Re: Reactionary petty-bourgeois strikes?

[Owen Jones <owen_jones@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

 Louis,

 The SWP have "sensible positions on the domestic class struggle"? With all
the respect I have for comrades of the SWP, this is such a big laugh, and I
thought you of all people would understand the mentality of the sects of the
Trotskyist movement. The position of the SWP on the domestic class struggle
is that if there is a picket or a protest of some form which is not led by
some far-Right organisation, then the revolution is a few steps closer (in
proportion to the size of the protest).

 There are those type of sects that are full of theory but isolate
themselves from the class struggle - armchair revolutionaries as it were.
The SWP(GB) are the reverse, with one of the most formidable mobilisation
machines of any organisation in the Western world, but with near contempt
for theory. They just love protests. They are the main protest organising
centre in the country. On nearly every demonstration you will see a sea of
SWP banners and placards. But to expect them to have sensible positions on
the domestic class struggle, positions which boil down to "revolution by the
middle of next week", is so very, very wrong.

 The Tories were not condemning the protests. They were taking the credit
for them, as some form of a "British taxpayers' revolt", and the next step
along from their failed "Dump the Pump" Campaign a few weeks ago. They
contrasted these "legitimate, peaceful protests" that froze society itself
with the "violent bully-boy tactics" of the miners. Indeed, one of the
organisations spearheading the blockades is effectively the
extra-parliamentary wing of the Conservative Party, the Countryside Alliance
who represent farmers who pay about ten times less for fuel than motorists
do at petrol stations. Some news programme cynically commented earlier this
week: "the unions condemn the protests as anarchy, the police call them a
legitimate peaceful protest - has the world turned upside down?" Indeed, the
leader of the Scottish Trade Union Congress was actually right on the mark
when he denounced the blockade as a "bosses' strike". Or the fact the oil
multinationals were using the demonstrators as pawns and were encouraging
the blockades. Or by the fact that the most reactionary papers of the
bourgeois media, such as the Daily Mail, were heralding the protestors as
national heroes.

 Notice how the Socialist Worker's editorial suggests the Tories were deadly
against the protests and yet fail to even provide quotes to prove it. Why?
There are no such quotes. Because those leading the blockades were the most
reactionary sections of the petty-bourgeoisie - and the social base of the
Conservative Party.

 And indeed today William Hague, the rather comic leader of the Tories,
called the protestors "fine, upstanding citizens". Excuse me if I see fit to
empty the contents of my stomach. And whilst a month ago the opinion polls
put Labour on 51% at the Tories at 29%, new opinion polls show either them
drawing equal or the Tories 2% ahead. I smell the stench of conspiracy...

 I have argued throughout that even though these reactionary petty-bourgeois
blockaders were actually being used as pawns by the ruling class, they may
backfire in that they inspire the working class to take their own militant
action. Tony Blair made it very clear what his basis for refusing to
capitulate was - it would open the floodgates. And indeed it may. However,
this was a case of the petty-bourgeoisie, who are incapable of an
independent role, being effectively used as pawns by the ruling class.
Perhaps one could even go as far as to suggest this was an attempted coup
d'etat.

 By the way, apparently when the SWP tried to intervene in the blockades,
they were promptly told to piss off.

 Cheers

       Owen