[Marxism] Re: (Marxism] SWP and Iraq

["Fred Feldman" <ffeldman@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Both Robin and Walter seem to be a little off on what is at issue in the 
question of the SWP's CEASING for the last several weeks (beginning with the 
major editorial called "War Party on the Ascent") to call for immediate, 
unconditional withdrawal and ending the occupation.  The War Party editorial 
did suggest that a future "revolutionary organization" in Iraq would oppose 
occupation and the restoration of the Baath Party regime, apparently placing 
the same order of importance on both demands.  But that major line editorial, 
did not demand either ending the occupation or immediate withdrawal.  

Joel Britton, the former candidate for California governor who, as I noted, had 
put forward the withdrawal demand in his campaign, apparently did not include 
the demand for withdrawal in his major "line" speech to the British Pathfinder 
meeting, and there is no indication that members of the SWP or the Communist 
League intervened in the demo in Britain on this line at all.  "On the 
contrary," as Jack Barnes and Steve Clark might say.

The course of the SWP on Iraq since the California campaign seems clearly to 
indicate a sharp shift and seems deliberately intended to indicate that.  The  
respect shown Bush and Rumsfeld, the endorsement of some of their views, the 
snarling at all their critics and their criticisms, the judgment that 
Washington is marching toward victory in Iraq, and that US imperialism is on a 
slow but virtually unstoppable (for the indefinite future) rise toward world 
hegemony, the campaigning of the Militant against "anti-Americanism" in Europe, 
and the disappearing of the withdrawal and sovereignty slogans indicate change 
not continuity of line.

If the party line has not changed, as Robin suggests, I assume this will begin 
to be conveyed in its public work starting immediately.  As  of now, the 
Militant is and party spokespeople seem to be aggressively creating the 
opposite impression.
Fred Feldman