hm, posturing clowns?
I don't think anti-capitalism would be enjoying it's current high profile as as cause/concept if it wasn't for the actions of those in the 'anarchist' or direct action 'movement'.

In the national consciousness, events like Mayday and J18, the successful anti-roads protests of the 90s.
On a local level, anarchists in my experience tend to be much more engaged with people on local issues than leninists who tend to isolate themselves through their political party mentality.

And on the whole I think that people find autonomous, grassroots decision making a lot more empowering and inspiring than Leninist 'democratic centralism'.

If the SWP is totally out of touch with ordinary people and the anarchists so popular why on Mayday were there 16,000 on the trade union march that the SWP supported and only about 1000 on the anarchist actions in Mayfair on the same day?

I'm not trying to make a sectarian point - I went on both protests. What I'm trying to say is that some anarchists are constantly trying to recreate another J18 - a high-point as they see it - when the reality has moved on.

Isn't the key to try and involve the working class, especially the unionised working class? This is what happened in Seattle and Genoa. It's the working class that has the real power to change society by acting collectively. Relating struggle to the working class seems to be a lesson the SWP has understood, but some anarchists have not.

Well weirdness, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. But a few points:

We did not give in to the SWP, just like we did not give in to Manchester Council and their campaign to close down our Victory to the Intifada picket and anyone else progressive who has a stall. This was why our stall was fine when you saw it.

The SWP's sectarian attitude towards similar left-social democratic/Trotskyist organisations that have come together to form the Socialist Alliance might have softened, but towards communists it has not. For example this year they would not even let supporters of Che Guevara into their session dedicated to rubbishing the revolutionary hero. So much for the "democracy" in social-democracy!

Its incorrect to say that we have been "an uncritical supporter of Third World nationalist movements". This is a very familiar accusation from those who don't actively oppose imperialism. We HAVE been consistent in supporting all national liberation movements of oppressed peoples against imperialism, especially against British imperialism. We have consistently defended the right of oppressed nations to self-determination IN A CONCRETE WAY, not abstract or idealist.

We are one of the few organisations to be doing anything consistent or practical in support of the Palestinian people's Intifada rather than just twittering and making hot air about whether there should be a one or two state solution etc; we have consistently supported the Irish people's right to self-determination and their right to fight for it by any means. We opposed both Labour and Tory occupation and torture and said no vote for them. And we consistently supported the South African people's struggle against apartheid.

Why do we support "nationalist" or correctly national liberation movements? There is a difference between the progressive nationalism (eg the struggle of the Palestinian or Irish people) that is aimed against imperialism and foreign oppression, and reactionary nationalism (like that of the BNP) which is for the "right" of the nation to oppress and exploit others. Communists have always been the most consistent defenders of the right of nations to self-determination and national liberation struggles, whether it was the Easter Rising or India's struggle in the past or Palestine today.

1) By replacing forced relations of oppression and occupation between nations with free and equal relations between nations, it will promote solidarity between the workers. (In what situation would international solidarity be strongest between Britain and Ireland - when British soldiers patrol Belfast and Derry and British society looks down on the Irish, or if chauvinism was overcome and the Irish people free?)

2) The defeat of imperialism in any nation by progressive forces is a blow against the British ruling class that exploits the whole world. It is an economic, political and moral blow against the old society and speeds its destruction.

3) The destruction of capitalism in Britain is promoted as the lifeblood of imperialism is cut off and its ability to stabilise itself and prevent crisis is undermined. Profits are hit and the rulers ability to buy-off the middle class and better paid workers who are used to tie the working class to the system is destroyed.

WE DO have a clear class based analysis of national liberation movements. WE SUPPORT THE RIGHT OF NATIONS TO SELF DETERMINATION NOT JUST FOR ITS OWN SAKE, BUT BECAUSE IT AIDS THE CAUSE OF SOCIALISM.
Generally national liberation movements consist of different class forces that come together to fight for freedom from foreign oppression. Yes they fight for different outcomes - no one can say for example that the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and Hamas are fighting for the same outcome, but they have come together against Zionism and imperialism. It is only if the working class wins in the liberation struggle and socialism is built that true liberation can be achieved. We criticised, for example the South African Communist Party for not defending the independence of the working class, not pushing for the working class to be the leading force in the ANC and therefore allowing a capitalist solution that did not overcome imperialism or poverty.

Therefore to say that the RCG is an "uncritical" supporter of "nationalist" movements is obviously just wrong.

On the other hand, the British left especially its Trotskyist trends have ditched or mutilated beyond recognition the principle of the right of nations to self-determination. Anti-imperialist movements, especially those that are forced to take up arms, are attacked as "petty bourgeois" or "nationalist", "Castroist", "guerrillaist", "Stalinist" as a way of ducking and diving and avoiding the real issue - that a handful of the world if oppressing and starving hundreds of millions. An imaginary and "pure" movement not contaminated by "nationalism" is substituted for the real living struggle. Imperialism is not confronted, solidarity is not provided. Social democracy and respectability is not disturbed, but are normally lined up with.

We support Cuba and the Communist Party of Cuba ("Castroism") because the Cuban people are building socialism and overcoming the starvation, poverty and disease that imperialism is creating in the rest of the world.Yet again most of the British left does not take a principled line and attacks Cuba with phrases like "Stalinism", "Castroism" and ignores its achievements while half the world starves, a really nasty form of middle-class socialism. This hostility to Cuba, like the hostility to liberation struggles is based on a hatred of anything that seriously threatens imperialism.

