Tendance Coatesy

Left Socialist Blog

Posts Tagged ‘Socialist Worker

Socialist Worker and Novara Media Attack Anti-Fascist Anti-Brexit Demo Against Tommy Robinson Great Brexit Betrayal Rally.

with 11 comments

Related image

Pro-Brexit Rally Calls for Anti-Brexit Response.

The Another Europe is Possible protest “No to Tommy Robinson, No to Brexit” continues to create controversy.

Leave or Remain, We All Hate Tommy

Callum Cant and Benjamin Walters write,

Another Europe is Possible (AEIP) is an ultra-remain campaign group that positions itself as the left wing of the ‘Stop Brexit’ movement. Its support base varies from Alliance for Workers’ Liberty members to Guardian columnist Zoe Williams. AEIP have called for a People’s Vote/Stop Brexit counter-protest to the far right march.

They argue that it’s not enough to simply oppose racism and fascism – we have to specifically oppose Brexit. For them, Brexit is not just a recruiting ground for the far right, it is actually a far right project in its entirety. So, the anti-fascist response has to be to try and stop Brexit.

After having carefully established that AEIP is “ultra”, AWL backed, no less, and, apparently has a view (which is not referenced) on the Brexit basis of the “far right project in its entirety” they outline an alternative.

Cant and Walters argument appears to be that the left needs to talk to  Brexit supporters, to weed them away from Robinson and UKIP leadership.

Whereas the Momentum-backed counter-protest is using the slogan ‘No to Tommy Robinson, No to Fortress Britain’ without taking a line on Brexit, AEIP are linking together an ultra-remain position with an anti-fascist position. This is a very bad mistake.

It is a mistake because it maps the political division of the Brexit debate (48% Remain, 52% Leave) onto the political division between fascists and anti-fascists (90% anti-fascist, 10% fascist). It gives Robinson exactly what he wants: leadership.

Instead of challenging his attempt to lead Leave voters and splitting the hard core of the far right away from the 52%, it consolidates his position from the other side of a police line. Robinson is a general looking for an army. AEIP’s line, if pursued, will do much to form his battalions for him.

Yes, we “all hate Tommy”.

But, one might ask how, as they suggest,  is the left going to lead Leave voters?

By arguing for a People’s Brexit?

By saying that a Brexit Britain with a “socialist economy” will be (as a Counterfire contributor put it recently) a “Beacon” off the shores of Europe?

Brexit is not a “floating signifier” that you can moor to the left’s politics.

It is a reactionary project through and through.

Trying another tack the authors assert,

…..anti-fascist fronts should only express the limited politics necessary to defeat the fascists on the day. They should appeal to as many people as possible (regardless of what they think about Brexit). They should recognise that the goal of the front is only to prevent the fascists from taking leadership.

Just how limited?

They argue that the demonstration called by the SWP Fronts Stand Up To Racism and Unite Against Fascism is against ‘Fortress Europe” is such a step

It is against Europe, that’s for sure.

Here is the SWP:

Unite and stop the racists and fascists on 9 December

Tomáš Tengely-Evans writes,

The Another Europe Is Possible campaign has called a separate mobilisation under the dangerous slogan of “No to Tommy Robinson—no to Brexit”. The organisers link opposition to Robinson to demands for a “People’s Vote” to stop Brexit.

Racism against migrants pushed by both Tory Brexiteers and Labour ­“centrists” who want to block Brexit has added to the racist atmosphere.

So the ‘limited’ united front is also against “Labour ‘centrists'”.

The SWP view on “anti-fascists” who “send volunteers to the Middle East to fight Isis” is not known.

In the meantime back in the real world of Brexit:

 

Advertisements

Written by Andrew Coates

November 28, 2018 at 1:58 pm

Socialist Worker: Get Ready for ‘Anti-Racist” Brexit in the “Interests of the Working Class”.

with 13 comments

Hasta La Victoria Siempre Comandante!

Great memes meme alike:

Break from neoliberal policies and racism—the Brexit we should fight for.

Socialist Worker. Charlie Kimber. 13th of November.

