Ukraine CWI Scam Moved

by left observer Fri Aug 29, 2003 11:21

I am also puzzled by this move. The story has its amusing side, but also raises seriosu issues. It seems to indicate the problems that tiny ultra-revolutionary organisations get themselves into when they are so keen to have six men and a dog installed as a 'section', that they are open to0 all sorts of scams. It also in my opinion demonstrates the futility of much of what they do. In any event, it is a rather important issue for anyone engaged in these party building activities, or in trying to sell them to the rest of the left.

by Jerry Cornelius Fri Aug 29, 2003 11:35

I am reposting the moved piece and comments below. I cannot fathom why they were moved unless it was in an attempt to discredit the piece. on the thread with the Star Wars/CWI satire there was a small piece regarding the scam. The article below has additional emails, statements and an original introduction.

However the only thing which has been discredited is the IMC Editor who did the moving.

_________________________________________

CWI Section In Scam
by Jerry Cornelius Thursday, Aug 28 2003, 10:20am


Indy readers will have heard about the Ukranian Trotskyists, a "Section" of the CWI which has scammed several different Fourth Internationals not to mention Fifths. I have assembled the entire story here with some fresh evidence.

Watch out for these people in Ireland! They may not be up to date with the latest SP revisions. They are likely to be calling for a Socialist Federation of the British Isles and may try to join the Labour Party. They may also claim that the Ukraine is not a capitalist country.

Read it and Weep! (With laughter.)
League for the Fifth International
International Secretariat
Public Statement
22 August 2003

UKRAINIAN FRAUD
o Rogue CWI group deceives international left
o True motives for deception still unclear

Investigations that the League for the Fifth International have
carried out over the past three weeks reveal that individuals
claiming
to be a Ukrainian section of the League are in fact members of
the
Committee for a Workers International (CWI). No section of
the LFI in
fact existed in Ukraine. In an unprecedented political fraud
these
people ? numbering up to 20 - infiltrated the LFI and pretended
over
three years to be members through a series of elaborate lies and
deceptions.

We were alerted to this by an accusations made on a web
discussion
group towards the end of July, and by the! subsequent
identification,
by an LFI member who recently visited Kiev, of a leading
figure in the
CWI (Oleg Vernik) pretending to be a member of our section.

Consultations with the CWI and the International Bolshevik
Tendency
enabled us to confirm that a number of CWI members were
involved in an
elaborate confidence trick that included a series of meetings
with
international socialist organisations both in Kiev and abroad.
The
deception took place on a considerable scale, involving
attendance at
international demonstrations, other meetings and congresses,
meetings
held in Kiev with foreign visitors, the production of
publications,
writing polemical articles against other tendencies (including
the
CWI).

The fraudsters acted in a highly co-ordinated fashion, ensuring
that
many of them expressed and expounded the views of the
tendencies in
question in a relatively sophisticated manner and with apparent
complete conviction. The number of tendencies deceived in
this way,
and the sheer level of activity required to sustain the deception,
suggest that this grouping could have had little time for
anything
else, let alone systematic activity in the working class
movement. We
await a full explanation as to how the Ukraine CWI, which is
formally
part of the CIS section and which profited financially from this
scam,
could play these games over three years without sounding the
alarm
bells with their leadership in Moscow and London.

In short, over the last period, when socialists of all countries
were
mobilising against capitalism and war, these people busied
themselves
defrauding anticapitalist and antiwar organisations.

The only two motives imaginable for such a deception could be
monetary
advantage? in plain terms theft? or a conscious attempt to
discredit
revolutionary internationalism.

The exact reasons for what was in fact a very elaborate
confidence
trick must await further evidence? since no large sums of mon!
ey were
involved, at least on the part of the LFI. Of course the sheer
number
of tendencies defrauded, could lead to he sums involved being
considerable. Given the difficulties which distance, very
limited
resources and language barriers place in the way of common
daily work,
such deception is always a possibility. Fortunately it is a rarity.

We understand that they deny such motives and maintain they
are loyal
to the CWI! However nothing can justify taking money from
another
organisation within the workers movement under false
pretences.

Any misappropriation of funds contributed by working class
people and
socialists is quite simply a crime against the working class as a
whole. It undermines the necessary trust for the collection of
resources and funds for organising and waging the class
struggle.

When people claiming to be "revolutionaries" and even
"Trotskyists" do
such things they give a weapon to the class enemy. Ev! en if
they
really believe they are serving their own political tend ency
they are
in fact engaging in criminal adventurism. For short term
material
gains they drag their own political banner through the mud,
ensuring
no one will ever trust them again.

Of course it is possible that what we have here was a conscious
attempt to discredit the whole idea of international
comradeship and
collaboration. What could be the motive for this? This would
serve the
interests either of a bourgeois nationalist or national-centred
currents in the workers? movement (Stalinism or Social
Democracy).
Last but not least there is the possibility of the intervention of
the
state itself.

The CWI has said publicly that it is investigating this. Other
tendencies are doing likewise. We will co-operate with them to
expose
this fraud fully and completely. The CWI have suspended
them. If the
individuals concerned have any shred of revolutionary honour
they will
now make a full and complete confession. If not they, and all
th! eir
accomplices, should be fully exposed to the entire Ukrainian
and
international left. We are willing to play our full part in doing
this.

As a consequence the LFI immediately suspended RV-MRM
and severed all
connections with it pending the next meeting of our
International
Executive Committee, which alone has the power to expel a
section.

Doubtless those tendencies that have always opposed
attempting to
build an common international organisation in general or
claimed it
was necessary to "postpone" it until large and stable mass
organisations are built on a national basis, will claim they are
vindicated by such incidents.

Unhappy the "principle" that sees itself validated by
extraordinary
acts of criminality! Let us see how such organisations, each
totally
adapted to their specific national conditions, can possibly
succeed in
developing an international strategy for revolution.

For our part we will continue! to seek to seek out relationships
of
political solidarity and comm on action with militants in
countries
not "blessed" with stable capitalist democracy, because only on
this
foundation can a truly internationalist organisation be built.

International Secretariat, LFI, 22 August 2003
----------------------------------------------------
On Thursday 14 August a British-based opponent organization
supplied
us with a photograph taken at one of their international
gatherings.
We knew one of the three people pictured as a British member
of the
opponent organization, but had taken the other two to be the
leader
and a senior member of our own Ukrainian group. The other
organization
had taken them to be the leader and a senior member of their
group.

We proceeded to exchange information and photographs with a
variety of
other leftist tendencies we suspected might also have been
targeted.
We are not at liberty to list those organizations because we
undertook
to treat much of the information we received in strict
confidence. We
expect that the identity of most of the other groups involved
will be
revealed in the near future.

We have established, beyond any doubt, that the same
collection of
people presented themselves as multiple groups, each with an
international affiliation. We have created a list of the players
we
have so far identified, with their photographs.

Aspects of this fraud have already been made public by two
organizations. The 26 July minutes of the executive of the
Socialist
Party of Great Britain (SPGB), available on the internet from 6
August, reports that the scam was set up to raise funds for the
Kiev
operations of the Committee for a Workers International (CWI-
-the
international organization of the Socialist Party of England and
Wales, led by Peter Taaffe). However the SPGB has yet to
produce
conclusive evidence.

What purports to be a CWI statement on the matter (dated 5
August and
appended to the 26 July SPGB minutes, and also distributed
through the
Leftist Trainspotters email list) claims that neither the CWI?s
international leadership nor its Commonwealth of Independent
States
lieutenants are involved, and announces the suspension of its
Ukrainian National Committee and Kiev City Committee,
pending an
investigation.

A Bit of History A group calling itself the ?Young
Revolutionary
Marxists? (YRM) of Ukraine wrote to us in 1999. A senior IBT
member
visited them late that year and was impressed both by their
apparent
understanding of Trotskyism and their interest in discussing
important
programmatic questions. He was particularly struck by their
account of
how a minority of their group had recently decamped to join
Workers
Power/League for a Revolutionary Communist International
because they
disagreed with our position of military support to the Soviet
Stalinist ?hardliners? in their August 1991 confrontation with
Boris
Yeltsin. The ?YRM? convincingly feigned agreement with our
position on
the coup and many other political questions.

Two of these operators, Zakhar Popovich and Boris Pastukh,
visited our
British organization in 2000. Pastukh, who was originally
introduced
to us as Alexander Sherbakov, was presented as the group?s
leader. It
is now clear that in addition to leading ?our? Ukrainian group,
he was
also ?leader? of at least two rival groups.

While in Britain, Popovich and Pastukh participated in a series
of
educationals and branch meetings. They appeared to be
politically
sharp, honest and committed. A leading IBT comrade made
another visit
to Kiev, and then two of their leaders attended our international
conference in October 2001, meeting the IBT leadership and a
cross-section of our membership. The conference concluded
with a bogus
?fusion? between the IBT and the ?YRM.? Since then, five
different IBT
comrades have visited Kiev, and another Ukrainian swindler,
Oleksander
Zvorsky, spent three weeks with our German section.

In the last year we became increasingly concerned about the
lethargic
pace of the translation of our materials into Russian and
Ukrainian,
their failure to produce any substantial original propaganda,
and the
marked absence of internal political and perspectives
documents. Yet
we were very conscious of the desperate poverty in Ukraine
and
attributed the lack of activity of our supposed section to the
difficulties involved in merely surviving in an economically
devastated country.

We had determined to upgrade the performance of our
?section.? As a
first step we dispatched a leading comrade on a four-week visit
with a
mandate to assess the problem and initiate an organizational
overhaul.
She was appalled by what appeared to be chronic Menshevik
organizational norms and a low level of membership
commitment. When
she raised these issues with the ?leadership? they appeared a bit
embarrassed and pretended to accept her proposals for
reorganizing the
group?s work. We anticipated that if they did not rapidly
improve
their functioning, a serious political struggle was inevitable.

In hindsight there are several incidents which might have
alerted us,
had we been at all suspicious. There were precautions we ought
to have
taken, and we certainly could have moved sooner to tighten up
what
appeared to be a largely dysfunctional organization. Yet there
can be
no absolute guarantee against being taken in by a complicated
(and
well organized) conspiracy run by intelligent criminals with a
background in Marxoid culture, particularly if their operation is
insulated by language and geography. We will learn from this
experience as we continue to work to extend the IBT
internationally,
but we do not expect to be able to avoid all risks.

Two leading members of our putative Kiev group told one of
our
comrades that they had first met through an amateur acting
troupe.
This might be true, although they are no longer amateurs. We
have
given these people some material aid--very modest by Western
standards, but significant in Ukraine. Our subsidy ostensibly
paid the
rent on a small apartment to be used as a political headquarters.
We
expect that other organizations have also been financing the
same
premises.

The primary motivation for this scam was presumably personal
material
gain, but we must assume that the Ukrainian political police
knew of
the charade, and shared any information they collected with
various
other intelligence agencies.

