Organisation update

[jondwhite]

LeafletsThe whole of the last chapter of The Socialist Labor Party 1876-1991 by Girard and Perry is instructive in this regard but Chapter 5 comments;

Quote:

‘The other principal means of agitation was leaflet distribution, which multiplied during this period even though party membership declined … While street meetings declined as a means of agitation during this period, leaflet distribution increased from an average of 800,000 per year in the 1920s to nearly four million in 1943. … But leaflet distribution encouraged two retrograde tendencies among the members. One was the withdrawal from the face-to-face verbal agitation and debate with members of left groups that was characteristic of an earlier period; the other was to increase acceptance of authoritarian tendencies in the party by becoming a sort of transmission belt for leaflets that expressed the thinking of national office.’

As for debating in print, the party’s longest running publication after the SS was Forum Journal, running for best part of a decade to nearly fifty issues, but it seems to have been neglected since the history published in the mid-1990s. Maybe since we’ve had discussion mailing lists since 2001, these take its place.Head officeHead offices of major political parties in Britain areConservatives, 4 Matthew Parker Street, London, SW1Labour, Southside, 105 Victoria Street, London, SW1Lib Dems, 8-10 Great George Street, London, SW1SPGB Head office prior to Clapham High Street was Rugby Chambers which was (like all other political party offices) north of the river and only a mile (20 mins walk) from Euston station.In the US, there is a term ‘field offices’ but political scientists studies seem to agree ‘ground game is important, if not paramount, to the outcome of an election’https://talkingpoliticsjomc.wordpress.com/2015/02/13/the-ground-game-quantified/

Quote:

‘wonder whether a field office, while noble in principle, can make an appreciable difference in an election [?] Yes, the numbers say: They can, and they do.' … ground game covers a longer arc than one election cycle: It often serves as a seed to future growth, a foundation laid — sometimes conspicuously, sometimes not — that can portend future success.’

Since AJ mentioned Militant Tendency

Quote:

‘This historically been the choice for various left-wing groups, who unable to become themselves as a proper political party they became paper-sellers – Militant being an example of when the paper became their platform for their programme’

A Guardian review of Michael Crick’s book comments

Quote:

‘At its zenith in the mid-80s, Militant, a revolutionary organisation that pretended to be merely a leftwing paper and its supporters – “in effect a secret political party”, in Crick’s words – had “probably more full-time workers  [300 of which 75 paid]… than the Labour party itself”.’

Maybe its time for the SPGB to employ full-timers. And Chapter 7 comments;

Quote:

‘Militant boasts the Centre is almost as large as the Labour Party HQ at Walworth Road, and the tendency has just applied for further expansion. The Centre does not just contain the editorial area and printing presses for the Militant newspaper, but all departments one would expect in any major political party. There is even a bookshop, and a small canteen, where workers can eat beneath large posters of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Trotsky. In addition to the Centre in London, Militant has more than a dozen regional offices around the country.’

This is the sort of financial and organisational commitment for the party, that members will have to get serious about committing existing party funds to, in order to lay foundations for future growth in membership. It’s the sort of commitment of early members calling for a weekly paper. Early members never realised their ambition, but early members could not have dreamed of the funds and financial resources available to the party today.  

[Brian Gardner]

I didnt say that that is all that happens at Head Office (and you probably know that). I was commenting on the efforts made to co-ordinate volunteers to be able to say HO was open for a certain number of days per week. I'm sure those members don't sit around doing nothing but wait for the door to open, but from my experience even when occupied, Head Office was a massively under-used space and to be honest I never got the impression that it was more than a free cafe with good conversation and a little bit of voluntary work occasionally thrown in.  Obviously, on those days when HO is not open, there is presumably no-one around and hence no activity underway. When I said "not been here for years" I was referring to this forum, and I was referring to my participation, which has been "lurking", so I think I have kept up to speed with EC minutes etc.  In my original post I did refer to getting a smaller, cheaper Head Office more appropriate to the level of activity.  It was when the debate shifted to having offices in other parts of the country (which I think is even more ludicrous) I suggested the issue should arguably be more about whether we have a Head Office at all if we cant man it.  I would be genuinely delighted if someone could confirm that HO is manned 24/7by dozens of comrades at a time undertking a range of party and propagnada activities, but otherwise I am concerned that we havebecome a library and archive with a political party attached.