We would like to see May’s deal defeated by MPs, most probably triggering her resignation, and then for massive pressure to force a general election.

This could see the Tories dumped.

Labour should run in any such election on a Brexit that would maintain free movement for workers, welcome migrants and oppose privatisation and austerity.

It should dump the pro-business single market, and stress international workers’ unity.

That’s the agenda the trade unions should campaign for. The alternative to the Tories’ Brexit isn’t going back to the policies of David Cameron and George Osborne before the 2016 referendum.

It’s to break from the stultifying neoliberal consensus.

Neither Labour nor the union leaders are doing that. So we need more struggle in the workplaces and the streets against austerity and racism.

That’s the way to shape the Brexit debate in the interests of the working class.

Such a major issue cannot be left to feuding pro-business groups.

Meanwhile as the “mass struggle” for Counterfire and the SWP’s Brexit rumbles in the nearest telephone box, Labour List publishes this assessment,

There’s a rocky road ahead for the Tories. But it’s a tricky time for Corbyn too

The government now has a draft EU withdrawal agreement. A big moment, yes, but this is just the beginning. Ministers last night had one-to-ones in No10 where they could read the key documents and Penny Mordaunt, widely thought of as the most likely to resign (#PMforPM is a thing amongst Tory Brexiteers) will take her turn this morning. Theresa May will have to get sign off from her cabinet, which meets at 2pm today with that aim, while the other EU countries must concur that the draft is complete enough to merit a summit in November. The EU summit must go well, then so must the Prime Minister’s pitch to parliament and country, before presenting the withdrawal agreement to MPs for approval.

There are hazards and potential pitfalls all the way along this path to getting the withdrawal deal secured. That precarious journey should be a good thing for Labour, but instead it looks to be a difficult time – particularly over the next few days. The draft agreement has not been published, but we know Labour can’t support it. Though there are MPs who fear a no-deal Brexit, and others who fear the optics of ignoring the 2016 result, the majority and particularly the leadership simply could not prop up a Tory government. But this leaves Labour spokespeople looking a bit silly, as the media rounds this morning showed.

Jeremy Corbyn’s initial reaction was fair enough. “We will look at the details of what has been agreed when they are available,” the leader said. “But from what we know of the shambolic handling of these negotiations, this is unlikely to be a good deal for the country. Labour has been clear from the beginning that we need a deal to support jobs and the economy – and that guarantees standards and protections. If this deal doesn’t meet our six tests and work for the whole country, then we will vote against it.” Under further scrutiny, however, opposition frontbenchers start to crumble as interviewers point out that May’s temporary customs union arrangement is pretty much what Labour has been advocating. It’s a tough gig, explaining why they oppose something that looks closer to Labour’s proposals than expected without being able to highlight the finer problematic details. Even when the documents are published, that’ll be 500 pages to comb through.

There is much excitement ahead of PMQs this afternoon, which precedes the crunch cabinet meeting. But there are no big resignations to mock so far. Although Brexiteer complaints of turning the country into a “vassal state” could be highlighted, such criticism would apply equally to Labour’s plans. The backstop is the Prime Minister’s obvious weak point, and yet the same customs arrangement would likely have had to be put forward under Labour. This is a politically dangerous period for May, but also a tricky one for Corbyn to navigate.

Sienna @siennamarla

Let us hope that Corbyn and McDonnell do not listen to Counterfire, Socialist Worker, and those who imagine that they are going to claw a ‘People’s Brexit’ out of the economic and social mess that is the only actually existing Brexit, a right-wing free-market one.

We should not forget that Trump’s nationalism is the rising form of the free-market politics, not the old “consensus”.

As in this:

Image may contain: 1 person, text

We do not need to cobble together some temporary customs union, we need to reverse Brexit and fight for a social Europe.

The internationalist left states,

Every Labour MP must vote against Brexit – and help bring down the Tories.

