Together we have a world to win...

When the Scottish Socialist Alliance was formed in 1996 and the SSP in 1998, the main socialist organisation which stood aside from the process was the Socialist Workers’ Party. Last year however the SWP, whose members in England are playing an active role in the Socialist Alliance, for the first time responded positively to an invitation to join the SSP. Discussions between representatives of the two parties took place over several months, and on May 1 the Scottish membership of the SWP collectively joined the SSP. This means that for the first time in living memory the vast majority of active socialists in Scotland will be in the same party. Frontline decided to ask two longstanding members of the SWP how they see this development. Neil Davidson is a leading member of the SWP in Edinburgh, active in the PCS and is the author of The Origins of Scottish Nationhood published last year by Pluto Press. Keir McKechnie is a leading member in Glasgow and has been active in Unison. The interviews were conducted before the final decision was taken.

Interview with Neil Davidson

Q. How do you see the growth of socialist ideas?

A. Scotland has to be seen as part of the world situation. There is a growing anti-capitalist mood which is seen at Faslane, the International Women’s Day protests, Palestine. In Scotland itself Blair’s market ideas are being challenged. People who previously looked to the Labour Party, or even the Communist Party, for an alternative to the market now have no political home. People are questioning society’s ideas and they are not looking for ‘Old Labour’ but for something new. This is reflected in the success of the SSP. Only the SSP are speaking out against the market.

Q. What do you think of the SWP joining the SSP?

A. When this idea originally came up in June-July last year I argued strongly in favour of it. You would have to be a completely mad sectarian to argue against it. A unified socialist force is something we have dreamed of for a long time. It would be a step forward for the class. We see this move not as a short-term raid, we don’t want to operate as a faction, but to build the SSP as a party.

Q. Do the SWP intend to operate as a platform within the SSP in the way that the ISM and others do?

A. We haven’t thrashed that out as yet. We want to maintain our ideas but not be a ‘party within a party’.

Q. Has this been controversial within the party?

A. A minority opposed joining the SSP, but the argument has been won.

Q. With the growth of alliances in England and Wales, Australia, Ireland, do you see this as an international process?

A. Partly, but it depends on the conditions in each country. In countries with right-wing Social Democratic governments it is easier. People want alternative forms of organisation. Socialist unity is very attractive. People are looking to come together in one forum. There is a ‘new internationalism’ - the role of global bodies like the WTO has enforced that. This will differ in different countries but it is a similar process.

Q. How do you see the question of national consciousness in Scotland?

A. Scotland has a high level of national consciousness as opposed to Scottish nationalism. People see things through a Scottish perspective. This is not a problem in itself if it links in to traditions of struggle (from Burns to the poll tax). But nationalism, having pride in ‘Scotland’, as a doctrine is dangerous.

Q. How should socialists respond to this?

A. They should not rubbish it, but understand it, and pitch internationalist arguments. They should not oppose independence on the basis of defending the UK state.
People are making legitimate democratic demands of the Scottish Parliament, demanding more powers. Positive legislation like Tommy Sheridans warrant sales bill have come through that parliament. The danger comes when we argue that Scotland is an oppressed nation, this is a false argument.
We have experience of this in the labour movement from those who say “save Scottish jobs”, “it’s Scotlands coal or oil” etc, which pit Scots workers against workers in the rest of Britain.

Q. The SWP has been heavily involved in Globalise Resistance.

A. Yes Globalise Resistance is a priority campaign. We see it as a chance to bring groups together, to focus the anti-capitalist mood. This mood is not as serious as in France or the US at the moment. We are trying to bring together a network around these issues.

Q. How do you see this developing?

A. It is about the most important shift in consciousness since the ‘68 period. But it is at a more advanced level because it is not just local struggles, there is an internationalist consciousness. Furthermore we do not have the problem of the influence of Stalinism, although the arguments will still come up. This makes it easier to move from an anti-capitalist to a socialist conclusion.

Q. Do you think the movement will take on socialist ideas?

A. It is beginning to already. There is a split between those who want to ‘reform’ institutions like the WTO and a more militant wing who reject the idea that they can be reformed. It is a very broad movement however, encompassing the Zapatistas, French peasants etc.

