I’ve had enough: Nick Bird Resigns From SWP

international | anti-capitalism | other press

Wednesday October 10, 2007 17:31

by John Cornford

Nick Bird has been a member of the SWP for 17 years. Below he outlines his reasons for parting with what he sees to be an undemocratic and dishonest organisation.

As for my intentions, I have been an SWP member for 17 years, but frankly I’ve had enough. This is a bit of a wrench for me, since I feel that I learnt the core political ideas and principles that I hold from the SWP. But for some years I have felt my belief in the good things that the party does being qualified by frustrations at its practices and methods. I will stay in Respect and align myself with those who want an inclusive, democratic party that fights for peace, justice, equality and socialism.

The reason that the SWP lurches from one extreme position to another is rooted, I believe, in its method of work; in a lack of openness and a stunted democratic structure within the party. The (lack of) coverage of this debate in Socialist Worker is one example.

To date, there has been one wholly inadequate report following the Respect NC statement, which mentioned that some people were ready to write Respect’s obituary, but failed to make any reference to the participants in, or terms of, the debate. Anyone whose only source of information on the subject was SW must surely have been rather confused.

When the whole future of Respect is at stake, surely that is worth mentioning in Socialist Worker? The debate about what type (special or otherwise) of party or coalition we need.

save preference

Comments (4 of 4)

SWP democracy

by Yeti

Sun Aug 10, 2008 15:11

Can you expand on the way the Irish SWP is more democratic? The impression given is thgat the SWP is run from London, with Keiran Allen being told what to do by the leadership there, and passing on the orders to the committee here.

Has anyone ever attended an SWP ard fheis and seen a vote for instance?

Can anyone remember an instance when the membership has publicly disagreed with the leadership on anything?

democratic deficit

by lisa - swp

Sun Aug 10, 2008 14:13

the democratic deficits cited all pertain to the brit swp , the irish swp is a lot more democratic

Interview With Nick Bird

Wed Oct 17, 2007 11:23

Nick Bird is interviewed for the Weekly Worker by Peter Manson. There is an extract below.

What for you is the best thing about the SWP tradition?

The whole emphasis on socialism from below - change comes from the self-activity of the class and that requires the most democratic means.

Many people have noted the contradiction between that and the way the SWP conducts its own internal organisation.

Yes, but I didn’t think that at the time. I am no longer in favour of the type of party the SWP has become, based on an interpretation of Leninism and an internal culture which is not sufficiently open or truly democratic. That is the view I have come to over the past four or five years.

There is no culture of discussion, there are no regular bulletins. While there is communication from the leadership, there is no forum for members to debate with each other. Connected to that is the ban on factions. Trade union fractions within the party do communicate amongst themselves and I am sure some larger branches have their own email lists. There are also some informal networks, but there is no official all-members list.

What measures need to be taken to overcome the democratic deficit in the SWP?

There needs to be an internal bulletin, forums for debate and members must be allowed to organise in factions or platforms. Conferences and national meetings need to be organised much more democratically. At present the central committee speaker introducing the discussion gets 30 minutes and everyone else gets four. But you can’t develop a sufficient answer to a complicated argument in four minutes. The whole thing ends up fragmented and the leadership has an inbuilt advantage.

The Irish SWP and the Respect debate

by leftist

Thu Oct 11, 2007 09:40

Bird speaking of arriving at a National Council meeting of the SWP in London remarks: "On arrival we received a document containing all the main documents so far published in the Respect debate - from the SWP central committee, John Rees/Elaine Graham Leigh, George Galloway, Salma Yaqoob and Alan Thornett/John Lister, plus (for good measure) a view from the SWP in Ireland (an uncontroversial piece agreeing with the British leadership)."

I like the bit about the SWP in Ireland weighing in behind the leadership in the mother country. God forbid that they think for themselves!

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

Anti-Empire

The Saker

Public Inquiry

Human Rights in Ireland

I’ve had enough: Nick Bird Resigns From SWP

Comments (4 of 4)