Its no surprise then that social democracy, opposition to liberation movements, hatred of Cuba and Trotskyism flourishes in the imperialist countries where the left is relatively weak, and is not found so much in the oppressed nations where the revolutionary tradition is stronger.

Together with a large number of other "weird" organisations from around the world that met at the Anti-Imperialist Camp in Italy recently, the Revolutionary Communist Group is committed to building a clear anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist pole in the anti-globalisation movement under the slogan "Turn the attack against Iraq into the end of the imperial world order"

Lastly, in Trotskyish, whats the difference between "Stalinoid", and "Stalinist" - an invented category that includes everything from revolutionary communism to social democracy?

Stop
the imperialist terror war!Final resolution of Assisi's Anti-imperialist
Camp


Turn the attack on Iraq into the end of the imperial world
order
The participants and organisations gathered at the Anti-Imperialist Camp in Assisi,
Italy, denounce the war waged by the US and its allies under the pretext of a
war against “terrorism”. The attack on the Afghan people, which caused thousands
of civilian deaths, has already shown that the real terrorists are the US and
its allies whose aim, is the elimination of any opposition in their drive for
global economic and political dominance.The "New World Order" was proclaimed
as the end of history, promising global peace, prosperity and democracy. In
reality the dictates of IMF, WB and WTO have brought unemployment, poverty and
misery. These are the conditions which the popular masses of Argentina and
elsewhere reacted against through their rebellion, as an expression of a new
global phase of social conflicts. The increasingly tyrannical character of
global capitalism was demonstrated by the violent repression of the Argentinean
people. The declaration of permanent war exposes these promises as a lie. It
shows the decline of the hegemony of imperialism and is an expression of the
intensifying social, political, cultural and military contradictions within the
system which will violently explode sooner or later.While the wretched of
the earth are deprived of their basic social and political rights, in the
imperialist countries themselves these rights are increasingly restricted.
Thousands of people are incarcerated in the US and Europe without trial because
of their Arab or Muslim decent as a form of racist oppression. Free expression
and coalition are falling victim to the "anti-terrorist" crusade as the West
attempts to eliminate anti-imperialist, revolutionary and communist forces from
political life. The notorious black list of the USA, adopted by the European
Union, is proscribing the liberation movements of the oppressed people as
terrorist, particularly targeting Palestinian forces, thereby violating its own
international laws stipulating resistance against colonialism and foreign
occupation as legitimate. The Anti-imperialist Camp will hold a protest
demonstration in Brussels on October 26 , 2002 calling for the cancellation of
the black list.The anti-globalisation movement has been representing the
first significant opposition against savage capitalism since 1989-91. Therefore
the Anti-imperialist Camp considers itself to be an integral part of this
movement. Faced with the escalation of international conflicts, this movement is
at a major turning point. For too long it has been evading a clear position,
being hypnotised by the humanitarian cover the West attributed to their
geo-strategic interests. In the face of imperialist aggression against the
Yugoslav people, under the guise of defending “Western values”, the movements
proclaimed neutrality passed unchallenged. After September 11 this was no longer
possible, as Bush declared that those who are not on the side of the US would be
hunted down as enemies. Some in the leadership of the movement revealed their
pro-imperialist character by expelling important anti-imperialist resistance
movements, including armed organisations. Thus they delivered the blueprint of
the what was to became the US and EU black list.The Anti-imperialist Camp
denounces the tendency to social democratic degeneration within the movement
which wants to preserve the capitalist world system by softening the abysmal
social contradictions. We oppose their covert and overt support for left
liberalism, which is under threat of expulsion from governmental power in many
European countries. We reject the US bi-party system being imposed in Europe and
we fight against both faces, left and right, of liberalism.The
Anti-imperialist Camp calls for the formation of an antagonistic
anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist pole gathering together the forces of the
anti-globalisation movement. We announce a united demonstration against the
European Union summit in Salonika in June 2003. We will mobilise against NATO
and to smash the EU.The Anti-imperialist Camp is denouncing the illegal
Hague tribunal against Slobodan Milosevic which is trying to legitimise NATO’s
criminal war against Yugoslavia and its people resisting the imperialist
dictates. Furthermore we oppose attempts of the West to impose international
jurisdiction by establishing an International Criminal Court in the Hague,
merely an attempt to criminalize resistance and legitimise imperialist
interests. We condemn the denial of human rights of prisoners of war who are
detained like animals in cages. The US internment camp in Guantanamo is the most
blatant case. We support all attempts to investigate the massacre against the
popular movement of Indonesia in 1965 masterminded by imperialism and causing
the death of millions, and to indict its perpetrators and rehabilitate its
victims. We call for the release of all political prisoners rotting in the cells
of the imperialists and their lackeys (like the Cuban five in the US). As an
example we mention the struggle of the revolutionaries in the Turkish prisons.
We will stage an international protest meeting on December 19 2002, to
commemorate and protest the massacre committed by the NATO state against the
political prisoners in order to crush their resistance..We unconditionally
defend the right of the oppressed peoples for social and national
self-determination against imperialism. In this context we stress the importance
of the struggle of indigenous people for autonomy. The Anti-imperialist Camp
defends socialist Cuba and its resistance against US aggression and call for the
lifting of the criminal blockade. We denounce the invention of the ”axis of
evil” and defend these countries against the escalating aggression. We denounce
the imperialist inspired coup d’etat against the Bolivarian government of Chavez
in Venezuela and support the popular struggle against the oligarchy. We give
full support to the liberation struggle of the Colombian people against the
continuing massacre committed by the paramilitary forces of the Colombian
oligarchy and supported by the US through Plan Colombia under the pretext of the
so-called war on drugs. We condemn the continuing extermination campaign against
the trade unions, the peasant organisations and the left opposition. We will
develop a solidarity movement with the Filipino and Nepalese popular resistance
against impending military interventions. We reiterate our support for the right
of self-determination for the Basque people and all other oppressed minorities
within the EU particularly for those forces who strive for socialism.Zionism
is the most brutal and inhumane form of colonial Apartheid and imperialist
oppression. Therefore the David against Goliath resistance of the Palestinian
people is an outstanding example which inspires the global anti-imperialist
struggle. We stand with the Palestinian people and their demands for the
immediate withdrawal of the Zionist occupation, the dismantlement of the Israeli
settlements, the right to return to their homes and for a sovereign state with
Jerusalem as the capital. As the ultimate resolution we endorse the perspective
of the revolutionary forces of the Middle East for a democratic state in
historic Palestine. We call for an international mobilisation on the anniversary
of the second Intifada on September 28 around the world, and will organise an
anti-imperialist solidarity delegation.Finally we call upon all the
democratic, anti-imperialist and revolutionary forces of the world to prepare to
defend Iraq and its people against the ongoing genocide and the war the
imperialist wish to wage against it, if they dare. We are announcing an
international solidarity delegation to serve as a human shield. At the same time
we will support the attempt of the anti-imperialist forces to transform the
imperialist aggression into a popular liberation war aiming to bring about the
end of the New World Order.
Where there is oppression, there will be resistance!Down with the US and
EU terror list – defend basic democratic rights!Turn the imperialist war
into revolutionary movements for national liberation and socialism!
Abnaa el Balad, Sons of the
Earth, PalestineAction of Tchad for Unity and SocialismBayan,
PhilippinesBsB, Movement for Social Liberation, AustriaCampaign against
impunity in ColombiaCMKP, Communist Worker's Peasant Party,
PakistanCommunards, SardiniaComunitarismu et Indipendentzia,
SardiniaDHKC, Revolutionary People’s Liberation Front,
Turkey/KurdistanDirection 17, ItalyEarth and Liberation, SicilyEHK,
Euskal Herria CommunistsIAC,
International Action Center, USAIDP, Popular Democratic Left, MexicoILC,
International Leninist
CurrentIRSP, Irish Republican Socialist PartyLoyalty for men and
earth, LebanonMovement for the Con-federation of Communists, ItalyNew
Left Front, HungaryPopular Committee for the support of the Palestinian
People and the Struggle against the Normalisation with the Zionist Enemy in
TunesiaPFLP, Popular Front for the Liberation of PalestineRCG, Revolutionary Communist Group,
BritainRed Action, Duisburg, GermanyRed Action, Nürnberg, GermanyRed
Umbria, ItalyResumen
LatinoamericanoRKL, Revolutionary Communist League, AustriaRKL,
Revolutionary Communist League, Thuringia, GermanySupport Group for the
mothers of May Place, Basque CountryYPKP, Indonesian Institute for the
investigation of the 1965/66 massacre, Indonesia
Mohamed Regraigui, militant of the Moroccan revolutionary left