?A Broad Spectrum? In our article on the 2001 ?fusion,? we
reported:

?The YRM derived from a circle of Kiev teenagers who, in
1989,
obtained a copy of Leon Trotsky?s The Revolution Betrayed,
and
discovered that it contained a wealth of political insights
profoundly
relevant to the events taking place around them, as the forces of
capitalist restoration gained momentum in the Soviet
degenerated
workers? state. From that original grouping, a broad spectrum
of
leftist organizations, all critical of Stalinism and, in most cases,
identifying themselves as Trotskyist, has reappeared in
Ukraine.?

?1917 No. 24, 2002 The ?broad spectrum? of virtual
organizations was
more closely related than we imagined.

Like the other groups involved, we trusted these petty crooks
and feel
betrayed. But it is also impossible not to see the comical side.
The
script was Twelfth Night meets Life of Brian, as these
characters, in
the guise of the Ukrainian section of one of our opponents,
harshly
denounced us and then, as ?our? group, indignantly proclaimed
the
criticism to be a pure invention.

We received occasional updates on ?our? relations with various
non-existent opponents in Kiev. Sometimes ?we? were able to
initiate
promising political discussions with ?them,? but soon ?they?
would
become hostile and refuse to talk. We were also advised of
actions by
the security service against various imaginary opponents, and
of the
periodic harassment of ?our? comrades. Needless to say, we
were
concerned and sympathetic and offered what advice we could.

An unanswered question: Oleg Vernik & the CWI The extent
of the whole
operation is not entirely clear, but Oleg Vernik, who was
introduced
to an IBT representative in Kiev in 2001 as the former leader of
the
CWI in Ukraine, is clearly a central figure. Pastukh described
him to
us as a leftist element disenchanted with the CWI, and a
potential
contact for the IBT. Pastukh later reported that Vernik had
dropped
out of politics.

In fact Vernik has remained highly active, contributing to CWI
websites and promoting them in internet postings. An article on
the
privatization of the sugar industry in the CWI?s Russian paper
Left
Vanguard (No. 49, 8 May 2003) is signed by Oleg Vernik. He
is credited
with an article on the website of the SPGB, and is listed as the
chair
of an independent union in Kiev called ?The Protection of
Labor.? The
IBT representative who recently visited Kiev was housed for a
month in
the same flat as Vernik, who was posing as Vitaliy, our ?office
manager? and ?organizer.?

We await with interest the CWI?s explanation of how they
managed to
remain entirely unaware of Oleg Vernik?s activities, given his
high
profile and the CWI?s considerable Russian language capacity.

It seems quite possible that Vernik, Pastukh, et al, once had,
and
even perhaps retain, in some attenuated and degenerate form, a
political motive for their activity. But they are so thoroughly
corrupted and cynical that they can only serve as an instrument
for
the enemies of the workers? movement.

Boris Pastukh, the ?leader? of the fake IBT/Ukraine group
(among
others) displayed a handsome wristwatch with a picture of
Libyan
strongman Muammar al-Qaddafi during a lubricated late-night
social at
our 2001 international conference. He claimed that friends in
the
Socialist Youth of Ukraine (an affiliate of Sheila Torrence?s
orthodox
Healyite tendency) had given it to him some time ago.

We recently came across an internet posting by Oleg Vernik
and Boris
Pastukh dated 11 June 2001 announcing preparations for a
?summer camp
in Crimea for brothers from Lybia [sic], Ukraine, Russia,
Byelorussia
and Moldovia? and advertising their own web site as
www.GreenBook.da.ru. (The Green Book was Qaddafi?s
equivalent of Mao?s
Red Book.) The website seems to have vanished, but it
suggests that
these hustlers were on the lookout for bigger fish to fry.

It is little consolation that we are not the only people to have
been
duped. Nor is it any great consolation to remember historical
semi-precedents, such as Roman Malinovsky, the Czarist spy
who became
a member of the Bolshevik Central Committee and head of the
Bolshevik
fraction in the Duma, or Mark Zborowski (Etienne), the GPU
agent who
was Leon Sedov's chief lieutenant in Paris and the likely
architect of
his murder, and subsequently Trotsky's leading representative
in
Europe.

We cannot allow these gangsters to discredit Trotskyism in the
former
Soviet Union. Serious people can have no hesitation in
exposing this
kind of scam. To be victimized but remain silent is to facilitate
future frauds. It is of course embarrassing to have been taken
in, but
we have a responsibility to do what we can to expose these
crooks to
the workers? movement.


---------------

From: "Socialist Party"
Date: Sun Jul 27, 2003 11:09 am
Subject: Fw: Very bad news from Ukraine

Sunday 27th July 2003

From: Darren O'Neil (General Secretary of the Socialist Party
of Great
Britain) To: All members on Spintcom/Spopen and Companion
Parties

Dear Comrades,

Enclosed below is a reply I wrote to John Thompson of the
Socialist
Party of Canada. Comrade Thompson was responding to my
email entitled
'Very Bad News from Ukraine' where I explained we had
discovered that
the Ukrainian Party was in fact a very sophisticated scam
against both
us and other political groups in the West.

What will follow with this email, is a further email where I
apologise
to Comrade Thompson for thinking that he was writing in his
capacity
as General Secretary and copies of the two attachments that I
enclosed
to Cde Thompson.

I apologise for the length of this reply to Comrade Thompsin
but I
felt that the points raised in his email had to be answered point
by
point. I can also assure you that I don't particularly enjoy
writing
such long posts, and it was something that took up a hell of a
lot of
my time yesterday morning and when I finished writing the
post I had
to sit down and take down the minutes of an EC meeting!!

Again, I'm sure many members don't wish to have the lists
clogged up
with this correspondence but I feel in light of what happened in
connection to the group in the Ukraine that we have inform as
many
members as possible of any developments. I must explain that
my
reasons for sending this correspondence to both Spintcom and
Spopen is
because some Party members opt to be on Spintocom not
Spopen and I've
sent it to Spopen because there are members of the Companion
Parties
on that list.

Yours for Socialism,
Darren O'Neil (General Secretary of the Socialist Party of Great
Britain) ----- Original Message ----- From: Socialist Party To:
SPC
Administrator Cc: steve.szalai@i... ; Len Wallace ; John Ayers
Sent:
Saturday, July 26, 2003 3:08 PM Subject: Re: Very bad news
from
Ukraine


Saturday 26th July 2003

From: Darren O'Neil (General Secretary of the Socialist Party
of Great
Britain) To: John Thompson (General Secretary of the Socialist
Party
of Canada)


Dear John,

Thanks for your reply to my email. We have an EC meeting
today, and I
will forward your email to that meeting but I do think I have to
raise
some points of information that arise from reading your email.
If I
may, can I take the points you raise in the order in which they
were
raised in your email:

Email from Adam Buick with unsigned criticisms of the WSP
(India) and
Comrade Sarkar: This email criticising the actions of Binay
Sarkar was
written by Adam and was circulated as personal
correspondence both
around our Party via email on SPOPEN (our email discussion
forum) and
to those same email addresses that Binay Sarkar sent both his
original
document and his most recent document entitled 'Reply to Vic
Vanni'.

It is the case that when we received the original document from
the
Indian Party on the 10th April 2003 informing us of their
decision to
disaffiliate

and to affiliate to theAshbourne Court Group, I sent an
immediate
email reply to Binay Sarkar, General Secretary of the Indian
Party,
explaining that as our Annual Conference was coming up the
following
week I would forward the Indian Party's documents to
Branches and the
matter would be discussed by our delegates at the Conference.
This
matter was indeed discussed by the delegates at our Conference
and it
was decided that we would send our Reply, written in the name
of our
EC, to the Indian Party and to all the original recipients of the
Indian Party document.

This reply was sent to the Indian Party (and to everyone else
via
email) on the 10th May. This reply set out our rebuttal to the
charges
laid against us by the Indian Party, but also challenged the very
serious allegations made in the Indian document against named
individuals of our Party of deliberate misinformation and of
tampering
with documents.

At the time of writing we have not received a reply from the
Indian
Party to our document of the 10th May. In fact we have not
even
received an acknowledgement from them that they received it
and/or
that they have decided not to reply to its contents. We did
however
receive an email from Binay Sarkar on the 23rd June in which
they
asked to be removed as affiliates of our organsiation in both
pages of
the Socialist Standard and the WSM website. I wrote back
acknowledging
his email, confirming that their name would be removed from
the
Socialist Standard but also explaining that the member of our
Party
who maintains the WSM website was at that time on holiday.
At the same
time I explained that part of the reason that their details were
not
immediately removed was because we were still hoping for a
response to
our document, and asked him again if they there were plans to
in fact
send a reply. Once again I did not even receive an
acknowledgement of
my email from the Indian Party, never mind them informing
me that they
had chosen not to send a reply.

What has in fact happened is that on the 20th of this month, we
received (with numerous other recipients) two emails from
Binay Sarkar
of the Indian Party a reply to personal correspondence he has
had with
Vic Vanni of our organisation. The second email, entitled
'Attachment
2', I and others who received were unable to open but the email
has
since by opened by a member and posted on our SPOPEN
discussion list.
However, in the first email he sent that we were able to open he
once
again repeats the allegations against Adam Buick he made in
their
original document. Allegations that we asked him to either
substantiate or withdraw in our reply to them and which he has
chosen
not to do. I will send another email to Binay Sarkar in the next
few
days asking him, in light of him repeating these allegations in
reply
to Vic Vanni, to again either substantiate or withdraw these
allegations. I will also ask him if the Indian Party has taken a
decision on whether or not they have decided to reply to our
document,
and if it is the case that they have chosen not to reply, can they
confirm in writing either by email or by post of this decision.

This was the context of Adam circulating both to our email list
and to
the recipients of Binay Sarkar's emails, the document in which
he
catalogues what he believes are the undemocratic practices of
Binay
Sarkar. As I wrote above this was written by Adam as an
individual
member of our Party. If you check the archives of our email
discussion
list SPOPEN, on [email protected] , you will note
that we seek to
do discuss matters relating to our Party and the WSM as
individual
members.

"The Ukaraine debacle seems to be just more evidence that the
SP is
not doing their homework with WSM members in regards to
the socialist
case." : As indicated in my original email, in all probability it
looks like the 'Socialist Enlightenment Group', the affiliate to
the
Ashbourne Court Group, were also part of this sting operation.
If the
organisation that affiliated to us was ficticious then how can it
be
the case there can be a split from them leading to the formation
of
the 'Socialist Enlightenment Group'? You will have to contact
members
of the Ashbourne Court Group to ask them if it is the case that
there
group is also ficticious. I hope you do recognise, however, that
we
put aside the fact that they been spreading disinformation about
us
for nigh on 12 years ( Remember the letter of last year from
Cyril May
to all the Companion Parties where he alleged there was a
secret
faction within the Party which had orchestrated the two
Branches
expulsions. Another allegation that has never been
substantiated.) ,
and contacted a member of their organisation to voice our
concerns on
this matter.

