Letters
ESF potential
As a member and employee of the Socialist Party of the Netherlands, I visited the European Social Forum in London. My personal main goal was meeting people in the hope that out of these contacts a permanent network could be established. Within the SP I participate in a recently formed working group whose main objective is to bring about cooperation between the different unions and our party. Its final purpose is to establish a cooperative supporting movement, strong enough to influence Dutch politics through action.
To me it was very disappointing that the ESF was nothing more than a ‘big left party’ for intellectuals. There was a lot of talking going on and we all had a great time. But why didn’t we exploit the potential? People and organisations from all over Europe (mainly young people) were there! Why wasn’t one day put aside to discuss the possibility of uniting the various left organisations and individuals, respecting each other’s opinions and ideals but with the notion that we must find a way to make a universal leftwing stand?
You (the CPGB) of all people mentioned the fact that the left division of opinion is our weakness. I agree. Rightwing neoliberals have made their move in a very short period: it’s called globalisation. Therefore we, the left, must follow their example. We must not start with a gathering of intellectuals blabbering on. We must start by taking part in activities at the base. The working class, housewives, children, teenagers, and so on.
Because unions (can) have an important active role in society and can mobilise a lot of people, they are of the utmost importance. Trade unionism - or, better, the trade union movement - gives leftwing politicians the tool to put their theory into practice.
We must find a way as soon as possible of organising an international leftwing conference so we can make one fist and forge our own ‘social globalisation’. We can’t do that without the support of the people. Therefore it is essential to mobilise using organisations in which they are gathered - trade unions, political and other social movements.
When we have established permanent and active participation, we must propose global actions, actions that hopefully will be supported by the trade unions. Our local initiative (linking the trade unions with the SP) in Holland is somewhat frustrated, because the biggest union in Holland (the FNV) is very sceptical. Therefore, once again, we must start at the base: the workers themselves. An exception is the FNV dockers branch in Rotterdam. They, in cooperation with the SP, are very active. They aim to change their union from within.
When a company - for instance, right now in Germany General Motors - tells us that there will be ‘reorganisation’ which will affect the lives of many workers, we must be able to take immediate action internationally through strikes and demonstrations. That way we can frustrate the multinationals.
All of this is not a dream, but can be achieved through a lot of work. If it came about, imagine how constructive and well organised the next ESF would be. A great left party for those who want a society that is based on humanity and not only on economics. Another world is possible for more than three days.
ESF potential
ESF potential
Not nationalist
Bob Davies condemns Cymuned (the Welsh for ‘community’) for attempting to tackle the very real problem of affordable housing facing Welsh-language communities. Cymuned’s solution is a reformist one that attempts to regulate the free market in housing, where inflation caused by incomers has meant that low- paid locals can’t afford to live in their own communities.
This is a real problem in most parts of Wales, regardless of language, but is particularly acute in areas where Welsh is still a living community language. Without these largely working-class communities, the Welsh language is in danger of becoming merely the academic plaything of the middle classes and quangos.
The use of the word ‘colonisation’ is a conscious attempt to place Cymuned in the broader anti-imperialist camp rather than a narrow, nationalist, anti-immigrant camp. This is not an anti-English movement - ironically the guy Bob mentions is originally from England and has learnt Welsh, as have many of Cymuned’s leading lights.
There is a world of difference between incomers who integrate, are sensitive to the fragile nature of a language and culture and contribute to the community, and those who use their wealth and influence to impose their language and culture on a community. A Brummie who learnt Welsh has written an excellent piece on how many of his fellow incomers are fleeing ‘multicultural’ cities in England and bring with them the same racist attitude towards ‘the natives’.
Since the 70s language and community activists have tried to tackle the problem of second homes and housing in Wales - sometimes with direct action. Socialists who understand the national dimension have also tried to come up with solutions, not least the need to control the housing market by starting to build council housing again or housing co-ops. It’s therefore disappointing to see other socialists dismiss these campaigns as “nationalism”, when in fact they raise big questions about imperialism, the free market, the importance of minority languages/cultures in the face of Anglo-American globalisation and the notion of putting people before profit.
