RESPECT: the “unity” coalition
A new political gathering on the left wing has been formed and is
attracting some attention to itself of late. But what is this group and
what will it mean for the working class?
R.E.S.P.E.C.T, standing for “Respect, Equality, Socialism, Peace,
Environment, Community, and Trade Unionism” was formed on 25 January
when over one thousand people gathered in central London for the
launching of the new organisation. The group has been initiated
by ex-Labour MP George Galloway, posing as some kind of figurehead, and
the Socialist Workers Party, the Stop the War Coalition, and various
smatterings of other left wing groups and trade unions.
The initial declaration of this new organisation uses the language of
socialism: “We want a world in which the democratic demands of the
people are carried out; a world based on need not profit; a world where
solidarity rather than self-interest is the spirit of the age”.
Observers will have noticed that they remain silent on how this new
world is to be obtained, instead focussing on the mass discontent
whipped up by the political blunderings of George Bush, Tony Blair and
other spokesmen of the western capitalist class, in particular on the
recent invasion of Iraq and the anti-war sentiment this provoked.
The anti-war movement was vast up to a point, and served as yet another
example of how capitalism’s interests are not tied up with those of the
workers. The spontaneous outburst of protest against imperialist war
was an inspiring event for any socialist, but, as we know, the movement
was massively ignored by the powers-that-be, and led to a feeling of
let-down among those workers who thought that capitalist parties
represented them. Now that the war has reached its conclusion, many
people may be searching for a new “political alternative”.
Respect has stated on several occasions that it wishes to be that
alternative. For instance:
“But the yearning for a political alternative is
even wider than the anti-war movement. Pensioners,
students, trade unionists, Muslims and other faith
groups, socialists, ethnic minorities and many others have been
deeply disappointed by the authoritarian social
policies and profit-centred, neo-liberal economic
strategy of the government.”
However, so far they have held back from talking about how they intend
to get to this new alternative or even about whether they think it will
work within the present economic system. The majority of their
propaganda to date consists of highlighting the recent problems of the
capitalist class in Britain and elsewhere, but where they fail is that
they seem to be under the impression that the current administrators of
capitalism are unpleasant, lying manipulators and exploiters by choice
rather than the system itself being to blame.
On some level it is perhaps unfair to judge just yet, since Respect is
young and has yet to make an impact on the political scene, and on one
level they are correct: there is a yearning for change. There has been
a yearning for change ever since class society developed, that yearning
of course is more generally known in socialist circles as the product
of the class struggle. The class struggle is the irrefutable antagonism
of interests in present society between the class that owns and profits
from the means of production, and the class that creates the wealth but
does not possess any means of producing wealth of their own. Those who
“yearn for change” are certainly aware of some form of injustice or
antagonism inherent in present-day society, and may be attracted to the
new Respect coalition. Unfortunately, since Respect is not direct about
what exactly they are aiming for, and how it is to be achieved, they
run the risk of becoming caught in the quagmire of popular but
ineffectual reformism.
List of Reforms
To date, Respect has provided the working class with promises for a
better world, peace instead of war, riches instead of poverty,
happiness instead of misery, but is quite silent on a possible future
away from capitalism, and have instead stated the following aims to
adjust the present economic system:
1. An end to the war and occupation of Iraq. We will not join any
further imperialist wars.
2. An education system that is not dependent on the ability to pay,
that is comprehensive and gives an equal chance in life to every child
no matter how wealthy or poor their parents, from nursery to university.
3. A publicly owned and funded, democratically controlled NHS, free to
all users.
4. Pensions that are linked to average earnings.
5. Raising the minimum wage to the European Union decency threshold of
œ7.40 an hour.
6. Tax the rich to fund welfare and to close the growing gap between
the poor and the wealthy few.
7. The repeal of the Tory anti-union laws.
8. Opposition to all form of discrimination based on race, gender,
ethnicity, religious beliefs (or lack of them), sexual orientation,
disabilities, national origin or citizenship.