It may in fact be the case that this group who perpetrated this
scam
have done the same sting to about ten other organisations in the
West
in the same period. Two members of our Party visited Kiev -
one of the
members spoke Russian - in late 2001 to meet up with this
group and
discussed matters with them over a ten day period. Hindsight
can be a
wonderful thing but I can assure you that our two members
sought to
ask the Ukrainian group the right questions, and did not just
recommend acceptance of this group as a companion
organisation through
a desire to have a section in Eastern Europe. I repeat if this
group
perpetrated the same scam against the Ashbourne Court Group,
then you
have to acknowledge that they also sent two representatives -
one who
could speak Russian - over to Ukraine to meet with a group
who told
them that the answers that they wanted to hear (including the
supposed
undemocratic nature of our Party).

One member of this Ukrainian group, who we now know to be
the leader
of their organisation - Oleg Vernik, visited Britain in Spring of
last
year to visit our Annual Conference, meeting our members and
addressing our Conference under the name of Semyon
Shevchenko. I have
enclosed as an attachment the full extract of his verbatim
speech to
our Conference. This - as part of the Conference Report - was
previously sent to the Companion Parties last year. As you will
note
in his speech to our Conference he was self-evidently lying to
us:
Pretending to be part of a group that had broken from
vanguardist
ideas. If you can explain to me how you are able to discover
when a
group is lying to you - and others groups at the same time - so
blatantly over a sustained period of time then I'd be happy to
hear
it.

As you are already well aware, we are a tradition which has
always
attached the greatest importance to openess and democratic
control of
our organisation and our discussions. That unfortunately lays
us open
to individuals and groups who may wish to take advantage of
that fact.
In fact, rather than this being a recent phenomenon as
Barltrop's book
,The Monument, indicates, this isn't the first time that such a
thing
has happened to us. Speaking on the phone yesterday to a
member of
fifty years standing she mentioned that such scams have
happened in
the Party's past. The only difference nowadays is that this scam
has
been conducted via email and the World Wide Web. We have
put our hands
up on this matter admitting that we made a mistake, but we
also have
to acknowledge that such practices happened in the past, and
Party
members of yester year were duped in a similar fashion. This is
not to
deflect attention from what has happened to us, just to
emphasise that
this isn't a recent phenomenon.

"The SPC has not as of yet accepted the WSP(Ukraine) as
being
socialist because we had not seen any real proof that they were
sound.
Similarly, the African WSM members display gross errors of
socialist
understanding that show them to be unsound socialists. We are
"split"
in Canada as to the SP policies of unilateral admittance of
WSM
members with autocratic rule from the SP to the exclusion of
other
Companion Parties in deciding the true character of WSM
members and
their poten tial as scientific socialists."

Sorry John, I'm surprised at your comments quoted above of: "
. . .SP
policies of unilateral admittance of WSM members with
autocratic rule
from the SP .
."
Enclosed as an attachment is a copy of an email that I sent to
the
Canadian Party on the 18th September of last year where I
produced
excerpts from previous emails to the Canadian Party and other
Parties
where we sought to consult you at every stage on this matter. I
have
to checked my records on this matter and I'm sure that it is the
case
that the Canadian Party never replied to us in a formal capacity
with
regards to their opinion on the matter of the Ukrainian
organisation.
There was some correspondence in connection to Tony K.
Gelsthorpe
writing in an individual capacity, but no formal reply from the
Canadian Party.

It is also the case that when we were first contacted by the
Ukrainian
group, they had also contacted comrades in the Canadian Party.
This is
not to apportion blame to anybody, but just to acknowledge
that all of
us were taken in on this matter.

As the resolution passed at our Conference last year on the
matter of
the Ukrainian group indicates: "Following the report of
Comrades
Lambert and Otter, this Conference recognises the Ukrainian
Group of
comrades as a Companion Party of the World Socialist
Movement, subject
to the endorsement by other Companion Parties." rather than
acting
unilaterally or autocratically we have sought to consult the
companion
parties at every stage on this matter. This has also been the case
on
the matter of the formal establishment of the World Socialist
Movement
resolution passed at last year's Conference.

"Similarly, the African WSM members display gross errors of
socialist
understanding that show them to be unsound socialists.": I
agree that
there has been problems with some individual members in
Africa, but I
do think it is wrong to tar all members in Africa with the same
brush.
This again, as in the case of the Ukrainian group, is a matter of
trust. The members from Africa that have applied to join
through
corresponding with our Membership Dept have sent in written
answers to
our Membership questionnaires and they have been admitted
on this
basis just in the same fashion if someone applying to join the
Party
in the Highlands of Scotland has applied to join. If those
applicants
in their written answers show understanding of the socialist
case then
we have accepted them on that basis.

If it is the case that at a later date individual members, whether
it
be in this country or in Africa, then express views that come
into
conflict with both our Object and Declaration of Principles and
with
the answers they gave in their written answers to our
Membership Dept,
then we have to challenge them on this matter. If it is the case
that
individuals have sought to join our Party under false pretences
then
we have to face up to that possibility. If it is the case that some
individuals have joined not fully understanding every aspect of
our
case then we have to acknowledge that as well.

However, I have to ask you has such a thing never happened in
the
history of the Canadian Party? Has it never been the case that
someone
has either joined under false pretences or has subsequently
shown not
to fully understand the socialist case. I know that it has
certainly
happened in our history and it is not confined to people
applying to
join from overseas. I refer back to Barltrop's 'The Monument'
again,
which I recognise is not the best source material but it is the
one
readily to hand. It was the case that a man named Howarth
joined the
Party in the thirties (I think) up in the North of England where
there
were no close by Branches of the Party and subsequently set up
Socialist Party Branches as far a field as Gateshead in the
North East
and in Birkenhead on Merseyside in the North West, and it was
only
later through personal correspondence that it was revealed that
this
man was a practising Buddhist.

As I say, that is only one example that is immediately to hand,
but
there are no doubt other cases and I know it was certainly the
case
with some overseas work dating back over 50 years ago. Once
again, it
is examples of where we have taken people on their word and
in a
straightforward fashion and it has been the case they have not
conducted themselves in the same fashion. However, I must
reiterate
again that to generalise about all members in Africa is
unfortunate -
I think such generalisations are not helpful and open to serious
misinterpretation.

"We are "split" as to the acceptance of members into the
socialist
movement before they are proven socialists. We are "split" as
to the
admittance of reforms in theory and potential actions regarding
a
minority socialist elected into a capitalist government because
refroms are not a platform of our case, the Object, and the D of
P.":
On this matter I would ask that perhaps there is a need for a
discussion on this matter on SPOPEN or elsewhere, where
these matters
of theory can be discussed. On the matter of the "admittance of
reforms in theory", I would refer you to the WB of Upton Park
debate
which has periodically sprung up in our organisation over its
long
history. I refer to this debate not to suggest that this is the last
word on the matter, but just to point out that this has been a
longstanding debate.

"We are "split" as to the validity of the SP to represent
scientific
soci alists when they have ousted persons of obvious socialist
understanding and declaring them "undemocratic" whereby the
expulsion
process was probably "rigged" to create the necessity for a
"split"."
: I'm sorry you will have to substantiate the suggestion that the
"expulsion process was probably "rigged" to create the
necessity for a
split". Documents were produced by our 2001 EC in December
of that
year and were sent to Companion Parties and also to members
on request
in the following period. This provided 'Some Party records on
the 3
Party Polls and events leading to the expulsion of members of
Camden &
N W London branches of the Socialist Party in 1991' (As a
point of
information a copy of this document was requested by Cyril
May in 2002
and a copy was duly sent. We did not receive any reply from
the
Ashbourne Court Group as to its contents.)

The document that was sent to the Canadian Party shows that
there were
in fact three Party Polls on this matter. Can you please specify
if
you are saying that all three Polls were rigged? Or is it the case
that a particular poll was rigged? If so, which one?

If it was the case that this was a deliberate attempt to split the
organisation, why it was the case that the overwhelming
majority of
members in the Party who voted against the expulsions
remained within
the Party? If it was "rigged", wouldn't they have seen this also
and
acted accordingly. You will also need to tell me if it was the
case
that these expulsions were deliberately engineered, why was it
the
case that the EC of our Party set up an ad-hoc committee in
1985 to
try and resolve any misunderstandings that may have existed
between
the two Branches, who were later expelled for persistent
undemocratic
behaviour, and the rest of the Party?

On this point I am writing in an individual capacity - and not as
General Secretary - but this chronology of events does not
suggest to
me an attempt to engineer a split. In fact it points to an attempt
to
resolve matters that had long got out of hand, and to try us get
us
back to what we are in politics to do: to work for socialist
revolution. For the record, as an individual Party member, I am
not in
favour of the shortened name of the Party and I'm in a minority
within
the Party on the matter of the resolution passed in the mid-
eighties
calling for the immediate abolition of the state, but I recognise
that
it is for me to argue these positions within the Party to get the
resolutions rescinded. To suggest that this is confirmation that
the
Party has departed from its Object and Declaration of
Principles is
something I have to strongly disagree. What I recognise is that
the
Party is not and has never been a monolith organisation and
that
different viewpoints have always existed within the Party,
where
members fully supportive of the Object and Declaration of
Principles
have disagreed with one another on certain issues. The example
you
cite of the Party's position on reforms, if and when it has
socialist
delegates in Parliament, is a case in point.

"Many excellent "socialists" in the SP have resigned to enjoin
with
various "left wing" elements with some writng long critiques
why the
SP and/or socialism will not work. Happens every decade or
so" I'm
sorry John but I'm not sure what point you actually making
here. If
you are saying that Party members have resigned from the
Party to join
left wing organisations then this is self-evidently true (I being
one
such example), but this is not a recent phenomenon. Again I
refer you
back to the long history of our Party: Founder members George
Hicks
and Valentine McEntee both ended up as Labour Members of
Parliament;
another founder member Tommy Jackson was on the Central
Committee of
the Communist Party of Great Britain; Jack Kent, a Tory
Mayor for
Acton. In later years Joan Lestor was also Labour Member of
Parliament.

These are the more famous examples but there are many more.
Surely one
wouldn't expect any more from an organisation that has been in
existence for nearly one hundred years? We have recently
experienced
resignations from our Party in the last six months, but I would
make
the obvious point that a number of those individuals who have
resigned
- for it has to be said different political reasons - from the Party
specifically because we are not the organisation that we have
been
accused of by the Ashbourne Court Group and the Indian Party,
and
which has been echoed in your email below.

It also has to be pointed that none of the members named by
Cyril May
in his letter of last year to Companion Parties of last year, who
were
accused of being part of the faction that had secretly engineered
the
expulsion of these two Branches have joined ". . .left wing"
elements
with some writng long critiques why the SP and/or socialism
will not
work . . .". A slander that Mr May can provide no proof for but
when
it is slander then why would he? Speaking as an individual
member -
and not as General Secretary - I do find it sad that the Canadian
Party did not seek to take up this circular from Cyril May with
us -
and similar such correspondence since - to ask if there is any
substance to the allegations made against us. It is also the case
that
there has been no correspondence received from the Canadian
Party
asking either if the allegations made against us by Binay Sarkar
are
true, or if Binay Sarkar can actually substantiate the allegations
that he has made about tampering with documents. I find this
especially sad because you have written of an expulsion
process that
was probably "rigged".

