Tendance Coatesy

Left Socialist Blog

As Crisis in International Trotskyism Reaches Breaking Point, Hold the Front Page: Gerry Downing, Ian Donovan and the Split in the Trotskyist faction.

with 19 comments

Image may contain: text

a complete decay of communist consciousness and the embrace of opportunism.”


Take your eyes off the bleeding ball for a minute, and all hell breaks loose.

““When I interrupted Ian to call out his insane rant about the Rothschilds’ he became outraged, shouted and threw his pen on the table..”

This was a complete pack of lies from start to finish. Another comrade who was there wrote:

“Sorry, E, I do not recall Ian raising his voice and shouting at all”

Looks like a duel at dawn between Gerry Downing and Ian Donovan.

In an effort to calm things down I have volunteered to mediate


Trotskyist Faction statement on Communist financial norms, democratic accountability, security and membership standards.

This statement was already written when we discovered that on 30 Jan 2020 Gerry Downing fraudulently put out his statement denouncing Gilad Atzmon and some of his associated and co-thinkers, in the name of Socialist Fight, 13 days after a 17th January vote was taken in which he failed to get a majority. He now claims that one member who had clearly lapsed, JC, whose case is addressed below, was a full member all along, and that gave him a majority after all. This question was raised at the 17th January meeting and various arguments were made to the effect that JC should be treated as a member. This was never agreed and ratified in an endorsed set of minutes in any case.

Objections had been raised by comrade Donovan in the meeting on the grounds that JC had made not paid subs, only made sporadic donations and had not been to any meetings for well over a year. The draft minutes mistakenly recorded that it was agreed that he was a member, after a hue and cry from Gerry and his ‘candidate members’ whose presence was itself contentious, and unwanted as the meeting in which it took place had originally been booked and planned by the decision of full members as a private meeting for those full members only.

Harsh words indeed,

Followed by,

Thus comrade Downing has not only betrayed the consistent anti-Zionist positions he used to uphold, he has flagrantly betrayed the democracy of his own organisation by fraudulently and retrospectively rewriting the history of a vote he didn’t win; he has fraudulently declared an ex-member to be a full member in order to claim to have ‘won’ a vote he failed to win, and he has in the process totally betrayed the Bolshevik tradition on the party question.

All this indicates, as the statement below shows, a complete decay of communist consciousness and the embrace of opportunism.

It gets hotter,

There is the smear, also against comrade Donovan, by ED. After the branch meeting at the Lucas Arms on 17 January, which was booked on the understanding it was supposed to be a private meeting to resolve this issue among full members only, but which Gerry declared Open with a public email on the day, and then GW and ED turned up and Gerry inveigled them in, after that ED made the following accusation against comrade Donovan a week later. She wrote:

“When I interrupted Ian to call out his insane rant about the Rothschilds’ he became outraged, shouted and threw his pen on the table..”

This was a complete pack of lies from start to finish. Another comrade who was there wrote:

“Sorry, E, I do not recall Ian raising his voice and shouting at all”

To which comrade Donovan responded and pointed out that he had challenged Gerry a week earlier about Gerry’s shouting in the meeting:

“Indeed. I note that when I challenged Gerry about shouting, he justified it on political grounds. But he did not say ‘well Ian shouted too’ when criticised for it by [another comrade]. If I had shouted at E he would have condemned me and been angry.

“This alone corroborates that this is untrue”.

And it did. And do E was compelled to admit:

 “Hiya folks, maybe I misspoke…“

They conclude,

To reassert principled politics, we need to draw those boundaries properly, and to re-establish Socialist Fight on proper Communist organisational norms. These are difficult and reactionary times, and some basic discipline and good security is essential to ensure that we are effective going forward.

Here is the infamous ‘statement’.

Socialist Fight statement on Gilad Atzmon, Devon Nola, Ian Greenhalgh of Veterans Today, anti-communism, racism and antisemitism 25-1-2020

The minutes of the meeting of 17 January, taken by Ian’s supporter in the Trotskyist Faction, Turan, confirming the meeting’s agreement that John Carty is a full member of Socialist Fight. Ian now says it was only Gerry Downing’s suggestion, that it was never agreed and anyway the minutes were never agreed as a true record – pathetic!

Signed by Gerry Downing, Mick Artur, Paul Humphreys, John Carty (full members), Charlie Walsh, Ella Downing, Gareth Martin (candidate members), Wilhelm Specklin (Holland), Dov Winter (USA), (International sympathisers).


The Socialist Fight Statement


Socialist Fight unreservedly condemns as racist and antisemitic Gilad Atzmon, Devon Nola and Ian Greenhalgh of Veterans Today and most of the milieu they attract and those who support them. And Gilad Atzmon notoriously said: “I despise the Jew in me and detest the Jew in you”, clearly indicating he was antisemitic. Socialist Fight rejects the Judeo-Bolshevik conspiracy theories they promulgate and identify them as irreconcilable enemies of Socialist Fight, Trotskyism in general and all who wish to fight for a socialist future. [1]

The public debate is still hotting up!