9. The right to self-determination of every individual in relation to
their religious (or non-religious) beliefs, as well as sexual choices.
10. The defence of the rights of refugees and asylum seekers.
Opposition to the European Union’s ‘Fortress Europe’ policies.
11. We will strongly oppose the anti-European xenophobic right wing in
any Euro referendum. But we oppose the ‘stability pact’ that the
European Union seeks to impose on all those who join the euro. This
pact would outlaw government deficit spending and reinforce the drive
to privatise and deregulate the economy and we will therefore vote ‘No’
in any referendum on this issue.
12. Support for the people of Palestine and opposition to the apartheid
system that oppresses them.
13. An end to the destruction of the environment by states and
corporations for whom profit is more important than sustaining the
natural world on which all life depends.
So ends this rather lengthy list of reforms and promises. It is
aimed at drawing in many disillusioned people eager to see the better
world promised come to realisation. The reforms won’t work though,
because of a basic misunderstanding of the type of society we live in.
We live in a capitalist society, a society where goods are only
produced for profit. In such a society, it’s logical that the creation
of profits must take precedence over everything else. Hence the
Socialist Party’s policy of not advocating reforms, since attempting to
attack this profit-making machine with piecemeal reforms, rather than
consistently aiming for the complete abolition of capitalism itself, is
doomed to failure and frustration.
There is a chance those among the SWP already know this, since it ties
in with the Trotskyist approach to reforms and struggle, but as long as
they hold that the working class as unable to develop a revolutionary
understanding of society, they will continue to attempt to deceive us
by providing us with “transitional demands” in the hope that the
workers will become so enraged at capitalism being unable to work in
their interests that they will want a revolution. In reality people can
simply become disillusioned with the reforms put forward by the left
wing and abandon any interest in politics.
It would be of interest to see just how large a hold the SWP has on the
rest of the coalition, as they reportedly made up half of the delegates
at the founding conference. Speculation on the chance Respect may go
the way of the Socialist Alliance seems already to have entered the
minds of many people, and it’s a strong possibility that infighting
between the SWP and the other groups may break out just as it did in
the SA.
Voices from the remnants of the Socialist Alliance
At the conference to launch Respect in Portsmouth, it was interesting
to note that questions from the audience and replies from the speakers
hinted that the Socialist Alliance was a spent force, and one that
nobody would wish to see again. It seemed to be held by the audience of
students and workers that the SA had failed miserably, and that its
policies had been ineffectual and misguided from the very start.
While this would be a ray of hope to revolutionary Marxists that the
working class are starting to become increasingly annoyed at Trotskyist
attempts to manipulate them, it’s of interest how some of the parties
who made up the SA are reacting to the Respect Coalition.
The so-called “Socialist Party” of England and Wales (SPEW, formerly
known as Militant Labour) have issued a statement to the new coalition,
claiming that they will support them in the European elections but feel
unable to join with them for the moment. They dredged up the past where
they butted heads with the SWP inside the SA, with the end result that
they left the organisation and the SWP consolidated its stranglehold.
They also appear to be upset that they were not invited to join with
the coalition earlier, a strong indication of the antagonism between
Militant and the SWP, but since they are not a part of the new
coalition (something the SWP is certainly pleased about) it seems they
will have little effect on the future of Respect.
Although the Communist Party of Britain (who publish the Morning Star)
never was a part of the Socialist Alliance, their reasons for not
joining with the Respect Coalition shed light on the SWP’s relationship
with the rest of the Leninist Left. In a statement on the new group
they said:
“We reject participation in the Respect Coalition
proposed by George Galloway and
others. It is a narrowly-based front for the SWP which has
emerged from the remnants of the failed Socialist
Alliance, and is likely to divide not only the
labour movement but the anti-war movement as well.
Its main constituent organisation holds quite
different views to those of our party on the role
and potential of the trade union movement and its leadership,
on the national question and the nature of
imperialism, and on the socialist countries past and
present.”
