Re 'Selection' of leadership
peterb at dsp.org.au
Wed Nov 20 20:35:47 MST 2002
Phil Ferguson: My point, which backed up Lou, was that when
the leadership is *selected* by the leadership itself you
end up with a very strange leadership.
Richard Fidler: Which was J.P. Cannon's point. As I recall,
the "fraternal" delegates (N.C. members) at SWP conventions
did not vote on the incoming N.C. (And their votes were only
consultative on all other questions.) Only the delegates
elected by the local branches got to vote on the composition
of the N.C., after hearing and discussing the report of the
nominating commission and proposing any changes they thought
appropriate in its proposed slate...
Peter Boyle: We've followed this system in the DSP and found
that it has worked well. We have yet to come across a
better, more democratic system of leadership election and we
have seen some much less democratic ones at work. It is not
a case of blindly following Cannon but of testing it out and
finding it works better than any alternative put forward so
far. It is up to the critics of this method to put a more
democratic alternative forward. I agree with Richard and
Phil that the shot about seating arrangements does not
deserve to be taken seriously.
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
More information about the Marxism