The Anti-War Movement Must Be Politically Independent Of The Pro-capitalist Parties

[kinetikos]

The antiwar movement can not succeed in its aims without turning to the international working class. The allies of workers in Britain are not the European governments or the UN but the working people of Europe, America and the globe. The movement against war must unite workers of all nations against the common enemy.

The movement against war must be politically independent of the pro-capitalist parties, whether Labour, Liberal or Green. A new party must be built on the basis of an international socialist programme through which workers can fight for power.

SEP Britain Statement

[OUTOFTHENIGHT]

Well comrades,I dont know about you but that did it for me.A discredited group, claiming to be Trotskyist ,lying on the fringes of the fringes of the international Labour movement have spoken!!!How many "new parties built on the basis of an international socialist programme" does that make now? Answera on the back of a postcard please.;-)
Ian

[kinetikos]

A discredited group

Cite, "Gomraydee"?

claiming to be Trotskyist

You don't believe that they are Trotskyists, "Gomraydee"? Cite?

lying on the fringes of the fringes of the international Labour movement

This means what? They're not hep enough for you? They're not the biggest groovy craze? What?

Do you actually disagree with the statement; did you bother to read the thing?

Or, "Gomraydee", do you just feel more comfortable ignoring such things so that you'll have more time to make inane statements of your own?

[OUTOFTHENIGHT]

AH!!! Now I see what your doing. BTW whats a "Gomrayee"? Neo-punk /anarchist sarcasm,perhaps?I subsribe to WSWS. Of course I have read the article. Same tune ,same violin.They call themselves trotskyist.....well...Stalin called himself a Marxist his methods proved he wasnt ....likewise the methods of the SEP /WRP prove the same.refer to History of British Trotskyism on IDOM about the role of this tendency. BTW "hep"...I think you mean hip but Im not sure;"groovey craze"???? Is that what you think socialist politics is ?Im sorry but I think you are a bit too advanced for me with your beatnik/jazzy ways.
Ian

[OUTOFTHENIGHT]

Before you answer Kinetikos ,I suggest you read the book quoted especially one of the postscripts entitled "Programme for the International"on IDOM. Also this comes under the sphere of the "inside or outside the Labour Party"  debate which has featured elsewhere on these boards.
It would be lovely to form an independent party ,the problem is getting the workers to support you.Outside of the mainstream Labour /Socialist parties  this  wont happen in spite of 2 million people marching in London against the war earlier this year.The march was very important ...as they were through out the world  
but my conclusion is that we have to oppose Blair and his warmongering inside the LP( thats if you live in the UK, that is)
Hope that clarifies thing a bit for you.
Ian

[kinetikos]

I subsribe to WSWS. Of course I have read the article

You subsribe? Well, why would you subscribe to a discredited, faux-trotskyist, fringe of the fringe rag? ...Of course you do...

"Gomraydee" is indeed my way of making fun of you. It's a slightly silly affectation, IMO. And made all the more silly when it is used by a person who can't even debate the merits of a position on what the position declares. And instead results to vague, smart-aleck attacks on the source.

postscripts entitled "Programme for the International"on IDOM

Ah finally! Well a link woulda been nice, but I'll find it anyway.

Outside of the mainstream Labour/Socialist parties this won't happen...

Hmmm... naysaying, huh? So you're going to reform the LP are you? I think starting from the proper perspective is a better way to go... but you have at it. Join hands with all the clowns! The Greens,  The LP, the "mainstream"... implicitly endorse their lies. Go ahead. The workers are just too stupid to listen to the truth, ya gotta butter 'em up, right?

[TavareeshKamo]

wtf u on about Kin?
calm down.

No one said anything about reforming the labour party, i think your confusing a means of achieving the goals and the goals itself.  

Kin, i myself started a group up myself called yfrc http://www.yfrc.org.uk and it had around 30 members in it within a year.  u know what happened to it? fuck all.  you know why? because it was not located within a mass workers movement.  I was waiting for people to join me, when in fact Lenin/Trotsky stated that we as marxists should be WITHIN the workers to be able to change anything and to have an effective organisation eg look at Spanish students unions where marxists within this movement are now leading it with remarkeable success.