Police arrest M&S picketer.

Police arrested Bob Derbyshire on Saturday 17 August at the weekly picket of Marks and Spencer in Market Street, central Manchester. It was the latest phase in a campaign of harassment led by the Council Licencing Department some of whose officials are determined to close down the picket altogether.

Saturday afternoon pickets outside Manchester centre M&S have taken place for nearly two years, from a month after the start of the Intifada. Now organised by Fight Racism! Fight Imperialism! Victory to the Intifada group, they are supported by the local Palestine Solidarity Committee and the Muslim Public Affairs Committee. Normally the pickets involve 15 - 30 people. The pickets have had a stall and in the past participants have been able to use a megaphone and collect money. That all changed from March 2002, when officials from the Licencing Department decided that the stall constituted a danger to the public under the Highway Act and confiscated it. The threatened summons failed to materialise, and in successive weeks picketers were able to keep the stall. Police started to pay some attention to the picket but agreed that the stall did not constitute an obstruction.

However, two council officials have made it their business to ensure that the stall is not erected, and have taken to arriving at the picket just before it starts and issuing warnings about the consequences if they find it set up. One of these zealots is Joyce Walkden, who has also decided that draping placards over nearby railings is also an offence since it constitutes fly-posting.

On 17 August, picketers found Joyce Walkden and two sidekicks waiting for them at 11.40, 20 minutes before the start of the picket. Ms Walkden said that if we put the stall up she would return with the police to have it removed together with any placards draped on the railings. Once she left some picketers put the stall up anyway. All went well until about 13:10, when Ms Walkden and her cronies returned. They could not do anything until the police arrived, at about 13:20 - Inspector Orr and Sergeant Duncan. Then all five of them marched up to Bob and demanded to know his name, address and date of birth since they were going to refer him to their legal department for possible further action. Bob duly gave his name and address, but declined to give his date of birth. Both police officers decided that Bob had to give his date of birth. Bob refused, saying that not only was he under no legal obligation to provide the information, and that the licencing officers had verified his details on an earlier occasion. As the argument went on so the cops started to lose it, as did the licencing officers, who decided picketers were 'touting' and 'importuning' illegally, and were also causing an obstruction. Finally the cops snapped, and told Bob they were arresting him under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act for obstruction.

