Skip to content or view screen version

SWP in Australia Falls Apart

Tomcat | 26.05.2003 18:56

The Socialist Workers Party controls a number of smaller organisations around the world. One of the biggest of these sidekick groups was in Australia. Over the last while, under the influence of the British SWP's hysterical perspectives it has fallen apart. Yesterday 21 members resigned. Below is their letter of resignation.

To the International Socialist Organisation

Dear Comrades,

It is with reluctance that we have decided to resign from the International Socialist Organisation.

The downward spiral of the group over the last two years shows no sign of abating. The respite from the general atmosphere of hostility and defensiveness following our last conference in December 2002 was only temporary. The resignations of long-standing comrades since conference have been met with indifference from the ISO national leadership.

Despite a stated commitment at conference to resolve our differences in the context of building the movement and the ISO, we have seen heavy-handed organisational measures and a refusal to discuss differences in a comradely fashion by the ISO leadership.

"Looking reality in the face" is the starting point for correcting mistakes, but there is a complete failure to acknowledge the scale of crisis that confronts the group. Critical comments are dismissed out of hand or met with allegations of factionalism. We have no confidence that this is about to change.

Following conference, we saw the emergence of a massive international anti-war movement and the largest anti-war demonstrations in Australia's history. That the ISO failed to grow out of this movement, has no greater political coherence, no larger established periphery and if anything smaller meetings is a serious indictment of the current practice of the group. This compares poorly with the dramatic political response and growth the organisation experienced in the first Gulf War. In itself, this recent failure should cause serious self-reflection on the part of the group. That this follows two years of intense internal crisis is why we have decided to act today.

Similarly, despite the resilience and significance of the refugee movement, the group seems unable to systematically integrate the campaign into its political work. On campuses, we have failed to build out of any of the very significant movements that have punctuated political life on campus. Discussion of the ISO's failure to build has been limited and discouraged.

This failure to analyse the current period or to reflect and appraise our own successes and failures in relating to the period, must cause confusion for all members at all levels of the ISO and may go some way to explain the malaise we believe is endemic in the organisation.

"A good militant today is an informed militant,” wrote Susan George soon after Seattle. Yet the underplaying of politics has been a persistent feature of the group's perspective in recent years. Conference itself recognised that there had been a one-sided emphasis on activism that had depoliticised the group. However, there has been no attempt to systematically redress this problem.

At the last conference, many comrades attempted to identify the issues underlying the crisis in the ISO. This was an attempt to assess the state of the group and try to understand the causes of our lack of growth in a period that is a very positive one for socialists.

Many of the issues raised in the pre-conference document An Urgent Need to Take Stock remain relevant. Two of them are of particular importance.

(i) Ideological intervention and the role of a small group. The emphasis on building the "next big event" means that the question of political intervention is constantly down-played. Consequently, despite overstatements about the possibility of "leading the movement" the organisational response means that we don't offer a political lead on campuses, local groups or in campaigns where we can find an audience for our ideas and have some influence. The group shifts from issue to issue often without any political discussion and without a sustained commitment to the campaigns. This makes it impossible to build long term relationships with other activists.

(ii) An organisational structure that fits with the period and the needs of a small group. The period demands a high level of political discussion and debate, yet current Marxist Forums are often devoid of theory, polemic, traditions and historical experience. These are crucial to respond to and to explain the political questions thrown up in campaigns as well as general questions presented by the crisis in capitalism which comrades face when interacting with classmates, co-workers and friends.

There is also a lack of political space for the very thing that is crucial to developing members' confidence to understand and to lead - discussing and learning from intervention in the campaigns themselves.

It has become impossible for us to discuss our differences with the current perspective and practices of the ISO within the framework of the ISO. Attempts to do so are met with animosity. In turn this animosity clouds the issues, avoids responding to the substance of any criticism and most importantly impedes the process of understanding the world and our role in it. We hope a resolution of these differences will become possible as we work together in future struggles.

We remain committed to the need for revolutionary organisation, the essential elements of socialism from below and the fundamental politics that distinguishes the International Socialist Tendency.

