Letters

Coup-ready

Business Week magazine (July 6) has an analysis of the situation in Greece. In the article is the following quote: “In 2011, European parliament member Jussi Hallo-aho of Finland suggested Greece needed a junta ‘to rein in the strikers and demonstrators ... with tanks’.”

This ‘solution’ is similar to the Pinochet coup in Chile in 1973. Chile had enormous inflation in the last stages of the Allende government. Pinochet solved that problem by killing and jailing tens of thousands. Allende had not armed Chilean workers and supported disarming them before the coup.

Similarly, Syriza has not armed Greek workers to prevent a second coup by the Greek military.

Earl Gilman
email

Despicable

“Syriza is now reaping the consequences of having taken office,” writes Eddie Ford (‘Euro leaders seek regime change’, July 2).

He goes on: “In the end, Brussels and the ‘institutions’ did not blink - nor were they ever going to. On June 30 Athens, surprising absolutely no-one, defaulted on its €1.5 billion payment to the International Monetary Fund. On the same day, the current bailout programme officially ended after euro zone finance ministers rejected a desperate last-minute appeal by Alexis Tsipras for a third bailout of €29.1 billion that would supposedly cover Greece’s needs for the next two years.”

This piece is nuts. Syriza and the Greek working class are reaping the consequences not of having taken office, but of the fact that Syriza are a bunch of neo-Stalinist, centrist traitors whose strategy for negotiation has failed abysmally and always was going to fail. It was absolutely correct to force these muppets into power where they could be exposed. Your piece suggests that they were misguided revolutionaries who took power too readily. Nothing could be further from the truth. Stalinist cynics of the highest water is what they are and to portray them as revolutionaries is a despicable act of deception by the Weekly Worker.

David Ellis
email

Oxi tactics

Is it a matter of tactics or principle whether we advocate a leftist party taking governmental office? Whereas, in general, Marxists oppose revolutionaries participating in bourgeois governments, it’s a question of tactics over non-revolutionary parties like Syriza. The question here and in Greece is which course of action is most likely to promote working class confidence and political awareness.

There is an argument to be made that Syriza should have refused to take office and instead constitute an extreme opposition and build its extraparliamentary support by pushing harder and more sharply for the needs and interests of the working class in Greece.

That opinion is not irrelevant; it is an important part of ongoing debate over strategy and tactics, but, given that Syriza did not heed the CPGB, it is not the most pressing issue of the moment. What positive proposals, policies, slogans and propaganda does the Weekly Worker put forward? ‘Should not have taken office’ is as useful as saying ‘Should have gone to Specsavers’.

Right now, how do we build solidarity in Britain with the Greek working class? That’s not the same as blanket support for the Syriza government, nor for proclaimed revolutionary groups inside or outside Syriza. And neither does it mean simplistic denunciation of Syriza as reformists and traitors. That fails to engage with Greek workers, and workers here and internationally who want to show solidarity with those Greek workers.

There is a clear danger of genuine, sincere solidarity being reduced to a ‘defend Syriza’ campaign of uncritical support, and of creating illusions in the ability and willingness of the current Syriza leadership to carry out even the reformist measures they are pledged to. Experience leads me to believe that the Morning Star, People’s Assembly, Unite the Resistance, People’s Charter and Stop the War promoters will be at the forefront of a dash to submerge any working class political content into some broad popular movement or other.

A tactic that maintains a principled political critique of Syriza (and of other Greek left groups, trade unions, etc) is vital. The CPGB and Alliance for Workers’ Liberty are two groups that see this, but Solidarity’s recent emphasis on giving us access to different views from within the Greek left, and the propagandist nature of the Weekly Worker, in different ways have made it difficult for me to grasp exactly what they are saying, what course they are pursuing.

Alan Theasby
email

Clear proof

Jack Conrad ends his meandering piece, ‘Truth, not myths, serve our cause’ (July 2), claiming Lenin’s continuity of political perspective in 1917, as follows:

“The Russian Revolution had gone further than the classical bourgeois revolutions of England 1645 or France 1789, but ‘has not yet reached a ‘pure’ dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry’.

“This final quote is from Lenin’s ‘The tasks of the proletariat in our revolution’, a draft platform dated April 10 1917. I see development, concrete application, yes. But, no ‘abandonment’, no ‘break’ with the old slogan for a ‘revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry’.”