Picketers decided to continue the protest until 13:45, when they moved to the nearby Bootle Street police station to protest at Bob's arrest. On arrival at 14:00, we were told that Bob would not be released for some hours whilst he was 'processed'. Supporters around the country were contacted and asked to phone the station demanding to know when he was going to be released. Outside picketers kept up a barrage of chants. Suddenly, at 14:15, Bob was released as the desk sergeant said they had verified who he was. So far he has not been charged.

The Council appears determined to close down the picket altogether. They are perfectly happy to interfere with the human right to demonstrate and protest. The weekly pickets have been effective in building solidarity with the Palestinian people and the Manchester Zionist supporters do not like that. FRFI Victory to the Intifada group is determined to ensure that the picket continues, and calls on all supporters to attend the next one on 24 August, starting at 12 noon prompt.

Stop
the imperialist terror war!Final resolution of Assisi's Anti-imperialist
Camp


Turn the attack on Iraq into the end of the imperial world
order
The participants and organisations gathered at the Anti-Imperialist Camp in Assisi,
Italy, denounce the war waged by the US and its allies under the pretext of a
war against “terrorism”. The attack on the Afghan people, which caused thousands
of civilian deaths, has already shown that the real terrorists are the US and
its allies whose aim, is the elimination of any opposition in their drive for
global economic and political dominance.The "New World Order" was proclaimed
as the end of history, promising global peace, prosperity and democracy. In
reality the dictates of IMF, WB and WTO have brought unemployment, poverty and
misery. These are the conditions which the popular masses of Argentina and
elsewhere reacted against through their rebellion, as an expression of a new
global phase of social conflicts. The increasingly tyrannical character of
global capitalism was demonstrated by the violent repression of the Argentinean
people. The declaration of permanent war exposes these promises as a lie. It
shows the decline of the hegemony of imperialism and is an expression of the
intensifying social, political, cultural and military contradictions within the
system which will violently explode sooner or later.While the wretched of
the earth are deprived of their basic social and political rights, in the
imperialist countries themselves these rights are increasingly restricted.
Thousands of people are incarcerated in the US and Europe without trial because
of their Arab or Muslim decent as a form of racist oppression. Free expression
and coalition are falling victim to the "anti-terrorist" crusade as the West
attempts to eliminate anti-imperialist, revolutionary and communist forces from
political life. The notorious black list of the USA, adopted by the European
Union, is proscribing the liberation movements of the oppressed people as
terrorist, particularly targeting Palestinian forces, thereby violating its own
international laws stipulating resistance against colonialism and foreign
occupation as legitimate. The Anti-imperialist Camp will hold a protest
demonstration in Brussels on October 26 , 2002 calling for the cancellation of
the black list.The anti-globalisation movement has been representing the
first significant opposition against savage capitalism since 1989-91. Therefore
the Anti-imperialist Camp considers itself to be an integral part of this
movement. Faced with the escalation of international conflicts, this movement is
at a major turning point. For too long it has been evading a clear position,
being hypnotised by the humanitarian cover the West attributed to their
geo-strategic interests. In the face of imperialist aggression against the
Yugoslav people, under the guise of defending “Western values”, the movements
proclaimed neutrality passed unchallenged. After September 11 this was no longer
possible, as Bush declared that those who are not on the side of the US would be
hunted down as enemies. Some in the leadership of the movement revealed their
pro-imperialist character by expelling important anti-imperialist resistance
movements, including armed organisations. Thus they delivered the blueprint of
the what was to became the US and EU black list.The Anti-imperialist Camp
denounces the tendency to social democratic degeneration within the movement
which wants to preserve the capitalist world system by softening the abysmal
social contradictions. We oppose their covert and overt support for left
liberalism, which is under threat of expulsion from governmental power in many
European countries. We reject the US bi-party system being imposed in Europe and
we fight against both faces, left and right, of liberalism.The
Anti-imperialist Camp calls for the formation of an antagonistic
anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist pole gathering together the forces of the
anti-globalisation movement. We announce a united demonstration against the
European Union summit in Salonika in June 2003. We will mobilise against NATO
and to smash the EU.The Anti-imperialist Camp is denouncing the illegal
Hague tribunal against Slobodan Milosevic which is trying to legitimise NATO’s
criminal war against Yugoslavia and its people resisting the imperialist
dictates. Furthermore we oppose attempts of the West to impose international
jurisdiction by establishing an International Criminal Court in the Hague,
merely an attempt to criminalize resistance and legitimise imperialist
interests. We condemn the denial of human rights of prisoners of war who are
detained like animals in cages. The US internment camp in Guantanamo is the most
blatant case. We support all attempts to investigate the massacre against the
popular movement of Indonesia in 1965 masterminded by imperialism and causing
the death of millions, and to indict its perpetrators and rehabilitate its
victims. We call for the release of all political prisoners rotting in the cells
of the imperialists and their lackeys (like the Cuban five in the US). As an
example we mention the struggle of the revolutionaries in the Turkish prisons.
We will stage an international protest meeting on December 19 2002, to
commemorate and protest the massacre committed by the NATO state against the
political prisoners in order to crush their resistance..We unconditionally
defend the right of the oppressed peoples for social and national
self-determination against imperialism. In this context we stress the importance
of the struggle of indigenous people for autonomy. The Anti-imperialist Camp
defends socialist Cuba and its resistance against US aggression and call for the
lifting of the criminal blockade. We denounce the invention of the ”axis of
evil” and defend these countries against the escalating aggression. We denounce
the imperialist inspired coup d’etat against the Bolivarian government of Chavez
in Venezuela and support the popular struggle against the oligarchy. We give
full support to the liberation struggle of the Colombian people against the
continuing massacre committed by the paramilitary forces of the Colombian
oligarchy and supported by the US through Plan Colombia under the pretext of the
so-called war on drugs. We condemn the continuing extermination campaign against
the trade unions, the peasant organisations and the left opposition. We will
develop a solidarity movement with the Filipino and Nepalese popular resistance
against impending military interventions. We reiterate our support for the right
of self-determination for the Basque people and all other oppressed minorities
within the EU particularly for those forces who strive for socialism.Zionism
is the most brutal and inhumane form of colonial Apartheid and imperialist
oppression. Therefore the David against Goliath resistance of the Palestinian
people is an outstanding example which inspires the global anti-imperialist
struggle. We stand with the Palestinian people and their demands for the
immediate withdrawal of the Zionist occupation, the dismantlement of the Israeli
settlements, the right to return to their homes and for a sovereign state with
Jerusalem as the capital. As the ultimate resolution we endorse the perspective
of the revolutionary forces of the Middle East for a democratic state in
historic Palestine. We call for an international mobilisation on the anniversary
of the second Intifada on September 28 around the world, and will organise an
anti-imperialist solidarity delegation.Finally we call upon all the
democratic, anti-imperialist and revolutionary forces of the world to prepare to
defend Iraq and its people against the ongoing genocide and the war the
imperialist wish to wage against it, if they dare. We are announcing an
international solidarity delegation to serve as a human shield. At the same time
we will support the attempt of the anti-imperialist forces to transform the
imperialist aggression into a popular liberation war aiming to bring about the
end of the New World Order.
Where there is oppression, there will be resistance!Down with the US and
EU terror list – defend basic democratic rights!Turn the imperialist war
into revolutionary movements for national liberation and socialism!
Abnaa el Balad, Sons of the
Earth, PalestineAction of Tchad for Unity and SocialismBayan,
PhilippinesBsB, Movement for Social Liberation, AustriaCampaign against
impunity in ColombiaCMKP, Communist Worker's Peasant Party,
PakistanCommunards, SardiniaComunitarismu et Indipendentzia,
SardiniaDHKC, Revolutionary People’s Liberation Front,
Turkey/KurdistanDirection 17, ItalyEarth and Liberation, SicilyEHK,
Euskal Herria CommunistsIAC,
International Action Center, USAIDP, Popular Democratic Left, MexicoILC,
International Leninist
CurrentIRSP, Irish Republican Socialist PartyLoyalty for men and
earth, LebanonMovement for the Con-federation of Communists, ItalyNew
Left Front, HungaryPopular Committee for the support of the Palestinian
People and the Struggle against the Normalisation with the Zionist Enemy in
TunesiaPFLP, Popular Front for the Liberation of PalestineRCG, Revolutionary Communist Group,
BritainRed Action, Duisburg, GermanyRed Action, Nürnberg, GermanyRed
Umbria, ItalyResumen
LatinoamericanoRKL, Revolutionary Communist League, AustriaRKL,
Revolutionary Communist League, Thuringia, GermanySupport Group for the
mothers of May Place, Basque CountryYPKP, Indonesian Institute for the
investigation of the 1965/66 massacre, Indonesia
Mohamed Regraigui, militant of the Moroccan revolutionary left