[Brian Gardner]

"Thanks for that additional information, Gnome. I forgot about the evening set aside to sticking labels and stamps to the Standard subscription"Despite his throwaway language, AlanJ has expressed his appreciation of the continues work of a few comrades in London, which I would certainly want to echo.  But I havent really seen anything posted that suggests we in fact need HO.  For minimal extra cost the SS mail-out could probably now be handled by the printers directly as that is usually what happens with subscription magazines?  (And it has the added benefit of allowing the deadine to be closer to publication date to enhance topicality). I do fear – and the responses here do not encourage me to think other – that our sentimental attachment to the comfort blanket of Clapham High Street will only be severed when the Party tips below any sort of sustainable critical mass (arguably there already): lashed grimly to the wheel we'll all go down with the ship.  We still have the chance to reconfigure ourselves and to harness the networked collaborative efforts of many unused comrades around the country in order to strengthen both our online presence, and our internal democracy. I hope that the national membership questionnaire can be the start of a process over the next few years of really addressing our function and organisation, and not so much as a belated reaction to our dwindling numbers, but as a positive response to increasingly overt working class frustration with capitalism.

[alanjjohnstone]

Quote:

The fact I have taken out small segments of a contributon, to comment upon, is not to be construed as an attack upon the individuals. Yet this often happens. Not in this instance I should think, as we know each other.

Indeed so, Matt. You are only too aware that even when we fully agree, i shall play the Devils Advocate so to sharpen our arguments and strengthen our case. And i am aware of your genuine sincerity and integrity in your treatment and attitude towards fellow-members, even those you find difficult to communicate with.I try and i usually succeed (according to third parties, that is, but i am sure some on this list can cite my occasional lapses) to maintain a degree of civility when i disagree with another. Comradely debate need not be acrimonious and certainly it should always show due respect to opponents. And some members know i don't take offence to the banter that can arise on threads when it is done in good humour (so rest easy ALB, the price of my amusement is only a pint of Guinness when we next meet up)JWD, perhaps you can furnish the list of minor parties Head Offices and where they are located. What is the situation now for SPEW in its facilities. Did they lose all that infrastructure or have it still intact? If it all dissolved who were the beneficiaries.I recall the furore when Scargill re-located the NUM HQ out of London and although there are many regional offices, isn't every union HQ still in London. For a union it is explicable, they have to be close to the centre of decision making – Whitehall and the City of London. Is such a requirement needed of ourselvesI think we all know the practice of even the main parties in an election campaign to have a presence on the ground. They temporary rent local vacant shops, shove up a banner and few placards.  I think BrianG and myself share the same concern (and he is free to correct me), that complacency about our future health based on bricks and mortar and bank balances will not lead to the necessary remedial action to maintain ourselves as a fully functioning and effective political party. If that truly is the prognosis, we require a Plan B for ourselves, a re-brand and re-launch as something quite different.Examples of this transition is few and far between, and i'm not sure of any that have been successful. If not, why not?I have kept saying that change within the Party has to be as harmonious one as possible making use of our shared collective wisdom (but accept that a similar Socialist Studies "splinter" is possible") I have also repeated that it will be a lengthy process, not one to be accomplished in a year or so, even though time waits for no-one.I have endorsed the pending report on the re-organisation of the Party as a much-welcomed first-step and i emphasise that, a first-step.I'm under no misunderstanding that other changes, some even more fundamental, may be called upon before the Party is set upon the right course. 

[Young Master Smeet]

If we were to draw up a list of minimum activity I would suggest two things:1: An annual conference.2: The Socialist Standard.Actually, for 1, I would privilige Summer School over conference, and relegate an AGM to a quick morning session before we got on with the weekend's discussions.The only geographic component we'd need under such a set up, would be two people close enough to each other to sign cheques.As an emergency measure, we could scrap party officers and the EC, have a 3-5 person Ways and Means Committee, and then do enough to keep thos two activities going.  Any branches as exist would have to be financially independent.

[ALB]

We are nowhere near there of course !  Actually, the idea of a Ways and Means Committee is a good one. There used to be a a General Purposes Committee that met between EC Meetings but it didn't work properly and got abolished, but could be revived if the EC were to meet quarterly. But let's wait and see what the Ad Hoc Organisation Committee come up with. The Party is not short of money either and won't be for years (read Private Eye to know how much we have). In fact, we've got enough to engage a full timer who could do all the work at Head Office and more. Again, wait for the report.

