Respect: the sewage swamp splits
“What have you now fallen out about? Has your SWP Central Committee belatedly understood that your association with Galloway is demeaning and befouling? Do you now find yourselves suddenly realising what you have got into, with the shock of someone who wakes up to the realisation that he has been sleep-walked into a disease-ridden swamp of sewage? Have you suddenly realised whom you’ve been holding hands with?”
Sean Matgamna: open letter to Chris Harman.
So, the SWP’s alliance with George Galloway, the Muslim Association of Britain, Jamaat-e-Islami and various small (and not-so-small) businessmen, has ended in tears and recriminations.
Hopefully, this signals the beginning of the end for the communalist disgrace that is ‘Respect’. However, it seems likely that for a while at least, Galloway and his unsavoury associates will soldier on with their reactionary little outfit, unencumbered by the ‘Marxists’ of the SWP with their irritating residual concerns about women’s and gay rights, trade unionism and that embarrassing “s”-word.
But the decline and eventual fall of Respect is now certain: and so much the better, especially for young people from Muslim backgrounds looking for answers to the many difficulties and complexities that face them in Britain today: socialists will have a better prospect of winning them to class politics, without the distraction of a semi-socialist , semi-Islamist (and, in reality, communalist) halfway house designed especially for Muslims, on the unspoken understanding that they aren’t ready for socialism.
Will the SWP learn anything from this fiasco, in which they have lost several prominent members (literally bought by Galloway’s payroll)?
Judging by the editorial in the latest Socialist Worker (and the pompous pontifications of the SWP’s best-known blogger), the answer would appear to be a resounding “no”. The idea that the original alliance with Galloway was absolutely principled, but that, out of the blue, good ol’ George has turned right-wing and started attacking the “left” (ie: the SWP) for electoral reasons and in order to keep in with “conservative forces”, is quite simply bollocks. And, one suspects, the SWP leadership (though not, perhaps, poor little Seymour), knows it’s bollocks.
George Galloway is exactly the same corrupt, opportunist, dictator-worshipping Stalinist / Catholic bigot today that he was five years ago, when the SWP first swooned at his feet. And they’ve defended him over every revelation – corruption, sexism, show-biz aspirations, etc, etc – right up until now. Just like, until now, they’ve angrily denied that Respect could in any way be described as “communalist“.
The truth – as anyone whose stomach has been strong enough to allow them to follow the saga of Respect over the past five years, will know – is that neither Galloway nor the project itself, have changed one iota. What has changed is the balance of forces: Galloway and his Islamist businessmen friends have been able to pack meetings, get their council candidates adopted and (in a few, carefully-chosen Muslim-majority wards), get them elected. The SWP has been out-manoeuvred and several of its less scrupulous members bought off.
So the SWP’s dalliance with Stalinism, Islamism and communalism has ended in tragedy. Now comes the farce…
Shiraz Socialist 
modernityblog said,
October 24, 2007 at 11:02 pm
good post, nice and succinct
the disagreement within Respect, which was initially plastered over, is deepening, the tone of SWPers is more directly critical of Galloway, whereas a few weeks ago they were very guarded in their remarks they are less so nowadays.
although Socialist Unity blog has turned into a Respect “dumping ground” for the various factions and wading through the documents is a bit tedious, some of the comments are intelligent, political and thoughtful
by the same token, there is the deluded notion that Respect can be “saved” and somehow turned into a workers party!
oh the triumph of naivete over reality
the question is how many SWPers will leave and become full Respect members and what will happen to the rump SWP?
I assume that Galloway has some sponsors lined up for the new version Respect? and so won’t miss any funding arrangement with the SWP
once their members have left, Galloway will launch some major recruitment drive, really, really play into the communalism stuff, and no longer need the footsoldiers of the SWP, he will have replacements with him at the top.
game, set and match.
Galloway might be slimy, but he’s a smooth operator in the real world of politics.