Jack would perhaps do well to dwell on Lenin’s more substantive discussion of this issue outlined in his Letters on tactics, also written and published in April 1917:

“‘The revolutionary-democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry’ has already become a reality in the Russian Revolution, for this ‘formula’ envisages only a relation of classes, and not a concrete political institution implementing this relation, this cooperation. ‘The Soviet of Workers’ and Soldiers’ Deputies’ - there you have the ‘revolutionary-democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry’ already accomplished in reality.

“This formula is already antiquated. Events have moved it from the realm of formulas into the realm of reality, clothed it with flesh and bone, concretised it and thereby modified it.

“A new and different task now faces us: to effect a split within this dictatorship between the proletarian elements (the anti-defencist, internationalist, ‘communist’ elements, who stand for a transition to the commune) and the small-proprietor or petty bourgeois elements (Chkheidze, Tsereteli, Steklov, the Socialist Revolutionaries and the other revolutionary defencists, who are opposed to moving towards the commune and are in favour of ‘supporting’ the bourgeoisie and the bourgeois government).

“The person who now speaks only of a ‘revolutionary democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry’ is behind the times; consequently he has in effect gone over to the petty bourgeoisie against the proletarian class struggle; that person should be consigned to the archive of ‘Bolshevik’ pre-revolutionary antiques (it may be called the archive of ‘old Bolsheviks’).”

At a purely pedantic level, Jack is correct that Lenin does not use the exact terms, ‘abandonment’ or ‘break’ in reference to the slogan for a “revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry”, but it is pretty clear what Lenin in April 1917 now thinks about this slogan - it is antiquated and suitable only for the archives.

Alan Gibson
email

Core idea

Stephen Diamond brings up a few points that I am not sure I was actually ever making (Letters, July 2).

Firstly, I am aware of The programme of the PartiOuvrier, but Marx was not involved in the drafting of the list of reforms, claiming responsibility solely for its preamble. In fact, Marx and Engels were quite critical of the platform, singling out the demand for a minimum wage as “foolish” and “nonsense”. So I wouldn’t place too much importance upon it as part of any argument.

Of course, my point in referring to the US guest worker legislation was to draw attention to the futility of reform or calling for regulation, but rather advancing the case that all law is implemented and enforced in the interests of the ruling class (or at least sections of it with the political sway).

Stephen states: “The demand for open borders - itself neither realisable under modern capitalism nor the first priority under socialism.” It is very true that, as Stephen says, under capitalism the call for no borders is utopian, which is why it should always be followed with explanation for the need to establish socialism. Contrary to his own claim, I do think ‘no borders’ will be one of the foremost priorities of socialism (although neither you nor I will determine the order of priorities - only those engaged in changing the world at that appropriate time will have that task).

Engels, in describing the socialist revolution, stated: “By creating the world market, big industry has already brought all the peoples of the earth, and especially the civilised peoples, into such close relation with one another that none is independent of what happens to the others.”

It follows that the communist revolution will not merely be a national phenomenon, but must take place simultaneously in all civilised countries - “that is to say, at least in England, America, France, and Germany. It will have a powerful impact on the other countries of the world, and will radically alter the course of development which they have followed up to now, while greatly stepping up its pace. It is a universal revolution and will, accordingly, have a universal range” (Principles of communism).

Socialism will be world socialism and all workers of the world are fellow workers, neither foreign nor non-foreign - none to be excluded and all to be welcomed. This is a core idea I think we should always promote. Indeed, as slogans go, Earl Gilman is perfectly right when he says in his letter, “There is no solution without revolution”.

Alan Johnstone
email

Recession

Arthur Bough makes a number of useful points (‘Fictitious capital and the rate of profit’, July 2), but does not seem to understand what I was trying to do in my article (‘Vanquishing the demons’, June 25).

My purpose was not to analyse the immediate current economic conjuncture, but to go back to the 2008-09 recession. I note that Michael Roberts begins his book, The great recession, by stating: “The great recession started at the beginning of 2008 and finished in the middle of 2009.” Is that correct or is it not?

It does not matter so much whether the analysis conforms to that put forward by Marx, or Overstone, or Overturn, or whoever, but whether it accounts for the facts. I am glad Arthur has written a book: I will endeavour to obtain a copy and read it, and see if I agree. In the meantime I look forward to learning of the other criticisms he has of my article.

Chris Gray
London

Corbyn clarity

Around 200 people attended Jeremy Corbyn’s meeting in Swansea last weekend - an excellent turnout, given that the event organisers, Welsh Labour Grassroots, only began to make arrangements for the meeting some nine days earlier - and one that highlights the momentum the comrade’s campaign is having within the ranks of the Labour Party and leftwing politics generally at this moment in time.