[Young Master Smeet]

If it were to meet quarterly, I'd prefer a Delegate Meeting Format, rather than a quarterly EC (at least that way different people could attend the various dates). 

[ALB]

Or an EC composed of branch delegates?

[Anonymous]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Vin., i'm not so sure of where or when i learned of it, but our possession of members records on paper has to do with privacy laws and computers. I'm sure someone else can clarify.

I cannot access other patient's records, even though they are 'online'. Member's details would only be available to authorised personel. Same with bank accounts. IMHO the SPGB needs to hire an Information Technology expert to look at  the party's administration. 

[jondwhite]

From New Statesman

Quote:

Despite a subscription-paying membership of no more than 2,000, the SWP employs 50 or 60 people full-time at its headquarters in Vauxhall, south London – and the national secretary decides who gets the jobs.

[robbo203]

  

Brian Gardner wrote:

 I do fear – and the responses here do not encourage me to think other – that our sentimental attachment to the comfort blanket of Clapham High Street will only be severed when the Party tips below any sort of sustainable critical mass (arguably there already): lashed grimly to the wheel we'll all go down with the ship.  We still have the chance to reconfigure ourselves and to harness the networked collaborative efforts of many unused comrades around the country in order to strengthen both our online presence, and our internal democracy. I hope that the national membership questionnaire can be the start of a process over the next few years of really addressing our function and organisation, and not so much as a belated reaction to our dwindling numbers, but as a positive response to increasingly overt working class frustration with capitalism.