the fact that you have to call it "democratic centralism" is so sad. The word itself implies justification for authroitarianism and dictatorship. Very very sad.

Also,anarchists,as im sure you allready have heard,DO believe in organising. We just happen to think it should be democratic-i.e the people involved should decide-not the leaders of some fucking party!

THE RIGHT OF NATIONS TO SELF-DETERMINATION
(Revolutionary Road to Communism in Britain, 1984)

Out of the super-profits of imperialism and on the backs of oppressed nations, the bourgeoisie of the imperialist powers had bribed an upper stratum of workers and built a labour aristocracy isolated from the conditions of poverty of the vast majority of workers. This was the objective basis of opportunism on an international scale. These opportunists are agents of the bourgeoisie and vehicles of its influence in the working class movement. They support the colonial policy of their bourgeoisie for it is the source of their privileges and status. Unless the working class movement rids itself of the influence of these opportunists it will remain tied to the bourgeoisie. In other words, the influence of the labour aristocracy has to be destroyed and opportunism defeated or the socialist revolution in the imperialist countries will not be possible. That is why the revolutionary struggle for socialism has to be linked up with a revolutionary programme on the national question.

What was true ofthe relationship of Britain and Ireland in the later part of the nineteenth century was mirrored all over the world with the development of imperialism as a world system. By building on the political experience of Marx and Engels on the Irish question, Lenin was able to formulate the revolutionary position in relation to national oppression in the epoch of imperialism. In particular, he was able to make clear the attitude the working class of an imperialist nation should adopt towards national liberation movements.

