12.09.2013
Socialist Platform: Principles first, then the masses
Mark Fischer on the differences that have arisen in the SP in the lead up to its first meeting
Relations have suddenly become very fraught between the Communist Party of Great Britain and four of the small group who originally drafted the Socialist Platform of Left Unity, as evidenced by the exchange on this page. The SP is, of course, an initiative that we have promoted, urged comrades in Left Unity to sign up to and campaigned for non-aligned comrades to join LU precisely in order to support it.1
What has sparked this falling-out has been some unexpected proposals about what should be, and what should not be, on the agenda for the first national meeting of the platform on September 14. Originally this was promoted as an opportunity for members to take real political ownership of the platform. And, of course, the meeting was properly constituted: ie, it was widely advertised, with plenty of notice and it had a deadline for the submission of amendments, motions, etc.
So what has happened since is more than disappointing. We welcomed the SP’s appearance. Whatever specific criticisms we had, it appeared to be in the process of ‘getting’ a very simple, but core idea we have long fought for - that Marxists, revolutionary socialists, communists ought to stand on the politics they profess to believe in. Or, to paraphrase Rosa Luxemburg, ‘Principles first, then the masses’. We have submitted amendments to the statement - twice now, actually. The four comrades are telling us that they do not want a substantive vote and are, instead, promising another chance before the November 30 national Left Unity conference. But why then? Why not now?
The ‘drafting group’ comrades - including Nick Wrack who very recently stood on our platforms and agreed with the vast majority of what we are now submitting - have unfortunately stumbled and fumbled their way into what looks like a dreadful position. They want to go at the speed of the most backward (as defined by themselves). To emphasise the crucial point, this is about political method first and foremost.
Concretely what is now being proposed by the four is that no changes should be introduced to the platform. So we presume they view it not as a working document, but something that is in effect written in stone. Of course, this proposal can and should be overturned - and we certainly urge comrades to vote this nonsense down. The drafting group of four want nothing more than “indicative votes” on amendments that have been legitimately submitted, in time and in good order, to a meeting that originally advertised itself as one where there would be discussion and debate over possible changes to the statement. The stated reason for the switch to ‘indicative voting’ is that: “we are concerned that the significant progress we have made so far in obtaining the support of so many people is not fractured or undermined by taking any decisions about the content of the statement without the fullest involvement of all who have supported [it] so far.”
The proposed agenda reflects this morbid fear that taking decisions to include amendments would, almost by definition, fracture and undermine the platform. This does not show much respect for the comrades who have signed up so far. Surely all genuine socialists aspire towards a society based on general freedom, surely they all want to see the back of the bureaucratic-military state machine, surely they all want a society which knows no countries, money or prisons. I would like to stress then that the amendments put forward by the CPGB2 were intended to clarify and strengthen the original formulations. Not to undermine or replace them.
What this whole episode reveals is a difference over method. We are simply fighting for what we think is needed when it comes to a ‘statement of socialist aims and principles’. On the other hand, the drafting group of four appear to be taking their lead from forces - real or imagined - to their right. For us Marxism necessitates telling the truth to the working class from the outset and at every point from then on. The working class cannot be fooled into winning socialism. So there can be no pretending to be clause four socialists or fudging the difference between left Labourism and genuine socialism.
mark.fischer@weeklyworker.org.uk
Notes
1. See our carousel item for the relevant documents - available on our website from September 13.
2. See ‘Socialist Platform - amendments’ Weekly Worker August 29.