SWP condemn direct action as 'elitism'
Jules | 18.11.2002 13:48
Lindsey German, chair of the Stop the War Coalition and leading Socialist Workers Party member, accused people involved in non-violent direct action of 'elitism' in a major article in this month's issue of the SWP's Socialist Review.
While discussing the success of the recent 400,000 strong march in central London, German counterposed big marches to non-violent direct action:
"When we talk about direct action and civil disobedience we mean mass direct action which can involve large numbers of trade unionists, students and peace campaigners. If small groups of people want to go off and do their own thing, or spend time training in non violent direct action techniques, that is fine, but they should not try to impose this elitism on the rest of us."
A recent anti-war demonstration in Brighton was attacked by police with batons and pepper spray. Without the non-violent direct action training undertaken by those involved, including local SWP members, the demonstration would have been ended by the police.
NVDA is used by hundreds of groups across the United States as a part of the masive anti-war movement. NVDA training played a major part in the success of the action against the World Trade Organisation in Seattle in 1999.
German counterposes her support for "mass direct action" to the "elitism" of training for direct action. This allows her, and the SWP in general, to claim they are supporting direct action in an abstract way while condemning it in reality - appearing radical to young people wanting to take action against the war while steering the movement away from any form of protest that goes beyond traditional marches.
Tactics, including illegal actions, unacceptable to the middle class Labour Party members that the SWP hopes to win to its party are condemned. While condemning direct action as elitist, the SWP voted for the government in the majority of seats in the last general election.
Clearly the SWP plays a major role in organising anti-war activity in Britain. Any support is welcome in this broad movement, including that of groups like the SWP who vote for the government.
In the coming months anti-war activists will have to decide whether to let the SWP's prejudices against illegal and direct activity restrict opposition to this war to legal, and in themselves ineffective, marches and demonstrations - or whether to welcome, build, train for and organise a wide range of protests against the coming invasion of the middle east and all the horrors it will unlease.
"When we talk about direct action and civil disobedience we mean mass direct action which can involve large numbers of trade unionists, students and peace campaigners. If small groups of people want to go off and do their own thing, or spend time training in non violent direct action techniques, that is fine, but they should not try to impose this elitism on the rest of us."
A recent anti-war demonstration in Brighton was attacked by police with batons and pepper spray. Without the non-violent direct action training undertaken by those involved, including local SWP members, the demonstration would have been ended by the police.
NVDA is used by hundreds of groups across the United States as a part of the masive anti-war movement. NVDA training played a major part in the success of the action against the World Trade Organisation in Seattle in 1999.
German counterposes her support for "mass direct action" to the "elitism" of training for direct action. This allows her, and the SWP in general, to claim they are supporting direct action in an abstract way while condemning it in reality - appearing radical to young people wanting to take action against the war while steering the movement away from any form of protest that goes beyond traditional marches.
Tactics, including illegal actions, unacceptable to the middle class Labour Party members that the SWP hopes to win to its party are condemned. While condemning direct action as elitist, the SWP voted for the government in the majority of seats in the last general election.
Clearly the SWP plays a major role in organising anti-war activity in Britain. Any support is welcome in this broad movement, including that of groups like the SWP who vote for the government.
In the coming months anti-war activists will have to decide whether to let the SWP's prejudices against illegal and direct activity restrict opposition to this war to legal, and in themselves ineffective, marches and demonstrations - or whether to welcome, build, train for and organise a wide range of protests against the coming invasion of the middle east and all the horrors it will unlease.
Jules
Homepage:
http://www.swp.org.uk/SR/268/SR3.HTM
Comments
Display the following 23 comments