I am deeply concerned at the way in which GR appears to be falling apart. One factor is that the SWP injected a lot of enthusiasm into it and became a leading group, but it can only do one thing at a time. The war has led to the SWP drifting away from GR, SA and ANL, which appear to be unable to exist as organisations without SWP cadres. This cannot be entirely blamed on the SWP, since other groups such as the Green Party have not shown the same dedication to organisation and grass-roots activism. My criticism is that the SWP's incredible enthusiasm and organisational mobilisation is directed by media headlines and so tends to be short-term. Groups they are allied with have not matched the SWP's strength - I think due to lazyness - and need to reassert themselves for the long-term future of these umbrella groups.

Another factor which could lead to a decline in GR is the lack of democratic accountability within the organisation. I am deeply disturbed by one e-mail I received today from someone in GR regarding the recent discussions on Indymedia. I think that the grass-roots members have to call the steering committee to account before disaster strikes. That means revealing finances and publishing the minutes of all GR committee meetings. I really fear for GR as I think that the way it is currently being run opens it to accusations of mismanagement and possible closure. If GR members and the anti-capitalist movement do not take these matters seriously, we will all be undermined.

as soon as there is a bit of power on the menu people tend to chuck the community spirit over board and go for personal glory. Once the voting has been rigged and jeremy, nigel and fiona are running things that's yer lot mate.
It's yer professional classes that call the shots they like to cover every possible angle so some of their sons and daughters take the alternative line and go anti global.
but when the shit hits they show their true colours, which are pretty muck of a much, and as for the greens sold out from time. Like check out Germoney.

Is it not time for the GR movement, which is plainly divergent and has outgrown the SWP, to go its own way?

GR needs to stand on it’s own, develop its position and aims. GR needs to develop it’s own network, models for representative democracy (whatever that means) and it should not let itself be dominated by the SWP.


Many within GR have a growing awareness of the SWP ‘s “Brand Management” of GR.

I believe that the GR brand aims to provide a safe overflow area to limit the number of people joining real groups of change.

GR People my advice is-

Go on GR be yourself – don’t let them march you up the hill and down again with only a few paper sales and a sore throat to show for it.

Get out there – be part of the revolution don’t be neutralised by the Government friendly SWP.

What would happen if a GR group was to organise a 'Globalise Resistance' public event without waiting for the say-so from head office? Clearly some new public events are needed, to discuss future action, future summits, what now after 9/11,etc. If such an event was set up by GR rank and file then I'd go to it, and so would a lot of the broad movement.

Groups such as People Not Profit (Liverpool), Earth First! (Sheffield) and loombreaker (Manchester) participated in the first lot of GR events. We all wanted this to be a real forum and acted in good faith. If a GR event was to be organised in good faith then you'd find the same lot of non-SWP activists ready to support it.

Any offers? Obviously people like me, on the outside of GR, could only support such events; unless the rank and file co-opted them onto an organising group.

I think that this is a really constructive posting by Lentilshaper and totally agree that we need a constructive debate, without sectarianism from either side. As a Worker’s Power member I think that this is exactly what Jeremy was trying to express in his document to the GR steering committee that was put up on an earlier posting. I think it was a good thing it was posted on Indymedia, as the GR e-group is a farce and it is impossible to have any access to GR members, as the SWP has exclusive control over the contact lists.

Lentilshaper is right when he says that GR cannot be ignored, as there are hundreds of people at least,

“who have got involved in GR because it was a visible and active movement. Some of them have filtered though to more DiY-anarcho politics but such group are often hard to find, difficult to work with and are thus not *the solution*. I'm therefore proposing that we talk here about whether all of the energy and people collected together by GR can be liberated for positive action -- and how will this happen.

Can this front be reclaimed by the people who joined it in good faith? Can the rank and file take over GR? Do we need to set up a network of pissed-off GR members? “

Personally I think that social forums could be a good way of setting up a real united front in a way which embraces all the ideologies on the left from anarchists, to Leninists to environmentalists. From such a base we could try and make a push into the organised working class and the trade unions.

On this point I’d like to say that Worker’s Power does acknowledge that GR is an SWP front, but we have remained on the steering committee to try and make GR a real united front. We reject the sectarianism that is currently poisoning the movement and this includes the sectarian attitudes of some of the anarchist movement that is directed towards the SWP and GR.

However, I feel that unless the SWP and GR as a whole takes real steps to stop it being a front organisation then it will lose all credibility and end up totally losing its way through the frustration of its membership and the perception of it from the anti-capitalist movement and people in general.

We have been raising concerns like this since Worker’s Power members were elected onto the steering committee and so far no action has been taken to remedy the situation. However our and others presence on the steering committee does not mean in any way that it is not a front for the SWP if no-one other than the SWP has any real power to implement change.

