DSP and Socialist Alliance

Shane Hopkinson s.hopkinson at cqu.edu.au
Fri Sep 6 11:12:42 MDT 2002

Dear MM

I think we have before us a move of real importance for the development of
the left in Australia. I think as Alan (?) said earlier to a large extent it settles the
debate about Zinovievism and the Cannonist nature of the DSP - we are
learning all the time and prepared to take bold and imaginative steps to build
the socialist movement.  There are things about the party culture that need to
change and this will be part of the debate but I think that its worth me making
some replies to some of the posts because I think this is an important debate
and we need it to be as constructive as possible.

> From: "Alan Bradley" <abradley1 at bigpond.com>
> Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 23:18:27 +1000
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: a member of the Brisbane Socialist Alliance.
> I dunno. The way the DSP has raised the stakes is likely to ensure that
> discussion is actually going to happen.
> The sad truth is that the Australian left is riddled with sectarians and
> dilletantes. Putting people on the spot is probably necessary for anything
> useful to happen.

Alan is identified on this list as a DSP though he often prefaces his posts with
I'm not in the DSP...  Its good to see him identify as a member of Socialist
Alliance (SA) but I one of the things that needs to change is these kinds of
characterisations of others in the Left - there may have been many ways to
raise debate without dissolving into the SA and others on the left are not all
'sectarians and dilletantes'.  Likewise his comments about Bob Gould as a
paleo-trotskyist  are not useful if they are read as some kind of indicator of
the DSP's position.

I will reply to Bob Gould later but for now just a point of clarification and
comment about the tone of the debate.



PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.

More information about the Marxism mailing list