28.08.2002
'Youth conference' stitch-up
What do you need to organise a youth conference of the Socialist Alliance? Invite young SA members to open the conference, you might think. A few workshops that present the various options for the alliance and discuss how school students, students and young workers can get involved in our organisation, perhaps. Lots of time to openly debate how we can change the world, hopefully. And if you are really bold you might hope that such a conference would initiate structures for a youth section of the SA. Wrong, wrong and wrong again. Unfortunately, what could have been an inspiring event of and for young people in the Socialist Alliance looks likely to become a pretty boring, bog-standard rally. The November 30 conference will not even feature 'youth' or 'students' in its name. Under the catchy title, 'New imperialism, new internationalism' (Nini), the usual old suspects will be invited to speak from the top table. Only one opinion will be put forward - the "majority line, the 80% that unites us", as Rob Hoveman from the Socialist Workers Party put it at one of the meetings of the conference arrangement committee. The packed agenda will feature opening and closing platform speeches of 30 and 60 minutes respectively. In between there will be two rounds of workshops, each lasting no longer than one hour and 15 minutes (and they include three platform speakers at five minutes each). And as for the establishment of a youth section - well, not if it can be avoided. Quite what this conference is supposed to be for is more than a little unclear. The original proposal for a SA youth conference was put forward by executive member Mandy Baker and supported by the CPGB. The largest SA component, the SWP, initially argued strongly against it, presumably fearing that it would cut across the transmission belt into the SWP. Also the comrades are of course still trying hard to keep the Socialist Alliance at the level of an 'electoral front'. Establishing an autonomous and potentially strong and vibrant youth section does not sit easily with this scheme. So the comrades from the SWP seem to have succeeded in making this conference as exciting and inspiring as Sunday mass. That is not to say that they have not worked hard to organise it. However, they have made sure that in all likelihood it is going to be a totally lifeless, dull affair. So far, the proposed speakers could as well be sitting at the top table of any rally organised by Globalise Resistance, the Stop the War Coalition or the SWP. Of course, in principle there is nothing wrong with speakers like Liz Davies, Tariq Ali, Suresh Grover, Weyman Bennett, John Pilger, Lindsey German and Tommy Sheridan. But none of these comrades are exactly what you would call spring chickens. Neither do they reflect the diversity that exists within the alliance. ISG, AWL, CPGB, Workers Power, etc. Rob Hoveman has been arguing that "it would be ludicrous to institutionalise differences from the top table", implying of course that young people would not be able to understand that an alliance of socialist organisations might actually contain dissident or minority opinions. It is patronising to pretend to young people that there are no differences in the SA. To pretend that things on the left have not changed at all in the last few years - ie, that we still organise on the basis of 'one organisation, one political line'. Surely, the recognition that we can work together despite our differences is the main strength of the alliance and not something that we have to be ashamed of. Sure, the SWP as the numerically dominant organisation is entitled to have more speakers on the rally and workshop platforms than any of the other organisations. But the comrades have been very untactful when it comes to including supporting organisations with different political opinions and methods. When the conference arrangement committee discussed which SA comrade they would recommend to the SA executive to speak in the European Social Forum workshop, I put myself forward (as the only CPGB speaker for Nini). The three comrades from the SWP were obviously not pleased. The fact that I would have been the only comrade to have actually been to all the ESF preparatory meetings across Europe seemed of little importance. While all other members of the organising committee agreed with the suggestion, you could see Rob and co straining their brains for an alternative. Towards the end of the meeting they succeeded: they suggested Claire Williams, a personable trade union organiser from the north east - who has unfortunately not been attending any ESF meetings, not even the local ones. She also happens to be an SWP member and would be speaking on the same platform as Guy Taylor, who is also a member of the SWP when he is not wearing his Globalise Resistance hat. Call me a sectarian, but that seems a little over the top. Both Claire and myself will be put forward for the NEC to come to a decision. Even more pathetic was the SWP's opposition to inviting Afif Safieh, the British representative of the PLO, to speak in the workshop on the Middle East/Palestine. The only reason I could think of for possibly not inviting him was his age - although such a consideration would also exclude Lindsay German, Tariq Ali and John Pilger. But Rob Hoveman gave different reasons. First he argued that Afif would not stick to five minutes, which could easily be enforced, surely. Secondly, the comrade maintained that Afif is "not much of a speaker". This is obviously not the case, as anybody who has heard him will tell you. He is a powerful speaker, who can talk extremely eloquently about the plight of the Palestinian people. He is very passionate, informative and knowledgeable. The third and final objection got a little closer to the truth: "He disagrees with the SA position on Palestine," argued comrade Hoveman. This is very instructive and explains why the SWP comrades really object to him. But it is not true actually. For several years, the PLO has put forward a programme for two states - one for the Israeli nation, one for the Palestinians. The SA has no position on the future state formation in the Middle East. It does not propose a two-state solution (like the CPGB and AWL), but neither does it call for a 'democratic, secular Palestine' which would abolish today's Israel. The latter of course is SWP policy. The SA executive meeting in April decided that our only slogans would be 'Free Palestine', 'Victory to the intifada' and 'Troops out' - all of which are also being put forward by the PLO and Afif Safieh. It was actually the SWP's John Rees who argued at this meeting against including the SWP's position (see Weekly Worker April 18). This was confirmed by the SA national council of May 11, where an amendment to call for a single Palestinian state was defeated by the SWP voting as a bloc against its own policy - in order, presumably to keep this slogan exclusively for SWP placards. So it seems comrade Hoveman has mixed up the positions of the SA and the SWP. The SA executive will decide in its next meeting on the final line-up of speakers and the timetable. But there is a real danger that absolutely nothing will come out of this conference. When myself and Alan Clarke from the AWL put forward a proposal to at least try to gather information about which SA members are attending which university, the proposal was met by a round of shrugged shoulders. It looks like it will be down to comrades from both our organisations to try and set up some SA university and youth groups. It is incredible that this has not yet happened. Attracting young people must surely be one of the main objectives of every political organisation. Winning over youth guarantees that your ideas do not die out. They are tomorrow's political leaders. They tend to be more radical and can infuse any organisation with fresh approaches and ideas. They can actually push things forward - especially in an organisation that needs a push as desperately as the Socialist Alliance. Tina Becker * Reviewing our constitution * Resistance and class independence
Worker