This is a disjointed drivel on nonsense. So the meeting agreed that John Carty was a member. Turan, Ian’s supporter, recorded the decision on which all, including Ian, agreed but IT NEVER HAPPENED. And the only reason it never hapoened was because Ian did not like it. Democracy how are you? That and the vile abuse heaped on me, Ella and Gareth and outrageous bureaucratic attempts to prevent new members joining, to prevent even a candadate membership and alleging I had “fraudulently” paid their dues so he would not bank the cheques.

Of course support for Gilad Atzmon and his defence of David Duke is the central crime here, calculated to do the maximum possible damage to Socialist Fight. Ian had moved sharply rightwards since the defeat of Labour on 12th December. Now he is openly proclaiming that the Jewish Zionist bourgeoisie is the main enemy and is totally incapable of answering the Socialist Fight statement. Unfortunately Turan and Dipak are riding with him from the margins to the extreme margins, always alibying open racist comments by the claim that Zionism is tge main enemy. Obviously Socialist Fight will not tolerate this defence of Holocaust deniers and far right kkk racists on the excuse that “the Zionists made them do it”.

The whole notion of “left-wing anti-Semitism” is a diabolical fraud created by fascist Zionist lobbying, the CIA and Western propaganda to topsy-turvy depict anyone for the Palestinian cause, the Arab world, anti-Zionism and socialism in general as racist or even fascist.

Peace and Love Cdes!

Related image

19 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Sounds like yet another example of Rightwingers muddying the waters rather than a problem with the actual Left per se.


    February 3, 2020 at 10:39 pm

  2. Donovan’s thesis is as simple as it is brutally stupid: it’s tacitly okay with him for Gilad Atzmon to be a Holocaust denier because something something Zionism.

    You’ll see immediately that this isn’t an explanation, it’s an excuse, and an excuse untouched by such boring quotidian mundanities as, e.g., logic or believability. For example, the more Atzmon tells us he’s freed himself from Zionism, the more directly he promotes Holocaust denial and happily rubs elbows with leading figures of the alt-right. And if Zionism causes Jews to be Holocaust deniers — because, remember, that’s Donovan’s excuse for Atzmon’s little fetish — how come only the very tiny microgroupuscule of Atzmonista/Shamirista/Eisenistas around “Deir Yassin Remembered” actually caught the disease?

    Gilad Atzmon promotes Holocaust denial because he doesn’t like Jews.

    Ian Donovan has to pretend this isn’t true. And that means setting the fudge machine to “stun.”

    Donovan supports the squalid racist Atzmon because he decided he wants to, that’s all. Why? Because he shares with Atzmon an opinion on the Jews that is, when unclothed and hosed clean of Donovanian fulminating fustian, clearly seen to be antisemitic. All the rest is window dressing.

    Sven Gøllÿ

    February 4, 2020 at 12:35 am

  3. Here, by the way, is the question Donovan’s running from rather frantically: why is he basically okay with Atzmon’s mania for promoting Holocaust denial?


    Also worth asking — is the same failing that drove Donovan from Left Unity and then LAW — the defense of “anti-Zionist” antisemitism in the Atzmon mode, even including Atzmon’s fetish for Holocaust denial — now going to get him the boot at Socialist Fight?

    Sven Gøllÿ

    February 4, 2020 at 12:54 am

  4. These people are nothing more than boils on the arse of history, pompous, jumped-up know nothings. I was at an art class the other day (my latest hobby) when I heard one of the other participants (an African woman) saying to the tutor that the Israelis are treating the Palestinians exactly like the Nazis treated the Jews. The tutor enthusiastically agreed. I felt like asking where the gas ovens were located in the Gaza Strip, but needless to say, I had to bite my tongue. It’s complete historical and political ignorance, compounded with malice. How any one can criticise Israel and not notice the elephant in the room that is the state of the Muslim and African world is almost beyond me, but not quite.

    Sue r

    February 4, 2020 at 10:34 am

    • But why does Israel get away with expanding its territory contrary to international Law?


      February 4, 2020 at 11:39 am

  5. Why do lefties takes sides in disputes between capitalist nations?

    Steven Johnston

    February 4, 2020 at 12:06 pm

    • Probably because they tend to be empathetic, caring people who have a strong belief in equality, fairness, and Social justice and want a better world. Unlike Rightwingers who tend to be Sociopaths or Psychopaths, driven by greed and self-interest.


