Trots gather round

DenDen Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 11:25:46 AM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

A report on the 13th January launch conference of Socialist Youth Network, the Labour Representation Committee's (LRC) youth organisation, is in this weeks issue of Weekly Worker - the paper of the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB). It makes for interesting reading, though not perhaps for the Labour Party members of the LRC.



The history of the Labour Party youth section is littered with small groups of Trots, Stalinists and assorted rag-bag trying to take it over - and sometimes succeeding. These days most of the flotsam and jetsam bob around Respect, the group controlled by the Socialist Workers Party, or beaver away in the trade unions. But the LRC have provided a new playground for their activities.

Weekly Worker 18th January 2007

`Alphabet soup

One wonders if guest speakers John McDonnell, Tony Benn and Katy Clark MP were aware exactly who they were calling "the future" in their conference speeches. Possibly they weren't able, in their half-hour visits, to gauge the real make-up of the conference.

The fact is, probably two-thirds to three-quarters of the turnout were not innocent Labourites at all, but a neat cross-section of those alphabet-soup groups most keen on the party. By far the largest segment was the Alliance for Workers' Liberty. Having recently given up on their old course of deep entry, they nonetheless snapped right back into form and helped vote through plenty of left reformist fare, with a couple of unambitious motions of their own thrown in for good measure. It's like they've never been away ...

Some groups never even got over the entry bug. For Socialist Appeal, this was another part of the grand plan which sees - via some kind of Marxist conjuring trick - workers flooding into the Labour Party in their hundreds of thousands upon a serious capitalist crisis. Why? They just do! Predictably (for them), they offered a fawning motion on Chávez and some interventions on uncontroversial issues, and hung around selling their simply irresistible eponymous magazine - the latest issue carries the shocking revelation that Blair said Iraq was a disaster on TV. A scoop only slightly undermined by its prominence in all mainstream news outlets two months ago.

It would be nice if, some day, one of these Labour-left gatherings might pass over without the backroom dealings of Socialist Action ... but this wasn't going to be it. As is the way with this extremely secretive, semi-Stalinist grouping, one was only able to identify them by employing one's sixth sense - there are two on the executive. Those standing were asked to give all their organisational affiliations and, sure enough, these comrades listed fronts dominated by Socialist Action. Anything up to eight other SA people may have been there. But who knows? If Appeal are wizards, Action are ninjas.

Then there were the two Socialist Students comrades left outside in the cold January air, boycotting the whole thing and attempting to lure the unwary with a nice, safe `Save the NHS' petition, before, one assumes, informing those who stopped to sign of the futility of the conference and the thoroughly bourgeois character of the Labour Party, now that their parent body, the Socialist Party, no longer enjoys Labour membership.

While you could say that breaking with Ted Grant's entry fetish was a positive step, the sectarian attitude to Labour now displayed is hardly an improvement.

James Turley'

For the uninitiated:

Alliance for Workers Liberty - a small group of semi-Trots who can appear quite sane at times.

Socialist Appeal - a smaller group of rigid Trots who hide inside the Labour Party. The true inheritors to the old Militant tradition of boring (in both meanings of the word) for the revolution.

Socialist Action - clandestine group in London, most of whom seem to work as Ken Livingstone's `advisors'.

Socialist Students - student wing of Socialist Party. The other bit of the Militant tradition that left the Labour Party to lead the masses.

And the Communist Party of Great Britain? - small (see a theme here?) group, very active, see themselves as Lenin's children - hard revolutionaries.


tags: , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
Trots gather round | 15 comments (15 topical)

Re: Trots gather round (#1)

by Andrea on Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 11:41:13 AM GMT

"A report on the 13th January launch conference of Socialist Youth Network, the Labour Representation Committee's (LRC) youth organisation, is in this weeks issue of Weekly Worker - the paper of the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB). It makes for interesting reading, though not perhaps for the Labour Party members of the LRC"

It seems that there're people who are members of both Communist Students and Labour Party!
http://www.cpgb.org.uk/worker/654/students.htm


Re: Trots gather round (#2)

by VS on Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 02:22:20 PM GMT

Although the Trotskyite groups make the most noise, it is false to say that SYN conference was dominated by them. In fact, a large number of members attending were not aligned to any Trot group and were simply independently-minded young people who want to work together to achieve progressive change within the Labour Party and wider society.