We take seriously the task of bringing Marxism to the layers of people influenced by anti-capitalism and who are politicised by the anti-war and refugee movements. We will shortly convene meetings to discuss how we can begin that task.

By establishing a practice of working alongside others on campus, in trade unions, in campaigns and other work, we hope to make socialist ideas relevant to the struggles in which they are involved and to show the links between those immediate struggles and the capitalist system.

We believe that a lively, comradely and political practice of discussion and debate is central to building a socialist movement.

We don't underestimate the difficulties, but there is no doubt that the questioning of the prevailing world order holds many opportunities for socialist ideas to gain a significant hearing. The sheer numbers of people who came out again and again to oppose the war on Iraq against the lies of our rulers and their media as well as the determination of the refugee movement are evidence of that possibility.

We therefore tender our resignations from the International Socialist Organisation.

Emilie Awbery
Greg Brown
Brett Cardinal
John Cleary
Scott Gault
Paul Gibens
Mark Gillespie
Mark Goudkamp
Kym Hickey
Paul Jacobs
Silja Leskinen
Shelly Menzies
Eliot Morland
Jean Parker
Ian Rintoul
Andrew Rivett
Nikki Thiedeke
Liz Thompson
Michael Thomson
Jess Reed
Josh Wood

Tomcat

Comments

Hide the following 15 comments

Putting the party before the movement???

26.05.2003 23:24

Well, it seems from the above that the SWP is on the right track.

The document says:

"The emphasis on building the "next big event" means that the question of political intervention is constantly down-played."

This certainly fits in in with my understanding of the recent practice of the British SWP. They threw everything into building the Iraq anti-war movement over the past 6 months. Then, as the war ended, they threw everything, again, into the anti-BNP campaign, in Burnley and Oldham especially. Now they are throwing everything into the Evian mobilisation. I am staggered by the amount of work they have done this year for anti-war, anti-racist and anti-globalisation movements.

Since the SWP has always been accused (wrongly in my view) of putting the building of its own party before the mass movement, it is is clear from the above statment, and my own experience here in Britain, that this is certainly not the case today.

So why are these confused Australian muddleheads resigning?

Jill


Bush waging permanent war

26.05.2003 23:32

Socialist Worker, Australia.

Issue 516, 22 May 2003,


THREE WEEKS ago George Bush stood on the deck of the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln and declared we have seen the turning of the tide in the war on terrorism.

On Monday of last week Australian defence minister Robert Hill said the war on Iraq had created a safer global community by contributing to the elimination of weapons of mass destruction and bringing greater stability in the Middle East.

The following day, suicide attacks on Western compounds in Saudi Arabia ripped through this arrogance.

The suicide attacks show that the Iraq war has not made the world safer. It has increased instability in the Middle East and fuelled hatred of the US.

Its no accident that the Riyadh bombings targeted the Vinnell Corporation, a subsidiary of giant arms firm Northrop Grumman. Vinnell trains the brutal Saudi security forces.

Of course, attacks like the one in Saudi Arabia do not threaten US imperialism. Bush will try to use the attacks to further strengthen the hand of the US military machine.

Much more important is the resistance to the US inside its new occupied territoriesAfghanistan and Iraq.

The first demonstration against the US occupation took place in Afghanistan two weeks ago. About 3000 people marched through the capital Kabul.

The US are breaking their promises, said Abdul Mohammed, a former soldier who took part in the protest. They promised to build our country and make factories but they have not kept their promises.

They put one leg in Afghanistan and one in Iraq, and they keep both peoples hungry. The only thing we got from America is bombsnothing else.

Similar protests are taking placeon a much larger scalein towns and cities across Iraq.

There can be no doubt Bushs hawks are already considering the next target in their permanent war.

Whatever they decide, they can count on the support of John Howard, who is restructuring the military to better allow Australia to fight alongside the US in future wars.

Thats why its important we follow the example of people in Afghanistan and Iraq, and continue to protest in the coming weeks and months.

Jack
- Homepage: http://www.iso.org.au


Hello - I'm one of the resigning comrades

27.05.2003 00:21

We're resigning because things just became impossible. We still believe in the politics though and are still politically active.

