Globalise Resistance is, if anything, a return to the SWP's tactics of the late 70s/early 80s. During the downturn period, their front organisations were quite strictly controlled (ANL mk2 etc).
GR has brought them into contact with a whole range of activists /movements whose politics have advantages over theirs (not least the ability to be able to think for oneself). They will have increasing difficulties keeping a lid on this, just as they did with Womens Voice, ANL mk 1 and the rank and file groups they shut down in the early 80s.
This is already evident from the posts to Indymedia, whether in the form of leaked internal documents or SWP members commenting.
All I can say is I wish this process well. It makes a change for there to be something come out fo the SWP apart from burnt-out activists.
The original thread seems to be from some sort of orthodox Trotskyist, setting out his stall for more of the same. Cliff's differences from the rest of the Leninists are pretty small, and hinge mainly on what you call the former soviet capitalist system (state - capitalist or deformed workers state) and at what point the revolution degenerated. THey all agree, though, that the Russian revolution degenerated long after Lenin had anything to wiht it (New Economic Policy, anyone?) and certainly not while Trotsky was militarising labour and executing revolutionaries as head of the Red Army.

I think you would be better off turning your attention to the opposing the current onslaught on Afganistan rather than worrying about the 'onslaught' of the SWP whatever that is. Did you get upset cos somebody tried to sell you a Socialist Worker? Poor baby!

As a rather dissident member of the SWP, I have been arguing that the leadership needs to change its tactics or face complete isolation from the broad anti-capitalist movement. I think the SWP has an essential role to play, but its main tactic is to take over other organisations - although now there is a recognition that other groups need at least token recognition. This is not good for the SWP or anyone else. What is needed is something like GR (which is a brilliant idea in terms of long-term co-ordination and organisation) which is truly a coalition, rather than purely an SWP initiative - or to be seen as such.

The problem is that the leadership dismisses any criticism of its 'politics of conquest' as anarchist whingeing or jealousy. Even people like me who openly criticise the leadership from within the party are patronised and talked at until we give up arguing. The problem is that the ruling committees so powerful, that the attitude is that it's their party and if members of the grassroots disagree they can fuck off.

In continuing this arrogance, the leadership is excluding a lot of people - anarchists and others - who might otherwise put aside their ideological differences and work alongside the SWP. It is also making many ordinary SWP members feel like they are not in control of their own party. This is a big, big problem.

It's essential for the SWP to recognise and take onboard constructive criticism from other groups and stop the monopolisation of resistance. Also, it's importance to keep the SWP as an integral part of the anti-capitalist movement.

The party's national conference is coming up in November, and I really hope this is something that will be discussed and resolved by branch delegates. Perhaps it's time to talk about root and branch reform of the party as well as examining tactics.

What organisations has the SWP taken over?

Just a couple of other points. The usual retort by party hacks to criticism of the SWP is that it is 'divisive' and that 'there are more important things in the world'.

Firstly, if lots of people inside and outside are getting more and more uneasy about the party's tactics and that tensions are mounting within the anti-capitalist and/or the anti-war movement, then there is a problem. This isn't an ideological problem - the SWP is being heavily criticised by groups within the Socialist Alliance as well. Unless this is resolved by changing the party's tactics, then the SWP will become increasingly divisive as a force.

Secondly, I agree, there are important things going on. Do you really think that anyone becomes politically active just to snipe at the SWP? Most activists' motivations are for change - sometimes revolutionary. The problem is that the SWP is trying to swamp everything to 'go for growth' and this is causing a lot of problems and headaches, particularly for those who genuinely want non-hierarchical organisation. So, yes, we need this debate and we need to resolve it. This needs to be done intelligently and constructively, not simply by launching into 'fuck the trot scum' diatribe.

I was just starting to worry that I might have to plow through a whole page of tedious news and reports of bourgeois activities like demos and marches.

Thank goodness someone recognises the true role of IMC sites, mutual denunciation and Trot-baiting. And well done for standing strong in the face of the under-complicated types who say "stop moaning and do your own thing". Do they not realise that actually doing things is just playing the system's game?

i really can't stand the way that stupid trots try and deflect any criticism of themselves by claiming that it's "sectarianism" or by telling people to fight the real enemies, you are the real enemy!

some very constructive points.
anyway, here is what i suggest we should do about GR & SWP: when, occasionally, individuals or groups start behaving in a naughty way, one approach is to raise the matter with a competent body to act as an arbiter in good faith.
I suggest that any groups or individuals who feel GR or SWP have overstepped the mark, to MAKE A FORMAL COMPLAINT TO THE SOCIALIST ALLIANCE,which the SWP is a member of. The other members can call a panel to examine the complaints and give good consell to the SWP, which they might be advised to accept.

As for the SWP general tactic, it is perfectly permissable to appeal to the remainder-left Labour party if they so wish BUT it is wrong for the SWP to do the Labour partys gravedigging for them. Using sheer numbers to overwhelm any independent initiatives, especially when politically inexperienced, or from the proletariat, is inexcusable.

'Monopolise Resistance - how Globalise Resistance would hijack revolt' is available from SchNEWS for a couple of first class stamps sent to SchNEWS, PO Box 2600, Brighton BN2 0EF or at the SchNEWS website.

"This isn't some stupid slagging match. As regular readers will know, SchNEWS is not in the habit of attacking other groups. We just think these things need saying.