After all, it is not just Trots who want to move the party in a leftward direction. I feel that most Labour members and most Labour voters in the country want a government that is commited to: keeping our NHS public, a 4th option for council housing, increasing the minimum wage, restoring the earnings link for pensioners, a trade union freedom bill and no renewal of Trident. These are not issues that make one a Trotskyist - they are issues that all who are socialists should be concerned about.

If you go to the SYN website - www.socialistyouth.org.uk, you can see the range of policy we passed - policy that i assume many on this website would agree with


Re: Trots gather round (#14)

by grimupnorth on Sat Jan 20, 2007 at 01:31:10 PM GMT

I'm far too old to join the SYN  but in my salad days I was a member of the LPYS -Labour Party Young Socialists.This was closed down by the Labour bureaucracy as it had been "taken over" by the Militant and replaced by the anodyne Young Labour.
A few days ago I was clearing  out my attic and I found a Final Agenda for said organisation's 1976 conference (how sad is that!).On the agenda ( apart from the mad stuff about nationalising the top 250 monipolies) were  many resolutions on more money for council housing, better funding for education,  gay rights ( then far from the status quo) and  better trade union legislation. What today's Trots would still call  a "left reformist" agenda. There will always be fringe groups - it;s just that under Blair ALL opposition was got rid of - you don't get anywhere by banning people, you  have to win the argument.FRankly, I would  rather attend an interesting  conference which includes  a motley gathering of ideologies than some slick, stage-managed nonsense which is what we're had at Labour Conference for 12 years.I wish SYN the best of luck.


[ Parent ]

Re: Trots gather round (#3)

by jamesturley on Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 02:29:27 PM GMT

what exactly is your point?  Is the LRC now irredeemably infected with the "trot lurgy" by dint of, er, allowing them to speak and vote at conferences like anyone else who doesn't stand against Labour?  What exactly do you thing Socialist Appeal are going to DO?  I'd like to think you got more out of my article than some crude "OMG TROTS" thing, because my point was that by and large they didn't extend themselves beyond the positions of the basic left-labourites there (who were at least in double figures, if outnumbered by us lot).  Hell, Socialist Action are programmatically bound not to do so. What does it threaten you to have marxists in the LP if all they do is vote through Venezuela solidarity campaigns?

Point is, constructively engage with these groups, or take down my article.  I don't want any godawful sectarian labourite using my shit for sectarian labourite purposes and neither, no doubt, does the Weekly Worker.  How about you have a look at what actually got passed, and criticise that?  Here's a starter for 10: open borders!


Re: Trots gather round (#4)

by LL on Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 02:53:19 PM GMT

13 of the 18 SYN exec positions were won by individuals who are not members of any Trot group.  Socialist Appeal and the CPBG won none. And Socialist Action hardly count as Trots anyway.


Re: Trots gather round (#5)

by jamesturley on Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 03:20:04 PM GMT

Yes, but they have a SEPARATE ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE!!! sin of sins!

In the interests of fairness I should point out that most of those "non-organised" people ran unopposed.  The only contested elections were for male exec without portfolio and student liaison officer.  In that narrow field, it's three (or four, depending on how you count the job-share) organiseds to two others.  What can we learn from this? That although most of the footsoldiers of the SYN are from the organised left, they do not as of yet set the agenda.  fancy...

The real issue is, even if it were simply a "gathering of trots" (which is isn't), this would not invalidate the LRC/SYN as a Labour organisation.  Who, honestly, cares - apart from blairite bureaucrats?


[ Parent ]

Re: Trots gather round (#6)

by davidfloyd on Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 03:30:27 PM GMT

"And the Communist Party of Great Britain? - small (see a theme here?) group, very active, see themselves as Lenin's children - hard revolutionaries."

Surely the current CPGB is made up of Mao's children, who would regard Lenin as more of a Grandad or Great-Uncle.

They're obviously not to be confused with the original CPGB - who's old name they cunningly assumed when that organisation totted up the proceeds of its Moscow gold and withdrew from the class struggle to enter the halfway house between Blairism and death.


Re: Trots gather round (#7)

by DenDen on Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 03:31:00 PM GMT

VS - jamesturley wrote
"The fact is, probably two-thirds to three-quarters of the turnout were not innocent Labourites at all, but a neat cross-section of those alphabet-soup groups most keen on the party."
I assume he had some basis for writing this? or do you think he simply made it up?

jamesturley - "my point" is that it harms political groups who wish to change the direction of the Labour Party if they allow Leninists of whatever ilk to direct their activities. It harms them if people think they may have an influence over them.