I wouldn't have a clue what is going on in the SWP - I think our problems are home grown.

We're in a small country here so we will still work together occassionally no doubt.

George Bush Jnr is coming to Aust in October - maybe we could have a giant demonstration then.

Regards!

Josh Wood


NOT IMPORTANT

27.05.2003 10:49

IF COMRADE TROTSKY WAS ALIVE TODAY YOU WOULD BE SHOT LIKE THE WHITE SCUM YOU ARE.

a joker


Why?

27.05.2003 11:34

I think this is very unfortunate news for the Australian left. This will also effect the circulation of the Australian Socialist Worker newspaper to many in the community.

Are the people who have left the ISO going to join Socialist Alternative, start another organisation or simply disintegrate into autonimous activists?

This has come as a surprise to me as I have only just learnt of this news from the letter being posted on every Australian Indymedia site. So far the only responses have been of joyful celebration from nazis and anarchists everywhere.
The ISO has certainly lost some very hard working and talented members. It is disturbing that so many feel they cannot change the ISO from within the group and have decided to quit instead.

John Tozer


Josh - use your brain

27.05.2003 11:46

Josh said

"I wouldn't have a clue what is going on in the SWP - I think our problems are home grown. "

And he signed a letter of resignation which also stated
"We remain committed to the need for revolutionary organisation, the essential elements of socialism from below and the fundamental politics that distinguishes the International Socialist Tendency."

Josh it is the fundamental politics of the IST that determines how both the SWP in Britain and ISO in Australia work. The problem with both organisations is that the fundamental politics are centrist politics.

commiebastard


The Socialist Muddleheads - Jack & Jill

27.05.2003 11:55

Jill twitters on about the next big event and isn't the SWP doing splendidly. Ballocks more like.

"To talk of failure is regarded as heresy by the SWP after the Preston result. But the Preston result - one councillor after five years of hard work - needs to be seen in context. We have just been through a period of massive political turmoil. We have had a two million strong demonstration against the government and its war. We have seen Blair? popularity plummet.

We have seen the first real signs of open dissent in Labour ranks.

In such a crisis the Socialist Alliance should have done much better than the BNP, not worse. The fascists, during the same period, have gone from being a handful of boneheads to the second biggest party in Burnley, with 6 councillors elsewhere around the country. They are the ones talking about breakthroughs."

from WORKERS POWER GLOBAL WEEK 25 MAY 2003

Don't look back Jill that way you never learn a thing!

commiebastard


Probs of the ISO

28.05.2003 05:53

I think it's useful to campare the fortunes of the Socialist Alliance in Australia and the UK. In the UK it goes from Indymedia bad to worst while in Australia it is the most constructive thing happening on the left. Guess where the ISO were able to spin their magic - you guessed in the UK while in Aussie they had to contend with the DSP and a confident and growing number of independents. Or for further proof look at the Aust branches. The only branch where the ISO again were able to apply their unique interpretation of life on earth was in Brisbane - and you guessed it, Brissy branch probably struggles more than anyother in the country.

However, I actually think it a sad day (except for Greg Brown - one of the most offensive people on the left that I have had the misfortune of meeting) in much the same vein as I would think it a sad day if indymedia closed. The point is not to gloat at the misfortunes of anyone else who tries to make the world a better world but to learn from these mistakes

Paul


Stay inside and build the Party!

28.05.2003 09:17

a revolutionary has the duty to stay in and help in buliding the revolutionary party as long as he can, if he can. Therefore it´s a stupid mistake the undersigned made to resign from the ISO. They´ll end up as privateers, or will splitt into further little grouplings. For instance, any similar break away from the German IS group over the past 30 years have lead to nothing, some of those grouplings left in this new and the past decade don´t even know of each other, let alone do they know that splits occured in the past since´68. So stay, if you can.

goofy


split but don't burn bridges

29.05.2003 03:16

Maybe it is better to split but not burn your bridges down. We basically agree on a lot of things. We're only human and sometimes we have to move on for the benefit of all concerned.

comrade


Jill

29.05.2003 11:26

People should know that 'Jill' is actually a long time fulltime member of the SWP...they find it funny to scour indymedia and post pro-SWP replys posing as real unaffiliated people

X


Info

29.05.2003 14:05

People should know that "X" is actually a longstanding full-time member of the SWP, too. His post is all part of a cunning double-bluff. As is this one. Or is it? It's all so dammnably confusing...

gibbon77


you can't fool me!

