Skip to content or view screen version

SWPs Chris Bambery: Join 'Stop the War' or we'll shoot you!

Spartacist League Britain | 06.03.2003 21:07

Protest SWP political exclusionism and threats of violence! For open political debate!

------- Spartacist League Statement -------

SWP’s Chris Bambery:
Join "Stop the War" or we’ll shoot you!

MARCH 1--The "Revolution 2003" teach-in at LSE organised by the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) this weekend featured self-appointed SWP thought police dispatching goon squads to harass the Spartacist League and Spartacus Youth Group and to impede the public from access to our revolutionary Marxist views. Inside the teach-in, the threats escalated after floor interventions by two young women supporters of the Spartacist League, who argued that opposition to the Iraq war and its domestic repercussions in the anti-Muslim witchhunt requires opposition to the Labour government, and exposed the SWP’s support to Islamic fundamentalism, as well as its earlier support to the dispatch of British troops to Northern Ireland under a Labour government. In response, SWP honcho Chris Bambery fumed that anyone who doesn’t politically support the Stop the War Coalition "deserves a bullet in the head". This is the real face of the SWP’s "give peace a chance" coalition-building: you’ve got to silence the reds to get workers and youth to lie down like lambs with the wolves of the Labour Party whilst they wage war on Iraq and against working people at home!

Physical exclusion, political censorship and threats of violence are the despicable acts of political cowards who disdain to debate their views, preferring to substitute the fist for the brain. Today it’s the Spartacist League, but who’s next on the SWP's hit list? We call on all leftists, trade unionists and anti-war activists to condemn and protest this flagrant incitement to violence against revolutionary socialists!

What’s got Bambery's knickers in a twist? The SWP must be undergoing uncomfortable contortions to present themselves as socialists while maintaining loyalty to Blair's Labour Party (whose election sent the SWP "over the moon"). In our interventions and in discussions with young militants before the meeting our comrades also warned that by promoting politicians like George Galloway and Jeremy Corbyn—who are actively campaigning for antiwar activists to join the Labour Party—the SWP and the Stop the War Coalition are helping channel the growing anger against Blair’s government and its war back into the reformist confines of the Labour Party. As Lenin wrote in Socialism and War, “unity with the opportunists actually means subordinating the working class to their ‘own’ national bourgeoisie...it means splitting the revolutionary proletariat of all countries.” We Spartacists fly under our own banners and argue that what working people, youth and minorities in Britain today need is not a swivel chair "regime change" of Gordon Brown for Tony Blair, but the construction of a multiethnic revolutionary workers party to sweep away the capitalist system which breeds racism, war and unemployment. Anything less, anything other, is nothing but a reformist balm on the raw rubs of the capitalist order.

Political debate is vital to clarify what programme and leadership the working class needs to fight for its interests. This is not the first time that the SWP has resorted to political exclusionism or thuggery against the Spartacist League or other tendencies in the workers movement. In July 1980 they went berserk and assaulted SL supporters shortly after the Soviet Red Army went into Afghanistan because we exposed the SWP for attacking Margaret Thatcher from the right for selling British beef to Soviet troops in Kabul. We said "Hail Red Army in Afghanistan!" and later denounced Gorbachev’s treacherous withdrawal from that country. Had the Soviets stayed and won, there wouldn’t be a Gulf War today!

We say that workers and minorities in Britain and the toiling masses of neo-colonial Iraq have a common enemy in the war crazed gangs running the White House and 10 Downing Street and a common interest in defending Iraq against US/British attack without giving one iota of political support to Saddam Hussein’s anti-worker capitalist regime. Imperialist wars such as the threatened slaughter of thousands of Iraqis are inherent to the system of capitalism, and to put an end to them what is needed is an international succession of socialist revolutions. For that purpose we say workers in this country need not a "reclaimed" Labour Party, but a multiethnic revolutionary workers party modelled on the Russian Bolshevik Party. It was the Bolshevik Party that, by successfully tearing the working class away from the pro-capitalist Corbyns, Galloways and Bamberys of the time, led the working class to power and took Russia out of the massacre of World War I through the 1917 October Revolution.

Like the Bolsheviks, we seek to win the working class and the oppressed to the revolutionary socialist programme through the open clash of opposing political programmes; be it at mobilisations such as the massive demonstration held in London on 15 February, in the trade unions, through electoral campaigns, through united-front actions in defence of the interests of workers and the oppressed, or at political meetings such as today’s “Revolution 2003” teach-in. Protest SWP political exclusionism and threats of violence! For open political debate!

Spartacist League Britain
- e-mail: WorkersHammer@compuserve.com
- Homepage: www.icl-fi.org

Comments

Hide the following 8 comments

You very sad

07.03.2003 01:19

Oh dear the Sparts(all ten of them)have been upset by the swp (all 4,000 of them).
Meanwhile over a million ordinary people have just just marched against this war shit and the feeling of militancy is growing everywhere. This newswire is for relevant news and action items, it's certainly not a debating forum for useless dinosaurs whose organisations and politics died a death years ago.
Got that?

Your Mum


Re George Galloway

07.03.2003 08:59

George Galloway

I don't know very much about the SWP so I can't comment on critics of it. I do know that George Galloway is NOT actively campaigning for people to join the Labour party.

