Legitimate criticisms of the SWP that do not deal with book prices

CKates at aol.com CKates at aol.com
Wed Feb 21 21:05:48 MST 1996

In a message dated 96-02-21 21:21:33 EST, you write:

>CKates at aol.com wrote:
>>Firstly, the fact that they claim that they are not Trotskyites. Because
>> *are*. They know they are and so does everybody else.
>You claim that you are not a StalinITE, but you are. You should know you
>are and so should everyone else who reads your posts.

Okay, okay I get it. Say -ist and not -ite. So okay they are TrotskyISTS and
I am *not* a
StalinIST. Okay??
>> Fourthly, their positions are just plain wrong. They think attempting to
>> defeat the Republicans is reformist, and that the CP is reformist, ....
>> <snip> they
>Is supporting the Democrats just plain right? Is it an example of
>revolutionary politics?
It's not about supporting the Democrats; the fascist *threat* (which we must
not overestimate) must be vanquished.

>> They say they lead the working class yet they refuse to
>> hold union office, a position that is immeasurably wrong and
>> counterproductive
>I don't believe that is the SWP position. In fact, there are numerous
>instances in which SWPers ran for union offices (and a few where they got
Even James Miller says it is their position. I guess they just don't follow

>> Everything is too reformist for them, except their ultra-leftist
>> line, and their miniscule ultra-left membership.
>There are ultra-left perhaps from the perspective of Michael Harrington,
>Irving Howe,  et. al. They are many things (mostly a cult), but I
>wouldn't call them ultra-left.
>Damn, Charlotte: you've made me defend the SWP -- something that I have
>not done for *many* years. However, it is only recently that I have
>engaged in on-going discussions with serious StalinITES.
Some ultra-left groups are tolerable, but not the SWP. They are ultra-left
pseudo-revolutionariy cultists. Have I covered all the bases? They are like
the AvakianISTS (almost let that ite slip out)of the RCP; they have no base
in the working class, yet continue to "lead" us. I do not think it is so much
their positions as their actions of dissolving mass campaigns, renouncing
mass slogans and practices, that leads me to call them ultra-left. They
follow the traditional definition of left-sectarian, with of course a bunch
of cultism as well outside of that definition. And, once more, I am not a
Stalinist. I'm not a Stalinist (and neither is Louis if that is what you
insinuate here)

     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---


More information about the Marxism mailing list