Internationalism, in the epoch of imperialism demands a resolute struggle against national oppression and support for the right of nations to self-determination. Many socialists have tried to argue against all nationalism on the grounds that they are "internationalists" But this is to turn internationalism into a lifeless and reactionary abstraction. This avoids confronting the reality of imperialism: the fact that the world has been divided into oppressor and oppressed nations and that national oppression has been extended and intensified. It also ignores the split in the working class movement. One section, the labour aristocracy, has been corrupted by the 'crumbs that fall from the table' of the imperialist bourgeoisie, obtained from the super-exploitation and brutal oppression of the people from oppressed nations. The other, the mass of the working class, cannot liberate itself without uniting with the movement of oppressed peoples against imperialist domination. Only such an alliance will make it possible to wage a united fight against the imperialist powers, the imperialist bourgeoisie, and their bought-off agents in the working class movement. This means the working class fighting in alliance with national liberation movements to destroy imperialism for the purpose of the socialist revolution.

The unity of all forces against imperialism can only be achieved on the basis of the internationalist principle 'No nation can be free if it oppresses other nations'. This is expressed through the demand of the right of nations to self-determination. Far from being counterposed to the socialist revolution, it is precisely to promote it that communists are so insistent on this demand. This demand recognises that class solidarity of workers is strengthened by the substitution of voluntary ties between nations for compulsory, militaristic ones. The demand for complete equality between nations, by removing distrust between the workers of the oppressor and oppressed nations, lays the foundation for a united international struggle for the socialist revolution. That is, for the only regime under which complete national equality can be achieved.

Our 'internationalists', when confronted with these arguments, are forced to adopt yet another line of approach. Of course, they say, we support the right of nations to self-determination, but as 'socialists' we are opposed to bourgeois and/or petty bourgeois nationalism. Once again, they avoid the reality of national oppression. They ignore the fact that, as Lenin pointed out, the actual conditions of the workers in the oppressed and in the oppressor nations are not the same from the standpoint of national oppression. The struggle of the working class against national oppression has a twofold character.

'(a) First, it is the "action" of the nationally oppressed proletariat and peasantry jointly with the nationally oppressed bourgeoisie against the oppressor nation; (b) second, it is the "action" of the proletariat, or its class conscious section, in the oppressor nation against the bourgeoisie of that nation and all the elements that follow it.' (Lenin Collected Works Vol 23 p77)
Let us examine these two points in turn.

In general, all national movements are an alliance of different class forces which unite together for the purpose of achieving national freedom. The bourgeoisie in the oppressed nation supports the struggle for national freedom only in so far as it promotes its own class interests. For this class, national freedom means the freedom to exploit its own working class, to accumulate wealth for itself, to establish itself as a national capitalist class. If, at any point, the struggle for national freedom threatens the conditions of capitalist exploitation itself, the bourgeoisie will abandon the national struggle for an alliance with imperialism.

The working class supports the struggle for national freedom as part of its struggle to abolish all privilege, all oppression and all exploitation - this being the precondition of its own emancipation. The working class policy in the national movement is to support the bourgeoisie only in a certain direction, but it never coincides with the bourgeoisie's policy. For this reason, the working class only gives the bourgeoisie conditional support. In so far as the bourgeoisie of the oppressed nation fights the oppressor, the working class strongly supports its struggle. As Lenin so clearly argued in 1914:

'The bourgeois nationalism of any oppressed nation has a general democratic content that is directed against oppression, and it is this content that we unconditionally support.' (Lenin Collected Works Vol 20 p412)
Insofar as the bourgeoisie of the oppressed nation stands for its own bourgeois nationalism, for privileges for itself the working class opposes it.

The important thing for the working class is to ensure the development of its class. The bourgeoisie is concerned to hamper this development by pushing forward its own class interests at the expense ofthe working class. The outcome of this clash of interests in the national struggle cannot be determined in advance. It depends on the concrete context in which the struggle for national freedom takes place.

The guiding light for the working-class movement is clear. The working class rejects all privileges for its 'own' national bourgeoisie, and its 'own' nation. It is opposed to compulsory ties between nations standing firmly for the equality of nations. In the imperialist nation, the working class can only express this position by insisting on the right of nations to self-determination. And it does this in the interest of international working class solidarity. A refusal to support the right of nations to self-determination must mean in practice support for the privileges of its own ruling class and its bought-off agents in the working class movement. Therefore, support for the right of nations to self-determination is the only basis for a united struggle aginst national oppression and imperialism, and for the socialist revolution.

The revolutionary standpoint therefore demands that the working class in the imperialist nation 'make common cause' with the oppressed peoples fighting imperialism. And, as Lenin argued, socialists could not, without ceasing to be socialists, reject such a struggle right down to an uprising or war. For the working class to side with its own ruling class or not actively oppose it, in the imperialist domination of the oppressed peoples necessarily means to strengthen the domination of opportunist forces over itself. Further, it undermines the unity of the working class in the oppressed and oppressor nations and hence the possibility of defeating imperialism and beginning the socialist revolution. Nothing demonstrates these essential points better than the relation of the British working class movement to the Irish struggle for freedom before, during and after the First Imperialist World War.

This "United Secretariat of the Fouth International" (these "Fourth Internationals" are many and tedious) that Chris Edwards talks of takes the form of the International Socialist Group (newspaper Socialist Outlook) in Britain. This organisation is one of the usual Labourite crowd and one of the smaller tendencies in the Socialist Alliance. In the opportunist SA (now there's an unfortunate accronym) it has been marked by a particularly outstanding opportunism, eg by calling for "more resources for the police"(!) and by saying "we don't always have to tell the truth... we can reach out to forces to our right". Just about sums it up!