Shiraz says,

On 31 October, the New Statesman magazine reported that: “At a recent strategy meeting, Andrew Murray – who works part-time as [Unite union leader] Len McCluskey’s chief of staff and part-time in Corbyn’s office – argued that the Labour Party should vote for Theresa May’s deal to avoid a no-deal exit”. Murray, reports the New Statesman, was successfully slapped down by Diane Abbott. But his stance will surely encourage those Labour MPs thinking of voting with the Tories, as will Corbyn’s shameful statement (in clear breach of party policy) in an interview for Der Spiegal, that “Brexit can’t be stopped”: let’s hope this was a momentary aberration by a well-meaning but politically illiterate leader brought up on the simplistic nationalism of Tony Benn and the Stalinist chimera of ‘socialism in one country’.

If the Tories are brought down, then further progress will depend on changing the Labour leadership’s stance. At present they say they want to replace the Tories’ negotiations by a ‘workable plan’ — a message which really amounts to “we can negotiate better than the Tories” — and they explicitly oppose continuing free movement for EU and British citizens across European borders.

May’s Tories will try to blackmail us by saying that the only alternatives are ‘no deal’ or a ‘hard Brexit’ of the type proposed by the Tories’ right-wing fringe. In fact the great bulk of big business is firmly against a ‘no deal’/’hard Brexit’: there is little chance of the Tories replacing May as leader by an ultra-Brexiteer and almost no chance that any Brexitemist could win a parliamentary majority for their favoured schemes. No one should let scaremongering corner them into supporting a supposedly “lesser evil” Brexit. When the Tories are in trouble, that is an opportunity to stop Brexit altogether.

Left Against Brexit groups have been formed in Nottingham, Sheffield, Leeds, Haringey, and South London. They have gone out on the streets to win people against Brexit. Over the next weeks and months they need to double their efforts.

Those should include campaigning in areas which are heavily pro-Remain, and in places like university campuses with strong pro-Remain opinion, in order to connect with and draw in more activists. The message needs to be “Remain and Rebel”, a battle for a different Europe reshaped in the interests of the working class by active working-class solidarity in the broad class-struggle arena created by the historically progressive capitalist semi-unification of Europe.

There is no case, under any circumstances,  for Labour MPs to vote for this deal – to vote, in other words, to save the Tory government.

 

PETITION: VOTE AGAINST THERESA MAY’S BREXIT DEAL

The government’s Brexit deal will soon go to a vote in parliament. This is the last opportunity for our elected representatives to stand up for us in the Brexit process.

Theresa May’s deal is not what anyone voted for in 2016. It will damage the rights and prosperity of millions of ordinary people. It is a threat to jobs, the NHS, the environment, human rights, free movement and basic things like food standards. And it will still mean that we have to abide by EU rules, without any say in how they are made.

Defeating the government’s deal will not result in a ‘no deal’ Brexit. If MPs block the deal, there can be an alternative – whether that’s a general election, or a public vote, or fresh negotiations.

We need MPs to stand up for their constituents and stand against the disaster of the government’s Brexit deal.

We, the undersigned, call on all MPs to vote against the government’s Brexit deal when it is put to the House of Commons.

Countefore, “Betraying the referendum result would spell disaster for Labour and the left, argues Martin Hall

 

Written by Andrew Coates

November 14, 2018 at 1:59 pm

Socialist Worker: Left Needs to Focus on “Energetic Rallies” and not “internal” Labour Battles as the Socialist Party Calls for Victory by Letting it Join.

leave a comment »

Image result for as soon as this pub closes

Always Ready with Good Advice.

It’s a hard task, but –  hell knows –  somebody has to keep up on what the non-Labour left is saying these days.

How else would we know what the vanguard is telling us?

Socialist Worker reports,

The Labour right has defeated the left in recent battles inside the Labour Party—ensuring it holds its grip on party structures.

Candidates backed by the right won all leading positions at a meeting of the party’s National Policy Forum last Saturday. Its policies shape Labour’s manifesto.

It followed right victories at regional conferences and annual general meetings of Constituency Labour Parties (CLPs).

The paper continues,

There is a danger that the defeats could encourage the Labour left to step up its attempts to win internal battles.

Labour left group Momentum has focused on winning more seats for CLP representatives on the party’s national executive committee (NEC). The NEC had been set to meet on Tuesday to debate changes to its rules and make-up.

