A Word to Win and its embittered detractor
Andrew Joseph Fernandez
dez at minyos.its.rmit.EDU.AU
Mon Aug 5 23:44:15 MDT 1996
> A Great Success for Workers Power and the LRCI
> The rather jaundiced account of Workers Power's international school 'A
> World to Win!' by "G. James" needs to be answered, just in case anyone were
> naive enough to believe it.
> 1. Far from having "far fewer" people in attendance, the 152 people who
> registered made it our most successful public event since 1991.
> 2. The restoration of capitalism in Eastern Europe was not "avoided" in
> discussion. On the contrary, it was an important element in the opening
> rally on the international situation. The meeting on China also focused on
> our analysis of this process.
> 3. The smaller groups that attended may have been "upset" at times - hardly
> surprising given that WP and LRCI speakers quite rightly criticised what
> they saw as the errors of their politics. If they don't like debate, they
> shouldn't have come. As for "misrepresentation" . . well, they would say
> that, wouldn't they?
> 4. The CPGB, unlike "G. James", have no complaint about the way the event
> was run. Far from attacking our supposed "bureaucratism", the report in
> their paper "Weekly Worker" recognised the event as useful and stated that
> their supporters were afforded full rights to express their views. They
> then went on in the article to do what G. James should have done: focus on
> his political criticisms instead of making interminable complaints about
> how he . . . sorry, "we" . . were treated.
> 5.As anyone who was present at the event will know, speakers' slips were
> distibuted only at the larger meetings, i.e at three evening rallies and
> the debate on the SLP. This was to ensure the widest and most
> representative mix of speakers. The overwhelming majority of meetings
> functioned without these slips with contributors indicating by hand.
> 6. Anyone preent will also know that the LCMRCI, TUG, CPGB and other groups
> were entitled and able to intervene almost whenever they wished. J. Villa
> of LCMRCI spoke in numerous meetings every day (despite the fcat that his
> contribution usually focused on the same point each time). J. Villa was not
> taken to speak in one meeting - the debate on the SLP. Many other people,
> including members of WP and LRCI, were also unable to get in to speak in a
> number of meetings. That's not bureaucracy - its democracy. G. James -
> whose writing style is eerily reminiscent of one J. Villa - is unable to
> distinguish between these things. The reason: he is demanding not democracy
> but privileged rights for himself.
> It appears that neither truth nor principle will stand in the way of
> Villa's campaign to discredit WP and the LRCI. But not even he can alter
> the fact that all our members - and many of our less embittered opponents -
> recognised the school as a success and a real step forward for our
--- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
More information about the Marxism