The USFI's leading organisation is the "Revolutionary Communist League" (LCR) in France which told people to vote for Chirac (the equivalent of the Tories in Britain) at the election because they thought Le Pen was worse. Class independence?

So who can trust these "more resources for the police" "we don't always have to tell the truth... we can reach out to forces to our right" Trots? They are to the RIGHT of the SWP.The cynical nature of these people's criticism of important liberation movements as "nationalist" and having "no class independence" is obvious.

Socialist Alliance – old Labour for new

(Source - Fight Racism! Fight Imperialism 160 April/May 2001)

Over the past couple of years most of the organisations on the British left have joined together in the Socialist Alliance (SA). The SA claims to be the start of a new movement, an alternative to Labour at the next general election. Its website states 'the Socialist Alliance represents a clear break in British politics...the future for the millions struggling for a better world, the overthrow of capitalism and a new sort of society...the most serious socialist challenge to the Labour Party for more than a generation'. This is a lofty claim. But should we believe it? Is the SA really a step forward for socialism in Britain? Does it represent something new? Or is it mutton dressed up as lamb, Old Labour in new garb? JIM CRAVEN investigates.


Last time they told us to vote Labour

The leading members of the SA are the Socialist Workers Party (SWP), Socialist Party (SP), Workers Power (WP), Alliance for Workers Liberty (AWL) and the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB). All bar the last told us to vote for Labour at the 1997 general election. The largest of them, the SWP, has always tailed behind the official labour movement and consistently condemned the working class whenever they have fought back against imperialist attacks. The SWP welcomed British troops into Ireland in 1969, condemned the uprisings of black and white youth in 1981 and criticised miners' defence squads in 1984/85.
Despite the despicable racist and imperialist history of the Labour Party, the SWP and the rest of these groups have always maintained that Labour is some sort of working class party. Thus the CPGB, which portrays itself as on the left of SA, argues that 'It is true that Labour has not, as yet, gone through the final consummation of the Blair project and become an outright bourgeois party' (Weekly Worker 15 March). As an example of the difference between Labour now and Labour 30 years ago, it contrasts Wilson's inability to send troops to VietNam because of grassroots opposition to the war, with Blair's leading role in the wars against Iraq and Kosovo. But of course it 'forgets' Ireland like the rest of the left, and ignores the fact it was the Wilson government which sent troops into Ireland in 1969. Labour has always been an imperialist party!


Still tied to Labour's apron strings

So the left urged us to vote Labour in 1997, and peddled the illusion that it would be better than the Tories. Now that Labour has once again shown how reactionary it is, the left is having to mount a display of opposition. But its 'opposition' is always to 'New Labour' rather than to the Labour Party, and anyway is diluted to building an 'alternative'; thus the left is urged 'to build a left focus for the sense of disillusionment and betrayal with New Labour...with a view to involving all those who are looking to an alternative to New Labour's neo-liberal agenda' (Socialist Worker).
So instead of an unequivocal call for a decisive break with Labour, we get the most contorted formulations, such as this from the CPGB: 'Of course this (refusal to vote for Blair loyalists) in no way precludes tactical electoral support for any Labour candidate who concretely represents some kind of progressive working-class based opposition to, or break from, Blairism, thereby in some way constituting an expression of Labour's current submerged proletarian component.' As if! For 'submerged' read 'drowned', and that decades ago!

To show the limits of their 'opposition', SA candidates will not stand against 'left' Labour candidates or in Labour marginals. The SA even decided not to stand in Brent East because Ken Livingstone, whose seat it used to be, is backing the Blairite candidate. This is the same Livingstone whose election as London Mayor last May SA hailed as a 'break to the left from Labour'. In fact, the SWP make it clear 'we still prefer a Labour victory to a Tory one'. So whereas last time their election slogans were 'Vote socialist or Labour' and 'Kick the Tories Out', this year they will be 'Vote socialist - build a left alternative to Blair' and 'Don't let the Tories in'. Such is the insignificant political change in their position.

As with any electoral organisation, all that matters to the SA are votes, any votes, and it will twist, turn and spin its policies to get them. According to reports in the Weekly Worker, the SWP in the Bedfordshire SA opposed anti-monarchy and free abortion policies because they might scare-off potential royalist and pro-life voters. In Haringey, Louise Christian, the SA candidate for Hornsey and Wood Green, claimed to oppose all immigration controls but didn't want to campaign around the slogan 'No immigration controls' even though she is standing against the appalling Immigration Minister Barbara Roche. Leading SWP member, Michael Bradley agreed, saying 'frustrated Labour Party members wouldn't vote for too radical an alternative'. The SA candidate for Tottenham, Weyman Bennett was another who did not want to put forward demands that might seem 'too radical' for union branches and regions.

At an SA manifesto conference in March (Weekly Worker 15 March), Hannah Sell, a leading member of the SP, was another who claimed to support the scrapping of immigration laws yet didn't want it included in the manifesto because the call for open borders was 'utopian' and 'even the most advanced sections of the working class' were against it. So it seems there are no votes to be won by opposing racism. Dave Packer of the International Socialist Group capped it all by saying, '(we) don't always have to tell the truth...(we) can reach out to forces to our right' and gave an example of how to do this by demanding 'more resources' for the police!