Momentum had focused its efforts on an online campaign in the weeks running up to the meeting, calling on its members to demand more CLP seats.

FBU union general secretary Matt Wrack recently called on all Momentum supporters to back the campaign. He warned, “Time is running out to transform Labour”.

But late on Monday evening the proposed changes were removed from the NEC’s agenda—meaning the left was defeated before the meeting even began.

The recent victories for the right show that the left is at its weakest when fighting internal battles against Labour’s right wing bureaucracy.

Weeks of campaigning can swiftly be quashed by backroom manoeuvering. And Labour’s new mass membership clearly has little enthusiasm for getting bogged down in internal battles.

But the left is stronger when it looks outwards. Jeremy Corbyn’s re-election campaign was successful because it drew tens of thousands of people to energetic rallies that promised a fight for a radically different society.

The Socialist, paper of the, you’ve guessed it, Socialist Party, has another option,

To be successful, Corbyn and those around him need to boldly come out for a programme to transform Labour and to transform the lives of working and middle class people.

That means opening up the Labour Party to all anti-austerity forces, allowing them to affiliate on a democratic, federal basis. It means inviting back into Labour all those socialists who have been expelled or excluded from membership by the Blairite party machine. It also has to involve being clear and open about what alternative is necessary..

Big public speeches, letting the Socialist Party join Labour….It’s all boiled down to what comrades have always said about these two groups: 1) The SWP organises “rallies” – that’s what they do. 2) The SP ‘builds the SP” – that’s what they do. Their lines have the merit of putting in second place all the other stuff about class struggle, nationalisation, revolution, People’s Brexit etc.

Anti-imperialism and the Syrian Revolution, *US* Socialist Worker Debates the Issues.

with 6 comments

Image result for syria

The US Socialist Worker (long divorced from its British parent, and the paper of the International Socialist Organization, ISO) has carried an important debate on Syria in the last week.

Anti-imperialism and the Syrian Revolution. Ashley Smith

THE SYRIAN Revolution has tested the left internationally by posing a blunt question: Which side are you on? Do you support the popular struggle against dictatorship and for democracy? Or are you with Bashar al-Assad’s brutal regime, his imperial backer Russia, his regional ally Iran and Iran’s proxies like Hezbollah from Lebanon?

Tragically, too many have failed this test.

From the very beginning of Syria’s revolution–even before the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and al-Qaeda’s Nusra Front some years later–a whole section of the left opposed the popular uprising against the Assad dictatorship that began in early 2011, part of the Arab Spring wave of popular rebellions against dictatorship and repression.

Since then, they have turned a blind eye to Assad’s massacre of some 400,000 Syrians, and his regime’s use of barrel bombs, chemical weapons and barbaric sieges of cities like Aleppo. Today, 11 million people–half the country’s population–have been displaced, with the Assad regime responsible for the lion’s share of the death and destruction.

The author criticises the “campist” belief that, ” there is only one imperialist power in the world–the U.S.–and that it is an all-powerful manipulator of international events.”

The U.S. does remain the world’s dominant imperialist power, but as a result of its failed war in Iraq and other factors, it has suffered a relative decline in strength. Washington is now challenged internationally by imperialist rivals like China and Russia, as well as regional powers. In this new imperial order, the U.S. is less capable of controlling world events–it fears popular revolt all the more.

This is perhaps a more specifically US stand,

The campist misreadings, however, have led them to the conclusion that the U.S. government is pulling the strings in the rebellion in Syria. Some have gone so far as to argue–absurdly–that the U.S. backs ISIS against Assad. Ironically, this puts the campists in agreement with Donald Trump, who, in his latest ravings, claims that Obama and Clinton were “founders” of ISIS.

One of the most striking paragraphs is the following,

A genuine internationalist left must stand with Syria’s popular resistance to Assad, which began as a nonviolent uprising against the dictatorship–and against intervention by American and Russian imperialism, as well as by the region’s main powers.

This stands in clear contrast to the entire strategy of groups in the UK, notably the Stop the War Coalition (StWC) , which  claims not to “take sides”.

