17.11.2005

Galloway's Churchillian moment

Mark Fischer listened to George Galloway praising the British armed forces in World War II - "our finest hour as a country"

Socialist Workers Party member Dean Ryan was being slightly unfair to himself when he told the 400-plus people packed into the November 15 Respect rally in Hackney that he was merely the "warm-up man" for the main speaker, George Galloway. The comrade, who was Respect's general election candidate for Hackney South and Shoreditch, spoke well and the brief contributions from both him and George Solomon of Military Families Against War were well received by an audience largely composed of new faces - a fact that clearly pleased the organisers. There was, however, no doubting the headline act of the evening. Comrade Galloway spoke for over an hour in total, animating the event with his customary verve, humour and eloquence. True, it was plain that this was another 'gig' in a very punishing tour and so much of what he had to say was not new (and if I hear the "shiver looking for a spine to run up" gag one more time I may throw something). The Respect member who complained in the truncated debate that the speakers had sounded like a "stuck record" thus pointed to a partial truth, but the fact is that comrade Galloway did address himself to some interesting new areas that imply important challenges for the political project he heads - or, more particularly, for the SWP component of it. First, the CPGB's Anne Mc Shane asked George to clarify the reasons for his support for the Blair's government's proposals on religious hatred. She pointed out that all the speakers on the platform - comrade Galloway included, of course - had identified the reactionary core of New Labour anti-terror legislation. Effectively, it amounted to a wide-ranging and pernicious attack on our civil liberties. Yet the religious hatred legislation was actually a component part of this offensive. While the anti-terror measure represented the stick of the government's attempt to herd sections of muslim population alienated by the war back into the New Labour 'big tent', this proposal was the carrot. Despite this, comrade Mc Shane pointed out, there had been considerable debate and dissension amongst muslims on the question and many opposed the legislation (see, for example, the comments of Anas Altikriti - Weekly Worker September 29). Why should we support a government initiative aimed at splitting and undermining our movement, she wondered? Comrade Galloway initially flatly contradicted the CPGB: she was "wrong" to suggest there were muslim organisations that did not back the proposals (he partially corrected himself when he added that "the main muslim organisations are in favour"). For him, the matter was simple. Muslims were the only section of society not covered by laws that banned the fostering of hatred against them - the blasphemy laws covered christians and, for the purposes of the act, Jews were protected under legislation against racial hatred. "Anti-islamic chauvinism was the last acceptable form of racism," the comrade suggested, and so, while he recognised the "hypocritical" motivations of the Blair government, he would vote for it. Clearly, Galloway's stance highlights the problems the Respect project causes the SWP in two ways. First, it is clearly being pulled dramatically to the right in the wake of this sort of politics. John Rees - effectively the SWP's leader - has actually taken a lead on the Respect national leadership in urging support for the religious hatred laws. We have no way of knowing whether this represents a majority position, as Socialist Worker and the organisation's other publications have been remarkably coy about unequivocally stating a clear position - the opportunist and dishonest SWP method it invariably employs when it embarks on yet another 'get rich quick' political scam. Second, Galloway made it plain that his support for the religious hatred laws was non-negotiable. He would act according to his conscience in parliament - however delegates to the November 19-20 Respect conference vote on the CPGB-sponsored motion opposing these laws. Thus, the SWP majority may actually vote down this motion precisely in order to avoid a political confrontation with Respect's talismanic figure - and where does this support for aspects of the Blair government's anti-terror offensive start to take the comrades? A similar problem was posed when Galloway replied to a question of New Labour's supposed hypocrisy in honouring the dead of previous wars at Cenotaph commemorations while at the same time sending more young people to their deaths in new conflicts. The comrade took the opportunity to underline his support for the role of the British armed forces in World War II - "our finest hour as a country", he said, employing the famous phrase of Churchill. Britain had "stood alone" against the Nazi hordes in a defining national struggle that we should "honour". If 'we' had not, he melodramatically stated, then he would not be standing in front of us tonight; instead, it would be "someone speaking German". Now, it is hardly a surprise when a left social democratic like George Galloway comes out with this sort of social-chauvinist nonsense about Britain's role in the second great imperialist war. It is a staple diet of this trend in the workers' movement. For instance, whenever Tony Benn searches for metaphors for the socialism he has in mind for us, he almost invariably cites World War II and its immediate aftermath, with the election of the Labour government of Attlee. This war - and the anti-fascist, democratic myths that the establishment was able to attach to it with the active connivance of Stalinism and social democracy - is a key component in the official 'story' of what Britain is all about. And our comrades from the left of the Labour Party are nothing if not very British "¦ The problem is again one for our SWP comrades, of course. An amendment has now been proposed to the original Respect national council motion to conference that expressed the same Brit-chauvinist sentiments (see www.respectcoalition.com/?ite=926). But, had Galloway's Churchillian moment come earlier in the meeting than his summing up, would SWPers have openly challenged this nonsense and told the truth to the hundreds of working class people at this rally about the real nature of British imperialism's role in that reactionary carnage? Whatever else can be said about George Galloway, he is transparently sincere in his politics and not afraid to put them forward - now there is something the SWP ought to try to emulate.