On the ISN amendments

Martin Thomas

The SWP-splinter International Socialist Network, of which Thompson is a

member, has broadly backed the LPP, but recommended amendments to both

LPP and SP.

In the SP, it proposes to replace “aims… to end capitalism”

with “aims… to challenge capitalism”. We all come across

challenging behaviour every week, from workmates, neighbours, or

friends, and usually we deal with it. It is not fatal. The capitalist

class is skilled at deflecting and dealing with challenges. To limit

ourselves to challenging it, rather than ending it, is to bow down to

that skill.

Other ISN amendments delete (without substitute) the SP’s statement that

capitalist state institutions must be replaced by different ones, and

its assertion that the Stalinist states were not socialist.

There can often be tactical good sense in small socialist groups

participating in big left parties which are reformist, or unclear about

Stalinism. We participate and argue patiently against the reformist and

Stalinist ideas. What is the sense of a small socialist group, like ISN,

intervening in an only-slightly-less-small group, Left Unity, in order

to argue against rejecting reformism and Stalinism?

The ISN’s amendments to the LPP try to make the LPP more left-wing. The

chief one aims to boost the LPP’s reference to socialism, which as it

stands is minimal: “we need a new left party which will present an

alternative set of values of equality and justice: socialist, feminist,

environmentalist…”

The ISN amendment would have the LPP talk about “the socialist

transformation of society”. “We believe that working people have the

power to create a new society based on collective organisation,

democratic coordination and the planning of economic activity in the

interests of humanity”.

The effort to “keep it broad” here results in hopeless vagueness. What

does “working people” mean? Do the ISN really look to an alliance

comprising working capitalists (as distinct from rentiers), small

employers and self-employed, and employed workers, but excluding

unemployed workers, students, retired workers, etc., to change the world?

Capitalism is based on “collective organisation” (read chapter 13

of Capital)! “Democratic coordination”? In modern bourgeois

democracies, capitalism has a form of that, too. “Planning of economic

activity”? Big-business strategists do that!

The ISN’s definition of socialism says nothing about who owns and

controls the means of production. The only distinctively socialistic

thing in it is the phrase “in the interests of humanity”, but that nails

things down no more than the original LPP talk of “alternative values of

equality and justice”.

If the ISN’s sentence were in a hurried article or leaflet, only pedants

would read it as other than an inept but good-spirited attempt to find

new words to explain socialism. But this is supposed to be an amendment

to a platform statement to make it more precise.

—

1 October 2013

To submit an article for the 'Discussion & Debate' section of our website please email it to info@leftunity.org

1 comment

One response to “On the ISN amendments”

Pete b says:

October 31, 2013 at 12:35 am

For isn its about squaring the circle. Can they hold together long enough to regroup with socialist resistance and the also falling apart anti capitalist initiative. This would not be a bad thing. The problem being socialist resistance. They themselves are an aging centrist blamanche looking to regroupto keep their apparatus going. Workers power are also wanting to join in. better for a new regroupment. They will at least generate a debate and struggle for their line. The common participation in left unity is not coincidental. There is I feel a spirit towards a broader unity. God help us we are in big shit facing a further historical defeat. We need a greater unity to have any real effect. But this doesnt mean we have to fudge with reformism.
If left unity doesnt survive at least it has been part of bringing forward a regroupment of the left. Good. Whatever the fate of left unity, history will be made.
If left unity holds together there could be a geater regroupment, but the involvement of these groups in lpp is wrong. How can you have a socialist regroupment and at the same time block with the right in left unity. is it a regroupment to hide your socialist politics? Regroup and block with the reformists and euro coms.
You risk the political future for short term gain, for the sake of a safe majority in left unity. My appeal is to stop the fudge. Your block, if it is one, could also swing the platform vote for the socialist platform too. We can appreciate your claim your cleaver tactical brains, the tailending of successive newleft party initiatives where socialist resistance has been in favour of backing the majority only to be embaressed by the lack of quality of those majorities.
I dont think this is good leadership, it does not empress me. Resistance still pride themselves on their international affiliation to the usec FI, but if you take a real look at similar “new workers party” initiatives, they have all formed on programmes well to the left of that proposed by the left party platform in left unity. The logic seeming to be the programme is not so impirtant its about trying to get a new party going, thats the object!
As I hint, this can be done on a socialist platform, of which the socialist platform in left unitu is the closest. If they could accept the platform vote as forcing a referendum on are you a socialist, and vote for the socialist platform this would reset left uniyu towarfs a regroupment of socialists. A much healthier basis from the current one with lpp.
Regroup and back the socialist platform. I believe left unity demonstrates a vitality to independant socialists and the prize here is great.
There is potential for a principled socialist block of 500+, a fractured swp from which others will join. A vehicle of a left majority in left unity with a bit of a name. The socialist block should not be embarressed to include in itself non aligned socialists. Id really like to ask that the documentaion of thr regroupment of soc rds, aci and isn be done publically and open to other socialists. Inclusive of us. And willing itself to take the lead in left umity. Im cencerned that soon this opportunity is not list!