The Left, the IWCA etc

Date: 25th July '02

Name: LLETSA

As somebody who hasn't been actively involved in a long while, and whose interest has only recently been rekindled, it seems to me that the state of play on the left looks something like this:

It is dominated by three main strands. Firstly, there is the Socialist Alliance. This is dominated by the SWP and consists also of other groups who have long hated them and each other. It is destined to fall apart in the same shambolic way it seems to have been (ill) conceived. This is because it pushes an agenda of social liberalism, which, while containing components that may or may not have some merit as individual causes, has proved unpalatable to all but the elements of the state apparatus and their big business masters who seek to utilise it for their own ends - globalizing capitalism requiring, in their eyes, a cross - class unity, based on 'human' concerns - and the social constituency that reflects the social makeup of the SA (even if almost none of that social constituency actually votes SA.)

Then there is the After New Labour left. These Labour left bureaucrats and their dwindling band of Trotskyist cheerleaders try to pressure and challenge the New Labour leadership. They seem to believe that if the long, mind - numbing slog of arguing resolutions at Labour and union conferences, and getting 'left' bureaucrats into various positions in the party results in some limited influence for them, the 'working class' - always viewed as largely passive - can be persuaded to perform their time - honoured duty of voting Labour, and will find themselves with a Labour government containing enough 'left' bureaucrats to make it look more like Old Labour and acting accordingly. It is bound to be even more of a resounding failure than it was in bygone eras when conditions for such a strategy were much more favourable. Today the Blairite Big Brothers, who wouldn't even allow 'nice' Kenny Livingstone's mayoral challenge to go through, will crush them. Furthermore, broader elements of the labour movement who might once have shown an interest will be cajoled, bribed and bullied by the party machine and the media into accepting that'this lot will let the Tories back in.'

Thirdly, there is the Socialist Labour Party, which seems to be an ultra - Stalinist nuthouse, which if it wasn't for the (dwaning) prestige of King Arthur would have deservedly disappeared almost as soon as it came along.

In practical terms, such as, for example, stopping the BNP, all of the above can help 'get the Labour vote out' - and, maybe, prevent the BNP getting as many council seats as it otherwise might. However, none of these are organised at a grass - roots level,in working class communities, while the BNP increasingly are, and are discredited in working class eyes anyway, apart from the type of Labour Party / Trade Union left individuals who command respect for their personal commitment. These types are becoming increasingly rare. And while only saying, in essence, with various justifications 'vote Labour', they can only help a government that will continue to implement the policies that are driving the poor towards the far - right all over Europe.

Even if the far - left should succeed in its 'historic mission' of splitting the Labour rank - and - file (does it still exist?), what would this left cobble together? Presumably some kind of 'Red - Green' alliance - like thae SA, in fact; possibly no bigger, and within which the sects would continue to fight for their 'Leninist perspective', or some such bullshit. And the creaking old roundabout would start to turn again....

The IWCA does seem to genuinly stand outside of all this. Its approach does seem to go direct to the working class in its identified constituencies - the poorest working class areas - and seems to be based around asking what the main concerns of the people who live there are,and what they would be prepared to do about them (remember this, you of the Leninist vanguard - ASKING not telling?). Then, strategies would be devised to get things done about these issues, which would then be presented to the people of those areas, giving them an opportunity to campaign on them. The idea seems to be to give the people of these areas the chance to try and do something about the things that affect their lives, with the eventual aim being to help create the confidence in working class people to start demanding chnge for themselves. This is gives meaning to the phrase 'with the class, not separate and apart from it.' The IWC would presumably try to give a socialist direction to all issues campaigned on, without the hectoring, alienating, jargonistic approach of the traditional left; using Marxism as a guide to the most principled way of acting rather than as a dogma. This is what would be done should the people of an area seek racist 'solutions' that would scapegoat the wrong people. In this way, eventually, should this kind of movement expand (and I don't see any evidence to suggest that the IWCA believes itself to be anything other than the kernal of such a movement, let alone having all the answers to the pitfalls of such a mssssive task), growing numbers of people would come to realise that this society needs replacing with a society of a new type.

For example, although not 'immediate working class concerns' (albeit while being the biggest threat to humanity), environmental problems, for example, could become so; the poor in the inner cities suffer worst from traffic pollution, as this is where bottle - necks generally occur daily as major roads are designed to get the largest number of vehicles in and out of city centres as quickly as possible, while the poisons emitted as a side effect of the economy more often than not affect such areas the worst - witness the state of the rivers, canals, the air quality and so on. The same goes for the more important of the other 'peripheral' issues. Could this be a more effective way of getting them into the mainstream while not seeming to the less well off a diversion from people's everyday problems?

I must repeat that I do not read what the IWCA is saying as a claim to having all the answers. What I do think they are saying is that a new approach has to be taken because while the far - left has been running around shouting its supposed Leninist slogans for decades, all that has happened is that the poorest in society - for whom the far - left claims to speak - have no time whatsoever for any of them and are increasingly turning to the far - right.

Is it necessary that the far - left listens to the type of movement that the IWCA seeks to create?, when the latter can just appeal straight to the class? There may be fewer edifying debates to be had - although this is not the same as saying that there should be no theoretical discussion - but the outcome might just be less demoralising for both the class and for the activists.

Back to discussion page                    RA home page