Dr Paul said,
October 24, 2007 at 11:32 pm
Do you really think that Respect without the SWP will have any future? Or, to put it another way, is there any prospect for a rag-bag containing Galloway, sundry Muslim politicians (of whom not a few — to be polite — seem to be genuine petty-bourgeois types with no discernable political outlook), a few small-fry of the far left, and not much else?
I imagine that that the SWP did all the donkey-work in maintaining Respect as a national organisation, and most of the footwork on a local level as well. Galloway could be a national figurehead of Respect so long as there was an organisation on a national basis; without the SWP, Respect probably will not be able to maintain itself as a coherent body either politically or organisationally. Galloway will be a figurehead for an incoherent array of local organisations and local politicians with little to keep them together ideologically or organisationally — as many of the councillors will soon head for what they see as more promising electoral fields — so he will be fronting an effectively disintegrating outfit, a general with less and less of an army.
modernityblog said,
October 25, 2007 at 12:15 am
Dr. Paul wrote:
Do you really think that Respect without the SWP will have any future?
surely, that depends how you define the future and the TYPE of party that Respect will become
I would expect it to morph into a strongish Islamists Party.
Let’s look at it another way, would Galloway have provoke this split without thinking it thru, he knew that he’d lose a chunk of SWPers, in fact he was probably betting on it, given his current conduct.
Galloway probably thinks that he can get in REAL money (from the ME, I’d guess), with that money build a professional organisation and become a pole of attraction.
all he needs is plenty of money, a bit of luck, and some people to do the footwork.
that is not impossible to organise, but will Respect be the same as it is now, I doubt it.
I think so many people on the Left underrate Galloway because they think his politics stink, nevertheless, Galloway is very adept and didn’t get to a leadership role in the Scottish Labour Party without having some finely attuned political skills. My bet is that he’ll chop the SWP into bits.
PS: I truly loathe Galloway, but I would not underestimate his ability at all.
Neues vom RESPECT-Zerfallsprozess « Entdinglichung said,
October 25, 2007 at 2:51 pm
[…] Programm des Bösen verteidigen werden will … nur blöd, dass sich alle daran erinnern, dass die SWP bis vor 14 Tagen dieselbige Agenda lauthals im Lande verkündigt hatte und die Socialist Alliance, welche gerade dasjenige Programm vertrat, welches die SWP zu […]
modernityblog said,
October 25, 2007 at 4:15 pm
this is a google translation of the above, not perfect but you’ll get the idea:
http://www.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fentdinglichung.wordpress.com%2F2007%2F10%2F25%2Fneues-vom-respect-zerfallsprozess%2F&langpair=de%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8
entdinglichung said,
October 25, 2007 at 5:47 pm
… unfortunately, google is inaccurate in translating irony and sarcasm … but it should be clear, that the contribution does not align itself with both sides in the conflict and critizises them from “the left” …
voltaires_priest said,
October 25, 2007 at 5:54 pm
No sense of humour, these Google-machines. But you’ve got to admire their military precision and efficiency.
modernityblog said,
October 25, 2007 at 6:32 pm
still there is plenty of irony and unintended humour in the Respect bush up!
Jim Denham said,
October 25, 2007 at 6:46 pm
As will have become apparent by now, Volty, me and (I think, the AWL) are giving critical but unconditional support to Comrade Rees and the SWP over this.
However, I think a lot of unitended humour can be drawn from the headline of their latest ‘Socialist Worker’ editorial: ‘Defend socialism and democracy in Respect’. The SWP “defending socialism”: ha-ha-ha. Defending DEMOCRACY: HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA…
The only thing unitentially funnier is poor Alan Thornett and his ISG’s truly pathetic attempt to step into the SWP’s vacated shoes as Galloway’s ‘Trot’ supporters… now that’s *really* funny, in a Buster Keaton sort of way.
voltaires_priest said,
October 25, 2007 at 7:55 pm
Denham, stop posting under my nickname…
SP said,
October 25, 2007 at 10:59 pm
Jim
re “critical but unconditional support”
This is a situation where you REALLY DO NOT have to take sides – sit back, relax and enjoy!
