the Socialist Worker actually says this:

"It [Labour] has become a corporate circus of stalls, cosy receptions
and dinners. Yet a large number of delegates hate the idea of profiteering
out of public services and are sickened by the fat cats clinking champagne
glasses with ministers. Much of the backbone of the Labour Party comes
from the trade unions. Many union members will not be happy to see the
same company bosses who sack workers and attack unions promoting
themselves at the conference. The anti-capitalist movement has to
build bridges towards these outraged Labour members."

Build bridges with "outraged" labour members rather than labour itself.
An important difference. As such, the original posting is incorrect.

it also says:

"Many of these people would describe themselves as Old Labour
to distinguish themselves from the policies Blair has driven through.
Some of them can come out with the same angry comments against
privatisation that you would hear from young people on anti-capitalist
demonstrations. But they don't, for the moment, believe there is any
alternative to remaining inside the Labour Party."

I always love when Trots call anyone more revolutionary and radical
than themselves "young" (shades of Lenin's "Infantile Disorder"? They
obviously need an older sidling, say a Big Brother or Uncle, to show
them the way...)

Let us not forget that "Old Labour" was just as anti-worker and pro-capitalist
as new Labour. That is why the Labour conference should be picketed
rather than "lobbyed" -- this is the party in power, they are the ones
implementing the attacks and they are not on our side. By thinking
that they are, you help make their job easier and undermine any
resistance.

We need to "build bridges" with *all* working class people -- we need
to organise a real alternative in our communities and workplaces,
an alternative which is really anti-capitalist (i.e. not the SWP and its
Leninist competitors). That means we need undermine labourism, not
"lobby" it and reproduce its errors (i.e. electioneering). The problem
(well, one of them) with the SWP is that it wants to recruit "outraged"
labour party members and so tone down any real critique of Labour.
Also, of course, they want them to join the Labour Party mark 2 (the
Socialist Alliance).

Yet again people who join the SWP because of their radical opposition to
the Labour Party, find they have to work arm in arm with the labour Party after
all -- and now embrace its failed tactics.

for a real alternative to Labourism (and Leninism), try anarchism
(www.anarchistfaq.org) and for a good critique of the SWP from the
1980s visit:

 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/8195/swp.html

Very good exposition of how not to build the movement. The clever thing to do is to show how you actually build it. Can you do that...

You should patent your self as a cure for insomnia.

Yawn, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Wot Anarcko says is true - but very boring -
though just cause GR/SWP are boring doesn't mean they're not dangerous -
but as revolutionaries - let's get beyound these ritual cliches
remember _
wot really matters is wot is happning in our everyday lives....-
HAVE FUN =:-) !!!

Veneceremes
& Blessed Be

"Very good exposition of how not to build the movement. The clever thing to
do is to show how you actually build it. Can you do that..."

Well, a big subject and I hope not to be too boring when I suggest a few
things:

1) Community Unionism -- build a direct action movement in our communities
which can be used to fight for things which matter to working class people. The
basic format would be similar to the poll-tax movement with a group in
every locality which acts as a people's assembly and means of struggle.

2) Industrial Unionism -- build a direct action union movement in this country.
The IWW could be a means of doing this, combining with militant rank and
file groups in existing unions. Capitalism will never be destroyed unless we
kill it where profit is generated, in the workplace.

3) Try to bring the global actions into localities -- and how that is done will be
depend on the people organising them and the issues and activities they want
to raise. To organise "festivals of the oppressed" everywhere.

4) Build alternatives like co-operatives, credit unions, LETS scheme to complement
the militant, direct action, organisations.

5) To mark and celebrate *our* historical dates in our own way -- May Day, of
course, but also events like the Paris Commune, Spain 1936, Poll Tax
Riot, Seattle and so on -- so we have a sense of continuity with what has
passed as well as being an excuse for a party...

Alot of this sort of thing people are doing already, but unfortunately its not
nearly as widespread as it should be.

I am sure there are more ideas -- but this is the sort of thing we should be discussing.
Obviously concrete situations will mean more concrete ideas, so sorry if the
above seems abstract.

For more discussion of community and industrial unionism, have a look at
section J.5 of "An Anarchist FAQ" (www.infoshop.org/faq/secJ5.html).

I hope that this is not too "boring" :)

Re: article on the SWP cosying up to Labour. Nothings changed - it has been a long term strategy of the SWP to 'become part of the furniture' of the labour movement. The straw that broke my back - after being in the SWP for 15 years - was the way full time members of the SWP tried to convince us that the move towards the Socialist Alliance was a 'victory' after receiving 1.5% of the vote! I wish the SA all the best - anyone who stands up against the bosses and claims Marxism as their banner gets my vote - but its the triumphalism that has creeped in now. Why don't we just set up a huge call centre and phone everyone over 15 and register if they consider themselves to be 'socialist'?
Thats what the SA is all about - head counting.
Theres nothing new to say about Trotskyism that Debord and the Situationists haven't already said. Nevertheless, BIG UP to anyone trying to throw an anvil into the killing machine...SWP or not.