Jeremy Corbyn’s message to his audience in Swansea was simple and clear: we need to recapture the “traditional socialist values” of the Labour Party as a starting point for establishing social peace and equality. “People need to live their lives with dignity,” the comrade stated, pointing out that only through collective organisation, planning and democracy within society could this be achieved.

Unashamedly promoting ideas of the welfare state, Corbyn spoke of the importance of fighting the privatisation of the NHS, of combating stigmatisation of the disabled and poorest members of society, of the importance of social housing and of the need for a passionate defence of workers’ and trade union rights. Economic orthodoxy, the need for austerity and the idea that ‘we’re all in this together’ have to be challenged, he passionately argued.

Referring to the treachery of New Labour and the Blair government in relation to the Iraq war, he committed himself to non-intervention in Syria and the Middle East: Britain’s intervention in that part of the world was a contributing factor for the development of Islamic State and the alienation of sections of the Muslim community, he said. Speaking of the need for a nuclear free, green world, Corbyn argued that this objective would only be achieved not within national boundaries, but by international consensus based on a global perspective.

On Labour Party organisation, Corbyn was equally clear in his perspectives: the internal mechanisms need an overhaul, he stated. We have to continue to fight to establish democracy within the party and to promote conference as the sovereign body - increasing the status of the national executive committee and reducing the power of the party leader were fundamental, he argued.

As a result of the ample time given to questions from the floor, we were able to hear where Corbyn further wished to take the party in order to try and “establish its soul”, as he had earlier put it. Interestingly, a number of contributors from the floor recognised that if its “soul” was to be determined, then that process wasn’t one that could be rushed into. Others asked what he would do to reconnect people with politics, given the apathy many, (particularly the youth), currently have towards it. As the comrade hadn’t mentioned them in his introductory speech, I asked him about his opinions relating to constitutional issues and those of political accountability.

In response, Jeremy Corbyn spoke of the importance of constitutional issues being taken seriously and his support for a “large, open constitutional convention” to discuss the power of the House of Commons, the role of the House of Lords and the need for a written constitution. In relation to political alienation, Corbyn argued that it was important to understand that people weren’t necessarily alienated from politics per se, but that they did politics in a different way. Political and economic perspectives had caused alienation amongst many sections of society, he stated. Understanding that was fundamental.

Giving people inspiration must be based upon the kind of society you are aiming for, he asserted. Corbyn had taken inspiration from the likes of Kier Hardy, Nye Bevan and, more recently, Tony Benn and their vision of the Labour Party and society. The party should be motivated by these people and their ideas of remodelling society: this would inspire all.

Comrades from the Socialist Party in England and Wales were notable by their absence. Local Socialist Workers Party comrades, supporting Corbyn’s campaign, made a couple of interventions on the subject of wider class unity being built with trade unions and protest campaigns outside as well as from within the Labour Party.

Bob Davies
email

Free Steve

The Committee for Steve Kaczynski’s Freedom is calling on all sincere leftists, trade unionists, socialists, communists and militants to attend our meeting on Friday July 17 at 7pm, at the Anatolian People’s Cultural Centre, 724 Seven Sisters Road, London N15, and help us in fighting for the release of Steve from a Turkish prison, where he has been held without charge since April 2.

On that day the AKP government regime in Turkey illegally raided the İdil Culture Centre (İdilKültürMerkezi). İdil Culture Centre workers and GrupYorum members were arrested, then detained after being dragged from the premises and later tortured. British national Steve Shaw Kaczynski was detained at this time and remains without charge held in severe isolation conditions.

Steve is well known on the British left and has been a member of the International Socialist Group (now Socialist Resistance), the CPGB (Weekly Worker) and the Scottish Socialist Party. We therefore reject with contempt the efforts of the Turkish government to slander him as a British ‘agent’ (why would the British state want to undermine their ally, Turkey?) and the even more outrageous parroting of this charge by Andy Newman on the Socialist Unity website.

If you knew Steve or can assist in any way, please attend the weekly pickets of the Turkish embassy every Wednesday, 12 noon to 1pm, at 43 Belgrave Square, London SW1X 8PA.

You can also help by sending a fax to the ministry of justice in Ankara and phoning to ask why Stephen Kaczynski has been unfairly arrested. Telephone: +90 312 417 7770; fax: +90 312 419 3370; email: info@adalet.gov.tr; address: 06659 Kizilay/Ankara. Please also support Steve by writing letters and cards to: Maltepe 3 No.lu Hapishanesi, YabancılarbölümüBüyükBakkalKöyMah, YakacıkYoluÜzeri, No13 Maltepe, Istanbul.