The STWC’s John Rees’ states,

The STWC has never supported the Assad regime. Just as we never supported the Taliban, Saddam Hussein or Colonel Gaddafi. Only in the minds of ‘them or us’ pretend patriots does the opposition to our own government’s wars mean support for dictators or terrorists. Our case has always been that war will worsen the problem and not solve it. We were right in that analysis in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.

There is no group, in other words, that they do stand with.

This is Smith’s conclusion,

No one committed to solidarity with the Syrian struggle can align themselves with either wing of the U.S. imperial establishment. Instead, the left must reject imperialism in any form, including Russia’s.

Rather than look to imperialist powers or dictatorial regimes in either camp, the left should stand for workers’ struggle across borders and in defense of oppressed nations and their fight for self-determination.

In Syria, the revolution has suffered a defeat for the time being. While civil society activists continue to seize every opportunity to assert their goals, their forces have been ravaged by counterrevolution–in the form of the Syria regime and its international allies on the one hand, and the Nusra Front and ISIS, which was particularly eager from the start to target the rebels than regime forces, on the other.

But as Gilbert Achcar argues in his book Morbid Symptoms: Relapse in the Arab Uprising, this setback, however devastating, comes amid a long period of revolutionary crisis in Syria and the whole region.

The task of the international left today is to oppose intervention by any of the imperialist and regional powers, reject the tyranny of the Assad regime itself, demand the opening of the borders to those fleeing the violence and chaos, collaborate with Syrian revolutionaries–and win people away from campism to the politics of international solidarity from below.

There is nothing specific about the Kurdish YPD and their alliances, nothing specific about the very special threat to progressives and democrats posed by Islamic State, – with all the international echoes that Jihadism poses.

Some will welcome (despite scepticism about how it will work out) US backing for the democratic Kurdish forces and be concerned about Turkish intervention.

Others will point to the specific threat created by the  Jihaist genociders of Daesh and the international volunteers for their death squads not least from Europe.

The debate that the article has caused has unfortunately focused on the role of the US rather than such issues. One reader commented, ” “Assad must go!” is the mantra not of the left, but of the Western imperialists.” Another states, “no to U.S. militarism being used to put in place a government that becomes a U.S. pawn.”

Perhaps the UK SWP reflects this debate by publishing the following today,

Turkish and Syrian socialists issue joint statement against intervention

The US, Russia, Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and all the others must keep their hands off Syria.

All support given to the Baas [Assad] regime must be stopped in order for the war to come to an end.

The Syrian people must decide their own future.

Turkey must immediately cease military operations in Syria, stop its enmity against the Kurds, and open its borders to Syrian refugees.

We call all the revolutionary Syrian forces to unify their struggle against: the dictatorship, the foreigners regional and imperialist interventions, and against the reactionary forces.

We believe that the victory of Syrian people on all these counter revolutionary forces, demand the unity of all the revolutionary forces of all the Syrians.

Long live peace, long live the revolution!

Revolutionary Socialist Workers Party (Turkey)

Revolutionary Left Current (Syria)

Now the this Blog has serious disagreements with the ISO, not least on issues which cross over to this searing problem, such as  its refusal to back secularists, like the French ligue de droits de l’homme, in France, against both Islamist and Nationalist-racist bigotry.

Bbut this debate is highly welcome.

Details on quite how anybody is going to stop foreign intervention in Syria and help the Syrian democratic cause win is perhaps too much to ask.

 

 

Written by Andrew Coates

August 31, 2016 at 12:50 pm

Lutfur Rahman Forced Out by Racism, Says Socialist Worker as Former Mayor Hand-Picks Successor.

with 31 comments

Meanwhile Lutfur is Busy Picking Heir to the Throne. 

Tower Hamlets mayor Lutfur Rahman forced out by a campaign of racism by Annette Macki.

Socialist Worker

The long Islamophobic witch hunt against Lutfur Rahman continued last week with his removal as mayor of Tower Hamlets in east London.

Election commissioner Richard Mawrey said Rahman had breached election rules and declared his re-election last year as void.