      February 4, 2020 at 12:14 pm

  6. They must be very naïve if they think they can get this under capitalism.

    Steven Johnston

    February 4, 2020 at 12:32 pm

  7. “Unlike Rightwingers who tend to be Sociopaths or Psychopaths, driven by greed and self-interest.”

    So you are psychiatrist now?

    Steven Johnston

    February 4, 2020 at 12:33 pm

    • I have some experience and a little knowledge. I’d hazard a guess that you have a Personality Disorder, probably Passive-Aggressive/Histrionic.


      February 4, 2020 at 12:52 pm

  8. Trev: Show me the gas ovens and the execution pits please. I’ve looked on Google earth and I can’t find them. Do you know the meaning of the term ‘hyperbole’?

    Sue R

    February 4, 2020 at 12:51 pm

  9. I have no idea what you are talking about Sue R. I never mentioned such things. I referred to the illegal expansion of territory.


    February 4, 2020 at 12:54 pm

  10. Trev, many of us commenting here have seen people like those in ‘Socialist Fight’, first hand.

    They have a long record of anti-semitism, going on about their “theory” of a “pan-national Jewish bourgeoisie” which makes up the “vanguard of the global ruling class”.

    “The Jews are not a nation, but they have a pan-national bourgeoisie …”

    “both a powerful imperialist formation, and deeply unstable. In this epoch of declining capitalism, it plays the role of a kind of ‘vanguard of the bourgeoisie’ – not quite the mirror-image of Marxism but with aspirations along those lines. It has been instrumental in pushing the nationally limited imperialist bourgeoisies to partially transcend their own national particularisms. Hence the ‘traditional’ imperialist bourgeoisie, based on the nation-state, having overcome their previous fear of the supposedly proletarian-internationalist role of the Jews as a result of the outcome of WWII, now regards Jewish ‘cosmopolitanism’ and bourgeois semi-internationalism as a good thing, and to a considerable degree defers and follows the leadership of the Jewish/Zionist bourgeoisie.


    This is how they describe myself and Jim,

    “Andrew Coates and Jim Denham: cynics and delusional Zionist right-wingers.”


    There is plenty more, not just mad, but red-brown anti-semitic stuff from that quarter.

    Andrew Coates

    February 4, 2020 at 1:21 pm

    • That’s pretty bizarre.


      February 4, 2020 at 1:29 pm

  11. trev: re Israel’s “illegal expansion of territory” (which I don’t think anyone here is defending, by the way), Barry Finger has pointed out (at Shiraz Socialist):

    Before Netanyahu another Israeli right-winger, Ehud Olmert, far different indeed than Benny Ganz, made an unprecedented offer to Abbas in 2008. According to chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat, Olmert accepted all of the PA’s publicly expressed demands and even offered Abbas more than the full area of the West Bank and Gaza. Olmert proposed that Israel retain 6.3% of the territory in order to keep control of major Jewish settlements. But he offered to compensate the Palestinians with Israeli land equivalent to 5.8% of the West Bank along with a link to the Gaza strip—another territory meant to be part of Palestine plus another 20 square kilometers.

    Regarding Jerusalem, Olmert said — according to Erekat -‘what is Arab is Arab, what’s Jewish is Jewish, and we’ll keep an open city.’ He offered to withdraw from Arab neighborhoods of east Jerusalem and to place the Old City under international control. Jerusalem would in effect be the capital of two countries.

    He even consented to the return of 150,000 Palestinian refugees over the course of 10 years.

    Could Olmert, who was under criminal investigation, have pieced together a working coalition to push these proposals through the Knesset? Who knows? Could he have saved his skin by delivering the long—and longed for– elusive peace? We cannot comment with certainty.

    What we do know is that Abbas and the PA rejected this plan out of hand.

    In 2009, Erekat explained to the Jordanian newspaper Ad-Dustour why the Palestinians decided to decline then Prime Minister Olmert’s offer. “(Prime Minister) Ehud Barak offered us 90% (of the occupied territories) and Olmert offered us 100%. Why should we hurry?”

    Now we know why.

    Jim Denham

    February 4, 2020 at 1:32 pm

  12. Thanks for the diagnosis Trev, I presume there is no charge for it?

    Steven Johnston

    February 4, 2020 at 1:47 pm

  13. Both Zionism and Palestinian nationalism hold back the growth of class consciousness among the working class in Israel and Palestine.

    So why would any socialist takes sides?

    Steven Johnston

    February 4, 2020 at 1:55 pm

  14. Trev is projecting his own mental maladies on to others. As for why the Palestine leadership keeps turning down peace offers, follow the money.

    Sue r

    February 4, 2020 at 3:01 pm

  15. Well, if you look at the governments in Gaza and the West bank that would explain why.

    They make Thatcher look like Corbyn.

    They are run by nationalist, bourgeoise parties.

    Steven Johnston

    February 4, 2020 at 3:19 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: