“Slavery” case: a Maoist cult?

[ALB]

According to today's Daily Telegraph, the people involved in the so-called "slavery" case were members of a Maoist cult.

We knew them as they were based in Acre Lane in Clapham and contested a parliamentary by-election in Lambeth Central in 1978 as we (and Colin Redgrave) did. Fortunately we got more votes than them.

They stood as the "South London People's Front" but this was a front for the "Workers Institute of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tsetung Thought". They are said to have been the model for the Tooting Popular Front in the TV series.

We knew the Maoists were nutty but not as much as now seems to be emerging. There's another nutty Maoist sect not far from us on the Wandsworth Road – the Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist) from which this other sect/cult apparently emerged.

[Anonymous]

ALB wrote:

There's another nutty Maoist sect not far from us on the Wandsworth Road – the Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist) from which this other sect/cult apparently emerged.

The RCPB (M-L) shop in Wandsworth Road now goes under the guise of the John Buckle Centre.  John Buckle was its General Secretary between 1979 and 1983.http://www.johnbucklecentre.org.uk/

[jondwhite]

If true, what was suspected to be a sect turns out to be a cult. For me a sect is a group that puts the interests of the group above anything outside the group. A cult is something that denies the validity of anything outside the group.The question is, how do you stop groups turning into sects or cults? The organisational structure? The members?

[alanjjohnstone]

"John Buckle Centre" Nice shop front and facia 

[ALB]

I think this does have political implications. Many Maoist and Trotskyist groups are self-styled "vanguard parties" formed around a single leader (or Leader). People who join such groups already consider themselves followers and are psychologically prepared to submit to the will of the central committee or its leader(s).It is not surprising that from time to time some of these leaders take advantage of this. Why for instance would women have submitted to Trotskyist Leader Gerry Healey's sexual advances if they had not already been prepared to submit to him politically? This incidentally also happened just up the road from us, actually in Clapham High Street where the SLL/WRP had its headquarters. Simon Pirani, ex-WRP, has attempted to explain this phenomenon in this article on his blog:http://piraniarchive.wordpress.com/home/investigations-campaigns-and-other-stuff/the-break-up-of-the-wrp-from-the-horses-mouth/It appears that the vanguard party, especially when led by a single leader, is a much more dangerous form of organisation than we normally assume.

[alanjjohnstone]

Hastily posted on the SOYMB blog http://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2013/11/who-needs-leaders.html

[Ed]

Sounds like they set up their very own little North Korea. "siege socialism in one house"

[ALB]

There's also this article from the Socialist Standard on a Maoist cult in America:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2000s/2005/no-1215-november-2005/cult-professional-revolutionary

[KAZ]

Howdy! I must be one of the few SPGBers to have actually visited the John Buckle Centre, even though it is only about 10 minutes away from no. 52. I think it is rather unfair to describe the RCP(ML) as a nutty sect. Apart from a rather strange obsession with North Korea, their politics are fairly orthodox Left and certainly less strident and self-obsessed than some of the Trots and the ethnic India 'Maoists' of Southall. I was warmly received on my visit and the individuals I met and dealt with were certainly less nutty than most of the SPGB folks I encounter on my London forays. I am always surprised how much these Leninist groups resemble our own. If they are a sect, what are we?

[ALB]

KAZ wrote:

Apart from a rather strange obsession with North Korea

Surely support for the North Korean regime and its ruling dynasty in the name of socialism automatically qualifies for being described as "nutty".

[BTSomerset]

I expect the capitalist press will use this as another stick to beat marxists with.

[ALB]

The "capitalist press" have in fact been phoning us to see if we have an information on this group. We received 4 calls today at Head Office from various media (fortunately not the Daily Wail). We've not been able to tell them much beyond that they contested the same by-election in Lambeth in 1978 as us calling themselves "The South London People's Front" and that we have one of their leaflets in our archives. Naturally, we have explained to them the difference between socialism and Maoism.If there is any member out there who remembers the 1978 by-election and who me them in the course of it they would problem like to interview him or her, admittedly probably to find confirmation sabout how strange they were.They probably phoned us because we are in the area, but one of them had clearly read either this thread or our SOYMB item

[jondwhite]

Robert Griffiths of the CPB/ Morning Star commented on Channel 4 News herehttp://bcove.me/hqjkkqwkviahttp://www.channel4.com/news/slave-house-couple-lambeth-leaders-1970s-political-cult

[admice]

There are some editing errors in the article. If you want help editing let me know. If this should be posted in a PM, apologies and also let me know. I would think teaching children critical thinking, independence and self-esteem would also help prevent sect and cult formation.

[BTSomerset]

The BBC have gone from describing the couple as Marxists to describing them as Maoists, so somebody must have listened.  They still have a quote from somebody at Manchester University describing Maoism as 'traditional conventional communism' though.  Tut. 

[Author]

Posts