Interviewed by Alister Black

Interview with Keir McKechnie

Q. How do you see the growth of socialist ideas in Scotland?

A. There are three things happening which are exciting, and they are interconnected: the disintegration of New Labour’s support which offers an opportunity denied to socialists since the formation of the Labour Party 101 years ago; the growing anti-capitalist movement which heralds a new radicalisation on an international scale; and the signs of growing resistance in the workplace.
What connects them is a united sense of opposition to the global neo-liberal economic consensus. All four of the major parties in the Scottish parliament are part of that consensus. We’ve seen that opposition here in Scotland with the brilliant GAP protests on International Women’s Day, at the Big Blockade at Faslane, and with the sizeable contingents which attended the demos in Prague and Nice. Another promising development is the success of rank-and-file newspapers such as the Carworker and the Postworker, which have tapped into a new mood of militancy on the shop floor.

Q. How do you view the idea of the SWP joining the SSP?

A. It’s exciting. A united party could act as a real pole of attraction for those thousands of people who are moving into opposition to New Labour and the neo-liberal consensus. You could imagine how a united party could have built across the country for Faslane, or now for Genoa J21.

Q. If the negotiations are successful, what would you see the role of the SWP being inside the SSP?

A. Building the SSP! Because we believe there has been a major shift in favour of the left we all have to adjust. For the last 20 years the left has been largely on the defensive. We had to hold together under attack. Our audience was necessarily restricted. Now we are moving onto the offensive. Our potential audience is huge. We are happy to be a small goldfish in a big bowl. We should stress what unites us; on 90 per cent of things we agree. We can argue over the 10 per cent over a coffee or a beer. We hope that the SSP can grow and grow quickly.

Q. The SWP became involved with the London Socialist Alliance and became one of the main driving forces behind it. This was broadened to participation in Alliances elsewhere in England and Wales. Sister organisations of the SWP in both Australia, and a little more tentatively in Ireland, are involved in trying to unify socialist forces through Socialist Alliances. How do you see this new development?

A. Two things are happening. Firstly, because there is a crisis in the reformist parties internationally, people feel that their traditional home has been hijacked by neo-liberals. This is most extreme in the case of New Labour. People you could label Old Labour - not necessarily people who identified with the Labour left in the past - now find Blair and Co. so right wing that they are being forced to look for a new home. People who even a few years ago would have dismissed socialists are now working and discussing with us. We’ve seen that with the Socialist Alliance in England and Wales, which has moved from being an alliance of the far left to one that involves much, much wider forces. So in North London, the solicitor Louise Christian, who represents the train crash victims of Southall and Paddington, is standing. and Bob Crow of the RMT is speaking in her support. In a union like the CWU there is a massive debate going on whether union members should pay money to New Labour. The union leadership is desperately trying to block that money being transferred by branches to the SA and SSP.
If the SSP and SA get the sort of votes we’ve had in recent by-elections, they can start to attract even wider numbers who are still hesitant about breaking with New Labour.
The second thing is that among socialists there is a genuine feeling that we need unity to capitalise on a very favourable situation. We believe that there is the possibility of regroupment on the Left internationally. The key thing here is not some of the arguments which mattered in the dog years for the Left, but a regroupment among those forces who understand that things are shifting and that we have to be bold, audacious and non-sectarian in relating to the anti-capitalist movement.

Q. In retrospect and in the light of these events do you regret the SWP not participating in the SSA when it was launched in 1996?

A. I think we should say honestly that we have learnt from the electoral success of the SSA/SSP but at the same time there has been a major shift since 1996. The experience of a Blair government has created a crisis among Labour supporters on an unprecedented scale. What has also become clear since 1996 is the evolution of the vast majority of former Scottish Militant Labour members who have clearly distanced themselves from the sort of sectarian approach that would alienate us from people who are moving left in reaction to Blair and who are becoming radicalised by the anti-capitalist movement. Seattle in November 1999 was, in Ralph Nader’s words, ‘a fork in the road’. We believe that the main danger facing the left currently is sectarianism. As is quite well-known, that has led the SWP to break with what was our sister organisation in the US after they failed to mobilise for Seattle. Every organisation makes mistakes, but the ISO then tried to justify this, playing down the significance of Seattle.

Q. The development of a national consciousness is an important dimension of Scottish politics. How do you view this development and the impact that it has?