I would ask, not in anger but actually in the hope that we can
resolve
this matter and reach some understanding, if you can actually
substantiate these allegations you've made against us. I would
also
ask that as you have signed this letter as 'General Secretary', are
you writing in an official capacity or as an individual member?
I will
be forwarding both this email and your original email to our
EC which
meets this afternoon for their comments. Where in this email I
have
been specifically writing as an individual member and not as
General
Secretary I have pointed this out. In the bulk of this email I
have to
sought to reply in accordance with the facts, and if it is the case
that our EC feels that part of what I have written is wrong or
needs
to be clarified, I will undoubtedly send on to the Canadian
Party any
updated comments.

I apologise for the length of this email but I did feel it
important
that I took in all seriousness the points raised in your email, and
sought to reply to them as fully as possible.

I will also forward this reply to our Party email discussion lists,
to
the Companion Parties and to the email addresses of Canadian
comrades
that I have in our address book.

Attachments enclosed are:
a.. The excerpt from our Annual Conference 2002 which
includes the
speech from Semyon Shevchenko, who we now know to be
Oleg Vernik. b..
My email of the 18th September 2002 that I sent to the
Canadian Party
detailing previous emails that I had sent to the Canadian Party
in
relation to the Ukrainian group.

Yours for Socialism,

Darren O'Neil (General Secretary)




----- Original Message -----
From: SPC Administrator
To: Socialist Party
Cc: kajeme@t...
Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2003 4:50 AM
Subject: Re: Very bad news from Ukraine


Dear Comrade O'Neil, Unlike the e-mail from Adam Buick I
received
unsigned criticising the WSP(India) and Comrade Sarkar in
particular
you have at least signed this message. I have asked Adam
who's
responsible for the recent WSP(India) critique as it was
unsigned, but
he has of yet not responded with any additional information to
me. The
Ukaraine debacle seems to be just more evidence that the SP is
not
doing their homework with WSM members in regards to the
socialist
case. The SPC has not as of yet accepted the WSP(Ukraine) as
being
socialist because we had not seen any real proof that they were
sound.
Similarly, the African WSM members display gross errors of
socialist
understanding that show them to be unsound socialists. We are
"split"
in Canada as to the SP policies of unilateral admittance of
WSM
members with autocratic rule from the SP to the exclusion of
other
Companion Parties in deciding the true character of WSM
members and
their poten tial as scientific socialists. We are "split" as to the
acceptance of members into the socialist movement before they
are
proven socialists. We are "split" as to the admittance of reforms
in
theory and potential actions regarding a minority socialist
elected
into a capitalist government because refroms are not a platform
of our
case, the Object, and the D of P. Our prime interest is the
socialist
emancipation of the world's workers so that an educated
working class
may have the educated advantage to be able to opt for the
establishment of socialism in the unspecified future without the
trimmings of all the capitalist apologetic rhetoric and
propaganda
imposed daily in our lives. I personally take criticism without
signatores as a grain of salt because it shows a callous
disregard for
the democratic process and an inability to freely debate with
those
responsible for their words. We are "split" as to the validity of
the
SP to represent scientific soci alists when they have ousted
persons
of obvious socialist understanding and declaring them
"undemocratic"
whereby the expulsion process was probably "rigged" to create
the
necessity for a "split". Many excellent "socialists" in the SP
have
resigned to enjoin with various "left wing" elements with some
writng
long critiques why the SP and/or socialism will not work.
Happens
every decade or so. I do appreciate your contact of the SPGB
with
regards to the Ukraine. Yours for socialism, John Thompson,
SPC.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Socialist Party"
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 13:40:23 +0100
To: "Spintcom" , "Spopen"
Subject: Very bad news from Ukraine


Friday 25th July 2003

From: General Secretary
To: All members on the WSM

Dear Comrades,

I'm afraid that I have to disclose some bad news relating to the
email
that Adam sent to SPINTCOM on Wednesday under the title of
'More From
Under the Floorboards', and the suggestion that the Ukrainian
Group
was little more than a scam perpetrated by a group called '
Workers'
Resistance', the Ukrainian section of the Committee for a
Workers
International. (The Committee of the Workers International is
the
international tendency of our old opponents the orthodox
Trotskyist
Socialist Party/Militant Tendency.)

Since Adam forwarded that email to Spintcom that we first
received on
Tuesday, Adam has discovered that a sum of money that was
sent to what
we thought was the Ukrainian Party was made out to some one
of the
name of Oleg Verniak, and it is also the case that when we did
a
search on google of the name Oleg Verniak one of the pages
that
appeared showed a picture of him. The link for the picture is
listed
below:


http://www.geocities.com/gena6414/modern_vortex/Russian_r
evolution/nat
ure_o f_sta\ tes.htm

Party members who attended the 2002 Annual Conference will
recognise
him as the Ukrainian delegate who attended the Conference
under the
name of Semyon Shevchenko and who addressed the
Conference under that
name. When 'Semyon' attended the Conference we were aware
that it was
not his real name but we understood that because of the
repressive
political climate in the Ukraine, it was the case that the
Ukrainian
comrades had to adopt aliases to avoid political persecution.
'Semyon'
did tell us that he was an assistant lecturer at Shevkenko
University
(hence the surname), and it is in fact the case that Oleg Verniak
is
listed as an Assistant Lecturer at Shevchenko University.

The original email and Adam's email will be going forward to
tomorrow's EC meeting and I don't feel this email is the time
and
place to do a full post mortem on this matter but I did think it
was
important that members were made aware of this development
as soon as
possible.

As the original email from the Russian group disclosed, this
appears
to be a scam that was perpetrated against a whole raft of
organisations on the "left" both in Britain and elsewhere in
Western
Europe and America. Obviously as a political party that seeks
to
conduct ourselves as a democratic organisation with no secret
meetings, no factions or intrigue etc we obviously took the
contact we
received from this group at face value, presuming that there
was no
hidden agaenda. It is also the case that if it the contents of the
email from the group in the Russia are on the whole correct
then this
is a sophisticated sting that may have carried on for a long
while
against both us and other groups and it was only because there
was a
split within Vernak's organisation that this intrigue has come to
light.

In connection with this matter, readers of the Ashbourne Court
Group's
publication, Socialist Studies, while note that their Spring 2003
issue (Number 47) carried a report entitled 'Socialists in the
Ukraine'. This report explained that the Ashbourne Court
Group had
received a communication from a group calling itself the
Socialist
Enlightenment Group, former members of the "Novikov
Group", (what we
knew of as the World Socialist Party of Ukraine) explaining
that they
had left the Novikov group because of what they termed as
"lack of
democracy in that group, the leadership role that developed and
their
disagreement with some of the propaganda emanating from
Clapham."
(p34).

The Report further went on to say that they had sent two
representatives over to Kiev in September of last year to attend
the
Conference of the Socialist Enlightenment Group and that, as a
consequence of the meeting, the two visiting delegates from the
Ashbourne Court Group recommended that: " . . . the group is
fully
committed to the 1904 Principles and Policy, and is one which
we
should recognise. We intend to seek practical means to co-
operate with
them, whilst appreciating the different and difficult conditions
in
which they operate .
."

Now if it is the case that the World Socialist Party of Ukraine
is a
ficticious group, then how can one have a split from such a
ficticious
group? It is because I am of the opinion that the Socialist
Enlightenment Group is also in on this scam that I telephoned
Charmian
Skelton of the Ashbourne Court Group this morning and told
her of the
email we received and of us discovering that, in all probability,
we
have been conned and so have the Ashbourne Court Group.
The
sophistication of this group who have undertaken this is such
that
they are adept at telling groups that they target what they want
to
hear and that obviously explains the quote from Socialist
Studies that
indicates that they were fully aware - via the internet - of the
disagreements we have had with the two expelled Branches
over many
years.

I'm not sure if Charmain Skelton believes what I told her on the
phone
- or perhaps feels that the group linked to them is genuine - but
I
promised to forward onto them copies of the original email that
sparked this off; the link to the picture above of Oleg
Verniak/Semyon
Shevchenko; and a cut and paste of 'Semyon Shevchenko'
speech to
Annual Conference 2002. Like most members I don't really
have much
time for the Ashbourne Court Group and the things they have
alleged
against us, but I did feel in the circumstances that they should
be
made aware of our doubts and suspicions about what is going
on in the
Ukraine. I would hope if the circumstances were different and
they had
came across this information instead of us, they would passed
the
information on to us as a courtesy.

I don't wish to pre-empt the EC discussion tomorrow but
speaking as an
individual member - and not as General Secretary - I hope that
the
Party decides to fully disclose what has happened in the pages
of the
Socialist Standard and on the websites, and that we contact
other
groups listed in the original email (whatever their political
persuasion) to inform them of what we have discovered.
Questions also
have to be asked of the Committee for Workers International
itself.
This International is controlled from London by Peter Taafe
and Lynn
Walsh (amongst others) and it has to be asked if they
sanctioned this
action by their Ukrainian section and what does that say about
their
organisation and how it operates. It may actually be the case
that
this group has been scamming the CWI as well as everyone
else. These
are questions that have to be raised.

Finally, like most members I was heartened when I heard of the
contact
from the Ukraine and was also impressed by the speech given
by
Shevchenko/Verniak to our Conference. I hold my hands up as
one of the
members who was taken in by all this, and will shoulder my
responsibility of the blame if there is any blame to be
apportioned
but I hope we don't not recriminate ourselves too much and/or
we don't
have a bout of finger pointing at comrades. As mentioned at the
start
of this email, we have always sought to conduct ourselves as a
Party
as an open and democratic party which urges workers to
conduct
themselves in the self-same political fashion. At worst we have
been
guilty of naivety in taking this group at face value, believing
what
they told us, but I don't feel that we should apportion blame to
either individuals in the Party/WSM or to the Party as a
collective.

I will also forward this email onto companion parties and to
companion
groups.

Yours for Socialism,
Darren O'Neil (General Secretary)
-------------------------------------------

LRP/COFI Statement on the Ukrainian "RWO"
After thorough investigation in collaboration with other
organizations, the League for the Revolutionary Party of the
United
States (LRP-U.S.) and the Communist Organization for the
Fourth
International (COFI) have conclusively determined that the
"Revolutionary Workers Organization" (RWO) in Ukraine,
which we had
recently accepted as a full member organization of COFI, has
in fact
never existed as a genuine organization. Its "members" and
"leaders,"
some of whom we had met more than once, were part of the
overall scam.
Therefore the "RWO" was not and is not a member section of
COFI.

