I am usually a big supporter and defender of direct action but what the SWP did earlier this evening was an utterly ultra-left stunt. What was the aim, to impress their own members? Also, who gave the SWP the authority to do that? What was the point as these were important and crucial negotiations between the Unite and BA. Yes, Woodley is a union bureaucrat but he has more accountability than a bunch of SWP organisers. And did the SWP organisers actually speak to the cabin crew or was it the usual ultra-left adventurism where they just went off on their own without any discussion?
I am not a fan of a bureaucrat like Woodley but frankly I don’t blame him for being angry by this wrong-headed stunt. This is not the way forward. What is the political cost of those actions orchestrated by the SWP? The union probably went into those talks in a position of strength since the court ruling and the SWP, accountable to nobody other their own political committee i.e. a bunch of nobodies, decide to disrupt these negotiations.
Did you feel good chanting away and then wandering off thinking the revolution is only a barricade away? That stunt could backfire dearly.
Own fecking goal comrades!
See also Random Blowe, AVPS, Socialist Unity, and Marshajane who has been twittering about this stunt from the start (and H/T to her as well as first discovered it from her tweets)
i get the feeling that the aim wasnt to disrupt the negotiations. but i dunno, thats how it turned out in the end.
I would also like to know who organised this piece of direct action, did BA workers support it or was it just SWP stunt? Also, what was the plan, if not disrupting the negotiations?
I am reluctant to criticise people on the left taking direct action when all we have so far is reports by the MSM. Simpson and Woodley have been taking pride in their role in “selling” a deal to workers who may not be willing to take it. The SWP don’t have a great track record but there is a possibility their actions might be backed by striking workers, so personally I’m not willing to have a go at them yet.
Their actions did not have the backing of striking workers and at no point have they claimed that they did. The SWP report of the day makes it clear that the protesters were inspired by the BA strikers but did not think to ask them if this would be a good idea.
Not cool. Good post.
Cheers Jim, it is not cool. For starters, you need to have the strikers at the forefront of the struggle not going off on your own. Very daft.
I think PhilBC over at AVPS sums it up very well:
“…for the comrades involved, well, a few of them will feel a wee more revolutionary tonight than when they woke up this morning.
Well, I don’t think they planned it, rather the ACAS talks were right next to their Right To Work Conference. All hyped up by the conference, they seem to have had a spur of the moment demo outside ACAS, and couldn’t believe their luck at the lack of security and barged in. The rest is history (or tragic farce). The crowd seem to be young raw recruits and students – but there are a few experienced activists – one of these is on the BBC video at least trying to focus the chanting onto the issue! But none of the experienced members appear to have tried to stop the movement into the ACAS building. Now they seem to be justifying it on their website, doing a press release, and trying to milk it. I hope at least internally they are also saying that this isn’t the way socialists operate to influence workers on strike! To think of all the lectures on substitutionism and ultra-leftism I had to endure when I was one of the ‘teenage trot’ ultra-left swp raw recruits a very long time ago!
Barry Kade is basically correct, but as someone who was at the conference I’d like to make 2 points.
First, I don’t particularly think anyone was ‘hyped up’ by the conference. Frankly, it wasn’t inspiring or energised enough. If anything it’s more plausible that frustration with its timidity and lack of direction helped feed the mood for some ultra-left madness.
Secondly, I strongly suspect experienced comrades played a more prominent role than you suggest. For one thing, there weren’t many young people at the conference – the under-representation of students was something that struck me at the conference itself. The recent veering into adventurism is a wider problem inside the SWP than just something limited to the newer and younger members.
I’d also like to stress that this substitutionist farce wasn’t supported by the conference, as Richard Seymour is (disgracefully) claiming over at Lenin’s Tomb. It’s important to get the facts straight.
What immediately worries me about this foolishness is how the right in Unison will use it to smear Paul Holmes campaign (Paul is backed by the swups).