On Wednesday he addressed a CamPeace meeting in King's college Cambridge and he said he would be tearing up his own membership card if the neo-conservatives are not deposed. It was proposed by a member of the audience that anti-war activists should mass-join the Cambridge Labour party to try de-select their own criminal war monger Anne Campbell MP. George Galloway pointed out this wouldn't work because there's no democracy left in the Labour party and a local party can't deselect an immoral MP.

Get your facts correct.

Student


Socialism?

07.03.2003 10:02

I think some people are confused as to what Socialism is.

Being a socialist doesn't make you a member of the SWP...

It's about class politics (same as any 'anarchist')
It's about abolishing private property (ditto)
It's about abolishing capitalism ('anti-capitalism')
It's about freedom.

What's the problem? Why are some 'anarchists' so 'anti-socialist'? Socialists and anarchists beleive in pretty much the same thing!

Stop being so narrow minded!!

j'boy


The problem....

07.03.2003 10:57

The problem some anarchist have with socialists is as follows.
Indeed you are right anarchists and socialists are looking for the same end point a free and equal society for all.
Those who follow the ideas of Marx are opposed to the state as are the anarchists as the enemy of freedom. The difference is that marxists believe that a 'dictatorship or the prolatariat' is necessary first, a short period after which the state will fall away as it will no longer be needed.
I and many other anarchists believe that history would seem to indicate other wise, and that the state is a weapon used against the people even when it claims to be working in its name.
What anarchists have against Socialists is that in all revolutionary periods in the 20th Century, certain people who called themselves socialists (although I don't believe they were) sought to gain power. In the process many thousands of anarchists were killed and along with many millions who simply didn't fit with the program.
These historical divisions are maintained by people like the Sparticist league who are one of the last proponents of soviet style bolshevism. There failure to address the mass murder of this era in russia, means they have no more place on this platform than fascist parties.
Its not that all anarchists are closed minded only that we are cautious.
If you want to know more about why:
Read some stuff on the Kronstadt and the imediate aftermath of the russian revolution. Or on The Barcelona Mayday's (1936).
I can also recommend 'Homage to Catalonia' written by a Marxist about his experience of the spanish civil war, he meant is as warning to stop what was happening but counldn't get in published for many months because most left wing presses were unwilling to criticise stalins role.
In solidarity and towards mutual learning and understanding

matt


ok

07.03.2003 11:36

Thanks for your response.
I see what your saying, and pretty much agree...

Of course we all (Socialists included) should be against Stalinism and all the horrible things that have happend in so called communist societies.

I agree that people should go back to what Marx actually said...

Marx did talk about the 'dictatorship of the proletariat' but surely that just means 'power' in the hands of the working class (the majority), not a 'vanguard' elite - that's Leninism isn't it?

Marx didn't go into how this 'dictatorship' (perhaps a badly chosen word) is organised - but I'd imagine it as something voluntary, free, grass roots and mass participatory. No?

The State is an expression of the capital/labour relationship - ie, the seperation of political and economic life (as opposed to fuedal relations which were purely personal where the 'State' was expressed in the form of an individual - lord/king)

Abolish capitalism and you abolish the State. No?

So, if I beleive all of this should I stop calling myself a Socialist?

In the name of Peace, Solidarity and Mutual Understanding

j'boy


Lefties and anarchists incompatible

07.03.2003 16:46

There are not many left-wing parties in the UK, if any that are actually for the abolition of capitalism. Sure, they complain about it, but their solution is to whack the minimum wage up to £7 per hour.

It's not surprising that anarchists who actively undermine capitalism and propose an alternative get frustrated with those brown-noses who will happily suck up to the government for a small worker bonus and a bit of lefty power in parliament.

Nhoj


The real reason

08.03.2003 15:37


I think anyone who was at Revolution knew why the Spartacists were asked to leave..

-Because they were heckling in discussions
-The event was for students and the majority of them were not students
-Because they had not declared they were from the SL

Political exclusion... I dont think so.

londoner


Sparts politics are flawed

10.03.2003 18:59

The Spartacists are an extremely small minority, mostly made up of Americans, who believe in what they call 'orthodox Trotskyism'. One of the tenets of this is that because Trotsky claimed that after the second world war Stalinism would be deposed (and it clearly wasn't) then the second world war did not end with the defeat of Japan!

More seriously, the Sparticists actively support suppressive regimes, using slogans like 'Defend Iraq' or even 'Defend North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lybia, Cuba against US/UK imperialism - for international solidarity!' or words to that effect. They defend the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and defend the 'right' of North Korea (a Stalinist state which has no free media or democracy, whose people are starving, which has the largest forced labour camps in the world) to have nuclear weapons. They claim that countries such as NK, China and the USSR are 'degenerate workers states', rather than the centralised state capitalist bureacracies they really are. China officially embraced capitalism in the early 1980s.

Finally, the Sparts expend most of their energy attacking the SWP! The SWP are by no means a perfect organistion (the belief in democratic centralism stifles dissent, activists have a tendency towards roboticism, there is too much emphasis on immediate recruitment, the hero worship of Lenin and Trotsky ignores any failings the October Revolution may have had) but the Sparts have all these failings and more besides. A Spart sticks to the party line more closer than any other group, with a peculiar cult-like adherence to certain methods of argument and long-winded slogans. If people don't like the SWP, everyone hates the Sparts.

Matt