A. The last 20 years has seen a major growth in nationalist consciousness in Scotland. That isn’t simply reflected in the SNP’s support; it goes wider.
In large part this was firstly a reaction to Tory rule in the 1980s and 90s.
Working class support for nationalism is largely in opposition to the Tories and now Blair. Socialists have to connect with this. We have worked closely with SNP members, MPs and MSPs, for example in fighting racism or opposing the Balkan war. Nationalism always has two faces. Historically Scottish nationalism has grown in response to the decline of British imperialism. We should welcome nationalist reflexes that lead people to challenge the system. At the same time, we should be hard on the SNP’s support for neo-liberal policies and its holding up of Ireland’s Celtic Tiger as a model for Scotland.
Scotland did not suffer from the colonial exploitation that Ireland did.
Irish nationalism emerged in opposition to British imperialism. The Scottish upper classes, in contrast, played a central role in forging the empire. The dominant symbols of Scottish nationalism - the war-pipes, the military tartans, the Glengarry and so on - are a product of that. Someone like Walter Scott could combine a strong sense of Scottish identity with a pride in the British state and Empire. Today the Scottish ruling class still forms a strong component of the British ruling class. Scotland is one of the most class-divided societies in Europe. We have to address that divide. It also remains the case that Scottish workers are organised in unions that, with the exception of the EIS, are UK-wide. A Scottish postal worker can vote SNP but will stay united with their English and Welsh brothers and sisters in fighting back against privatisation and Royal Mail management.

Q. What do you think the attitude of socialists should be to independence?

A. This follows on from the last question. Given the historic role of British imperialism, socialists have no interest in preserving the unity of the UK state. We would love to see it destroyed by revolution, but if it falls apart into its national components we would shed no tears. We support the right of the Scottish people to self-determination. That includes their right to independence. If the choice is one of independence or of preserving the UK state, then we would support independence. But if nationalism is used to weaken a working class fight-back we should oppose it. For instance, during the 1984-85 miners’ strike, the Scottish NUM leadership argued that the Ravenscraig steelworks should be exempted from picketing because its future might be under threat. They accepted a nationalist agenda. The result of this was to weaken the miners’ fight and to hasten the closure of Ravenscraig in the wake of their defeat.
Concretely we should press for the powers of the Scottish parliament to be extended.

Q. Over the last few months the SWP have been promoting events around ‘Globalise Resistance’. Is this a priority campaign for you?

A. The wider anti-capitalist movement should be a priority for any socialist or radical. It can create a radicalisation even more profound than in 1968. Globalise Resistance is an attempt to take what you might term an anti-capitalist mood and to turn it into an anti-capitalist movement, such as we’ve seen in the USA and France. The February Globalise Resistance counter-conference in Glasgow was a big success, bringing together over 500 people. We used that to help build the Faslane blockade and to initiate the successful protests against sweatshop labour outside GAP around International Women’s Day.
The anti-capitalist movement represents a big shift forward. What was important about Seattle was that diverse groups involved in all sorts of issues and campaigns came together and saw that they faced a common enemy, one with a common global agenda, the neo-liberal economic model. It also represented a victory that echoed round the world.
For us this is a priority. It represents the most exciting radical development since 1968 and its aftermath. We have to be part of it and to learn from it. Here in Scotland, we have to act locally against nuclear missiles, privatisation and GM foods, but realising that it’s part of a global fightback.

Q. With many anti-globalisation demonstrations taking place across the world, what role do you think the anti-globalisation movement is playing and will play internationally?

A. In Genoa on 21 July (J21), there is going to be a massive demonstration ( - the Italian press are talking of 200,000 - ) outside the G8 summit. The delegates to that are now staying on two cruise liners because of the opposition building up in the city. As at Seattle, Prague, Nice and Davos they are meeting under siege. They are on the defensive. Some of us went from Scotland to Prague and Nice. Everyone loved it. We want hundreds from Scotland in Genoa. A united SSP can play a major role in that.
In France a new Left is emerging round organisations like ATTAC and publications like Le Monde Diplomatique. In Porto Allegre in Brazil 11,000 people came together. Each day we are seeing a new Left emerge.

Q. Do you think this movement can take on socialist ideas?

A. Socialists firstly have to throw themselves into this developing movement.
It’s all too easy to stand on the sidelines carping. There’s a tradition of that. In 1968 there were those on the left who didn’t go on the mass demos against the Vietnam war because they said they were middle class! We have to engage with people and not just lecture and hector them. That will require working with a wide range of people with all sorts of ideas. First we have to come together, then we can debate and discuss. All of us are on a learning curve here. We face new arguments - we all need to know about debt,
GM foods, global warming and much else. We need to use a new language and be prepared to listen and learn. We’ve got some answers but we need to create a dialogue where we aren’t seen as simply laying down our solutions.
That’s why we are excited by the prospect of joining the SSP. Together we have a world to win. There is a real sense that capitalism threatens our planet and humanity. But another world is possible. Let’s come together to win it!

Interviewed by Nick McKerrell