I agree with many of the comments above, and yes it does concern me as well how this could have an impact on the Holmes and Hicks respective union campaigns… Whether or not they were hyped, it shows a level of demoralism and desperation … a need to do something, anything without planning or thinking consequences through….and it came to their attention re Acas/Unite and BA (with the vile Willie Walsh) were in negotiation next door so lets protest!
Now…. if it was a BA board meeting with the top brass there, Willie Walsh presiding… and there was a protest headed by BA workers, TUs, activists, leftie MPs, leftie TU Gen Secs (something to put pressure on the bureaucrats like Woodley/Simpson) and so on…and they disrupted that meeting then rock on!
But yesterday was not the time nor place. I dunno maybe there was a confusion with Acas HQ for the Winter Palace…
Comrades,
Now isn’t the time to launder our dirty washing in public view. Now is the time to stand shoulder to shoulder with our S.W.P. brothers and sisters, and actively campaign for a glorious victory. Don’t you realise that New labour have gone and what it’s now been replaced with are enemies of the people?
No Neil, we keep things in the open and have public debate. Not sure if you are being serious or satirical….
@ harpymarx:
Where-ever Neil Lees turns up he’s attempting to stop people attacking both the S.W.P. and their U.A.F. counter parts.
Now I’m never gonna agree with your political beliefs, but a word to the wise, and take it or dismiss it as you please. Neil Lees (UKFightback on you tube) is utter poison to everyone who disagrees with his street attack buddies.
He will say ANYTHING to get one over on you, me or anybody else that may get in his way…
Nuff said.
Lees isn’t just an enemy to those of a more libertarian/small government persuasion, he is an enemy to all who don’t share a totalitarian set of beliefs (including those on the Left who are more democratic than himself, and are themselves prone to his smearing and attempts to shut down debate). He even tailors his language to sound like Mao.
This is why he has historically hidden away on YouTube, having videos removed that didn’t subscribe to the visions of his Communitarian New Labour masters, and any criticism of their eroding of our civil liberties had to be removed.
Nobody of any political persuasion – barring a small group of the most radical of the authoritarian Left – can trust this individual, and would do themselves a great favour by giving him a wide berth altogether.
Why don’t you just fuck off and die, Lees, you grotesque little Trot twat!
Whatever I think of the SWP, telling them to ‘fuck and die’ isn’t political debate. Quit the insults mate!
This radical little SWP/UAF/Common Purpose communist troll who spies on all our content on You Tube and elsewhere, flagging videos and bragging about the fact that he had all the Gordon Brown “Downfall” videos removed and making death threats under the aliases of UKFightback, bnpinfo and many others, deserves every insult he gets. Some might argue he deserves more.
Now is the time to stand shoulder to shoulder with our S.W.P. brothers…
That’s a bit fucking rich from someone who didn’t even vote for Labour in the GE. There’ll be no decent debate to be had with totalitarian hypocrite like lickspittle Lees, so Spidey’s comment does it for me too …. fuck off and die.
That is all.
I agree with the condemnations of the SWP here and elsewhere and have no intention of standing ‘stand shoulder to shoulder’ with them.
Let’s not pretend that is is a one off though – their tactic of ‘parachute politics’ has been a defining feature of why so many of us deeply mistrust the Trotskyist left. My take on this is here:
http://www.blowe.org.uk/2010/05/return-of-parachute-politics.html
V. good post Kevin and commented.
[...] try and influence the ongoing talks between Unite and BA. It has also been described as an “own goal” and a “cynical [...]
please do not accuse the SWP of ultra-leftism: today’s genuine ultra-leftists from the council communist, situationist or left communist tradition generally do act in a cautious and non-substitutionist way … opportunist adventurism is a more adequate term
[...] weitere sinnvolle Kommentare zu dieser Aktion bei Liam, David und Harpy [...]
[...] Plus it got them on the TV news. Opinions on the SWP’s Finest Hour can be found here, here, here and here. Obviously, glorified publicity stunts are somewhat easier than trying to get people [...]