Old Labour promises

If you question their socialist credentials these people will point to radical demands which are in their manifesto. But when it comes to actually making a stand on these demands such as opposing immigration controls, SA retreats behind the electoral tactic of seeking broad-based support for moderate policies. Electioneering is replacing class struggle: very Old Labour indeed.
Most telling of all is the lack of any international issues among SA's major policies, apart from 'save the planet' and 'cancel Third World debt'. Key issues for the international working class and the defeat of imperialism are in practice ignored - victory to the Palestinian people, British imperialism out of Ireland, imperialist troops out of the Gulf, end the bombing and blockade of Iraq, defend socialist Cuba. These have to be defended by socialists claiming to 'represent the future for the millions struggling for a better world, the overthrow of capitalism and a new sort of society'. As with the call for an end to all immigration controls it is not surprising that groups refusing to oppose imperialism have kicked such demands into touch.


The revolutionary alternative for the working class

Voting for one bunch or another of racist, imperialist crooks, Labour or Tory, is no answer for the working class. Simply posing as an 'alternative' to 'the betrayal of New Labour' is no answer either. There can be no working class movement in this country until the Labour Party and every rotten tradition it stands for is smashed. The Socialist Alliance is neither 'a clean break in British politics' nor a 'socialist challenge to Labour'. It is an electoral ginger group; a tactical alliance of the tired social-democratic forces of the British left trying to patch together Old Labour out of New Labour cast-offs.
The alternative is to turn to the poorest sections of the working class who are fighting the realities of a Labour government, racism and imperialism every day of their lives, those who have no interest in Labour old or new. The new movement cannot be built artificially on the basis of electoral pacts, it will arise from the real class struggles of these people. The SA will be an irrelevance to them.


Snouts in the trough

As SA candidates trim and tailor their policies to maximise their votes, we will discover amongst them self-seekers who really hunger to get their snouts in the trough. We won't support them, and we won't support the SA project because it encourages this behaviour. Our position will be as it always has been: we will support any candidate who represents a real working class struggle or an independent working class political force.

Bribery and corruption – all in a day's work for Labour

The feeble whitewash by the Hammond Inquiry into the Hinduja brothers' passport applications cannot mask the cesspit of sleaze that the Labour Party and their big-business mates slosh around in.

Robinson rears from the slime again

Geoffrey Robinson, the Labour Paymaster General forced to resign over a dodgy £323,000 loan for Peter Mandelson's house, now stands accused of lying over a £200,000 payment from arch-crook and Labour supporter Robert Maxwell. Robinson swore blind that he never received the money. A report with proof about the payment was allegedly hushed up by Stephen Byers in 1999. Blair and Brown have rushed to Robinson's defence; they have, after all, benefited from his largesse. Blair has holidayed at Robinson's luxury villa in Tuscany, while Brown and his advisers have stayed at Robinson's apartment in Cannes. Robinson's business interests, like those of Maxwell before him, are littered with shady dealings.

Hands up if you think Mandelson is innocent

Hammond found 'no evidence' of a link between Peter Mandelson's 'inquiries' about the Hinduja brothers' passport applications and their offer to sponsor the Dome, and was 'unable to come to any definite conclusion' about whether Mandelson tried to hush up his contact with Mike O'Brien at the Home Office over the applications. This has allowed Mandelson to get off in return for promising not to expect any apologies or an early return to government.

Keith Vaz up to his neck in it

Hammond also excused Europe minister Keith Vaz of any improper support for the Hindujas' passport applications, despite the fact the Hindujas were sponsoring another millennium project with which Vaz was involved.
Vaz has refused to co-operate with another inquiry by the Commons Standards Committee into allegations of corruption in his Leicester East constituency. Allegations included receiving bribes for help with planning permissions and land deals and taking payments meant as Labour Party donations. To a further allegation that he received contributions from a company for his parliamentary campaign without disclosing the source of the company's income, Vaz said that he knew nothing of the company's affairs. The company is run by Vaz's wife and his mother!

New allegations accuse Vaz of not disclosing the Hinduja Foundation as the source of payments received by Vaz's company for helping to organise a Hinduja sponsored reception at the House of Commons. Suspicions of widespread corruption in the Leicester East constituency were reinforced when local Labour officers claimed to have lost records of financial transactions between them and Vaz.


Corruption is part of the system

This is not just a case of a few bad apples; of weak characters falling prey to occasional temptation. Bribery and corruption are endemic to capitalism. Swapping favours and greasing palms is all part of a day's work. It becomes so natural that those involved don't even register it as corruption. For the present Vaz retains 'the full support' of Blair and Robin Cook. After the election they may dump him, but more sleaze will follow.

Jim Craven

Trotsky and Lenin were the architects of the Bolshevik counter-revolution fighting for what Lenin called state capitalism and against workers power as expressed through the Factory Committees. Trotsky was himself responsible for the militarisation of labour on the railroads. He organised the military assault on the Kronstadt Soviet using troops who did not speak Russian.

If you really want to put forward communist politics in a way that challenges the anarchists it would be better to root it in something genuine like the tradition of Otto Ruhle and Anton Pannekoek than the bourgeois politics of Lenin and co.

Now this is what I want from IMC! Far-left groups posting up pages and pages and pages of closely-typed critiques of each other. Stuff your tedious marches and strikes; let's have more precise analysis of who to blame for the disintegration of the Fourth/Fifth International, and who's the most bourgeois sell-out quasi-imperialist etc etc.

Pity those spoilsports in the SWP won't join in. "We've got more important things to do"; well la-de-da! I mean, how dare they? What's more important than arguing with each other?