In the United Kingdom, please contact the following to ask for their support and help with the immediate release of Steve: Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Prisoners Abroad; Reprieve; Fair Trials International; and Amnesty International.

For more information, please email steve.ozgurluk2015@yandex.com.

Gerry Downing
Committee for Steve Kaczynski’s Freedom

BDS success

On Monday July 6 protestors shut down four factories owned by Israel’s biggest arms company, Elbit Systems, to mark the anniversary of the 2014 attack on Gaza.

An injunction was issued in an attempt to prevent one of three UK protests, at UAV Engines Ltd (UEL), a drone engine factory near Shenstone, Staffordshire. Despite this campaigners from London Palestine Action, Campaign Against the Arms Trade and the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign blocked the entrance to the factory in the early hours of the morning.

From 9am police attempted to clear the protest using force, physically removing young and elderly protestors alike. There were several arrests. Hundreds of Palestine solidarity campaigners from around the country arrived at the site to support fellow Palestine solidarity activists.

Production was also halted at Elbit’s Elite KL factory in Tamworth, Staffordshire and at an Elbit factory called Instro Precision in Broadstairs, Kent, with activists on the roof of both factories. A similar occupation took place in Melbourne, Australia.

The activists accuse the company of complicity in Israel’s alleged war crimes in Gaza. Amnesty International research into the UAV Engines Ltd factory indicates that components made there, including engines for armed unmanned aerial vehicles - better known as drones - were used in Israel’s 2008-09 attack on Gaza, code-named ‘Operation Cast Lead’, which killed 1,400 Palestinians.

The Shenstone and Broadstairs factories have been targeted by protesters before. At the height of Israel’s 51-day assault last year, nine protestors staged a sit-in on the roof of UEL for two days in August, costing the company over £100,000. Charges against the nine people arrested were dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service just hours before a deadline to provide the defendants with details of arms export licences granted to UEL to send its hi-tech engines to Israel for use in the Hermes 450 - a drone widely deployed by the Israeli military.

UK government data shows that drone engines manufactured here are exported to Israel. These Israeli-owned factories are very much a part of Israel’s brutal regime of apartheid and settler-colonialism over the Palestinian people. Israel was only able to massacre 2,200 Palestinians in Gaza last summer because factories like these are allowed to operate and because governments such as the UK government continue to allow arms exports to Israel.

People came to Shenstone to show their solidarity with the Palestinian struggle for freedom, justice and equality and to demand that the UK government imposes a two-way military embargo on Israel. For a time we transformed the space around the UEL arms factory, converting it from a site of destruction into a fun, creative and child-friendly environment. A space that meets our needs and not the needs of Israeli and multinational corporations that export death for profit.

According to the UN, during its attack on Gaza last summer, Israel killed over 2,200 Palestinians, including more than 500 children. Approximately 11,000 people were injured, including 1,000 children left with permanent disabilities. An estimated 18,000 homes were destroyed or severely damaged, making 100,000 people homeless.

A report recently released by the Campaign Against Arms Trade, War on Want and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign found that fresh arms exports to Israel worth nearly £4 million - including components for drones - were approved by Britain within weeks of the attack. These deals show that, despite Israel’s alleged war crimes, the government’s attitude to the arms trade with Israel is ‘business as usual’.

This week’s action marks 10 years since the launch of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement that pressures Israel to comply with international law. The movement is backed by major UK trade unions, the Green Party and the National Union of Students. Recent successes include the announcement by Orange that it intends to leave the Israeli market and the news that foreign direct investment into Israel has dropped by almost 50% last year, partly due to the growth of the boycott movement.

We urge people that share our opposition to Israel’s crimes against the Palestinian people to join the growing movement for a boycott of Israel.

Elly Hassan
London Palestine Action

Making Mick rich

I didn’t want to waste any more time discussing pop groups and was initially going to ignore Howard Phillips’ letter (July 2). But may I suggest to him that future articles that seem to have no political bearing be sent to a music paper?

Also, Howard seems to be shocked that the Weekly Worker would be read by a lefty - a term which I consider a compliment, by the way. He seems to suggest that leafleting working class areas is a waste of time, and maybe he’s right. But much better we find one or two supporters there rather than encourage them to join the millions who have spent their hard-earned cash making Sir Mick Jagger and friends multimillionaires and the super-large capitalist music corporations even richer.

Tony Roberts
email