[Marxism] Re: Pete Evans
plf13 at student.canterbury.ac.nz
Thu Nov 27 20:41:24 MST 2003
Pete Evans suggests to Walter that if he wants to talk about the US SWP
politics and activities, he should talk to them and not to Pete himself.
A problem here is that there actually is no way to engage the group.
Members who have raised any problems with the group's orientation, like
Fred F, have found themselves being given the heave-ho.
Moreover, it is not like the US group practises Bolshevik norms. For
instance, in Lenin's party different views within the party were
regularly expressed in the party press. There was a lively and healthy
internal political life, with lots of debate, as you would expect in any
party of workers trying to work out how to make a revolution. It was
extremely rare for anyone to be expelled for political differences.
Grief, Kamenev and Zinoviev didn't even get expelled for virtually
giving away the details of the October insurrection.
What framework is there for either members or people outside to engage
the line of the US SWP, however?
Pete suggests Walter (and presumably others like Jose and Louis) write
to the letters page.
In the unlikely event that their letters would be published, the tiny
word limit precludes any serious political debate.
A year or two back, the 'militant' ran a big polemic against Jose.
Needless to say they didn't offer Jose any space, as a revolutionary, to
put his analysis of the issue at dispute.
What are Barnes and co so scared of? Why be terrified of political
differences among revolutionaries and political debate?
We know that this American group don't like 'anti-Americanism'. Do they
not like political debate either?
More information about the Marxism