Rahman, who won with a 3,000 majority, has been banned from standing again. He has also been ordered to pay £250,000 in costs.

It continues,

The judgement perpetuates the racist myth of Muslims as passive zombies manipulated by their leaders. It says, “A distinction must be made between a sophisticated, highly educated and politically literate community and a community which is traditional, respectful of authority and, possibly, not fully integrated with the other communities living in the same area.”

It upholds the claim that Rahman used “spiritual influence”.  Mawrey cites a letter signed by 101 imams stating it was a “religious duty” to vote. But there was no outcry in March when a letter from Catholic bishops was read out at masses across England and Wales urging people to “think carefully” about who to vote for in the general election.

The judgement criticises Rahman for referring “to the Bangladeshi community in Tower Hamlets as if it were a small beleaguered ethnic minority in a sea of hostile racial prejudice”.

The article does not deal with any of the charges in the case.

There is no mention of the list of the offences Lutfur has been convicted of and the details of the manipulation of  ‘spiritual influence’, the screams of ‘Zionist’ ‘Racist’, was a reality in Tower Hamlets. That it very clearly worked for support for one party, Rahman’s Tower Hamlets First!

As far as we are aware the Bishops did not tie their ‘spiritual influence’ to any single party – if they did, shame on them!

If Socialist Worker discovers, through its ace -reporters, that Tower Hamlets First benefited from spiritual backing, that is religious campaigning that channelled the  backing of religious organisations behind Lutfur,  we have no doubt that they will discuss this: as every single mainstream media outlet has done at great, great, length.

Socialists have often suffered from this kind of interference, the case of Italy being one of the most notorious.

It might be worth a mention.

Annette Macki also makes no reference to George Galloway’s former warm endorsement of the same Richard Mawrey who made this “racist” prosecution.

But that was when a judgement went in Galloway’s favour. *

Naturally.

Clearly there will be no need for electoral courts  if Socialist Worker has its way.

Or indeed looking at ‘bourgeois’ and ‘racist’ evidence’.

Organising resistance

A meeting to organise the fightback against the attack on democracy on Tower Hamlets has been called for Thursday of this week.

Speakers were set to include Lutfur Rahman, Salma Yaqoob, Stop the War convenor Lindsey German and Weyman Bennett from Unite Against Fascism.

Last November some 1,000 people came to a meeting in Tower Hamlets after Tory minister Eric Pickles sentin a takeover squad to run the council.

This showed the potential to build resistance to the attacks. The general election will be another opportunity.

TUSC and Left Unity candidate in Bethnal Green and Bow Glyn Robbins will be leafleting in the borough this Saturday.

He said, “On 7 May we have the chance to tell the establishment, ‘We’ll decide who to vote for and who runs our borough’ and vote for a socialist.”

Vote for the SWP and make sure there’s more electoral courts!

They will “decide who to vote for!”

******

In the meantime in the post-modern political world of Tower Hamlet First and its ‘simulation’ of democracy:

Lutfur to offer Rabina Khan chance of becoming Tower Hamlets First mayoral candidate: scrutiny begins 

Trial by Jeory.

Further to this post last night, I understand from sources close to Lutfur Rahman that Cllr Rabina Khan is to be offeees the chance of being Tower Hamlets First’s candidate for mayor in June’s election.

She may well speak at the Water Lilly rally on Thursday night.

Lutfur’s camp are expecting some fall out from this decision. They know there is anger about the way this decision has been made, ie by Lutfur’s “kitchen cabinet” whose number includes of course Rabina’s husband, Cllr Aminur Khan.

They think it could even precipitate a number of THF councillors to break away from the “party” and speak out about how Lutfur has been conducting affairs. Some think Rabina is easier to control. So watch this space on that one.

Now that Oli Rahman has been overlooked, I suspect he may not feel the acting mayor role for six weeks is worth his job at the DWP. Read last night’s post for details on that.

This means he would have two options. He could quit as deputy mayor and thus acting mayor and thus leave it to someone else to nominate who should act as mayor until June 11. Clearly, Lutfur would like that person to be Rabina to boost her profile.

