We require little lecture on

We require little lecture on political unity from those on the Trotskyist Left who are well deserved of the title 57 Varieties , having mostly been made up out of splits of splits of splits of splits….Why should we join your Campaign for a New Workers party and not other groups such Campaign for a new Marxist Party …or even Respect (before its purges) ….and a host of other non-starters that have come and gone in the past. The Weekly Worker is always an amusing source of the disharmony exhibited within TUSC, itself  the offspring of No2EU. I never said Sheridan was a member of the SPS. He is though an ex-member of the old Scottish Militant Labour and the CWI.  Aware of his personality cult , your comrades in Scotland in what was the International Socialists (not to be confused with the original I.S.  – seems stealing other groups names is a habit)  nevertheless resigned en masse from the SSP and aligned themselves with Solidarity (as of course did the ever opportunist SWP). How are the remaining members of the SSP such as Colin Fox  who perhaps placed party before the individual viewed by yourself…renegades? class traitors? deluded dupes? running dogs of Murdoch? Let me again clarify for you…we have no objection to workers and socialists gettting involved in fights for partial demands but don’t believe the party should do that. We regard the strategy of transitional demands as elitist and manipulative, as well as just downright silly.The party’s task is NOT to “lead the workers in struggle” or even to instruct its members on what to do in trade unions, tenants’ associations etc, because we believe that socialists and class-conscious workers are quite capable of making decisions for themselves. If this sounds difficult to understand, it’s because you haven’t risen beyond a Leninist level of consciousness  To return to trhe question of a united class as i said in an earlier reply we hold that within trade unions for practical reasons for unions, in order to be effective, must recruit all workers in a particular industry or trade regardless of political or philosophical views. A union, regardless of type, to be effective today must depend primarily on numbers rather than understanding. We dismissed the chances of large numbers of workers, pragmatic proletarians, resigning from established unions for small radical organisations that can show no evidence of power, which is an immediate question for them. We were castigated for such a position by the so-called radicals of the syndicalist movement who liked to call us the sectarians. As a union activist i have personally worked hand in hand with SWP/Militant/CP/SNP/Labour Party and even the odd fascist or two. As the current recession within capitalism continues, squeezing and stamping down upon the working class ever more relentlessly, alongside the growing realisation of the failure of all forms of running the system; then there is definitely a growing POTENTIAL for the escalation of struggle towards the overthrow of the system. However, how many times has the potential been there in past moments of escalated struggle and capitalist crisis only to disappear or to be channelled into reformist, pro-capitalist directions? Discontent over wages or conditions can be a catalyst for socialist understanding but so can many other things such as concern about the environment or war or the threat of war or bad housing or the just the general culture of capitalism . The SPGB does not minimise the necessity or importance of the workers keeping up the struggle to maintain wage-levels and resisting cuts, etc. If they always yielded to the demands of their exploiters without resistance they would not be worth their salt, nor be fit for waging the class struggle to put an end to exploitation. Successes through such actions as striking and protests may well encourage other workers to stand up for their rights more but the reality remains that the workers’ strength is determined by their position within the capitalist economy, and their victories will always be partial ones within the market system. Only by looking to the political situation, the reality of class ownership and power within capitalism, and organising to make themselves a party to the political battle in the name of common ownership for their mutual needs, will a general gain come to workers, and an end to these sectional battles. Otherwise, the ultimate result of the strikes will be the need to strike or demonstrate again in the future.The never-ending treadmill of the class struggle. Workers can never win the class struggle while it is confined simply to the level of trade union militancy. It requires to be transformed into socialist consciousness. I see little evidence of SPEW engaging with worker on the question of socialism but find ample proof that SPEW  feeds the working class with false illusions.  From your websiteThe masses increasingly know what they don’t want but don’t, as yet, know what they want, because of the absence of an authoritative Marxist leadership. –  The NC is elected precisely to manage the organisation in between congresses. Sometimes, in exceptional circumstances, it even will be compelled in the light of changed circumstances to change the decision of the congress.We have demanded £220 income for all workers including the pensioners…Firstly, the call for £220, is a transitional demand, which can only be realised fully on the basis of the reorganisation of society on socialist foundationsIn place of the term nationalisation, we should look for new ways of expressing the same idea, “public ownership” or the term that Trotsky used at one stage of “socialisation”. Of course we have to add the demand for workers’ control and workers’ management.Our general position is well known; we oppose all restrictions imposed by decaying and outmoded capitalism. We oppose passports, we oppose the attempt to restrict the free movement of labour, the capitalists idea of “fortress Europe” etc. But truth is concrete and on this issue we have to take account of the different levels of consciousness of the proletariat. We cannot put forward, in the manner of the sects, the bald slogan of “open borders” or of “no to immigration controls” or a variant of this…http://www.marxist.net/namechange/transitionalprogramme/index.htmlAll things to all people…duh..and thats supposed to be a principled position