We warn readers of Proletarian Revolution magazine that
reports and
articles that we have published by or about the RWO of
Ukraine, as
well as its affiliate, the RWO of Russia, are at best unreliable.
The
activity reports have proved to be untrue and no one should
rely on
their assertions about political events in those countries.

Incontrovertible evidence has been uncovered demonstrating
that a
group of purported "revolutionaries" in Ukraine has perpetrated
a
fraud upon at least ten far left organizations internationally, and
probably far more. These sinister elements have misrepresented
themselves as members of political groups in Ukraine which
claim to be
in agreement with a wide variety of different and opposing left
tendencies. The same individuals passed themselves off as
members and
leaders of multiple organizations. To convince international
organizations of their false political identities and affiliations,
they published fake leaflets and periodicals purporting to
express
their views and criticisms of various international organizations
and
other non-existent Ukrainian groups. They reported on
activities they
supposedly carried out in furtherance of their purported views
and
participated in extensive political discussions with their
international affiliates. The RWO introduced us to an alleged
member
of another non-existent g roup in order to demonstrate the
multiplicity of far left organizations in Ukraine.

By means of this present statement we wish to warn the
workers'
movement and far left organizations everywhere that a criminal
fraud
by sinister elements located in Ukraine is being perpetrated
upon the
working class and the socialist movement around the world.

The scam began to unravel when t

by Jerry Cornelius Fri Aug 29, 2003 11:40

LRP/COFI Statement on the Ukrainian "RWO"
After thorough investigation in collaboration with other
organizations, the League for the Revolutionary Party of the
United
States (LRP-U.S.) and the Communist Organization for the
Fourth
International (COFI) have conclusively determined that the
"Revolutionary Workers Organization" (RWO) in Ukraine,
which we had
recently accepted as a full member organization of COFI, has
in fact
never existed as a genuine organization. Its "members" and
"leaders,"
some of whom we had met more than once, were part of the
overall scam.
Therefore the "RWO" was not and is not a member section of
COFI.

We warn readers of Proletarian Revolution magazine that
reports and
articles that we have published by or about the RWO of
Ukraine, as
well as its affiliate, the RWO of Russia, are at best unreliable.
The
activity reports have proved to be untrue and no one should
rely on
their assertions about political events in those countries.

Incontrovertible evidence has been uncovered demonstrating
that a
group of purported "revolutionaries" in Ukraine has perpetrated
a
fraud upon at least ten far left organizations internationally, and
probably far more. These sinister elements have misrepresented
themselves as members of political groups in Ukraine which
claim to be
in agreement with a wide variety of different and opposing left
tendencies. The same individuals passed themselves off as
members and
leaders of multiple organizations. To convince international
organizations of their false political identities and affiliations,
they published fake leaflets and periodicals purporting to
express
their views and criticisms of various international organizations
and
other non-existent Ukrainian groups. They reported on
activities they
supposedly carried out in furtherance of their purported views
and
participated in extensive political discussions with their
international affiliates. The RWO introduced us to an alleged
member
of another non-existent g roup in order to demonstrate the
multiplicity of far left organizations in Ukraine.

By means of this present statement we wish to warn the
workers'
movement and far left organizations everywhere that a criminal
fraud
by sinister elements located in Ukraine is being perpetrated
upon the
working class and the socialist movement around the world.

The scam began to unravel when the Socialist Party of Great
Britain
exposed the fact that they were among the organizations
deceived.
Their statement is available on the internet at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/spintcom/message/2767. Other
groups have
informed us that they will shortly release their own statements
to the
same effect. We expect to issue a joint statement with some of
the
other affected organizations in the near future. And we will





Another Split?
by Magneto Thursday, Aug 28 2003, 10:53am


Whats this about the Indian Section leaving and any more info on the tampering with documents allegation? Will we now hear that they got money from NGOs/Trade Unions/Social Democrats?



Left Out
by Jerry Cornelius Thursday, Aug 28 2003, 10:56am


This is the end of the article, ommitted in error.

suspended the leadership of its Ukrainian section
and has
announced that it will conduct a full investigation as to whether
or
not this group was behind the sinister operation.

One evident reason for the bizarre conspiracy was to obtain
money from
abroad, cashing in by pointing to the very real poverty of the
Ukrainian working class. Given the sums involved, it is likely
that
theft was not the only reason for the scam. We do not know at
this
point whether it was organized by the Ukrainian secret police
or the
agencies of other governments. Nor do we know yet whether
the
perpetrators were simply common thieves. Whatever its
motivation, this
conspiracy has dealt a blow to the revival of the proletarian
movement, to Marxism in general and to Trotskyism in
particular, not
only in Ukraine but throughout the former Soviet Union and
around the
world. The heritage of Stalinism was already a massively
inhibiting
factor affecting the attitude of workers in the former Stalinist-
ruled
states toward revolutionary communism. These liars have
added their
own contribution to that distrust.

If and when we are able to determine exactly the nature of the
forces
behind this scam, we will publicize that information. We and
other
organizations will soon publish photographs of the criminals,
together
with their alternative names and the multiple organizations they
have
ostensibly founded and led. Let workers beware of these
charlatans.



Stuff happens
by Jim Monaghan Thursday, Aug 28 2003, 12:35pm


Two points
1. I remember a person ripping off the version of Sinn Fein I belonged too. He went with the raffle money.We let it go as we figured he had money problems. If he had come to us we would have tried to help him out as we figured it was not really a deliberate thing. It happens.
2. A more political point. A lot of groups judge people by their attitudes to their near opponents rather than their work in the real struggle. Workers Power and it's disappeared Irish affiliate the unlamented Irish Workers Group were so involved with the faults of their Trotskyist rivals that all other criteria went by the board.
There is an old comment that this brings to mind.
"Yes, it works in practice but does it work in theory".
This can be applied to the so called polemics between the sectarian groups.
Never mind their part in building the say the antiwar movement but what is their position on "deformed workers states"( Please add in whatever abstract debate of your choice")
No wonder the dupes were conned by a few documents which fufilled their needs rather than any real evidence of activity in any real struggle.
On a footnote this is not the first time this has happened and it will not be the last.
Alas, there are parts of the world where even a few bob from well meaning politicos could make a difference.



Ah Jim
by Pat C Thursday, Aug 28 2003, 12:44pm


The IWG may have been doctrinaire but they also played an important and useful part in many campaigns especially in the Dublin Abortion Information Campaign.



A reply from Lynn Walsh
by No hue and cry over Kiev Thursday, Aug 28 2003, 1:47pm


Report to the International Executive Committee on the
Alleged 'Fraud' Against 'Anti-capitalist' Organisations on a Global
Scale by the Ukrainian Section of the Committee For a Workers
International Part 1

At the end of the 1980s, Comrade Taffe predicted the 'Red 'Nineties'.
The growth during that period, of new sections of the CWI in various
countries, including the Ukraine and Pakistan, showed this
perspective to be totally correct.
In the first decade of the 21st Century however, (which have been
described by petit-bourgeois cynics as the 'Blue Zeros'), it was
necessary to re-assess our Bolshevik tactics in relation to the
United Front. Following the hijacking of our Socialist Party- sponsored Socialist Alliance in England by the SWP, the international
executive of our movement decided that rather than stick to rigid
organisational formulas, some new innovations were needed to draw in
young blood. Thus for the Ukraine, for example, a new original
formula for 'A United Front of a Special Kind' was adopted.
Our Ukrainian comrades in Workers Resistance (Robitnychiy Sprotiv -
RS) were encouraged to form, in an unsectarian manner, a united front
with ALL tendencies. We recognised from the beginning that there were
problems with this, as virtually the only revolutionary tendencies in
existence in the Ukraine were the CWI's RS and a sectarian Maoist
group of dubious origins. But it was decided nevertheless that if
organisations outside of the Ukraine wanted to set up 'sympathising
sections', the Ukrainian RS section would support their RIGHT to do
so and help them by inviting them to Kiev for discussions on ideas
for practical help for Ukrainian recruits, such as sending money from
the West for computers, office space, salaries, plane tickets etc. This is in fact what happened. The problem was that in reality, most
of these centrist and sectarian tendencies from the West had no
prospect whatever of building in the Ukraine. Also, some, if not all,
of our comrades, not wanting to disappoint the visitors, got carried
away and adopted the roles of being actual supporters of these groups
themselves. When queried on these activities at the time by the IEC,
the RS comrades argued that just as it has always been correctly
argued by Trotskists that lying is justified in order to protect
party cadres from witchhunts by social democrats and centrists, it
was similarly correct to say whatever was necessary to protect the
CWI from undue pressure in having to explain complex concepts of
revolutionary unity to the sectarians which were beyond their level
of political maturity (to be fair, it must said that many of these
visitors, of petit bourgeois, bohemian, backgrounds were plying our
healthy young comrades with alcoholic drinks).
As more groups than we could count were 'invited' and money from the
West started piling in (there was much more than had been
anticipated), the problem was what to do with it. All of the groups
which the centrists and sectarians thought they had set up
were 'virtual' rather than real (the lack of interest in these sects
in the Ukraine was no fault of our own, it must be added). This being
the case, there was no real way to spend the money 'directly' on
their behalf. We agreed that our Ukrainian RS members should put the
money to good use in the elections by paying the salaries of our
overworked fulltimers and a not unreasonable affiliation fee to the
CWI. (And of course it goes without saying that if somebody in the
Ukraine really did, despite the successes of RS, want to form a group
in alliance with any of the Western sectarians they could apply for
financial assistance through the proper channels.)
Comrades, the fact that we did get RS members elected as councillors
would alone justify this within the more general truth, constantly
stressed by Lenin and Trotsky, that the left as whole benefits from
the class struggle, and that the best organiser of this struggle is
the world party of the proletariat, which in the current epoch is the
CWI.
We would also point out that those larger organisations in the West -
such as the SWP and Socialist Appeal - were not targeted in this
particular unity offensive. Our careful attitude here is deserving of
the utmost respect from these comrades.
We have recently learned that in August 2002 an email on an internet
Russian-language Left newsgroup drew attention to certain
inconsistencies of the 'practice', such as the 'oddness' of different
Ukrainian tendencies sharing the same address etc. Unfortunately our
Russian section, in which we have a fulltime British organiser, did
not think anyone would pay any attention and ignored it. Worse was to
come however. More will be revealed when we issue Part Two of our
report, but for the present it is necessary to say that not only were
all the Ukrainian sections set up by Western leftists
merely 'virtual' but that our own Ukrainian section was a 100 per
cent fake.
We never did have a Ukrainian section. What we had were a gang of
sophisticated fraudsters pretending to be CWI supporters, though
secretly operating their own counter-revolutionary code of
discipline. We can however, assure the international workers movement
that these elements will be dealt with in the most severe terms.
Although this gang has now deserted the movement and walked off with
the cash (and no doubt to sell their story to the highest bidder in
the capitalist media) we will show no mercy. We will expel them
anyway.
Some sectarians have refused to rule out the possibility that this
whole business was organised by us unwittingly or otherwise on behalf
of one or more state security service with the aim of disrupting
sections of the 'anti-capitalist' left on a global scale. Frankly
this is laughable. While the CWI, like many groups, has had problems
with penetration agents in the past, we have never allowed them to
influence our policies or compromise our principles and we have
always thought that drawing attention to such matters discourages
potential recruits and feeds conspiracy theorists. If the RS fakers
had any political motives, it is most likely that they were
anarchist. Indeed their petit-bourgeois, anti-bolshevik refusal to
turn up and be disciplined by our commission points in this direction
(and of course we would point out that whem we ran Liverpool, our
own 'security service', known affectionately as 'MillyFive', was very
effective against centrists and sectarians).
As a result of all this, there may be demands by sectarians to
ostracise CWI cadres, expel them from internet newsgroups, boot out
our numerous full-time union officials and generally treat our
comrades with calumny. We should fight any such moves in no uncertain
terms. Since we were more fooled than anybody else, we should not
take seriously demands that the CWI reimburse those 30-50
organisations from around the world who have made, or will make, very
serious allegations of fraud against us. The Socialist Party of
England and Wales and the Committee for a Wonkers International
simply cannot afford charity to other organisations at this time. We
might, on the other hand, send a written apology for
the 'misunderstanding' to any organisation that promises not make any
more allegations of these sort or take legal action against us.
Although no doubt mistakes have been made, our leadership has done
its best under difficult circumstances. Foreign sections come and go
but the Party goes on for ever! All members must be instructed to
stand by and prepare to defend the Party from its detractors. Out
watchword must be 'No Hue and Cry over Kiev!'
Lynn Welch on behalf on the Commission



