Positive "critical reflection" and OzLeft (guffaw)

[Ben Reid <Ben.Reid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I'm amused that John Percy's comments have stung some of the members 
of the Ozleft gossip site. I'm frankly nauseated by Ed Lewis' predictably 
demagogic 
calls for "critical reflection" and the like.

Yes, there probably are some DSP members who have left 
over the years and engaged in some genuine self-reflection. They usually 
rejoin as a result of this or remain supporters. Currently a 
number of ex-DSPers are among the many non-aligned activists who 
have been enthusiastically in favour of Socialist Alliance moving towards 
becoming a multi-tendency socialist party. Predictably the critics of 
Socialist Alliance have even tried to use this fact belittle the Alliance's
modest achievements.

perhaps they're all DSP "fellow travelers" who have not learnt the fine art of 
"positive self-
reflection."

Of course it's interesting to note the difference between these comrades and
Ozleft. The former are actually engaged in constructive project of 
socialist regroupment. 

OzLeft seems more interested in taking delight in re-publishing Begg and 
Healy's 
haughty resignation letters. the rationale seems to be "anything goes as long 
as 
it's a chance to kick the DSP!"

I had some sympathy for Begg and Healy's original criticisms of some 
organisational practices in the DSP. Particularly as they had an sense of "mia 
culpa' 
about them. 

This evaporated when I read their puerile resignation letters. 

These two (as with their whole life in the party) were treated with kid's gloves
in the whole factional dispute. They had clearly pre-decided to split at the 
earliest 
opportunity. I actually cringed a bit at John Percy's "please come back" 
letters. 
Some critical reflection of my own on the DSP's past has led me to wonder 
why spoilt little Eastern suburbs of Melbourne brats seemed to receive special 
treatment
because of their self confidence and bravado. 

To be fair they're now off doing their own thing with their own little group. 
So good luck 
to them.

Yet the problem with Ozleft is not just the delight they seem to take with any 
criticisms of the DSP.
It is the fact that is all they seem to do. Here is the left in Australia with 
a 
considerable opportunity to regroup important numbers of activists in 
multi-tendency party.
What does OzLeft mainly do? Promote Gould's garrulous, absurd and long-winded 
fulminations
calling on the left to rejoin the Labor Party! This sits oddly with the 
professed adherence of many
of the site's sponsors to membership of the Green party.

With the Socialist Alliance there is the emergence of a political vehicle 
guaranteeing pluralism and 
permanent tendencies, with a not inconsiderable base amongst key unions and all 
we hear is  
"boogy boogy aren't the DSP bad. Don't go near them or Socialist Alliance!!!" 
Looking at the site I see no balanced reflection on these issues at all. I see 
no indication
of what kind of political project the left should engage in except Gould's 
embarrassing 
soliloquies. 

And this is positive "self-criticism and reflection"!? Ed, please spare us your 
pompous clap-trap.  

 







John Percy on the "party" of former members of parties:

>>Most move on, some adapt to the prevailing political orthodoxy, but some
still haven't settled with their past in the revolutionary party and for a
while can spend a good part of their political activity attacking their own
past by attacking those still actively building a party.>>

And presumably none, in this view, since it strangely isn't mentioned as a
third alternative, remain engaged to one degree or another in progressive
political, community, trade union or other useful volunteer activity.

But many do, as we all know. So why the omission?


What about reframing it as the much more generous and accurate "engaging in
critical reflection" on their own past practices: practices which, as new
generations bear witness
http://members.optushome.com.au/spainter/resignations.html continue to this
day in John's organisation?

Perhaps, too, there is the felt need and responsibility for a calling to
account of their own and others' activities and behaviour, particularly
since these affect the present.

Critical thought is mandatory, I would have thought, for any sort of
intellectual growth of any individual, group or organisation, let alone a
Marxist one. There's not much evidence of critical thought in John's Looking
Backward, Looking Forward. It looks very much like an attempt to create a
self-congratulatory official history/mythology.

Ed Lewis