Or he could nominate a deputy before he resigns and that person could become acting mayor. He may appoint former deputy mayor Cllr Ohid Ahmed to that role.

I think Richard Mawrey QC’s aside that the governance of Tower Hamlets may need further examination will prove prescient.

More on Trial by Jeory site.

 

* Details of this (from 2007) here: George Galloway – Who Once Endorsed Richard Mawrey QC – Says Lutfur Conviction for Fraud and Illegal Practices “Shameful”.

Galloway Number 3 in ‘House of Scroungers’ says Socialist Worker – er, Not.

with 7 comments

Socialist Worker says,

House of Scroungers

Tory MP Sir Malcolm Rifkind says it’s “quite unrealistic” to expect MPs to live on their salary of £67,000 a year.

They note that,

“Gordon Brown, the former prime minister, declared additional income of close to £1 million. Geoffrey Cox, the Conservative MP, declared earnings of £820,000—12 times the annual MP wage.”

And conclude:

As Jack Straw with great foresight said in 2010 “Their behaviour, prima facie, does indeed bring the Parliamentary Labour Party, as well as parliament, into disrepute, because it appears that former Cabinet ministers are more interested in making money than they are in properly representing their constituents.”

For an unaccountable reason George Galloway got left off Socialist Worker’s little list, so we have helpfully supplied the full one.

‘Oscars’ for the Most Barking Mad Left Writing.

with 10 comments

The ‘Barking’: Top Award for Left Writing.

The Oscars tonight will be overshadowed by the new ceremonies for the ‘Most Barking Left Writing’ (Hat-Tip: Dave Osland).

The principal coveted trophy, (pictured), will be awarded this evening in the Spring Road Allotment Shed – former Telephone Box.

The past year has seen some strong contenders for the prize.

We have had John Tummon, of Left Unity, and his ‘Calpihate motion

To show solidarity with the people of the Middle  East by supporting the end of the  structure of the  divided nation states imposed by the Versailles  settlement and their replacement by a Caliphate type polity in which diversity and autonomy are protected and nurtured and the mass of people can effectively control executive authority’. Left Unity distances itself specifically from the use of intemperate, inaccurate and moralist language such as ‘terrorism’, ‘evil’, ‘fundamentalist’, ‘viciously reactionary’, ‘murderous’, genocidal’, etc in discussion about the Middle East; these terms are deployed by people and forces seeking not to understand or analyse, but to demonise in order to dominate, and they have no place within socialist discourse.”

We have had Socialist Worker publishing Hassan Mahamdallie who compared the outsiders fighting for the genociders of the Islamic State (Da’esh) and the foreign  volunteers who backed Spanish democracy (“in the 1930s radicalised young men from the same mining communities illegally made their way into Spain to take up arms against general Franco’s fascist army”).

He added this sentence, “It has been disheartening to watch establishment Muslim leaders apologetically rushing out with condemnations. They have pointlessly distanced themselves from “John the Jihadi”—who is alleged to have killed Foley—and declared that Isis is “un-Islamic”.

The tonnes and tonnes of material written about the Ukraine has been ruled worthy of a special award – to follow.

The slaughter at Charlie Hebdo, and the Hyper-Cacher, has brought a fine crop in.

Tariq Ali set the bar high by announcing after the attack (this is a version from the 28th of January),

How serious is Islamophobia in France and other European countries?

France is the worst in Europe and tries to mask it by proclaiming its secular values (sound familiar?), but these values don’t apply to Islam. In fact, French secularism means anything but Islam. And when satirical magazines taunt them, they react. It’s as simple as that.

Only yesterday he tried to keep in the running by saying (Guardian), of Charlie.

In the 80s it had become a stale magazine, and people have told me that one reason for attacking the Muslims and reprinting the Danish cartoons was to boost circulation.” He argues that Je suis Charlie stickers express something other than support for freedom of expression and condemnation of those who murdered in the name of Islam – a loathing for Muslims.

Note: Charlie Hebdo stopped publication from 1981 t0 1992 except for a special issue in 1982.