Mike said,
October 26, 2007 at 3:22 am
Like the AWL I too support Comrade John Rees rather in the fashion that a rope supports a hanged man.
Darren said,
October 26, 2007 at 5:05 pm
Interesting to think that at a time when it could be argued that the SWP is going through it’s greatest internal crisis for a generation – thanks as much to the internet as anything else – it doesn’t look like any other left group will benefit from the fallout. (I mean in terms of picking up stray or disillusioned SWP members.)
I’ll hazard a guess that if the SWP were to lose a layer of longstanding activists following the Respect debacle, they will be more likely to end up in the left-wing of Green Party, if anywhere at all.
But what would I know?
modernityblog said,
October 26, 2007 at 6:04 pm
SWPers as Greens? Hmm, interesting idea
well, it seems to me that there are a lot of would-be Luddites in the SWP, and life style politics could make a change from their current situation
fair point
so instead of being a pain in the arse over faux anti-imperialism they’ll start moaning about cycles, re-cycling, etc
entdinglichung said,
October 26, 2007 at 6:22 pm
the general experience with disillusioned members of “Linksruck”, the SWP-clone in Germany is, that the majority of them (most of them joined “Linksruck” without any foregoing experience in another political group) drops out of organized leftist politics
Jim Denham said,
October 26, 2007 at 6:33 pm
That’s the saddest part of it all: generally, disillusioned SWP’ers simply drop out of politics and disappear. Though some drop out of politics (as we know it) and -unfortunately – don’t disappear, like Gary Bushell and Salma Yaqoub’s bag-carrier Ger Francis.
But the reason that the majority justr disappear is that the SWP is a cult that indocrinates its members that the rest of the far left is irrelevant and the Labour Party a waste of time. Very few even stay active in trade unionism, either. But, like the CP in years gone by, the SWP has some excellent comrades in its ranks. It’s now taken over from the SLL/WRP as “the machine for maiming militants”.
Dr Paul said,
October 26, 2007 at 9:46 pm
Modernity feels that Respect will probably mutate into an Islamist organisation. If it does, then it will condemn itself to if not complete oblivion then not a particularly propitious future.
I don’t think that there is any scope for an Islamist party in Britain beyond one which will exclude non-Muslims, that is, be a totally sectarian (in a religious manner) group and promote politics that would repel most Muslims. It would be a replica of the sundry little Islamist groups that are around today and which represent only a tiny proportion of Muslims in Britain. And with them in existence, who needs an ersatz one largely created and led by the Roman Catholic Galloway?
I would never underestimate Galloway’s slipperiness and ability to schmooz around people and obtain money. But it needs more than that to create a political movement, one that can have an impact locally and nationally in Britain. Previous to Respect, did he lead or play a prominent role in a political movement, rather than in a campaigning body or charity?
It’s no doubt true that he has weighed up the chances of keeping the non-SWPers on-side if or, more likely, when the SWP actually parts company with him. It seems that the International Socialist Group (USFI) has sided with Galloway. But they don’t amount to much, and the departure of the SWP will increase the weight of Muslim groups and individuals. As there can be no unifying factor amongst the latter — some are political Islamists, and this would include a range from liberals such as Salma Yaqoob to outright hard-liners, and some are not particularly religious but are chancers with an eye on perks of the job once elected, shysters in other words — the whole thing will be extremely unstable from the start.
The SWP was the factor that kept Respect together; it set it up, it provided the bulk of the foot-soldiers, it maintained its national coherence. Without its presence, the political, personal and geographical differences contained within it will come immediately to the surface.
I think that the SWP will try to wash its hands of the whole affair, try to ignore what critics outwith its ranks have to say (usually: ‘I told you so!’), and not carry out an in-depth analysis, with the aim of carrying on as if it had never occurred; in short, treat it as a bad dream.
