[Marxism] Re:SWP resolution

[dwalters@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

This issue has been debated previously on this list, and quite extensively.

I think that the SWP calls for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq, *formally*,
has been established. I won't argue they don't. The issue was mostly how they
reported the news in Iraq which, IMO, totally (as in completely, without-a-
doubt, etc) parrotted imperialist news outlets and sources. They would report,
*repeatedly* news from Iraq that completely failed to distiguish itself from
what the Pentagon was stating about the Resistance and the political struggle
there. Ergo, there was no point to reading the Militant, as one could get the
same news from ABC evening news or the NYTimes (the latter of which had much
better coverage, and a seemingly *better* line than The Militant did). It was
often presented as 'straight' news and thus reinforced this perception.

Aditionally, they take an *abstentionist* position on the struggle by the Iraqi
people against US imperialism. They do *NOT* support it, and thus in a war
between people under occupation and the occupiers, they take a comfortable *3rd
Camp* position, even under the pretense of supporting US withdrawl. By stating
that the Resistance is mostly "...Baathist elements and their allies..." means
they are falsifying what is going on in Iraq at best and, at worst, is taking
the same line as the Pentagon. [I will state that no one knows what the
Resistance is composed over even in terms of 'mostly', since they have no real
unified command structure].

I have not read the Militant online in about 6 months so I don't know if
they've changed their tune. Just about every person (meaning everyone and there
maybe someone who doesn't fit this description but I haven't met them yet) that
read the Militant during the last 2 years have observed the same thing (except
for people who describe themselves as close to the politics of the SWP *a
priori*).

The bigger issue is that the position of the Militant is to do nothing about
the war in Iraq but talk about it (unless this has changed recently). In this
regard, their posiition in the real world is the same as the Spartacist League
or any ultra-left abstentionist outfit [as in 'talking socialism' but refusing
to do organizing around it].

"Going to shops and factories..." to discuss the issue of Iraq means little as
SWPers are more often than not seen as the plant "Jahovah Witnesses", and not
taken seriously by their co-workers because they abstain from the basic
everyday union issues confronting the workers on the shop floor...but they
expect workers to understand or listen to their views on Iraq?

I understand that the SWP has engaged in limited organizing. This is to their
credit, and if done correctly, they will gain a wider audiance for their brand
of politics.

However, their previous open hostility to the anti-war movement makes much of
what they argue for irrelevant (to the point of *ignoring* massive anti-war
demonstrations in the pages of The Militant), in the same way ultra-left
sectarians have no impact on anything for the most part either.

David Walters

_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism