Letters

Disrespect

So Marcus Ström urges us to support the latest ‘alternative to Blair’ vehicle - Respect!

Marcus reminds us that this new vehicle is a step back from the failed Socialist Alliance and he also points out that “At its centre is the Socialist Workers Party, the largest ostensible Marxist group in Britain, in alliance with the best known anti-war MP, George Galloway” (‘Party notes’, April 8).

And here of course for all to see is its weakness. The Socialist Alliance failed because the SWP (and its fellow-travellers) were at the centre of that barren ‘alternative to New Labour’ - stopping it from developing into a socialist movement in its own right, merely to be the ‘electoral front’ of the SWP whilst it took their fancy.

As for the eloquent and extremely bright George Galloway MP, he is nothing more than the latest star that the SWP think will win them Respectability and help channel naive radical youth into their ranks to become (in theory) the new revolutionary cadre so needed by this Leninist organisation, but (in practice) will end up as disillusioned paper-sellers.

Marcus goes on to say: “The working class, through its own struggles, needs clear principles in order for it to learn politics of the highest order.” I should think the CPGB leadership have absolutely no principles left themselves - they have watched and participated in the pantomime performed within the SA since the SWP takeover in 2001 and yet they have decided to support yet another ‘socialism-from-above’ experiment. Yes, I can understand any humanist/socialist such as Tatchell joining the Green Party rather than Respect - which looks set to be just another version of the dictatorship by slates SA/SWP.

Even if Respect manages to gain a few decent results on the back of the latest ‘anti-war feeling’, where does it go after that? That support will evaporate just as it did after the great London march, which I recall many of your naive SA ‘vanguardists’ at the time took to be the prelude of revolution! Having continually criticised the SWP’s antics only to fall in behind them yet again makes it appear that the CPGB leaders are playing to the SWP what Blair plays to George W Bush - lackey. Wake up before you have no credibility left!

Further on in your pages, Dave Craig still witters on about fighting to keep the Socialist Alliance alive - please put the light out, Dave, you’ll be the last one out, old mate.

Disrespect
Disrespect

Party power

John Livingston says: “I am all for a strong socialist republic of England, but I oppose any form of totalitarianism, whether right or left. Socialism should be the highest form of democratic rule, because, if it’s not, then it’s no better than any other tyrannical regime that’s based on oppression and slaughter. Stalin’s USSR is proof of that” (Letters, March 11).

Communists judge societies by their socio-economic systems: that is, whether their means of production and distribution are privately or publicly owned, and by the programme of the party in power. Is it a bourgeois state or a workers’ state? That is the fundamental question, and the means by which the working class achieves and holds onto power is a tactical question.

The dictatorship of the proletariat is a transitional phase on the road to socialism, and the working class will find itself having to exercise its totalitarianism against the capitalist class, just as the capitalist class has historically done to the working class in order to hold onto power. The degree of totalitarianism will be inversely proportional to the degree that the working class is both economically and politically secure. There is no such thing as a ‘polite’ revolution.

Another of your correspondents, Guiam Wainwright, writes: “The essence of anarchism is for peace, for the abolition of all laws, as there will be no need for them: ie, there won’t be a law against murder, because nobody would ever want or need to commit it. I view communism as a stepping stone towards this system, and your system of collectives especially is one I agree with.

“But is there a point at which you believe the party would find it possible to actually hand control to them? Is it possible that another Stalin-like regime will arise, or do you believe your Party leaders to be sufficiently in control and have enough faith in Marxism to prevent this from happening?” (Letters, March 25).

Guiam, communism would be the final stepping stone, identical to the scenario that you describe. That is the ultimate goal. The need for parties will have long since disappeared, for parties exist only because there is class struggle.

You need to read The revolution betrayed by Leon Trotsky to fully appreciate the fact that Stalinism didn’t arise because the party was lax. It arose because of the extreme poverty that characterised the environment in which the Bolsheviks had to work. Leon Trotsky observes that, while it was much easier to take power in Russia than it would be for communists to take power in an advanced capitalist country, it would be infinitely easier for communists to hold onto power in the latter, as “we can only share the poverty”. Read the book.

Party power
Party power

Stalinist asylum

I agree with most of the immediate demands in your Draft programme except one - your policy to give migrant workers the right to become British citizens after only three months. With the number of people emigrating, immigrants will soon outnumber true British people. I believe that a Communist Party should adopt a more Stalinist attitude towards immigration and asylum.

Stalinist asylum
Stalinist asylum

Boneheads

OK, people have their beliefs, but what right have you got to call them “boneheads” (‘BNP gains from left default’ Weekly Worker May 8 2003)?

I’m an 18-year-old skinhead. I have no connection with Nazi beliefs or Hitler. The German for ‘nationalist’ is Nazi, so you put them in the Nazi category. I’m a BNP supporter and I am a nationalist. I also believe that even Hitler had a point. I’m not saying I believe what he did was right, but you ask any historian who was the best political leader in the world in the 1900s. If they’re truthful they will say Hitler.

We don’t even know what Blair is doing with our money. If you are going to criticise Hitler’s plans and actions, you should also criticise Europe and Tony Blair. The 12-region split-up by Europe was Hitler’s plan for Britain. He was going to take us over and let us trade freely, but Tony Blair wants to put a 17.5% tax on trade. Now who looks like Hitler?

The only reason Blair is going to Europe is because it’s more money in his pocket. He went to a catholic church and Europe is a catholic community, so Tony wants a seat. But the people of Britain are fooled by this man. If anybody should have their picture in an article with the title “boneheads” underneath it, it’s the British community for not realising that Tony is the religious equivalent to the devil.

Knowing how these things go, I realise my comment will be filtered out as normal.

Boneheads
Boneheads

Housing crash

I would like to comment on the seemingly never-ending rise in house prices across the UK. It is the classic bubble - you know that when investors believe there’s no place else to go.

You can’t blame people for getting into home ownership. Cheap money is one factor. Another is that lenders have dramatically lowered their eligibility standards. Down-payments for first-time homebuyers now average 3%, down from 20% 30 years ago.

The implosion will start among first-time homebuyers with few other assets. They support the whole housing market through the move-up chain, whose links are tenuous. The current boom could end with a devastating crash, triggered by a rise in interest rates, which will hit those investors who have taken out ‘buy to let’ mortgages as a pension plan.

As prices fall, many property speculators will withdraw from the market, preferring to rent houses out in anticipation of a more buoyant market later on. There will be a bulge in the market for rented accommodation. The sudden appearance of many ‘For rent’ signs will exert downward pressure on an already vulnerable owner-occupier market.

The gap on the interest payable on a mortgage and the return, which can be received in rent, on the capital value of a property, will widen. It will become far cheaper to rent property than to rent money, in the form of a mortgage, from a bank or building society. This will further deter house purchases and depress the values of residential property, adding to the self-feeding downward spiral.

There will be a steady increase in the number of houses on the market in all sizes and shapes, but sales will be very, very poor. By 2010, it is our estimate that the average house price in the UK will have fallen, from its peak, by 60%.

That is exactly what happened when the property bubble burst in Japan during the 1990s.

Housing crash
Housing crash