Dr Paul said,
October 26, 2007 at 11:27 pm
Re Jim D’s comment # 16: Isn’t this what happens with every group? Splits lead not only to new groups, but to drop-outs too. Some become renegades — did your own group not have within its ranks one Wendy Henry, who ended up a nasty hack for Rupert Murdoch? The bloke who nearly recruited me to Workers Action in 1978, as the AWL, was called then — Stephen Corbishley — reverted to Catholicism and deserted the left. Then there’s Alan Johnson, now touting for the Henry Jackson Cold War Society. Look what happened to my old lot, the Revolutionary Communist Party. No, the SWP is not the only one with a record for turning out bad’uns.
modernityblog said,
October 27, 2007 at 12:27 am
Dr Paul wrote:
Modernity feels that Respect will probably mutate into an Islamist organisation.
Perhaps I should have said “could”, upon reflection “will” seems a bit strong.
I think we are all trying to predict the future without much an idea is to the outcome of the battles, but it seems to me we have to try and envisage what type of party or movement would Respect evolve into without the presence of a large chunk of the SWP?
I suspect on paper they’ll be very similar but in reality they would be a stronger Islamist flavour, how strong who knows?
Whatever it changes into, I don’t think it will sink into oblivion, if the funding is there
I wouldn’t underestimate the Islamists one bit, many of them are businessmen and used to structuring organisations, not necessarily political organisations in the same way as the SWP, but I suspect they would be competent organisers, capable and having some funding.
I think we can all agree that the SWP went in to this alliance with some agenda? then surely the other parties also had some agenda of their own ?
the Islamists (and it’s a broad category) want to increase their influence, that is their intent. Galloway, he likes fame, glory, publicity, the money, the power and the adulation.
So even if such a new grouping wasn’t “the New Workers party”, that does not necessarily mean it won’t have a political life of its own, any more than the Lib Dems, maybe not sizeable, maybe not a mass movement, but it could be influential and have its own momentum.
And on that basis, it would be easy for Galloway to drum up funding from the Middle East, having a movement that sets an agenda in Britain could be very attractive and a few million quid in oil money might go a long way to establishing it.
Galloway and the Islamist businessmen could build up a replacement cadre for the SWP foot soldiers, they might be helped by ex-SWPers and stray Trots.
It could go many different ways but that seems a reasonable scenario, and it is a mistake to disregard the abilities and political acumen of the Islamist businessmen. I think they know what they want and they probably found their alliance with the SWP annoying at times, so they’ll try to have their way in the future without the SWP.
I’d welcome your speculation!
Respect: Stand with the SWP! « Shiraz Socialist said,
October 27, 2007 at 12:30 am
[…] sound weird coming from me. But I felt the need to add a little personal note to Jim’s excellent post (with which I largely agree) about the recent crisis in the “Respect” […]
Dr Paul said,
October 28, 2007 at 12:20 pm
Replying to Modernity, funding isn’t everything. The WRP under Gerry Healy was an extremely wealthy organisation via the gross exploitation of its members, generous generations from rich actors and dodgy dealings with Arab states. Yet with all its resources, it collapsed ignominiously, having achieved very little durable in the interim.
Even if Galloway obtains some generous funding from Muslim entrepreneurs and Middle East sources, what sort of organisation can he build? The SWP gave Respect a national focus, without it Respect would become a gaggle of local groups. Some of them would have some sort of left-wing focus if they are headed by the non-SWP or ex-SWP people. But the groups that have a strong Muslim presence would be a different question.
Is there some sort of Islamic politics that can produce a reasonably unified organisation? I very much doubt it. There will be areas where an individual will be able to mobilise his family and friends to vote for him and his mates; this seems to be the case in Tower Hamlets, and Tower Hamlets Respect has had a mass of new recruits just prior to an important meeting — I bet that this is an example of this.