29.05.2003 17:05

ALL OF YOU ARE IN THE SWP! IMC IS AN SWP FRONT!

a nonny mouse


SWP as a political cult

30.05.2003 11:01

I would like to add the following thought to this discussion:

The issues raised by those resigning from the SWP mirror precisely the trajectory of every grouping which has tried to remain somehow within the orbit of classical Leninism/ Trotskyism. I believe that all such groups, based on democratic centralism, create extreme group conformity; stifle dissent; underestimate the importance of democracy; create a self serving leadership body before whom the membershiup are supposed to genuflect; produce a frantic working environment one is more likely to find among the Moonies than thinking political activists; and ultimately disillusion most of those that they recruit. For these groups (I would simply describe them as political cults) there is always a struggle and a choice between influence in the real world on the one hand, and total control over their dwindling membership on the other. They always choose the latter.

I developed this argument recently in a book with Tim Wohlforth, who used to be very active in the US Trotskyist movement. I was myself prominently involved in the old Militant Tendency, in Northern Ireland. Our book is 'On the Edge: Political Cults Right and Left', published by Sharpe in New York, if anyone cares to follow the argument in more detail.I believe that anyone interested in seriously influencin gsociety has to face up to these issues, and in the process move on from many of the shibolleths of Bolshevism, which have demonstrated now over many years that they have only one end point - bureaucracy, the suppression of critical thinking, and endless splitting of left forces.

Dennis Tourish
mail e-mail: D.Tourish@abdn.ac.uk


IS Tradition against the ISTendency

06.06.2003 04:48

News of 21 ISO (OZ) cdes leaving their organisation cannot be good news for the SWP or the IST as a whole. Josh Wood has stated that he believes that the problems of the ISO were homegrown and in certain respects no doubt they were. But the SWP leadership, the de facto leadership of the ISt, should not b let off the hook so easily. After all it was the SWP which developed the perspective of the 1930's in slow motion which the ISO adopted. And similarly it was the SWP which has urged support for electoralist Socialist Alliances which do nothing to move forward the workers movement and are in point of fact nothing but sectarian adventures.

Another comrade urges the cdes leaving the ISO to remain in that body and points out that in Germany various splits from the IST group there have disintegrated over time. This is true but it does not even begin to ask why tisis so leave alone answer this question. Furthermore we might ask why so many cdes left Linksruck in the direction of movementism ater a series of scandals in that group. What can be said is that their political direction was the result of their immersion in anti-capitalist politics without any connection to the workers movement, blind activism of this kind, in self imposed sectarian isolation from the organised workers movement will always lead to such collapses. And again this was at the behest of the SWP leadership.

The successes of the SWP leadership over the past decade or more could be extended beyond the short list above. Cdes might ask what happened to the ISt group in belgium, why there are two IS groups in France, why the ISO (USA) has continued to grow wothout any sign of the sectarian degeneration the SWP identified in it, why the SWO in Aotearoa shrinks while the ISO grows, etc, etc. Why the SWP itself has not grown despite the repeaated cry of its hacs that "there has never been a better time to be a revolutionary." Why it has in fact shrunken over the last decade and has to resort to frequent organisational restructuring when the last attempt to solve by organisational methods failed to solve what are political problems. Why the SWP has a weaker base within the working class today than at any time since the late 1970's. Given the sometimes belligerent intervention of SWP fulltimers in these groups Josh needs to ask again if all the problems of the ISO were indeed homegrown.

Josh and his comrades need to look at the small growth of Socialist Alternative since they left the ISO nearly a decade ago and ask why they have grown while the ISO has shattered. Surely rejoining the IS Tradition will mean rejecting not only the ISO but the quasi-International of the IS Tendency?

Mike