There is a national dimension, but this is also about class - half the holiday homes in Wales are owned by people living in Wales. The wealthy (and often Welsh-speaking) middle classes of Cardiff are as guilty of distorting the rural housing market as a Brummie or a cockney. But, generally, the people moving into rural Wales are English, many of them retired and relatively wealthy and they are forcing out young working class people. This in turn distorts communities, leading to school closures, the loss of local services and creates a situation whereby you’re far more likely to hear the Welsh language spoken on urban council estates than some remote hillside cottage.
Bob’s analysis offers no solutions. Cymuned may not register in the greater scheme of things, but it has more than 2,000 members in a community of 500,000 Welsh speakers, which gives you an indication of the grassroots appeal of the movement. As I said, it’s a reformist movement with many deficiencies. It was founded three years ago because of the failure of the politicians, particularly Plaid Cymru, to provide answers. It is not pushing for exclusive use of the Welsh language - that’s a nonsense in today’s multi-lingual world.
Cymuned, as far as I understand, wants Welsh to survive as a living community language - a progressive demand that all socialists should support.
Not nationalist
Not nationalist
Sub standard
I thought Paul Greenaway was rather hard on Geoff Hoon, when he said that “In his statement to parliament on Tuesday, UK defence secretary Geoff Hoon resembled a used-car salesman trying to shift a complete wreck - so pathetically unconvincing was his position” (‘Battle for Fallujah rages’, October 21).
Geoff Hoon is clearly a very good salesman of second-hand goods: ‘I’ve got five very good submarines - low mileage, one careful owner.’
Sub standard
Sub standard
Sub reward
As a recent subscriber to the Weekly Worker it was a pleasure to read the report on the ESF demo (‘Damning criticism’, October 21). I was particularly amused by the section which read: “Bruce Kent (former chair, CND) opened with a comical dig at atheists, saying he had prayed for it to stop raining and now ‘the sun is shining’. The joke was on him later when it pissed down.”
This is the kind of frank and honest reporting I was hoping for when I took out my subscription!
Sub reward
Sub reward
Anti-semitism
It’s sad that it has taken a rabid anti-semite like Royston Bull to demonstrate to Jim Denham that Roland Rance’s standard anti-racist position on Palestine doesn’t amount to anti-semitism (Letters, October 14).
Anti-semitism
Anti-semitism
Left cooperation
The question of our strategy in the general election is going to be of crucial importance for the Respect conference. As we can see from their motion, the core organising group wants a limited, tightly focused campaign in areas where respectable votes can be secured. The current working number is 35 key constituencies (Luton, Tower Hamlets, Leicester are all likely contenders, for example).
It’s a simple technique with a tried and tested pedigree. It’s the technique the British National Party have used to significantly raise their profile and the Socialist Party have used, focusing on key areas to achieve limited, but important, success. The fact is that a swathe of two percent results impresses very few people indeed and, judging from the Euro election, this is the kind of result that an across-the-board Respect challenge would achieve. But Respect does have a number of constituencies where they can reasonably expect a big hit, possibly even winning a seat. Now that would be impressive.
The second advantage of this strategy is that it opens up a far greater scope for cooperation and negotiation with other organisations on the left who, rightly or wrongly, have chosen not to sign up with respect. Prospects for meaningful negotiations with Forward Wales, for instance, will be far improved. At the Euro elections there was massive pressure on Respect Wales not to let the side down and stand against Forward Wales. This resulted in an extremely humiliating result - one which need not be repeated this time round.
Likewise with the limited seats strategy there will be no excuse whatsoever for standing against sitting Labour left MPs, clashing with the Socialist Party, or other leftwing organisations where they have credible candidates. Where socialist or clearly progressive candidates get good votes, it is good for the movement as a whole. It gives people confidence and makes the left more credible in wider society. This means that it is in every leftwinger’s interests for, say, the Socialist Party to do well - even if you have profound disagreements with that organisation.
I hope that Respect will see this wider picture and not go for the short-term sectarianism of attempting to drive the ‘opposition’ into the ground, a technique much favoured by the hard left in the past. Being the biggest tadpole in the pond is of no use to anyone. Serving the interests of the movement through cooperation and collaboration is to everyone’s benefit. The more the array of left candidates are seen as part of the same family of radical campaigning fighters, the more we will be able to get past the ‘pond life’ stage of left politics. The less respect we pay to our comrades from traditions other than our own, the more we will all be dragged down into the mire.