It would, however, be very wrong to view this as a specifically Muslim thing. It is common in areas of recent immigration and close-knit families and communities. It is a communal thing, and religion is a secondary issue. As I stated before, I imagine that a lot of the Muslim businessmen involved with Respect would be ‘convenient Muslims’, using their formal beliefs as a mobilising factor in the voting. Their main objective would be to get on the council, at best to represent their constituents in local matters, at worst to gain the perks of the job, peculation, etc. Can a national political movement, rather than a clutch of disparate local bodies, be built upon people like this? Extremely unlikely, I’d say.
Ideological Muslims pose another question. How much unity can be established amongst them outwith an organisational form such as Respect? All sorts of ideological differences could arise, not to mention personal squabbles. Again, there’s not much scope for unity. And is there much scope for a Muslim political party, even assuming that some sort of theological/ideological unity be cobbled up?
Respect was an attempt by the SWP to gain influence amongst Muslims in Britain on the basis of the conjuncture of its and their opposition to the war on Iraq. The SWP is learning the hard way what we all told them that appealing to Muslims as Muslims would align them with those least likely to be converted to socialism. When I was in the RCP, we recruited people from all manner of religious backgrounds, but they were those who were breaking, or who had broken, from those backgrounds. Not only would the Respect project would repel those sort of people, but most of the Muslim activists attracted to Respect would disagree with many of the SWP’s formal positions. This made Respect unstable from the start.
Now, with the SWP seemingly junking Respect, therefore stripping it of a national organisational focus, and with Iraq and Afghanistan not anything like the politically mobilising factors that they were, I can foresee differences, both ideological/political and purely personal/organisational, arising; amongst the remaining left-wingers; between secular leftists and religious Muslims; between non-ideological Muslims and ideological Muslims; amongst ideological Muslims over points of doctrine… the alignments of disagreements are endless.
No, even with Galloway’s undoubted skills at chatting people up, schmoozing, etc, I can’t see him leading a non-SWP Respect.
Mike said,
October 29, 2007 at 4:56 am
Dr Paul wrote “Respect was an attempt by the SWP to gain influence amongst Muslims in Britain”. Which point is true but only incompletely explains the rationale of the SWP for co-launching Respect with Galloway and company. To complete the picture it is only fair to recall that the SWP expected, or rather hoped against the evidence of the Socialist Alliance, that with the toehold in Britains Muslim communities won by Respect that bodycould then go on to win electioral support amongst wider sections of working people moving left in reaction to New Labours course. A shabby perspective borrowed from the SWP’s turn to the Socialist Alliance wrong both times but it does indicate their continued, if threadbare, focus on the working class which is good reason to support them against the small biznessmen tendency.
As for the future of Respect without the SWP. Well most of what the learned doctor is correct in the long term. But in the short to medium term Galloway might well emerge wih 2 parliamentary seats for his ludicrous party. By reason of the bankruptcy of Labourism and the influence of the communal networks he has tapped into. But if that happens we will most defintely be treated to some of the most amateur performances in the entire history of the Westminster parliament followed by the swift death of Respect when galloway gives up and retires to the Algarve.
As for the future of the SWP…….Now that is far more interesting.
martinohr said,
October 29, 2007 at 10:02 am
I think shiraz socialists should record forever the respective pages of mutual admiration on georgegalloway.com and lenins tmb before they are lost to the world forever. Given the penchant in both the swp and gallowayland for changing history to fit the present it is likely that the swp will soon be maintaining that they never did support galloway and vice versa.
Here’s what galloway says about Lenins Tomb: “Lenin’s Tomb – the British left’s most dynamic & inspiring blog, written by activists & trade unionists in Respect.” http://www.georgegalloway.com/page.php?page=content/links.html
Over at the LeninsTomb you tube channel (http://www.youtube.com/user/leninology) there are 24 clips of comrade galloway.
On leninstomb itself you can take your pick from any one of 186 thrilling articles and thousands more comments (http://www.google.com/search?q=galloway&hl=en&sitesearch=leninology.blogspot.com&start=0&sa=N)