under the heading of ‘The revolutionary ideas of
Karl Marx’. Perhaps ‘A lesson in Stalinism’ would have been a better
title.
When CPGB comrades arrived to engage in a debate with the SWP comrades and
their audience, Alan Kenny, the local SWP organiser, attempted to bar them
from the meeting. CPGB comrade Lee Rock was told he was not welcome
because he was not a student (neither is comrade Kenny actually).
Having previously been a member of the SWP and an SWSS group convenor at
Essex University, I know from attending and organising many SWSS meetings
that there is no bar on non-students attending. This ban was obviously a
political one - Lee Rock (an ex-SWPer himself) thinks the wrong thoughts
and says the wrong things. Then Alan Kenny also insisted on the removal of
CPGB member and Sheffield University student Ben Lewis from the meeting.
This time the charge was that he is too “rude” and disruptive. Another
ruse for a political ban - the SWP cannot countenance a debate with
comrades to its left.
What does this say about comrade Kenny’s view of “the revolutionary ideas
of Karl Marx”? Are these emancipatory ideas? Is this sort of bureaucratic
exclusion the first step on the path to humanity’s general freedom? Not in
my mind.
What also does this say about Chris Bambery - a member of the SWP’s
central committee and editor of Socialist Worker? Comrade Bambery often
comes across as a bullish and overconfident speaker - the man certainly
knows how to shout. But what does this bureaucratic exclusion say about
his confidence in reality? He is certainly not confident of his own
ability to win out in a free debate.
In the end three members of Communist Students entered the meeting once
Bambery had begun his opening. Comrade Kenny clearly did not want to make
a fool of himself by excluding them in front of the whole meeting and they
were able to stay. In the discussion two of them managed to speak and
raised questions about the importance of democracy in the workers’
movement. Unfortunately comrade Bambery once again displayed the lack of
confidence he has in defending his own ideas and completely ignored our
comrades’ questions.
If SWP members think they can intimidate our comrades into keeping their
mouths shut, they are seriously wrong. Unlike Stalin they have no state
machine to enforce their sterile view of politics, and in the long run
neither students, workers nor their own rank and file members will stand
for this type of approach.
Communist Students will continue to organise our own events and engage
with those put on by other left groups. Unlike the SWP we positively want
members of other left groups to attend our meetings and engage in
comradely debate. We intend to make an impact.