[Marxism] Socialist Alliance: DSP front well to the back.
alanb1000 at yahoo.com
Sun Mar 12 04:52:26 MST 2006
From: Ggregray at aol.com
> The reality was however that the DSP had a
> different view all along. As its recently
> discarded 40 year leader John Percy wrote
> last October in the DSP's internal discussion
> a large part of the DSP's motivation for
> getting involved in the SA was as a means
> of delivering a blow to the ISO and that
> tactic worked he boasted.
This is a complete distortion of Percy's comments,
which were to the effect that the ISO suffered from
their reluctance to take up the leading role in
uniting and, well, leading the left that they were
offered by the SA project.
Of course, the DSP suffered from their *eagerness* to
take up this role, but that's another story.
One of the bits of gossip that was sprayed around when
the SA was initiated was that the DSP was trying to
split the ISO. This was nonsense, of course, but it
has been able to be revived by this distortion of
I can't speak for the DSP, but *I* knew perfectly well
that groups that refused to take up the challege of
trying to lead the left forward were likely to pay for
their negligence. That was, and is, simply a
side-effect of political failure. It is *not* a result
of, or a motive for, political maneuvering, but is
just the price you pay for clowning.
If there actually is a legitimate element of the
political competition that exists between the existing
grouplets, it probably lies in this area, where groups
have the right to destroy themselves through
stupidity. Hopefully those who survive are the
It's not something to gloat about, though.
And, by the way, Percy's comments were in a minority
report that was *rejected* by the DSP. That is, the
DSP *repudiated* his comments.
But that's irrelevant to Adler.
> It worked to make the SA in effect a front
> for the DSP pushing through its politically
> bizarre position of transforming the SA into
> a multi-tendency socialist party (mtsp)
A position repeatedly supported by the overwhelming
majority of non-aligned SA members...
> and effectively establishing its newspaper
> Green Left Weekly as the organ of the SA.
"Effectively"? Perhaps. But only on a de facto basis.
There was never any attempt to formally make it so.
GLW has probably nearly ten times the circulation of
the ISO paper, and a hundred times the circulation of
the publications of any of the other tendencies.
Any "organ" of the SA would inevitably be largely
built around the nucleus of GLW's infrastructure and
> Now it's time to let the facts speak. In a
> field of 11 the SA came in at 9 with 0.81
> percent of the vote.
This is a perfectly normal vote for an aggregation of
obscure far-left grouplets. It's not something to get
The circumstances where we could change this don't
exist at the moment.
To put it bluntly, there is currently no organised
Left in Australia that is worthy of the name.
The SA is and was (*especially* in the eyes of the
DSP) an attempt at beginning to create one.
Greg Adler has, quite correctly, decided that this
project is not for him. Good on him. I hope his
alternative project bears fruit.
Assuming he has an alternative project, of course.
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
More information about the Marxism