The motivation in putting the proposals forward to the steering committee is to create a real united front that can help the anti-capitalist movement to grow, something which GR is currently failing to do, even at the admission of the SWP. As said, if these issues aren’t taken seriously GR will soon lose all credibility.

PS It would be interesting if Daniel Brett could post up the e-mail he got from GR that he was concerned about

Could be a good idea Lentilshaper. I'll get back to you when I've had some time to think!

Indymedia is primarily for news.

Discussion happens yes but that is secondary.

If discussing GR the best place to do that is the GR discussion group -  http://uk.clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/globaliseresistance

I agree discussion of GR is important, perhaps that's why Indymedia is not the best place - since there have been several different and similar discussions going on after many posts, the thread is often lost and the same arguements repeated.

Still 'discussion' is good, constructive debate even better, just slagging people off is a waste of time and energy - we all know the situations and views of different people by now right?

I don't wish to republish private correspondence that could be used by the corporate media and the state to damage the anti-capitalist movement. But I am sure that the steering group and the finance committee of GR are aware of the problems - particularly as I have referred the matter to the Green party's executive. Really, it's none of my business as I am not a GR member. It's up to GR grass-roots members to call their committees to account, particularly relating to the organisation's finances. I suggest GR activists co-ordinate through the organisation's yahoo.com forum, rather than indymedia, and demand answers to some of the questions raised in indymedia over the past few days.

I've reposted the comments on the GR e-group to see if I can get a reply. If I do I'll post it on Indymedia so we can all see what the explanation or lack of explanation is.

However this is a crucial discussion for the anti-capitalist movement in some ways so I disagree it shouldn't be brought up on Indymedia, especially as the GR e-group is so small and is so hard to join (you have to have a yahoo account for a start).

Said a leading GR poliburo member yesterday.

Tuy Beguiler, notorious Double Glazing and Insurace salesman made the shock anouncement at a packed meeting tomorrow.
"I reject Stan and all his SWP followers" he roared to the small howling mob. "Let us impale ourselves upon the True Crossword of pure nonsense".
Temple Maiden Horeena Mertz stood by in adulation.

How was it that such a peculiar conglomerate as GR ever emerged ? What social forces enable a party like the SWP to maintain a hold on the independent left in Britain ?
I recommend a text from New Left Review 23 (1964) by Perry Anderson called "Origins of the Present Crisis". I maintain it to be the most important single work to appear in a leftist magazine since the days of Marx in the Chartist Peoples Paper.
what, he asks, leaves English lefism so strangely adrift, almost uniquely so in an advanced society ? The uproar it caused at the time attests to its power, and any textbook on the years of the Republic (aprox 1640-60) will refer to Anderson's unorthodox ideas.
I cannot find an online version of this remarkable work. Try contacting the NLR for a copy.

In response to Josh -- I do not believe that GR can or should be a 'united front'. All I am looking for is that all those people involved in GR *realise their own autonomy* and start acting for themselves -- and using the connections that GR has established amongst themselves. Subvert the GR e-mail lists! Announce your own events in the GR publications! Maybe this cannot happen. Maybe the SWP were the only active ingredient. Maybe we will have to pick up the fragments of energy piecemeal, by attracting people to new projects.

I am not going to post any more on this issue. Hopefully if any grassroots events do come out of the decaying GR forum then they'll be posted on Indymedia.

Perry Anderson is alive, holding a professorship at UCLA and able to answer your questions. A search gives quite a few links but not the elusive text of "Present Crisis"...

i think our friend spinosa has it right, look at the bigger picture. i think it is crucuial we have a broad front such as a genoa social forum type network. GR has shown there are masses of people who feel a need to be involved in somrething bigger than themselves. Personally, i dont think this could be gr unless swp let go and allow feedom for he org. however, the ideas of a autonously organised gr event is briallaint, it would call their bluff and liberate ideas and energy.Bby the way, any chance of publishing the perry anderson/nlf article here, learn from history yes...

The debate about gr/swp is raging as always on urban75 bulletin boards

Spinosa indeed ! No, I flattered. Ive been trying to get this work by Anderson re-publicised, even though he's a Marxist. Frankly, had he come from france, he wouldve been up there with Debray or Marcuse but coming from England, well, he was left adrift from the mainstream just lke the rest of we indepedent leftists.
What Anderson, even as a Marxist, has to say of value in this rather old text is that the Labour party represents a FAILURE of earlier radicalism, not its culmination. This implies that the SWP, by trying to link everything to labour, is commiting a grave and dangerous error.