It was your report that spoke of "two-third to three-quarters" of attendees being of that persuation. As far as I'm concerned it matters little if someone is a Trotskist or Stalinist or Leninist - their approach to party organisation is a long way away from democratic socialism.


Re: Trots gather round (#8)

by VS on Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 03:56:19 PM GMT

I am not sure where the Weekly Worker got their 1/2 to 3/4 figure from, because it does not seem to reflect the actual situation.

Obviously, people from small groups will try and join groups like SYN. And there is nothing wrong with this so long as they don't act in a destructive fashion.


[ Parent ]

Re: Trots gather round (#9)

by serenitynow on Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 04:25:51 PM GMT

DenDen its interesting you raise the approach to party organisation of certain groups within the Left as an issue.

I note from another blog today that you have been very quick to dismiss Tribune allegations of shady tactics by Blairites in recent selection processes.

Seems like the Labour Party is a small glasshouse, perhaps you should refrain from throwing stones lest you cut your wee hands?


[ Parent ]

Re: Trots gather round (#13)

by jamesturley on Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 07:47:59 PM GMT

Ok, well, in response to the first point, it should be clear - from the executive make-up and the political direction of the "Trots" concerned - that the "direction" is the product of nice, safe Labour types.  And until there is a significant let-up in the Labour Party regime (or improvement of intestinal fortitude on the Trots' part), that is likely to remain the case.

And our "approach to party organisation"?  Would that be the Communist Students approach of electing everybody under cosh of instant recall and arguing over everything for ages?  Or the AWL's approach of at least having a good degree of debate over their positions and suchlike?  That's the majority of the Leninists at the SYN conference - on the other hand, it's not exactly without precedent in the Labour Party to oppose such principles of organisation! I suppose you must be in that grand tradition... ;)


[ Parent ]

Re: Trots gather round (#10)

by DenDen on Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 05:01:06 PM GMT

serenitynow - Please read my two posts on 'Labour Selection Rumpus' again.

I did not dismiss the allegations, but questioned Tribune's use of the word 'investigation' for the story. They present the end result of conversations and assert that party staff and Downing Street officials, have been breaking selection rules  and that there have been breaches of rules or procedure. All without evidence. It comes down to one person says 'yes' and another saying 'no'.

Neither of my posts assert there were not problems, they do assert Tribune didn't do any investigation but merely provided gossip.


Re: Trots gather round (#11)

by otware on Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 05:16:56 PM GMT

Who cares about the Trots???

AWL is hardly taking control of the Labour Party. Who cares if they have their own executive comittee, general committee, managing committee or (dare I say it) central committee? Who gives a shit? What do you think the Socialist Campaign Group is? They have official posiitions like chairman etc. What about Compass?

It amazes me that people can get so worked up about a handful of harmless trots at some leftist meeting, and yet not care about Compass! (not that compass is bad). Compass is vast compared to the AWL, and has some very senior MPs as members.

People need to stop being so scared of the left. Blairites are always going on about the 'progressive coalition', but it seems that you are only allowed to be part of it if you are some sort of uber-blairite.


Re: Trots gather round (#12)

by Juvenal on Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 06:00:52 PM GMT

Long live the People's Front of Judea!


Re: Trots gather round (#15)

by doctordunc on Sat Jan 20, 2007 at 02:33:48 PM GMT

Err...let's put this to bed.  My understanding is that people cannot join the SYN (and therefore be delegates to their conference with voting rights)if they are members of a party that stands candidates against the Labour Party at elections.  Further to that, my understanding is that that is also the case with Compass, the Co-op Party and a number of mainstream groups in the Labour movement.

Furthermore, it is known quite accurately what proportion of conference delegates are members of organised left groups: I wasn't there and it's not for me to speculate, but my understanding is that the Weekly Worker 2/3 estimate should be reversed.

Lastly: it doesn't matter.  Members of these groups attend LABOUR PARTY meetings and conferences, TRADE UNION meetings and conferences, etc.  This doesn't invalidate the Labour Party or the Trade Union movement.  Members of such groups tend to be pretty vocal and visible.  Depending on your perspective, some of the groups mentioned can be quite helpful and positive on a number of campaigning areas - but that is effectively irrelevent.  Groups like Labour First, etc. are organised groups of capitalists within the Labour Party hoping to make the party break irreperably with democratic socialism: I don't like their existence but I can't wish them away.

Move on.


Trots gather round | 15 comments (15 topical)