 Brian, I think you’ve hit on something here which might very well show the way forward – the reconfiguration of the SPGB in a more networked collaborative form.   I wouldn’t go along with the idea of downsizing and relocating HO, however.  Quite apart from the negative symbolic implications of a party in decline,  I think that would cause massive dislocations and disruptions at a time when the Party is in relatively fragile state. I would focus instead on the positive content of your suggestion – of a more networked approach to party organisation and activity – and to explore ways in which HO could assist this development through an expanded remit There needs I think to be a much stronger emphasis on local initiative and horizontal linkages and maybe part of the problem is that the Party appears to be too centralised which is potentially debilitating or off-putting for many members who live a long way from London.   Stronger regionalisation of party activity may be one way to counter this  Maybe, also, there is some mileage in the idea of the Party renting (or even buying) cheap premises  in the North  England/Scotland area (or even in the Midlands) as well as retaining its London HO.  Possibly you could even have the EC meet in one or the other office in alternate years.  I dunno.  I haven't really thought much about it.  It’s just an idea so feel free to shoot it down in flames if you must. As you might know, I recently re-joined the SPGB and in response to the questionnaire being sent around to members, I put forward a number of suggestions of my own as to how to stimulate greater involvement by members – (and also sympathisers incidentally, since the importance of sympathisers should not be overlooked and a greater role should be made available to them and their active support solicited in my view).   These suggestions spring from a conviction that a major reason for low level of activity and the decline in membership has to do with what can be summed up in a single word: ISOLATION.  It is because of the brute fact of physical isolation that members feel powerless and disheartened about making any kind of impact.  Some of them then lose interest, become disillusioned and drift way So key to a strategy of revitalising the Party has to focus on how to break down this pervasive sense of isolation and to foster a much richer, denser network of horizontal relationships or connections between individuals. That in turned depends, I believe, on broadening the range of activities of function undertaken by the party and devolving  them – not just in the Party but throughout the WSM as a whole since the same arguments apply to the movement as a whole Here are some of the suggestions that have been put forward: 1.     A buddy system.  To see how it functions check this out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddy_system.  This would be particularly useful for new members2.     Video-conferencing and other forms of enhanced communication to overcome the problem of physical isolation.   Wider computerisation to be encouraged within the Party.  Weekend courses to develop communication skills could be held3.     A world socialist penpal club could be set  up enabling individuals with similar interests to contact each other with a few to closer collaboration e.g jointly written articles in the SS etc4.     A socialist research department be established to build up a central data base that could be used to provide data , tailored specifically to suit the socialist case, and organised under appropriate headings for speakers, writers or anyone else to make use.  My late brother, Andy, had already begun to set up such a database with this in mind, (see here  http://andycox1953.webs.com/database.htm). The beauty of this idea is that anyone and everyone could become involved in the research itself to whatever extent it suited them by simply submitting any useful information to the research coordinator.  Occasional bulletins could be issued along the lines of the Labour Bulletin produced by the Labour Research Department as part of its “fact service” (http://www.lrdpublications.org.uk/all_issues.php?pub=FS&year=2017).  This could draw attention to the SPGB as a source of valuable information5.     Greater emphasis on social activities.  In the early days of the SPGB this seemed to have played quite an important role e g Sunday jaunts by bicycle etc.  My impression (which may be quite wrong since Ive been out of th Party for quite a while) is that there does not seems to be much in the way of socialising going on apart from the odd HO social or branch social.  That is a pity because socialising is way of strengthening personal bonds and breaking down the aforementioned sense of isolation.  The range of social activities that the Party or its branches could engage is wide: film nights, discos, musical events, pub crawls, weekend trips, longer organised trips abroad (to Spain for example – nudge nudge wink wink), camping holidays and so on and so forth.   You could even have organised “propaganda tours” of the UK combining pleasure with business.  I recall having gone on such a tour myself in the 8os, visting, if I remember correctly, S Wales and Bolton6.     Reinstate the World Socialist as a theoretical half yearly journal of the WSM.  I have never really understood why it was discontinued in the first place.  Not only is there a need for a theoretical journal in its own right, with a somewhat different remit to the Socialist Standard but, again, this is another example of how to address this problem of isolation at the international level.  There seems to be precious little interaction going on between the different companion parties.  A journal of the entire WSM would go some way to addressing this problem There are other concrete suggestions I could offer but I will leave it at that.    I think the underlying rationale is clear from the suggestions I’ve already made – increasing the interactions between members by expanding the range and diversity of activities available to them. Of course, I appreciate the argument that it is all very well making these suggestions but it is a different matter encouraging people to come forward to put them into effect.  That’s a valid criticism and I don’t pretend to have any convincing riposte I can offer.   All I can say is let’s “suck it and see”.  If we don’t try it we will never know.  All I have is a vague hunch that the wider the variety of activities on offer the more likely you are to elicit a positive response.  And once people start responding it becomes a self-reinforcing tendency that draws in others and stimulates their greater involvement One final thought – whatever the outcome of this exercise I think it would be worth contacting people who have recently left the Party, even if only on a selective basis, to see if they might be interesting in re-joining in the light of all these “exciting new developments”.  It’s unlikely to work in most cases but who knows? It might just persuade a few to re-join and the Party can ill afford to pass up on the opportunity of bringing in a few more members [rc1]

[Brian]

robbo203 wrote:

As you might know, I recently re-joined the SPGB and in response to the questionnaire being sent around to members, I put forward a number of suggestions of my own as to how to stimulate greater involvement by members – (and also sympathisers incidentally, since the importance of sympathisers should not be overlooked and a greater role should be made available to them and their active support solicited in my view).   These suggestions spring from a conviction that a major reason for low level of activity and the decline in membership has to do with what can be summed up in a single word: ISOLATION.  It is because of the brute fact of physical isolation that members feel powerless and disheartened about making any kind of impact.  Some of them then lose interest, become disillusioned and drift way 

I can reveal that ISOLATION is one pattern – amongst others – I have observed from the responses.

[ALB]

Brian wrote:

I can reveal that ISOLATION is one pattern – amongst others – I have observed from the responses.

That is not surprising as the great bulk of members who have joined over the past ten or more years have joined via the internet rather than in person via a geographical branch (which, incidentally, given the turnover of members could be a quarter or more of the membership). They could well be on average younger than the present active members.This suggests that the internet is probably their preferred method of communication, If so, it's here that we will need to make some changes, e.g. internet forums (friendly ones). People here have suggested streaming EC meetings. Not sure that's a good idea as they are not that interesting. If we're going to stream anything it should be public meetings or interesting internal discussions.As I've said, it will be interesting to see what the survey turns up from these members who joined via the internet. Hopefully sufficient of them will have replied so we can see if there's a pattern.