Sad affair
by Brian Cahill - Socialist Party Thursday, Aug 28 2003, 2:28pm


This is a sad incident.

A few weeks ago a small left wing organisation in Britain, the SPGB received an email from somebody in the Ukraine. This email claimed that the SPGB's sister organisation in the Ukraine, the World Socialist Party of the Ukraine, did not really exist.

Instead they were being tricked by some Kiev members of an organisation called Workers Resistance. Workers Resistance is affiliated to the Committee for a Workers International (CWI).

When a member of the SPGB mentioned this on an email list that some members of the CWI are also on, the allegation and the evidence gathered by the SPGB was passed on to the CWI. Other left wing organisations also began to come forward announcing that they have been involved in similar incidents.

The CWI is taking these allegations extremely seriously. An investigation has been established and the Ukrainian National Committee and the Kiev Regional Committee of Workers Resistance have been suspended pending its conclusions.

By the way, just in case anybody is taken in by the comments from "Lynn Walsh" above, they are a (reasonably amusing) satire and were not written by anybody connected with the CWI.



Question for Brian
by CWI Analyst Thursday, Aug 28 2003, 2:37pm


Actually, Brian, I thought it improbable that Lynn Walsh had written the above. I hear that he has now discovered that your version of democratic centralism is actually bureaucratic centralism, that he has launched a faction to fight for his views, that he no longer speaks to Peter Taaffe and that in ways we all know so well expulsions may be imminent. Care to comment?



Coming in his pants...
by Magnus fan Thursday, Aug 28 2003, 2:44pm


Look at Magnus nearly creaming himself in the hope that there might be trouble in the Indian sister organisation of the Socialist Party and that there might be allegations of "tampering with documents"! His obsession is so total that it might almost be sweet.

Unfortunately his obsession isn't matched by his literacy. If he had read the documents above with a little more care he might have realised that the organisations rowing about some incident in India have nothing to do with the Irish Socialist Party, the English and Welsh Socialist Party or the CWI.

Oh well Magnus, I'm sure you will find something else to troll about in a few minutes.



Hi Johnno
by Magneto Thursday, Aug 28 2003, 3:27pm


Glad to see you are still a fan, still dont get the name right though. Dont you think you should br dealing with the central issue of the fraud committed by your Ukraine Section rather than trying to put a spin on things. My error was minor in comparison to being taken in by a bunch of conmen.

I have to admit I'm surprised that your English AND Welsh SP hasnt fused with the SPGB. I'll bet you envy them that name!



Life Of Brian Cahill
by Agent of Chaos Thursday, Aug 28 2003, 3:32pm


"A few weeks ago a small left wing organisation in Britain, the SPGB received an email from somebody in the Ukraine. "

Come on now Brian! Small? The SP in England & Wales has a max of 400 members. The SPGB is bigger than you.



Committee for a Workers’ International statement on UKraine
by CWI Thursday, Aug 28 2003, 3:52pm


Statements are currently circulating on the web regarding the
Ukrainian section of the CWI. These include the allegation
that members of the Ukrainian section of the CWI have made
approaches to other organisations in order to obtain finances
on a dubious and false premise.

Neither the International Secretariat or the International
Executive Committee of the CWI nor the leadership of the
CIS section of the CWI knew about this alleged activity. Such
dishonest methods of obtaining finances is neither condoned
nor supported by the CWI and its leadership. The CWI is
proud of its principled political approach on political and
organisational questions. The finances of the CWI and its
sections are raised from the international working class and
youth including the tremendous self-sacrifice of our
membership.

The CWI is totally opposed to the methods alleged to have
been used by the leadership of the Ukrainian section and
regard them as serious charges. The CWI has therefore
suspended the Ukrainian National Committee and the Kiev
City Committee pending the results of an investigation which
is now being organised by the CWI. Following the conclusion
of such an investigation all appropriate action will be taken.

related link: http://www.worldsocialist-cwi.org



Federation Once Again!
by pat c Thursday, Aug 28 2003, 4:03pm


"Neither the International Secretariat or the International
Executive Committee of the CWI nor the leadership of the
CIS section of the CWI knew about this alleged activity"

The Leadership of the CIS section??????

Ye Gods! They wont even let the different ex Soviet Union States have their own sections!

There once was a Soviet Union so there must be one again! None of this nonsense about self-determination!

These guys are something else.



CWI
by Marc Mulholland Thursday, Aug 28 2003, 4:20pm
[email protected]

The Ukrainian affair seems unfortunate for all concerned.

Allow me again, if you will, to mention my memoirs of days in Militant / CWI at http://marcmulholland.tripod.com/histor/ . Cheers.



Marc
by Belfaster Thursday, Aug 28 2003, 4:45pm


Looking forward to next piece



Cheers, Marc
by Ray Thursday, Aug 28 2003, 4:47pm


I'm enjoying those pieces - well worth reading.



Great Stuff Marc
by pat c Thursday, Aug 28 2003, 4:55pm


Its good to se the Truth about Finn Geaneys treatment online.



More praise....
by archivist Thursday, Aug 28 2003, 4:58pm


I'd also like to add my praise for Marc's material. It is very useful. It began on a thread debating how cultic or otherwise the CWI was/ is, and I have found his detailed description of such issues as how dissent and so-called debate actually occurs very revealing. I do not believe that these approaches can usefully inform the building of any new movement to change society. Thanks Marc.



CPGB Contribution to CWI Scam story
by Amused observer Friday, Aug 29 2003, 10:09am


Weekly Worker 493 Thursday August 28 2003

Attack of the clones
The revolutionary left plays at ‘internationalism’. Events in the Ukraine prove that beyond doubt
A bizarre collection of organisations on the revolutionary left have been on the receiving end of a petty, but nonetheless politically quite sophisticated, fraud dating back to at least the late 1900s. Five young Ukrainian conspirators - seemingly with a background in the ‘official communist’ Komsomol and well able to pick up the vital factional nuances of left politics in the Anglo-Saxon world - managed to pass themselves off as ‘sections’ of anything up to 12 different organisations. A feat which might be explained by the claim that they first met each other in an “amateur acting troupe”.

Those stung include Peter Taaffe’s Committee for a Workers’ International, the Alliance for Workers’ Liberty, Sheila Torrance’s Workers Revolutionary Party and its ‘Fourth International’, the US-based League for a Revolutionary Party, the Committees of Correspondence (publishers of News and Letters), the International Bolshevik Tendency, the Socialist Party of Great Britain and Workers Power, along with its burlesque League for the Fifth International. Plans were also being hatched to establish links with colonel Gaddafi and his regime in Libya - that at least might have proved to be a real money-spinner.

Using a whole string of aliases - Alexander, Ivor, Ivan, Jukuv, Kyril, Marsha, Alyosha, Ihor, Pugachov, Mikhail, Oleksity, Sergey Kozubenkow, Vadym Yevtoshok, Vassily, Viktor, Vitality, Yakov - Boris Pastukh, Oleg Vernik (assistant lecturer at a Kiev law school and mastermind of the fraud), Oleksander Zvorsky (born 1972), Yuri Baronov (born 1984) and Zakhar Popovich (born 1976) recreated in fictional microcosm the factional struggles and rivalries that plague the left in Britain and the US. Negotiations, polemics, splits and all. This doubtlessly pleased their ‘masters’ in London and New York no end.

In a spirit of internationalism, but presumably with an eye to outdoing their rivals on the left, various groups channelled money and material resources to aid those whom they believed to be their co-thinkers. For example, it seems that at least three organisations were supplying cash for the upkeep of an ‘office’ in Kiev. Besides that there were trips to Germany, Britain and elsewhere.

Now the whole scam has been exposed. Apparently the executive committee of the SPGB got the feeling that all was not well with their World Socialist Party Ukraine in July. Their minutes put the worries on record. The penny dropped for the IBT and Workers Power on August 14. A leading WP comrade was boastfully displaying a photograph of the organisation’s recent world congress to an IBT member. Standing on either side of the said WPer were two Ukrainian comrades - they were instantly recognisable. They were the IBT’s key comrades in their own Ukrainian section. Photos and information were quickly exchanged between factional centres - everyone had been conned.

With exposure the various Ukrainian ‘sections’ have simply winked out of existence and the CWI - said to be the original host organism - has suspended its whole Ukrainian membership pending a full investigation.

The fiasco is not without its funny side, of course. The Sting meets Life of Brian. For instance, we also received an approach from these people (see below). A little later, we got a furious email from a leading AWLer, demanding to know what ‘our group’ in the Ukraine was doing putting out leaflets attacking their group, the Ukrainian Workers Tendency. They were - of course - the same people. Even better, I have often been teased by a leading member of the minuscule IBT in Britain that at least his group in the Ukraine was bigger than ours. As it turns out, they were exactly the same size, comrade. Whatever else can be said about this mob, you cannot criticise them for not working for the money …

Perhaps tempted by what they saw as our relatively successful fundraising efforts, these con-artists contacted us in June of last year. Complimenting us on our role in the Socialist Alliance, the self-styled “Communist Struggle Group (Ukraine)” told us that the main thrust of its work was “the call to establish of a wide socialist anti-Stalinist alliance like the SA in the UK”, with the perspective of this bloc developing in the direction of a “real mass socialist party”.

