The subjects covered in this blog include Slavoj Žižek, IQ tests, Chomsky, Tony Blair, Baudrillard, global warming, sociobiology, Islam, Islamism, Marx, Foucault, National/International Socialism, economics, the Frankfurt School, philosophy, anti-racism, etc... I've had articles published in The Conservative Online, American Thinker, Philosophy Now, Intellectual Conservative, Human Events, Faith Freedom, Brenner Brief (Broadside News), New English Review, etc... (Paul Austin Murphy's Philosophy can be found here

Thursday, 1 April 2010

A Rant on the Far Left and the Islamists

It may seem strange that I spend so much time criticising the extreme left (e.g., the SWP) when everyone knows that it is dead. I’m not sure if that’s really the case. Take the SWP again. It has no power or influence qua the SWP. But it does have power in that it infiltrates and/or takes over many pressure groups and whatnot. (For example, Rock Again Racism, Stop the War, Respect, and, as I’ve recently found out, even those pressure groups against ‘global’ things which I thought were, if anything, anarchist or green.) As you know, in the old days they took over teaching unions and actors unions (even then, not qua the SWP, as such). Now, of course, they are trying to take over, or infiltrate, or influence, various Islamist groups. Again, not qua the SWP or even qua socialists.

This is similar to what I think about Continental philosophy and philosophers. Of course not many people read Derrida, Foucault and That Lot. Not even many (English) lecturers read anything by these philosophers. What does happen is that their work trickles down to less capable and original minds. That is, to lecturers, students and even to the man on the street. What they end up getting is third-hand stuff. But it’s still has a strong influence. I know for a fact that they many never read Derrida, Foucault and the rest. They don’t even read the second-class derivative stuff from the ‘philosophers’ at Neasden Polytechnic. However, their ideas were most definitely passed onto them when they were at university. Such philosophers are or were in the air, as it were. This is what the SWP is doing – or at least trying to do. Nick Cohen is right. The SWP is dead, qua the SWP. Even the SWP know that it is dead qua the SWP. Thus it is all the more important to do as much infiltrating and taking-over as possible. In these respects, the SWP is far from dead. They are not dead, in the Islamist case, because when I hear Salma Yaqoob, and other Islamists, I hear the words, phrases and ideas, and even the timbre and tone, of the SWP and its speakers.

So, in these senses, Cohen and the rest are wrong about the ‘death’ of the extreme left.

Let’s get to the core as to why the SWP, and all other extremist political parties, including Islamist ones, are utterly obnoxious entities. This is a quote from the SWP’s Master and Lord, Trotsky:

‘Comrades, none of us wishes or is able to be right against the party. The party in the last analysis is always right, because the party is the sole historical instrument given to the proletariat for the solution of its basic problems. I know one cannot be right against the party. It is only
possible to be right with the party and through the party, for history has not
created other ways for the realisation of what is right.’ (57)

Having read that, one wonders why Trotsky has always been painted as the good guy against the bad guy that was Stalin. Stalin, in the above, was given all the ammunition he could possibly need to kill millions of people. ‘But Trotsky didn’t kill anyone.’ Perhaps that has something to do with the fact that he never took over a country. Perhaps also it was lucky that someone put an axe in his head before he did.

That passage is frightening stuff. Indeed, even if what it says is, or was, true, it would still be frightening and dangerous stuff. That absolute confidence that one has the truth. This is not just a case of the Party, a reified and metaphysical entity by any account, having the Truth, but an individual, Trotsky, also having the Truth – the Truth that the Party has the Truth.

And all that Hegelian metaphysical nonsense about ‘history’, or History, too. That’s why Trotskyism, and Marxism, are, in fact, so old-fashioned – that Hegelian and Platonic bent for reification (e.g., the Party, the Truth, the Proletariat, the Jews, the Press).

In the end, even if John Rees or Chris Harman or Lindsey German (or even Bin Laden) admits to being wrong on certain (probably ‘inconsequential’) issues, it will still be the case that his Party, the SWP, cannot be wrong on any issues – or at least not on the big issues (e.g. that ‘capitalism is bad in every way’). I mentioned Platonic metaphysics. This Trotskyite stuff, as well as the passage itself, is also religious in nature. The claims for the infallibility of the Party and so on. No wonder Marxism and Trotskyism fell out of fashion, even with the intellectuals, from the 1960s onwards (though certainly not all intellectuals!). This is such old-fashioned metaphysical and – perhaps, more interestingly – religious stuff.

There are basically only two types of people who still support the SWP: middle-class students and those older people who actually run the SWP. Thus, even though the SWP is insignificant qua the SWP, its leaders still have power and many of them still earn a decent living from books, articles, lectures (to students), etc. by selling the idea of revolutionary socialism.

Finally, just as we can see Trotsky explaining how the Party cannot be wrong and that it is the embodiment of the ‘consciousness of the working class’, it is surely just one small step to go as far as Gerry Healy, of the Workers Revolutionary Party, did:

‘You are doing this for the party and I am the party.’

No comments:

Post a Comment