I have to disagree with Matt on the best place to discuss GR. GR discussion groups are by nature dominated by the SWP, the very party which puts off many anti-capitalists from working with it. We need a forum to discuss ideas which will not be re-directed down a cul-de-sac by 'big brother' and Indymedia is the nearest we've got. GR can go two ways. It can continue to act as a recruiting drive for the SWP, or it can ditch the SWP, and become a genuine broad based socialist/anarchist organisation in which trust can begin to be had in each other. This can't be achieved as long as SWP members are controlled by their C.C. To lose the SWP might mean a drop in GR membership of a couple of thousand members (most of whom are simply waiting for the next 'bandwaggon' to come along so as the C.C. can tell them to climb aboard) but would possibly bring on board that section of the anti-capitalist movement who have all the ideas and energy and who are not into scoring party political fronts, backing Blair or standing in elections. There, sorry for the long post.

In answer to those who say GR should not be this or that, my dream for a group or whatever at the moment is...

That it's more like a network, a space for people and other groups to co-ordinate together in.

A doorway or gateway that's always there and easy to find for people who want to get involved in stuff, as opposed to a cul-de-sac where there isn't anywhere to go once you're in it, or a travellers camp which keeps moving every two weeks so nobody can find it.

Something that can collectively organise open meetings to discuss ideas and strategies.

Something that would facilitate the exchange of information and ideas between people and other groups.


In monopolise resistance, the schnews published critique of GR it says that the other more autonomous groups and networks need to be more organised and be more public about ideas and projects. I have not seen any evidence of such a change. If GR was not SWP dominated or whatever it would be a great forum for this to happen.

Just ideas and dreams...

I don't understand the reasoning behind this thread. What has GR done? Its organised good united front meetings and continues to do so, it organises transport to international demos and backs London based activities, it organises reports and speaking tours, videos, propaganda and press releases putting a broad anti capitalist line. I don't have a problem with any of that, I don't think it has monopolised resistance It just seems that no one else can get their shit together at a national level. Whats happened to RTS? & the Wombles?

We don't need a mass GR party but we do need basic organisation and we should be working together whatever the labels.

Peace

wee point of correction to Lentilshaper's comment posted 11:13am Wed Feb 13 '02

> Groups such as People Not Profit (Liverpool), Earth First! (Sheffield) and loombreaker
> (Manchester) participated in the first lot of GR events. We all wanted this to be a real
> forum and acted in good faith

The Loombreaker is not a group, but a free newsletter (www.loombreaker.org.uk)
It was a Manchester Earth First! stall at the Manchester Globalise Resistance event.
Our participation was only with an information stall and individual contributions. We in no way as a group participated to support the GR platform, unfortunately learning from previous experiences and attempts at 'co-operation'. We acted not out of a belief in the forum; instead of harping on about the SWP, we decided to promote the non-hierarchical grassroots alternatives.

This is an addition to the previous comment (becuase otherwise these things tend to get established as facts when they are not

Sheffield EF! (which had a bit of a mysterious existence in any case at that time) did not participate in the first GR event in Sheffield.

We were invited to but, the feeling, as far as I remember it, was that we were not prepared to have one person speaking on behalf of a diverse and loose group, and they wouldn't accept a group of us reflecting our diversity, and that the structure of the day as organised by GR did not provide any space for non-hierarchical discussion. That is discussion that is not framed around the format of 'speakers'=experts and 'listeners'=dumb and need to be told what's what. Individuals who would identify with the EF! network did attend but not as EFers.

For the record, at various points since Seattle and the SWP's discovery of the 'anti-capitalist movement'. Ecologicallly minded libertarians and anarchists in Sheffield have tried to put aside our feelings about the SWP's politics and practices and tried to work with them. We have compromised our politics, put the 'interests of the movement first' bit our lips and ignored the self gratifying dogmatic egos and blatant single interest in recruitment that we have encountered. The result is that we have been treated disrespectfully time and time again.

I could give these examples but it is all too boring and predictable. The upshot is that most freedom loving activists in Sheffield don't want to have anything to do with the SWP/GR. Sorry folks but there is only so much crap that people are prepared to put up with.

In terms of the discussion about GR, I think those of us that want to see an alternative to the SWP's antics have not yet taken on board the postive aspects of Schnews pamphlet and begun to develop an organised national network of red-black-green-feminist-anti-racist-internationalist-queer-fun loving - system NETWORKED!!! hating revolutionaries that it suggested (though it didn't quite put it like that)
and the reason we haven't - an adolescent fear of structure rather than a mature acceptance of participation, delegated responsibility and acountability

So Schnews or somebody else - how about calling a gathering of all who want to create such a network - this has to go beyond the EF! network, it has its own particular work to do, which is essential but is not going to be everbody's key thing.