Some discussions were mentioned with the Ukrainian Workers Tendency - the “organisation of supporters of the Alliance for Workers’ Liberty”. While the CSG(U) agreed with “some of their programme documents”, the UWT still needed to “overcome a lot of dogmatic, authoritarian and sectarian Trotskyist” baggage (Weekly Worker June 13 2002). A carefully crafted ‘teaser’ of a letter, in other words, designed to get us reaching for our cheque book. However, I don’t think the ‘comrades’ were that encouraged by our reply …

We publicly answered the letter in the following issue of our paper (this open exchange caused some consternation back in Kiev at the time - now we understand why). We agreed that the SA represented a potential route out of the sectarian impasse in which the UK left found itself. At the same time, we noted that “abroad, the sects still seem to behave in the old way … the various splinters of the British revolutionary left have attempted to build Ukrainian replicas of themselves. This is sad to watch, frankly.

“Groups that can barely reproduce themselves in this country expend gargantuan amounts of time, resources and energy attempting to construct ‘Potemkin village’ versions of themselves in other parts of the globe. Entertainingly, members of these sects will castigate our organisation for not being interested in this sterile and pointless work - ‘You’re not internationalists,’ they taunt us. In fact, their understanding of ‘internationalism’ is thoroughly degenerate.

“Our comrade Marcus Ström has cuttingly dubbed their efforts as constructing ‘oil-slick internationals’. Given time and tide (and the internet), it is possible to spread yourself over a wide geographical area and pick up small knots of (supposed) co-thinkers across the world. There is no depth to the phenomenon, however. It is all on the surface and, given the non-permeable nature of the material, it can never go any deeper. A sect internationalising itself is not ‘internationalism’” (Weekly Worker June 20 2002).

Concretely, we offered our ‘comrades’ in the Ukraine access to the Weekly Worker to develop their ideas and openly engage with other trends, including our own; technical help with the construction of websites or publishing projects; joint work at the Florence European Social Forum that year; an invite to Communist University and assistance and advice on launching their own Summer Offensive-style fund drive.

Now, we are not claiming to be staggeringly more clever than any of the groups who were stung. It is quite feasible that this Ukrainian mob might have been able to con some cash out of us eventually - if they had not so busy with trends who were an easier touch, perhaps. We do believe the incident has highlighted two very different approaches to the key question of ‘internationalism’, however.

First, our organisation is not interested in creating identikit clones of itself across the globe. We emphasised independent fundraising tasks to the Ukrainian ‘comrades’, because we have learned from our own experience in the ‘official’ world communist movement an important truth. One prerequisite of independent politics is independent finances, the ability to have the wherewithal to say what you want, about whom you want, when you want.

A genuine communist international will - like the Third International - represent the coming together of different revolutionary trends and traditions, fusing on the basis of historic victories of our class. The criterion for joining this world party of revolution will not be bland ‘agreement’ with this or that shibboleth, to employ a currently loaded term. It will be a living political entity. Sects which seek to ‘internationalise’ their own arid impotence via a forlorn, massively time-consuming global quest for co-thinkers are unlikely to have much positive to contribute to any world party of the future.

Second, we agree with Lenin: “There is one, and only one, kind of internationalism,” he pointedly states. “And that is working wholeheartedly for the development of the revolutionary movement and the revolutionary struggle in one’s own country, and supporting (by propaganda, sympathy and material aid) this struggle and only this line in every country without exception” (VI Lenin CW Vol 24, Moscow 1977, p24).

The “development of the revolutionary movement” in this country would be greatly enhanced by the principled unity of the revolutionary left, a step forward tantalisingly glimpsed in the best moments of the SA. The fight for this is the concrete, genuinely Leninist application of internationalism in today’s UK.

Mark Fischer

by Cynic Fri Aug 29, 2003 11:46

The SP Junta are really hopping about the Marc Mulholland Blog, so maybe thats why the whole thread was moved to the story thread. Want Risible the Duty Editor yesterday? Hes a real by the book dude, sounds like a Leninist.

Watchout Indy! There could be a SP cuckoo in the IMC nest.

by IMCer Fri Aug 29, 2003 12:01

If somebody has a problem with an editorial decision the appropriate place to take it up is on the open editorial list.

The editorial list exists to allow everyone who uses Indymedia and who takes an interest in the site to take part in the decision making process.

Ignoring the editorial list and trying to make yourself heard by reposting deleted or moved comments on the newswire is unacceptable behaviour.

Once more, the newswire is not the place for this. The editorial list is. Posting this kind of thing here only guarantees that it will be deleted or moved again.

by Belfaster Fri Aug 29, 2003 12:06

Would that surprise me?, still looking forward though to Marc's next piece, already has been and is being read widely, confirms what people have been saying all along especially that it has now come from a once leadership figure. No doubt though now the stories of what an evil person Marc was while in the SP will be circulated to their membership.

by Jerry Cornelius Fri Aug 29, 2003 12:15

So if I expose a dodgy action on the part of the Editors it means my piece will be deleted? Why wont you openly say why you moved a factual piece to a spoof story thread?

Who was the Editor who did this and why did they do it?

by Magneto Fri Aug 29, 2003 12:21

But in the best interests of Indymedia Ireland, the questions should be answered. Telling someone that their complaint is going to be deleted does not inspire confidence in the IMC Editorial Group, a hardworking and dedicated bunch.

I personally cannot see the logic in moving a factually based piece to a thread which was taken up with a fantasy pastiche. However, I may well be missing the point. I wish the relevant Editor would educate me.

But please do so on the Newsline. It is not whinging to disagree in public with an editorial decision. It is known as Free Speech and Democracy.

by Andrew Fri Aug 29, 2003 12:25

The editoral list may be the place to settle the detail of editoral policy but its obviously useful that contributors who feel unjustly treated can 'whinge' on the newswire and that others can then react to these whinges. If 90% of the other contributors agree with the original whinger then I'd imagine this will have some impact on the way such policy is implement in the future. On the other hand if 90% of the other contributors tell the whinger to cop themselves on in most cases (bar the nuts) this will effect their future behaviour.

by Agent of Chaos Fri Aug 29, 2003 12:36

Neither do I in any way believe tha the indy gang (as a whole) are up to dirty tricks. But this was an odd move. An open explanation would help.

Slapping complainers down is not the way forward. Lets have an explanation and leave the reposted materiel up.

by pat c Fri Aug 29, 2003 12:41

Leave this up and do give a reason for the original move. Risible has reasons for getting tetchy, he does get abuse but if he moved this then he should give an explanation.

by Anthony Fri Aug 29, 2003 13:29

I checked the archives of the editorial list and I can't see any mention of the move. Now that I think about it, it seems to be only deletions that get posted to the list. In any case, I imagine that the explanation for this move is simple enough. A conspiracy by an editor to hide the truth or discredit a story is one of the least likely reasons.

I notice that IBT was the first to report on the Ukrainian scam as a comment "Real life is odder" to the satirical piece. It in turn was then followed by a few people commenting on the scam. I imagine that the editor who came across the article from Jerry Cornelius figured that since it was on the same topic as the last few comments on the Star Wars / CWI article, it should be moved there to keep the continuity of that thread and avoid the scenario of having two ongoing threads discussing the same issue.

by Jerry Cornelius Fri Aug 29, 2003 13:38

The moved piece has a lot more materiel and an original introduction. Thanks for revealing that it was moved without discussion on the Editorial LIst and at the whim of an individual Editor.

by seedot Fri Aug 29, 2003 14:11

There does seem to be an issue with things being moved not generating an automatic mail, but the piece was moved because (quote from tech list - not my mail)


> As it was I moved the "story" anyway as it contained
> substantial direct duplication and was a comment on an
> earlier story anyway:
> http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=60807&results_offset=40

The reason this was on the tech list was the comments under the story were v. small due to an issue with stories of that size being truncated (along with closing tags).

The reason it was moved seems reasonable to me - but I found it amusing the first time and way too long and boring the second time. Anything over 1500 words I prefer on dead tree.

by Jerry Cornelius Fri Aug 29, 2003 14:19

It certainly was not a comment on a previous story, the previous story was just that, a work of fiction. This was factual reportage and analysis.

It was also a lot mor substantial than the comment which had been posted to the spoof thread.

You may have a short attention span but some people appreciate getting the whole truth.

The fact that the deletion wasnt even informed to the Editorial List makes me suspect the Editor concerned was on a solo run . I would like it if he or she would come forward and explain their actions.

by Cynic Fri Aug 29, 2003 14:44

If you want to see freemasonry in action just go to the Editorial List. Aidan O'Brien is black-balling Iosaf from becoming an editor.

Why?

Because Iosaf sent Aisan a rude email! If you want to join the Lodge then you had better be polite to the men who count.

by Anthony Fri Aug 29, 2003 14:53

I agree that the Ukrainian scam is a separate story and deserves to have an article of its own. Ideally, IBT would have posted it as a separate article in the first place but s/he presumably didn't think that it was newsworthy enough to be a separate article.

Normally, it's not a big problem if a thread gets moved. People often start new articles based on comments from a previous piece and they are moved back to the original article without any fuss. For deletions, the publishing software, Ireland IMC's very own Oscailt, asks the editor for a reason then automatically sends a mail to the list. The fact that no mail was sent to the editorial list is quite ususal in the case of moving stories and not indicative of any kind of subterfuge or bias on behalf of the editor.

I'm sure the editor in question will reply personally when next he's online. They don't work 24 hours a day.

by ec Fri Aug 29, 2003 15:19

cynic - you omitted to mention that because things generally proceed by consensus on the editorial lists - aidan is also being blackballed by mr. o as if at present. Aidan is not an active editor at present.

Gazing into my crystal ball I see Mr. o as if replacing pat c in aidan's affections eventually. It's like that around here. We all become fond of the strangest people.

As for freemasonry - I am a member of editorial group and there are three others who work on it who I know only by first name or pseudonym and who I am not conscious of ever having met in the offline world.

More people needed always especially those interested in generating features or original reports / especially from outside the hole that is dubbalin.

by pat c Fri Aug 29, 2003 15:45

EC how could you suggest that Iosaf might replace me in Aidans affections? Even though things are purely platonic, I still hope that Aidan will become my Boswell (not Boise).

I dont think anything sinister is going on here, I just think the Editor in question made an unwise decision. The person who posted as IMCer just made things worse.

by SP Fan Fri Aug 29, 2003 19:08

INTRODUCTION TO 'IDEOLOGICAL INTRANSIGENCE, DEMOCRATIC CENTRALISM AND CULTISM' Dennis Tourish


IDEOLOGICAL INTRANSIGENCE, DEMOCRATIC CENTRALISM AND CULTISM: A CASE STUDY Dennis Tourish

http://mysite.freeserve.com/whatnext

In "Next issue of What Next" section.

by Cynic Fri Aug 29, 2003 19:30

How long is your investigation going to take? Are you hoping we'll all forget about it?

by Fan of SP fan Fri Aug 29, 2003 21:35

Interesting review of Tourish's book in issue 17 of What Next.

by fan of fan of sp fan Fri Aug 29, 2003 23:47

There may indeed be a review of the book in issue 17, but the posting from SP fan relates to an earlier paper on the subject that what next have produced. in any event, there is an alternative thread on the CWI is a cult issue which can be used.

