NZ: ACA

[Philip Ferguson <plf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Scott wrote:
>The record of the discussion Phil describes - in my
>opinion sometimes inaccurately - can be seen on the
>archives of the antiwarcap list at
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/antiwar_anticap_nz/ (I


It went on for quite a while and makes interesting reading.

The only people who said they would not work with other people involved in
the discussions was when the leader of the CWG said he wouldn't work with
me.  The reason being I was opposed to making graduated tax  part of the
agreed platform (WP were also opposed).


>An important point is that only a very few people
>interested in the ACA idea took part in this
>discussion - most of these folks, in Auckland at
>least, either did not have access to e mail or were
>not on the list where the discussion took place.


So what happened to the conference that the CWG and yourself favoured
organising?






>Most people interested in the ACA in Auckland learned
>that  revo and WPNZ had decided upon a 'bottom line'
>platform of six points very soon after they had been
>informed about the idea of ACA.


Well, it was all discussed in public.  The point was that no-one disagreed
with the six points, whereas just about everyone had some disagreement with
the 48-point alternative proposed by the main leader of the CWG.


>With the exception of
>two people, one of whom is me, all of the interested
>people I knew lost interest in the project, to say the
>least, after hearing that revo and WPNZ had worked out
>a bottom line and were proceeeding with the formation
>of the ACA on the basis of it.


That's odd, because a whole chunk of active members of the Anti-Imperialist
Coalition have since joined the ACA.  Perhaps you've missed some recent
meetings or something.



>Revo and WPNZ argued that they needed to push ahead
>with the formation of the ACA on the basis of their
>six points because the campaign needed to start soon
>to be effective - long discussions, they argued, would
>end up taking the place of practical political action.
>
>I think it must be a couple of months since this
>argument was advanced, and I'm unaware of any ACA
>campaign activity having taken place in Auckland,
>beyond the circulation of ACA prop material by WPNZ
>members doing things that they would normally do as
>WPNZ members (ie selling their paper at the flea
>markets, coming to AIC meetings). I may be mistaken,
>but I'm not aware of the ACA holding any sort of
>public meeting in Auckland - the sort of meeting that
>most people would consider a necessary condition for a
>real election campaign.


This is also a strange comment.  We were proved right - the elections are
to take place on July 27.  We are still waiting for the CWG and anyone who
agreed with it to organise their 'broad conference' of the left and hammer
out a combined approach to the elections.

In the meantime, the ACA has signed up more members than the entire far
left put together, a majority of the signees being in Auckland.


>I would guess that ACA has been invisible in Auckland
>because it has not attracted enough people to wage a
>real campaign.

You need to get out to Otara more.  If you do you will find a chunk of ACA
hoardings and other election propaganda.  Auckland ACAers have also
produced several leaflets, including one which was distributed at the big
teachers' stopwork in Wellington a fortnight ago.


>If this is true, then it's difficult to
>avoid the conclusion that the argument for rushing
>ahead was a mistaken one.


How could it be mistaken when there is an election on July 27 and those who
disagreed with going ahead on the six points have done nothing in the
interim for the election?  If we had've held back and discussed the CWG's
48-pt platform, we would still be discussing it on July 27.


>know that the ACA has been
>more active in Wellington and Christchurch, and
>recently held a conference in Wellington (the report
>on this conference did not unfortunately say how many
>people attended).


About 25 people were there, mainly from Wellington.  It was a Wellington
weekend, with stalls and street meetings in Porirua and the central city,
an afternoon meeting in the community centre in Te Aro (this was the
meeting 25 people came to), a planning meeting, and a university stall.  It
got things in Wellington off to a good start.  I think they have now signed
up a couple of dozen people and as well as stalls in Porirua and in the
city centre at varsity they have even managed a trip to Palmerston North.
We have a very good ACA candidate, who lives and works in Porirua.


>I hope that they have managed to
>attract a few more people in Auckland now that the
>election date is set. If they do hold a meeting, I
>will certainly come along to support them.


Well, last time I looked they had signed up 60 people in Auckland.  So I'm
not sure how many "a few" is.

Given the tiny size of the WP and Revo, our progress nationally has been
quite impressive.  If some people had've gotten their way, the ACA would
never have happened.  Instead we would've had an endless discussion and
left bunfight about whose programme was bigger than whose rather than
*active unity* around an average-sized programme that was perfectly
sufficient for the job and which left each element of the Coalition free to
campaign on whatever other parts of their own organisation's programme they
wanted to.

In the meantime, I am still waiting to see where the 'broad conference'
promised by the CWG is.

Cheers,
Phil













>
>
>Cheers



~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.