[kinetikos]

The movement against war must be politically independent of the pro-capitalist parties, whether Labour, Liberal or Green. A new party must be built on the basis of an international socialist programme through which workers can fight for power.

Do you disagree with the above statement?

Do you disagree with any part of this Statement

What I'm on about is this as a reply:

Well comrades,I dont know about you but that did it for me.A discredited group, claiming to be Trotskyist ,lying on the fringes of the fringes of the international Labour movement have spoken!!!How many "new parties built on the basis of an international socialist programme" does that make now? Answera on the back of a postcard please.;-)

Do you find that an acceptable reply?

...and to have an effective organisation...

I can't possibly see any real effective organization that doesn't state the truth from the outset. So tell me what you see wrong with their (SEP) statement. And then we can have an open and honest debate. And then we can get together and stop all this childish sniping.

What say?

[kinetikos]

Oh, and, Happy Birthday!

[marx_was_right]

Comrades,

I think what we are looking at here is an extreme case of ultra-leftism

What were the opinions of the founders of Marxism on ultra-leftism?

Firstly Marx and Engels wrote in the Communist Manifesto

"In what relation do the Communists stand to the proletarians as a whole? The Communists do not form a separate party opposed to the other working-class parties. They have no interests separate and apart from those of the proletariat as a whole. They do not set up any sectarian principles of their own, by which to shape and mold the proletarian movement."

Lenin in particular dedicated alot of time writting against ultra-leftism, you should read his book Left-Wing Communism - an infantile disorder

"We can (and must) begin to build socialism, not with abstract human material, or with human material specially prepared by us, but with the human material bequeathed to us by capitalism. True, that is no easy matter, but no other approach to this task is serious enough to warrant discussion."

"We cannot but regard as equally ridiculous and childish nonsense the pompous, very learned, and frightfully revolutionary disquisitions of the German Lefts to the effect that Communists cannot and should not work in reactionary trade unions, that it is permissible to turn down such work, that it is necessary to withdraw from the trade unions and create a brand-new and immaculate "Workers’ Union" invented by very pleasant (and, probably, for the most part very youthful) Communists, etc., etc."

" This ridiculous "theory" that Communists should not work in reactionary trade unions reveals with the utmost clarity the frivolous attitude of the "Left" Communists towards the question of influencing the "masses", and their misuse of clamour about the "masses". If you want to help the "masses" and win the sympathy and support of the "masses", you should not fear difficulties, or pinpricks, chicanery, insults and persecution from the "leaders" (who, being opportunists and social-chauvinists, are in most cases directly or indirectly connected with the bourgeoisie and the police), but must absolutely work wherever the masses are to be found. You must be capable of any sacrifice, of overcoming the greatest obstacles, in order to carry on agitation and propaganda systematically, perseveringly, persistently and patiently in those institutions, societies and associations -- even the most reactionary—in which proletarian or semi-proletarian masses are to be found."

"Those who try to deduce the tactics of the revolutionary proletariat from principles such as: "The Communist Party must keep its doctrine pure, and its independence of reformism inviolate; its mission is to lead the way, without stopping or turning, by the direct road to the communist revolution"—will inevitably fall into error. Such principles are merely a repetition of the mistake made by the French Blanquist Communards, who, in 1874, "repudiated" all compromises and all intermediate stages. Second, it is beyond doubt that, in this question too, as always, the task consists in learning to apply the general and basic principles of communism to the specific relations between classes and parties, to the specific features in the objective development towards communism, which are different in each country and which we must be able to discover, study, and predict."

In his pamphlet the Transitional Programme Trotsky, talking about sectarianism, warned that

"He who does not seek and does not find the road to the masses is not a fighter but a dead weight to the party. A program is formulated not for the editorial board or for the leaders of discussion clubs, but for the revolutionary action of millions."

