Tuesday, 4 December 2007
If Not This, Then That
As a comment on a previous post puts it, "There's more voter choice in Russia. The parties are much easier to tell apart and do not collude with each other anything like as much." Quite. Those who don't like the Russian result have a clear alternative preference, and only one: the Communist Party of the Russian Federation. An understandable, if despicable, preference on the part of old CPGB and Straight Left hands who make up much of British neoconservatism; but a preference at once despicable and incomprehensible on the part of the transatlantic Trots at the core of the movement.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Straight Left was a paper associated with the old British Communist Party, but not exclusively of it. It had influence amongst left Labour MPs, mass movements and trade unions. The idea that Straight Left invented, supports or is associated with British neoconservatism is absoluetely completely barking mad! You've obviously never read a copy or met anyone associated with the paper.
ReplyDeleteI have no idea where you get your "information" from, but I suggest you have a word with whoever it is who supplies you with this bizarre conspiracy theory nonsense.
What you say about Labour MPs is, unfortunately, true (a few of them are still alive). But what "mass movements" have you in mind? There was nothing "mass" about them. They were just noisy, or pernicious, or both. Like neoconservatism, in fact.
ReplyDeleteHarry's Place, in particular, is a linear continuation of Straight Left. Whereas the American parent body is strictly Trotskyist in its roots, British neoconservatism includes both old Trots and numerous old CPGB hands or hangers on (David Aaronovitch, Peter Mandelson, Charles Clarke, John Reid, the Miliband brothers, and on, and on, and on).
Of course, neoconservatism is wholly Marxist. Only the ending has been changed, so that the bourgeoisie wins. But the Marxist dialectical materialism remains intact. So does the Leninist vanguard elitism, "democratic centralism", and identification of religious and other interests as "Useful Idiots". So does the Trotskyist entryism and belief in the permanent revolution.
And so does the Stalinist belief in the creation of the dictatorship of the victorious class in a superstate from which to export it throughout the world, including by force of arms, while vanguard elites everywhere owe their patriotic allegiance to that superstate instead of to their own respective countries.
Compared to most variations on Marxism in practice (in North Korea, say), neoconservatism is strikingly orthodox. Which makes it no wonder that that is where Straight Left has ended up.
david
ReplyDeleteThis is so silly I feel a bit silly myself for even enaging with this nonsense. Harry's Place is a neocon website set up by people who were once, quite a long time ago, on the left. Its ONLY connection with the Straight Left newspaper is that the website owner "Harry" was once a member of the CPGB for a couple of years when he was a student and used to read Straight Left. But so what? The CPGB has lots of ex-members. many of them read Straight left.
"Harry" was a NOBODY in the CPGB, so the idea that Harry's Place is some kind of Straight Left conspiracy is completely bonkers. Straight Left is, as its name suggests, on the left. They can hardly be held responsible for what a former student subscriber does 15 years later!
Think about it.
As Wikipedia says (yes, I know, but this is actually a useful summary of what many of us know anyway):
ReplyDelete"Harry's Place was originally started by a writer using the nom de plume Harry Hatchet (aka "Harry" - none of Harry's Place writers use their full name), who was originally the sole writer. Harry was active in British anti-fascist and Marxist politics in the mid-to-late 1980s, and in this period was also a member of the Straight Left faction of the Communist Party of Great Britain. It is claimed that he took the pseudonym "Harry Steele" as a tribute to Harry Pollitt, former General Secretary of the CPGB, and the Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin (though Harry claims it was a "p***-take" and "not a homage to anyone"). Under this name he contributed to a number of far-left message boards and mailing lists, including "UK Left Network" and "The Politburo", a discussion board for British Communists, the latter of which he set up. In this period he became well-known among fellow contributors for his support for "orthodox" Soviet Communism and his attacks on Trotskyists, in particular the Socialist Workers Party."
But he and the Trots are friends now, of course. They're all neocons together.
David
ReplyDeleteBut so what? He's an EX-leftist. A FORMER leftist. A person who was ONCE on the left, but no longer is.
Your line of argument is deeply flawed, to put it mildly. Suppose I were to join (for the sake of argument) the Liberal Democrats and leave after a couple years, having held no position of influence whatsoever. Then 15 years later I write an article praising Adolf Hitler.
Could any rational person extrapolate from these events that the leaders of the Liberal Democrats are involved in a conspiracy to rehabilitate Hitler?
Likewise, in the case of the old CPGB and Straight Left, the idea that they can be held responsible for what a turncoat nobody says or does 15 years later is bananas.
Whether you approve or disapprove of the politics of the Straight Left newspaper is not the point. Straight Left is not, and never has been, associated in any way with neo-conservatism. In fact, it is vehemently opposed to it, as even a cursory glance at the journal will reveal.
Your post is bizarre in the extreme.
What appears in Straight Left now hardly matters. Even most informed people would be suprised to learn that it still existed, and I'm not sure why it does when neither the CPGB nor the USSR has done so for quite a while.
ReplyDeleteI'm talking about its heyday, when "Hatchet" was not just a reader of it, as you no doubt well know.
Neocons are as Marxist as they were in their youth. See my previous comment about their ideology. It is as Marxist as ever, as Leninist as ever, as Trotskyist as ever, and yet also as Stalinist as ever. It is more orthodox than many past and present Marxist governments in the world.
And it is no surprise that, by opposing Putin, it backs to the hilt the Communist Party of the Russian Federation. Least surprising of all is the cheerleading against Putin, and thus for that party, by the Straight Left website, Harry's Place.