Galloway calls on the Socialist Party to join Respect Coalition

by Masters Voice Sat Jun 25, 2005 02:53

Is Galloway the elected leader of Respect?
What Role does John Rees hold.. I thought he was General secretary..
Have Respect members been asked and voted as to this move?
Have M15 been consulted?
I think a lot of questions have to be asked..dont you?
After all Respect is a democratic organisition.
Isnt it?

by Honest John Fri Jun 24, 2005 18:29

"Marks points though have watered my taste buds to read more extensively on the Respect project and to make up my own mind – with of course eventually penning an article on it."

You don't have to, honestly Davy.

by Davy Carlin Fri Jun 24, 2005 18:23

I really don't have the time to read all this stuff presently but am going to down load this page and the various articles linked to read on way to and over at Scotland.

I have not really got a feel for what is going on in Respect although welcomed an initiative that seemed to have initially courted democratic participant and political left unity. And I can hear some cry – but the SWP where involved!

Marks points though have watered my taste buds to read more extensively on the Respect project and to make up my own mind – with of course eventually penning an article on it. I am not even sure at the minute if it is a party or a Coalition as I had heard activists calling it both

by Davy Carlin Fri Jun 24, 2005 18:23

I really don't have the time to read all this stuff presently but am going to down load this page and the various articles linked to read on way to and over at Scotland.

I have not really got a feel for what is going on in Respect although welcomed an initiative that seemed to have initially courted democratic participant and political left unity. And I can hear some cry – but the SWP where involved!

Marks points though have watered my taste buds to read more extensively on the Respect project and to make up my own mind – with of course eventually penning an article on it. I am not even sure at the minute if it is a party or a Coalition as I had heard activists calling it both

by respect Fri Jun 24, 2005 18:13

http://www.cpgb.org.uk/worker/551/respect%20-%20main.htm

more respect stuff from cpgb

http://www.cpgb.org.uk/respect/index.html

by Mark P - Socialist Party (personal cap) Fri Jun 24, 2005 17:54

Before I begin, I have some advice for "unity" and for anyone else who is going to contribute to this thread. If you want issues like these to be discussed fraternally and with a minimum of suspicion it is best to make where you are coming from clear. The use of these once-off psuedonyms doesn't help. I would guess for instance that "unity" is probably a member of the Irish Socialist Workers Party (SWP) because nobody else on the left in Ireland seems to have any time for the Respect project. Why not identify where you are coming from openly?

On the main question asked, it's interesting that Galloway was talking of the Socialist Party joining the Respect Coalition. It may simply be part of a general call for growth of Respect. It may be that he wants an organisational counterweight to the SWP. Or it may simply be because he was speaking at the conference of the PCS, a trade union in large part led by the Socialist Party. My attitude to the Respect Coaltion however remains unchanged.

The English and Welsh Socialist Party have taken a very balanced approach towards the Respect Coalition right from the beginning. They have not indulged in dismissive and hostile attacks on Respect but have instead offered constructive criticism. The Socialist Party has been clear about the potential for a new left alternative in England coming out of the anti-war movement. It has generally called for a Respect vote and it welcomed Galloway's election victory. It attempted to get involved in the discussions around the setting up of the Coalition but was prevented from participating. The Socialist Party has carefully analysed the successes of Respect as well as its problems.

Those problems however are important and they explain why the Socialist Party is not involved in it.

The two main problems with Respect are the total lack of democracy in the organisation and the weakness of its political programme and approach. These are not minor issues which socialists can shrug off because there is the chance to amass a few extra votes. These things are the core of our politics.

To understand the lack of democracy within Respect you should go right back to looking at how it was founded. Instead of open discussions amongst as broad a section of the left and the workers movement as possible, there were deals behind closed doors between Galloway, the SWP and a handful of Muslim religious figures. A democratic organisation could have started by involving layers of shop stewards and other trade unionists, community activists etc in a process of discussion and debate, spreading across the country and deciding on policy and programme. Instead the political decisions were made in smoke filled rooms and then presented to a rally for acclamation. Forces like the Socialist Party which sought to be involved were deliberately excluded. That was a bad way to begin but the real issue is that little has changed.

Respect has since had one national conference, an event which was an affront to the word democracy. The SWP carefully excluded any voice which they felt might offer a critical perspective from becoming a delegate. Any delegate who did make it to the conference and who had the cheek to raise even the most minor and fraternal criticism had bile poured on them from the platform. The message was clear - the other members of the coalition are there to cheer and deliver leaflets, not to have annoying opinions of their own. Respect has no proper branch structure, no publications internal or external and absolutely no way for ordinary members to influence the policy or political method of the organisation.

This isn't carping. A number of promising starts in creating a left alternative in England have been destroyed by this sort of behaviour, most obviously the Socialist Alliance and Socialist Labour Party. If Respect is to play a useful role this will quite simply have to change.

The other main problem is that quite unneccessary political compromises have been made in the assumption that these will help gather votes. Respect does not put itself forward as a socialist alternative, neither does it even concentrate on class politics. The Socialist Party is quite aware that a broad alliance will probably not have a full revolutionary programme, but Respect's politics are a step back even from the political positions of the Scottish Socialist Party, the Socialist Alliance or the Socialist Labour Party. Connected to this is the quite unprincipled manner in which Respect has sought to gain votes from British Muslims.

I should be clear about this. Winning support amongst ethnic minority communities in Britain is a good thing. Muslims are amongst the most oppressed sections of society and also one of the groups who reacted most strongly against the war in Iraq. There have been some rather unpleasant criticisms of Respect which seem to imply that gaining Muslim support is a bad thing. That isn't a criticism which the Socialist Party makes, rather our problem is with the way in which this support has been sought.

Respect has issued leaflets calling itself "the party for Muslims" and declaring that its leaders are "fighters for Muslims". It has put out material referring to one of its candidates as "Sister Yvonne" and emphasised that she is "the only Muslim candidate". The people it has gathered as its chief Muslim allies are not working class or young people but instead religious leaders like Dr Al-tikriti of the Muslim Association of Britain and Dr Naseem of the Birmingham Central Mosque. This to me is the wrong way for socialists to go about winning support amongst Muslims, who are themselves a class divided section of society. Instead of trying to win over Muslim workers on the basis of class an appeal is made to all Muslims on the basis of religion. This is an approach which damages the socialist case within Muslim communities and risks alienating other sections of the working class, including other ethnic minority groupings. It is important to remember that thus far Respect has done no better than the Socialist Alliance or Socialist Party outside of a very small number of areas with very high Muslim populations.

These are important criticisms. They are not sectarian point-scoring and they are not malicious distortions. In these circumstances the Socialist Party cannot just join up and sign its name to a political method it disagrees with but cannot hope to seriously change. So the Socialist Party's attitude to Respect remains the same - we would like to be involved but in current circumstances we cannot be. I think it is for proponents of the Respect project to address these criticisms, although I've yet to see any of them seriously do so.

The following link should be of interest:
http://www.socialismtoday.org/87/islam.html

by unity - . Fri Jun 24, 2005 15:34

should be in other press section sorry

by unity - (still waiting!) Fri Jun 24, 2005 15:21

SP UK on respect

http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/respect.htm

Socialist party on respect

http://www.socialistparty.net/pub/pages/viewwin04/5.htm