The opportunity for winning mass support for anti-capitalist ideas has never been greater. Let's not blow it".

There always seems to be at least one there in any public show - however small-- with some sparse beard and a piercing of some kind - a nose ring or something - for some street cred. And always with an aggressive male (as they always are) line on the current situation - as though the current edition of the Socialist Worker has been learnt by heart and can be trotted (!) out according to the situation.And it's always so in your face, and often even an ok analysis. And then the banners and the placards. And some times you think, this is an SWP demo and the cause will turn to dust surely.

I have been a regular visitor to this site since a couple of months before Genoa and during that time I have seen the level of debate degenerate hugely.

This summer I felt as if we were a growing united movement with a lot of work to do. What I saw on these pages was organisation, solidarity and hope.

We are now a substantial movement, many many people around us oppose this horrible war and know exactly who is to blame for it. I would have expected to see this reflected on this site and others like it. What I have seen instead is an incredible amount of self indulgent sniping and sectarianism. I suspect that only 5-10 people are responsible for the majority of this, but it is truly pathetic.

We are going to be in serious trouble if we carry on like this -not that the people around us won't be radicalised -they will be, I see it on the tube, at college, at work every day. Those people will leave us behind.

What worries me most is the kind of elitism I have started to see here. Who is good enough to join our movement? Well, I say anyone who opposes the war and who wants to get involved is more than welcome. But it seems to be that half the tossers (not half the posts, just half the tossers) here hate the SWP for being middle class (and from what I've seen they certainly aren't) Whilst the other half believe that the entire working class are Nazi scum

Really y'all need to sort this out... and quickly. Sectarianism is a luxury we just can't afford.

for fucks sake you're doing it again, you silly trot scum are not accepting any arguments about how you are so parasitic and are trying to accuse anybody that can see it of being "pro-war". i think that if you are going to argue that when people are trying to stop a bunch of aristocratic twats from taking over their movement they are being "sectarianists" then i really think you ought to stop posting utter bollocks. i would also like somebody to give me proof that the SWP are not parasities.

The 'narchs are at it again. That's an abbreviation for "anarchists", by the way. Well, they are a narky lot, aren't they? Always bleating about something. The anarchites, and their hangers-on, make sure there is some SWP-bashing crap on the front page of Indymedia UK with monotonous regularity. That is their idea of political struggle. The reality, however, is that the 'narchs themselves are led by self-appointed cliques who are every bit as unaccountable as any trade union bureaucrat. And we all remember what the anarchites did in the Spanish Civil War, don't we? They joined a bourgeois government--the republican government in Catalonia along with the Stalinites. Only Trotsky and his allies opposed this betrayal--see Trotsky's writings on Spain at the Trotsky Internet Archive (www.marxists.org) if you don't believe this. The 'narchs politics represent the outlook of the radical petit-bourgeoisie--a class sandwiched in between the working class and the big bourgoeisie. And like all petit bourgeois, they constantly attack in equal measure both the big bourgeoisie and the organisations of the working class (including Trotskyism which reflects its interests most directly). The 'narch's arrogant contempt for Marxism, Leninism and Trotskyism is in reality the class contempt of the middle class towards working people. Their lies about the record of the Bolsheviks reflect and echo the anti-communist mentality of the cold war imperialists.

The 'narchs engage in much pseuedo-militant posturing, but in fact this apparently "revolutionary" approach often amounts to mindless and pointless provocations, which have the effect of exposing the working class to unwarranted repression. It is no accident that such methods are often utilised by the agent provocateurs of the state as a pretext to launch savage attacks on protesters (Genoa!). And by the way, the murdered domonstratator at Genoa was NOT an anarchite, as the 'narchs opportunistically claimed, but a member of Rifondazione youth movement.

The 'narchs are contemptuous of the democratic process of the workers movement ("majoritarian tyranny"!?) just as the middle class itself jealously guards its own selfish, child-like, egotistical, "individualism". This in turn reflects a lack of basic (working) class consciousness and class solidarity. Instead, the 'narch's prefer to ignore the democratic decisions of the workers movement and launch into some stupid, posturing provocation--a sort political masturbation.

Fred: you know that madness is a condition where your reality is not in tune with the facts. I suggest you pick up a few basic history books and have a good read - or keep taking the pills, mate.

I agree that it's essential to debate the role of the SWP. Rather than jump to the anti-Trot/anti-anarchist vitriol, we should all be prepared to take constructive criticism. Learning and evolving in relation to others is also an essential element of 'unity in diversity'. The SWP, like any group, should take criticism seriously and learn to adapt, or risk causing disunity.

However, hatred of other groups of people who otherwise have the same motivations for justice and liberty is simply sectarian. On Indymedia, we are seeing more of this sectarianism, mostly from those who are against the SWP, than we are of constructive criticism. I'd like to urge people to tone it down a bit and at least respect one another, even if you disagree.

And before anyone suggests it, I wasn't trying to defend the SWP, which I think has a number of flaws. I just think we need to be tone down the hostilities amongst us and become a bit more serious and level-headed about how we organise resistance, particularly given the new and horrendous terrorism currently being unleashed on millions of Afghanis by the US and UK military. It's not a time to be hysterical towards one another, but by no means am I suggesting that this kind of debate over tactics should not take place. Cheers and Salems.