[Anonymous]

ALB wrote:

Brian wrote:

I can reveal that ISOLATION is one pattern – amongst others – I have observed from the responses.

That is not surprising as the great bulk of members who have joined over the past ten or more years have joined via the internet rather than in person via a geographical branch (which, incidentally, given the turnover of members could be a quarter or more of the membership). They could well be on average younger than the present active members.This suggests that the internet is probably their preferred method of communication, If so, it's here that we will need to make some changes, e.g. internet forums (friendly ones). People here have suggested streaming EC meetings. Not sure that's a good idea as they are not that interesting. If we're going to stream anything it should be public meetings or interesting internal discussions.As I've said, it will be interesting to see what the survey turns up from these members who joined via the internet. Hopefully sufficient of them will have replied so we can see if there's a pattern.

It shows that old experienced members must continue educating the new members, or sympathizers must be educated by the SP/WSM prior joining. We want potential members to have prior knowledge before joining, we do not want to do any hard labour, and after member join the party we abandon them, and that is the reason why they get isolated, and they lose the desire to continue Most Leninists parties they educate potential members first,  and then assign one or two persons for that members, and even more, sometimes they go to the home of that person, and sometimes they are assigned to a study group, even churches are doing a much better jobIf we can not meet personally the applicant, we must make a phone call and talk to the applicant. This is a relationship with human beings, we are creating our own fetishism, they are not objects, they are human beingsWe do not have a policy, committee,   or procedures to continue educating our potential members and new members. What about asking them to travel at least one day to our Head Office? What about asking them to assist at least one session to our summer school? I do know a person who became a member of one of the companion party and he has told me that they have not contacted him for more than 2 years, and he does not know if he still a member of the WSM. The Leninist Parties are doing a much better jobBesides being isolated from our members, we are isolated from the working class, the companion parties, and the world working class. It is total isolation like hermits. We have a very good articulated socialist theory, we do not know how to propagate it, we are going to get cook in our own sauce

[robbo203]

Marcos, I think you have hit the nail on the head here.   This is sort of what I was driving at in my earlier post.  The way I see it (and I may, of course be quite mistaken in this assessment from my own remote vantage point in Spain) is that the Party is too centralised, to focussed on HO.  There is seemingly precious little in the way of horizontal interactions between members and it is as if the very culture and organisational set up of the Party is designed to encourage a sense of passivity and isolation.     You join and basically that’s it.  You are left on your own to determine your own degree of involvement in the party.  There seems to be little if any proactive attempt to reach out to members on a personal level to encourage their involvement (again I could be quite mistaken in thinking this).  A few generalised calls for volunteers to come to HO to process the mail or to attend some event to sell literature or distribute leaflets hardly constitutes a determined effort to involve members. If you live miles away from anyone this would be impractical anyway.  So you are at a loss to know what to do.  You feel increasingly isolated and you begin to wonder what was the point in joining in the first place.  It is astonishing that some members of the WSM literally don’t even know if they are still members.  That speaks volumes about the relationship between members and the organisation   The general ethos of the Party is far too laissez faire.  But the problem is also that members don’t know how they can contribute.  The range of promoted activities available is too restricted and narrow and often inaccessible and out of reach to many members.  This is why I argue that any prospect of revitalising the SPGB and the WSM in general has to involve both a broadening and a deepening of the interactions within the membership and that this can be achieved in part by expanding the number of things that the Party actually does.  Sympathisers too need to be encouraged to participate more fully in such activities.   Whilst I obviously don’t advocate a sort of Leninist approach of compulsory participation in certain activities such as selling newspapers, there surely has to be some sort of intermediate position between this and the current failing  laissez faire approach.  Marcos refers to the way in which Leninist parties operate and their much more proactive approach to the recruitment and “shepherding” of new members.  I had one experience of this many years about the time when I first joined the SPGB.  I recall writing a critical letter to some magazine.  One of the organisers of the Leninist sect concerned  (I forget which) promptly  contacted me and offered to come all the way from London to the depths of Surry where I was living at the time for a face to face meeting even though I said I was sympathetic to the SPGB at the time. In some ways that is quite impressive as a demonstration of dedication albeit also slightly creepy and cultish. We don’t have to go that far but something like the buddy system which I recommend in my list of suggestions is a good half way house solution.     

[Author]

Posts