The Socialist Workers Party Central Committee gave Tariq his angle on the 8th of January,

Racists and right wingers are trying to use Wednesday’s horrific killings in Paris to divide working people, justify imperialist intervention and whip up Islamophobia.

Almost everyone will recognise that the attacks are wrong and completely unacceptable. We must not let them be exploited to generate racism, justify more wars, or to give a boost to the far right.

The media present Charlie Hebdo as simply a “satirical magazine”. But it is not the French equivalent of Private Eye as some commentators have suggested. It may have been once, but it has become a specialist in presenting provocative and racist attacks on Islam. That does not justify the killings, but it is essential background.

Let’s unite against racism and Islamophobia.

The ever-reliable John Wight on Socialist Unity said this (8th January)  as the dead still lay unburied,

The free speech ‘merchants’, those who were so up in arms over matters related to the massacre at the offices of Charlie Hebdo, who use free speech as a sword rather than a shield, would like nothing more than to silence one of the only voices in the country’s national life who dares challenge the demonisation of Muslims and the Muslim community, establishment support for the apartheid state of Israel, and a political status of quo of military intervention overseas and social and economic injustice at home.

But it’s the Economic & Philosophic Science Review that stands out,

Fake-”left” line-up once more with imperialism to “condemn terror” over the Paris attacks, proving even further their craven capitulation to the warmongering demonisation being used to whip up World War Three. Attacking the Islamists as “reactionary” is opportunist sophistry, as is writing them off as “isolated individual terrorists” . Such pretend “Marxism” is just a cover for petty bourgeois moralising and “free speech and democracy” reformist humbug that solves nothing but helps feed the “kill them all” fascist revenge mentality stirred up by capitalist cynicism.

Further afield Ramzay Baroud‘s efforts post-Charlie in the Morning Star to pin the blame for hatred of Muslims and the crimes of Imperialism on the New Atheists merits an honourable mention.

Socialist Fight, Gerry Downing and Graham Durham of the Crickelwood People’s Republic (twinned with the Donbass),  is outstanding.

Ian Donovan is also one to to watch, “in his opinion, there is a Jewish “pan-national bourgeoisie”, which has constituted itself as ruling class “vanguard” in key imperialist countries, and it is this that accounts for US support for Israel.” (Weekly Worker).

Donovan’s recommendation, Support George Galloway MP for Bradford West, is surely in line with these views

The Weekly Worker’s Letter Page yields a rich harvest notably this which is clearly the front runner:

Sounds absurd?

Phil Kent has accused me of holding positions I never held in relation to Stalin, the issue of peak oil and reptilians (Letters, January 15). He also claims I am an elitist, because I believe in leadership.

Firstly, I never argued that Stalin’s victims “deserved to die” – I challenge Kent to prove otherwise. In passing, it’s interesting to note that following the demise of the Soviet Union, when Boris Yeltsin released the figures for individuals in Soviet prisons, these were lower than the USA. The capitalist media went silent.

Secondly, I never argued that rising oil prices would “soon” mean the end of capitalism. What I argued is that rising oil prices in the period of declining oil production, following the global peak, would lead to the collapse of capitalism, if no viable substitute for cheap oil was found. World oil production goes through three stages: rising production, peak and decline. We are still at the peak stage, when oil supply is at its maximum.

Thirdly, I never claimed that the future of humanity “may rest on the beneficence of extra-terrestrial reptiles”. I replied to Andrew Northall’s letter of December 18 and referred to the reptilian control theory, which argues that for thousands of years humanity has been controlled by a reptilian race, using their mixed reptile-human genetic bloodlines, who have oppressed and exploited humans, while claiming descent from the ‘gods’ and the divine right to rule by bloodline. Ancient and modern society is obsessed with reptilian, serpent and dragon themes, possibly due to this heritage. Even the flag of Wales has a dragon on it.

Most people have closed minds, depending on the issues. Mention the possibility of aliens secretly manipulating humanity behind the scenes and the shutters come down. Perhaps Kent should contemplate Einstein’s words: “If at first an idea does not sound absurd, there is no hope for it.

Tony Clark Weekly Worker.