And also

"Under the influence of the betrayal by the historical organizations of the proletariat, certain sectarian moods and groupings of various kinds arise or are regenerated at the periphery of the Fourth International. At their base lies a refusal to struggle for partial and transitional demands, i.e., for the elementary interests and needs of the working masses, as they are today. Preparing for the revolution means to the sectarians, convincing themselves of the superiority of socialism. They propose turning their backs on the “old” trade unions, i.e., to tens of millions of organized workers—as if the masses could somehow live outside of the conditions of the actual class struggle!"

"Sectarians are capable of differentiating between but two colors: red and black."

"They remain indifferent to the inner struggle within reformist organizations — as if one could win the masses without intervening in their daily strife! They refuse to draw a distinction between the bourgeois democracy and fascism — as if the masses could help but feel the difference on every hand!"

I think we can conclude that what this group are saying is both sectarian and utopian. If they are genuinley interested in changing society then first they must change their tactics, as their current strategy bears no relivance to the working class who will bypass them without even noticing them.

[OUTOFTHENIGHT]

Sorry kin , frustration boiled over .Do you no how many times I have heard a tendency like the WSWS come out with the old"a new party" ...."must be politically independent of the pro-capitalist parties"? You know ,I dont mean to get at you ,far from it I just get a bit irritated by these people.
Anyway kin I will try to be sensible from now on.Do you mind me asking you how you think it should be achieved?Indeed is it possible to be achieved? I mean I think you know where I am coming from;y ou started the thread with just this quote from the SEP and I was opiniating somewhat frustratingly,assuming how you wanted a discussion on this to go.Pad it out a bit mate.
Ian ;)

[kinetikos]

"In what relation do the Communists stand to the proletarians as a whole? The Communists do not form a separate party opposed to the other working-class parties. They have no interests separate and apart from those of the proletariat as a whole. They do not set up any sectarian principles of their own, by which to shape and mold the proletarian movement."

The movement against war must be politically independent of the pro-capitalist parties, whether Labour, Liberal or Green. A new party must be built on the basis of an international socialist programme through which workers can fight for power.

I'll let it stew. And see how many can discern.

Is Blair's Labour Party (Blair is the Man they've yoked)  a working-class party? Are the petit-bourgeios Greens? The Liberals?

I'll let it stew. There is no difference between the first and last quoted here. None. Now for the another quote:

[The workers] themselves must contribute most to their final victory, by informing themselves of their own class interests, by taking up their independent political position as soon as possible by not allowing themselves to be misled by the hypocritical phrases of the democratic petty bourgeoisie into doubting for one minute the necessity of an independently organized party of the proletariat. - Marx & Engels, London 1850  

[kinetikos]

Not letting it stew, stirring for a sec... as I take a moment to plead once again with OOTN to respond to the article itself.

You know ,I dont mean to get at you ,far from it I just get a bit irritated by these people.

AND NOT TO BE SO CYNICAL & TRULY SECTARIAN.

Thanks for the toned down demeanor, OOTN. Now, what have you to say against the position layed out?

I get irritated too...for the exact same reasons. This fucking thing (the left) is a mess. But we can still, if we try, at least argue the goddamned points. No?

Don't let the pettiness consume the movement. I think you'd agree.

Flesh it out? I will once you respond to the statement. Let me know what you think about that, first. Okay?

...BTW, I'm still needing to go look at that IDOM bit you wanted me to look at. PM me a link to exactly what you are on about? Either way I'll look, but it'd help.

[des-esseintes]

Every Trotskyist sect is a sin. Why can't they just work together? Someone should arrange a "committee for the unification of the revolutionary Left" or something where all the sectarians could sit down and discuss their differences and arrive at agreements. I bet if the sects started fusing, we would have a mass revolutionary party in no time :o

[marx_was_right]

The workers can organise themselves into a class independent party only after they become class conscious, until then if you are to take the position of a communist your current task is to reach the masses with your revolutionary ideas and solutions. Calling for an independent party at this stage is madness, surely when you see 20+ other ‘workers parties’ shouting the same thing about their own group you would start to wake up and realise that?