The text is somewhat sceptical as to the ability of the non-SWP
factions in Respect to resist an attempt by the SWP to overwhelm the
entire organisation, but time will tell if such scepticism is well
founded.
Other statements follow that the CPB believe the new coalition could be
harmful to a movement that wishes to “recapture” the Labour Party and
“return” it to the interests of the working class. How exactly a
pro-capitalist party such as Labour, which is and always has been for
the continued existence of capital, can be turned towards the interests
of socialism is something that will remain a mystery.
The Alliance for Workers’ Liberty (AWL) remained in the Socialist
Alliance, and is a small but vocal group of Trotskyists, so far
refusing to join Respect and heaping all manner of warnings of
impending disaster on its reformist and opportunist tactics. Focussing
on George Galloway, who has been set up as a “leading figure” in the
coalition, they have attacked his pathetic claim that he needs
“œ150,000 a year to function as a leading figure” and also his shady
ties to the former dictatorship in Iraq. The AWL attacks Respect’s soft
approach to socialism, in so far as Respect’s only mention of the word
socialism is that it makes up the “S” in the word R.E.S.P.E.C.T.
Up to now the AWL has been the most eloquent voice of protest and
warning heard from the Leninist Left, but its repeated calls for the
standard Trotskyist demands of nationalisation and state control do not
impress the revolutionary Marxist nor any worker who does not simply
wish to see the current free market regime replaced with a system based
on state capital.
While the CPGB (not to be confused with the old CPGB whose name they
picked up and who publish the Weekly Worker) has joined with the
Respect Coalition, like other groups, it has voiced concern about
overwhelming SWP involvement in the new coalition’s politics, via a
leaflet that they distributed at the Portsmouth meeting, which is
summed up in the following:
“In order to keep a disparate alliance together,
the Socialist Workers Party, which will surely make
up the bulk of the convention, and its allies are
junking principle after principle to launch Respect.”
We are certainly hearing voices of caution from several groups, some
outside of the Socialist Alliance and some within, who are wary of SWP
interference in this attempted new movement in left wing
politics. This could be a simply matter of political feuding;
some left groups may be jealous of the SWP’s numbers and disturbing
tendency to use this to pack meetings or on some occasions intimidate
and/or initiate violent attacks on its political opponents.
However, we should not forget that a lot of these groups would not for
a moment hesitate to act in the undemocratic and pushy manner that the
SWP do, if they thought it would hasten their aim of introducing a
state capitalist regime in Britain such as that which was started by
the Bolsheviks in Russia.
Conclusion
While it may seem unfair to judge a new political movement before it
has had an effective chance to prove itself, it would seem that we
should not get our hopes up for Respect. As stated and proved, they
have made it clear they are advocating reforms to capitalism, and while
these reforms may at first seem attractive, it is certain they would
always be at odds with the very nature of the economic system we live
in, i.e., capitalism. Lacking an honest revolutionary stance for a new
society, reformism becomes caught in a pointless and frustrating
circular battle with an economic system that is based on exploitation.
As long as the accumulation of capital takes precedence, either in the
hands of the individual capitalist or state institutions, the primary
concern of exploitation of labour and making profit will take
precedence over the concerns of human need.
It may seem cynical to write off the coalition completely, but when
even former allies in the Socialist Alliance are showing such doubts on
its ability to create a new workers movement, it’s clear to socialists
that Respect should be treated with caution if not scepticism. The fact
that if and when Respect have any success, George Galloway is bound to
come under attack by the media for his supposed friendly links to the
old regime in Iraq. A man such as Galloway with such a dubious
political background can only spell trouble for Respect’s appearance as
credible left wing organisation, but for the moment they seem oblivious
to this danger.
One thing is certain though, a socialist organisation will get nowhere
without a firm grasp of democracy, sound Marxist principle, a disdain
to conceal its socialist objective, and a membership in full possession
of the facts about current society and the revolutionary alternative.
Respect has none of these organisational principles, and is showing no
sign of understanding or desiring to develop any of them.
Dan Read
Socialist
Party home page