17.04.2014

Serious approach demanded

We publish the response of the ISN to the CPGB's suggestion of discussions around revolutionary unity

The International Socialist Network has taken over two months to reply to our second letter offering talks. From what we hear, there was a fair degree of debate on the organisation’s internal list over our approach - not that you’d get that from the terse, apolitical 33 words from Kris Stewart, reproduced below. We are also told that a number of the ISN comrades involved in this internal discussion displayed a quite laughable level of ignorance about the CPGB, its origins and current politics (one even confused us with Workers Power, I hear).

Some boringly familiar slurs against our organisation were trotted out - we are irrelevant, hair-splitting, cynical, a cranky “passive, propagandist sect”, an abstract bunch of Spart-like, sectarian time-wasters who are happy to disclose others internal discussions, but don’t divulge their own differences (we publish them in our paper actually, comrades ...).

The point about our supposed irresponsible “wrecking tactics” is clearly a source of some anger for some ISNers. “They leaked our internal documents” at a sensitive moment in the faction fight in the Socialist Workers Party, one comrade apparently wrote. In fact, the documents were anonymously leaked to us with the clear purpose of having them publicly featured on our site. We assumed - not unreasonably - that the simple fact that this material was being sent to us meant by definition it was good to go. If we inadvertently published something that caused problems for the comrades who went on to form the ISN, then of course we regret that. However, we simply were not in the position of being able to differentiate the safe stuff from the hazardous - something that was actually addressed in last year’s Communist University in the discussion following ISNer Paris Thompson’s opening on the events that shook the SWP.

The crisis of the left, of which the ISN is a product of course, demands a rather more serious attitude than this organisation has displayed so far.

CPGB to ISN, January 27

Comrades

We are writing to again propose talks between representatives of the ISN and the Communist Party of Great Britain. You will know that our organisation has closely followed and commented on the crisis in the Socialist Workers Party. Unlike some other groups in our movement, this commentary has not been intended to either speed up that process of disintegration and decay or to fish for a few handfuls of recruits. We have been clear that the rebellion in this important revolutionary organisation is an opportunity for dissidents to:

(a) use the resulting political and theoretical fluidity to openly and critically reassess the history of their particular trend in Marxism and, through this

(b) open discussions and exchanges with other traditions on the revolutionary left with a view to the formation of a united revolutionary group, unambiguously based on Marxism and with an open, democratic party culture - ie, genuine democratic centralism, in our view.

The disaster in the SWP has developed since we first wrote, but - while there are obviously features that are unique to it - it is a manifestation of the general turmoil of groups and parties that declare loyalty to Marxism. This underlines the importance of Marxists beginning serious exchanges on the programmatic crisis that has ripped through our ranks in the 20th/21st century.

We look forward to your reply.

With communist greetings

Mark Fischer (on behalf of the CPGB)

ISN to CPGB, April 10

The Network’s steering committee has discussed your letter, and we have reaffirmed our decision not to engage with your organisation on this subject at this time.

Regards

Kris Stewart

(for the IS Network)