Of course, there may be times where it is simply not possible to reach a consensus - but these should be minimised at all costs. Woe betide those, from any organisation, who sacrifice the interests of the movement as a whole for the sake of what is, after all, only an election. This weekend delegates will have the opportunity to push for Respect to be as open and friendly as possible towards other forces on the left - I hope that they seize this opportunity.
Left cooperation
Left cooperation
I recant
Stuart Richardson takes me to task for allegedly stating that “it was not appropriate to raise general political and international issues in local elections” (Letters, October 21). I cannot recall saying or writing anything that could be interpreted in that way, nor can I find any record of having done so. Perhaps comrade Richardson could be a little more precise than claiming I said or wrote this “in the summer”.
In any case I certainly do not believe it. So if I did state it, I unreservedly recant. I think nobody in the CPGB holds any such view.
I recant
I recant
Untouched
Phil Hamilton’s review of the World Socialist Web Site is a little ungenerous in treating only of the pages that are represented as part of the American left (‘Avoiding cooperation’, October 21). The main site is part of a global project.
In complaining of the Socialist Equality Party’s unwillingness to cooperate with other socialists Phil misses the point. These organisations (and the very milieu that the CPGB seeks to address) are almost wholly steeped in protest politics, pressure groups and life-style issues, and can hardly be viewed as building blocks for a workers’ party. The WSWS casts its net somewhat more widely, addressing thousands worldwide who are largely untouched by the ‘left’.
If Phil thinks that WSWS neglects democratic demands, I suggest he treats himself to the recent article on Thomas Paine, one of many serious and well researched contributions.
Untouched
Untouched
Medieval
Your article on the WSWS has some constructive elements, but what is the task of the day? Making a website which would entail all that is good in the WSWS, but provide more democracy, a discussion forum, comments to articles, and be more inclined to materialism than to idealism, and at least try to keep in touch with science.
I know a lot about the problems in the WSWS and could help in making a better site if other people are interested in joining hands in that endeavour. But the first step is to recognise that the WSWS is the best at present and what it is that makes it good. If we could learn from the competition of the market economy and bring it to bear on leftist websites, we would be able to achieve much better things than medieval scholastics.
Medieval
Medieval
State control
Last week you touched on the policing of the ESF, but you have missed the point about the extent of the state interference (Weekly Worker October 21). Your criticism of Livingstone has been that he has used his control of funding to control the direction of the ESF and place his apparatchiks (in alliance with the Socialist Workers Party) in key roles.
Reading this, you could form the impression that he used either his own money or the funds of an organisation he headed. In fact these were state funds and, as the comrades in Cobas have correctly pointed out, the entire ESF was state-funded. It is a very small jump from the state funding events to the state policing them. This was not simply the case of a few coppers wandering round the halls and looking at stalls, though that is unacceptable. The fringe events suffered from constant police harassment, with people being stopped and searched and photographs taken. Protestors and demonstrators were also subject to arbitrary arrest, as your account of the demonstration showed.
One of the refreshing things about the ESF was the different response from the European left to that of the British left. Our comrades from Europe were outraged that such a level of policing was tolerated and that the ESF itself had raised no protest. The British left characteristically put it all down to the anarchists or the mythical ‘black bloc’. This was not only the response of the politically degenerate SWP.
Describing the protest at the ESF plenary on Saturday night, you wrote: “Predictably, arrests immediately followed as the main body of protesters withdrew”. Why is it predictable that protesters at an internal meeting of the left should be arrested? No such fate befell the comrades from Workers Power. As for the demonstration on Sunday, it is unacceptable that the leaders of the demonstration should have continued the march when a group trying to join it had been stopped by the cops.
However, in my experience no large leftwing group has ever taken seriously the need for solidarity with those attacked by the state. Some groups have, of course, gone further. I vividly remember Steve Nally and Tommy Sheridan of Militant (as was) promising to “name names” after the poll tax riot. As to taking state money, I also recall the parasitical relationship the left had with the state when Livingstone was boss of the GLC.
Any movement that is genuinely a revolutionary opposition to capitalism needs also to oppose the capitalist state in all its manifestations. Sadly, we seem to be a long way from that.
State control
State control