Maybe you should practice not only opening your eyes, but also your mind. Sorry about my high expectations.

by R Isible - 1 of IMC Editorial Sat Aug 30, 2003 00:50

Seedot quotes me accurately from the tech-list, I moved the story to become a comment because it is a comment on the previously existing thread which was about the CWI and how they are having some trouble or other with something or other.

I make no apologies for moving it and would do it again and disagree with Anthony's opinion that it deserves a newswire post all by itself. It was on the same topic as an existing subject and contained substantial duplications.

Further, the arrogant posting of this "why was it moved" piece instead of a posting to [email protected] is a demonstration of the near-autistic insistence of the posters of this "news" that their squabbles be elevated to a more prominent position.

W.r.t. the "risible is an undercover SP member" I refuse to comment other than to say that my editorial decisions are made with the intent of indymedia.ie becoming something more than a display of irrelevant, incoherent, cliquish backstabbing which serves mainly to stroke the egos of those involved.

I'd much rather see pieces like the Food Not Bombs story, or the Michael Moore story or the reports from Tim Hourigan about Shannon or the "US warship" story -- real news stories, not endless pointless bickering that serves to make "the left" look like a bunch of fools.

I can't stop you (Pat C, Agent of Chaos, Curious, King Mob, who-effing-ever) from re-posting cut-and-paste screeds from whatever niche-listserv s your on, but I can stop you spreading it into multiple stories within the same week when there's a thread already dealing with the story and I can stop you duplicating material.

I'll continue to do so unless the rest of the editors object in which case I'll bow to their decision.

If you don't like the decisions the editorial-collective makes then the solution is to quit yer bitchin and become an editor. That's what I did: I wanted more of your rubbish deleted because I thought a valuable resource (an independent open newswire for Ireland) was in danger of being swamped with reposted stories, mainstream cut-n-paste spin, trivial personal abuse and all the other detritus that you can find anywhere on the net or in print.

If you don't like that, then do something about it: become an editor.

by R Isible - 1 of IMC editorial Sat Aug 30, 2003 01:00

the fact that you insist upon reposting the now-definitely-duplicated material (and a long set of rubbish it is too) demonstrates at least two things:
1. You are unaware of a more effective and sophisticated use of the medium known as "the web" which provides handy things called "URLs" which are referenced by "hyperlinks". You could have used one of those instead of wearing out your mouse hand.

2. You insist on reposting _before_ you have clarified why your article was _moved_ and not _deleted_.

As a final point of interest: is "jerry cornelius" a pseudonym for "Pat C"? You display the same fondness for long tedious cut-n-paste jobs and the same obsession with the SP, so it makes me wonder.

by pat c Sat Aug 30, 2003 19:04

It should be obvious that more than one person posts as Jerry Cornelius.As I stated above though I think it should have been left up and I dont think your "justification" stands up to scruitiny.
I do think you have received some unjustified abuse but, as an editor, some humility and the acceptance that you might have made an error would not go amiss.

When however did the Editorial Collective decide that the piece should be moved ? Certainly not on the editorial list.

by R Isible Sat Aug 30, 2003 19:38

1. All that's obvious is that at least one person with what borders on an obsession with the SP and a fondness for cutting-and-pasting insists on posting and reposting and reposting about them. This looks very sad and weird and serves to make all the combatants look like complete nutcases. Have you ever tried showing indymedia.ie to someone with no involvement in organised politics as an "alternate newssource"? "Don't waste your time reading the Herald", you might have said to them, "don't get trapped into reading the perceptions of a small number of journalists embedded into the system in Ireland. There's an alternative -- it allows people to publish the news they see in their area and does a side-step around the fact that it's too expensive to publish a newspaper or run a TV station. It's great, it lets people tell their own news from their own perspective." Then they read it and the first thing they see is an interminable flame-fest about something obscure which goes on and on and gets thrown up in every topic and subject. I've had the misfortune to recommend indymedia.ie to several people and have had to spend no small time backtracking and explaining that unfortunately there's no way to get the participants to cooperate if they're insane, but that there are however a large number of interesting sane posts and the majority of contributors are trying to work together to create a new medium instead of feeding off old, pathetic disputes. 2. Editorial decisions are made by editors, deletions are automatically notified to the list. Downgrading of non-stories to become comments on earlier threads are not. This, as has been pointed out above in other editor's comments is something that needs to be rectified. In this case I discussed the downgrading on the technical list and forgot that I would have to manually inform the editorial list. No conspiracy. Although the reach of the SP is long and their agents look just like you and me and the only way to unmask them is to search for their third-nipple this is not one of their dastardly plots and I have no extra body parts. End of story.

by pat c Sat Aug 30, 2003 19:50

You seem rather intolerant of other peoples opinions. You as an individual decided to move this story, it was not the decision of an editorial collective.You are not even prepared to consider the opinions posted which are contrary to your own.

As Cromwell said to the extreme Presbyterians: "I beseech thee, consider in the bowels of Christ that ye might be wrong".

It really is rather funny also that you accuse me of impersonation when you choose to hide behind a mask.

by pat c Sat Aug 30, 2003 19:56

You know you use the same terms as SPers, because I disagree with the SP and have posted materiel which is embarassing to them, I must be a weirdo.

Makes me wonder about your political allegiances. Perhaps some of the other posters are correct and you are misusing your editorial privileges for your own political ends.

It doesnt pay to be polite or to defend people like you, you just take it as a sign of weakness.

by R Isible Sat Aug 30, 2003 20:28

A thread that existed on the newswire dealing with a StarWars parody about the CWI. Within this thread was a discussion that dealt with the CWI being scammed. Some days later a "new" story appeared on the newswire that dealt with the CWI being scammed. I moved it. The story was not deleted so a deletion notice did not go to the editorial list. Luckily there was also a technical problem that I mentioned on the technical list, so I have evidence that I did not act in secret. I should have ensured that the other editors were notified but I made an error. No pro-SP cover up is in operation. I still believe that what I did was right and that contributors should post to existing threads instead of starting new ones. As far as "humility" and an "inability to accept others opinions", you may well be correct, but all I can tell you is that I'm doing what I believe to be right and I'm not going to pretend that I believe otherwise in an effort to appear "reasonable" and win some sort of popularity contest. I'm as uninterested in that as I am in personal abuse. I'm sorry if you feel that my genuine description of how the SP "debate" appears "weird" is an insult -- it's not intended to be. I actually see it as abnormal, and as I pointed out this has been commented on by other people with no axes to grind that were fresh to the site. They don't bother to read it any more and I haven't the heart to pressure them to do so given the current climate. That's all. I'm not going to reply on this anymore as I feel that the explanation is clear and you've already taken this discussion to the editorial list and further responses from me won't clarify anything further here.

by pat c Sat Aug 30, 2003 20:53

You think you are right, and you wont take into accont the opinions of others.

by ec Sat Aug 30, 2003 22:58

don't you think by now that if others on ed. lists disagreed with risible strongly on this we'd be pointing it out on the list. the only logical conclusion is that we don't have a problem with what he did and his small slipup in not informing the correct list.

Both of yiz should chill out and forget this

by help - help Sun Aug 31, 2003 02:59

pat can't you see your obbsession is getting annoying. Now one else gives a toss except you.
joe higgins ukranian friends don't keep me awake at night. Please more editors with their feet in reality!!! stories that matter to us. Thank you
and fair play (and no pat i'm not in any party)

by joe Mon Sep 01, 2003 10:18

What do people think of the actual post

by pat c Mon Sep 01, 2003 11:22

from what i can see several members of the editorial list have disagreed with the actions of risible. you should also take andrews comments into account. how many people on this thread have supported risible?

eamon, you are missing the main point, i didnt post or repost this article. if i had assembled this collection of bits and pieces about the Ukraine affair then i would have been happy to claim responsibility.

i think this is yet another example of independent "anarchist" merry pranksters. they dont like the sp because of its leninism and they dont like me because of my republicanism. possibly the same people who impersonated john throne and posted his open letter to the sp here. might even be the people who have been impersonating me & brian cahill. could it even be those who create imaginary sp/sy members who make statements wgich show the sp in a bad light.

to my helpful friend, do you think that john throne, john reimann, dennis tourish, marc mulholland et al are obsessed with you?

by help - none thanks be to jaysus Tue Sep 02, 2003 03:06

You're missing the point pat! I don't know who any of these people are, i'm interested in NEWS. From the NEWSWIRE! Relevant NEWS about whats HAPPENING now. And I'm frankly sick of all the silly little inter party/sect/individual scraps which are nothing but intellectual wanks. You know I got more news about bincharges in my two local freebies than on indymedia. They had a socialist councillor in them and they didn't mention a cult from the ukraine, do you think they are missing something (or is it indymedia)
This site is not normal anymore - look through the debates they are meaningless to anyone not in the socialist party or their rivals, completely meaningless. Christ it drives me mad, in fact fuck it I quit I'm going back to my locals forever!

by Gloating..... Tue Sep 02, 2003 15:11

Here is the CWI IS statement -


'Subject: Statement from the IS of the CWI on the Ukraine





Statement from the International Secretariat of the CWI on the
Ukraine Organisation

In late July and early August, allegations concerning the leadership
of the Kiev and Ukrainian organisations of the CWI were brought to
our attention. Serious charges of fraud against this leadership in
their dealings with many left groups internationally were made and
since then CWI representatives have investigated them.
Unfortunately, we have found that, in substance, these allegations
appear to be true. Indeed, when confronted with these charges, the
leadership of the Ukrainian organisation admitted that they had
pursued a policy of deception in their dealings with many left
groups. This was done, they claim, in order to obtain "information"
about these groups, but primarily to gather funds from these
organisations.

Up to this time, the leadership of the CWI and the International
Secretariat, as well as the IEC, were completely unaware that these
methods were being used. They are totally at variance with the
longstanding methods, both politically and organisationally,
practised by our International. As soon as it was confirmed, by
these individuals in Kiev, that these dishonest methods had been
used, we took the step of suspending the leadership of the Kiev and
Ukrainian organisations. Since then, in a visit to Kiev, an
investigation has been conducted by the CWI and we are now in
possession of a more detailed picture of what the Ukrainian
leadership has done over a period of years in their dealings with
other political revolutionary groups.

In 1999, there was a discussion in the Kiev organisation about the
need to find money. This led to the establishment of a so- called `International Department' in February 2000, which the CWI
had no knowledge of and which we did not discover until recently.
The leaders of the Kiev organisation claim that this was set up for
two specific reasons:
a) To gather information internationally on political organisations,
programme, etc;
b) In order to raise money to finance the activity of the Kiev and
Ukrainian organisation.

The Kiev leadership sent out e-mails to many left organisations, the
exact number of which still remains unclear. These secret approaches
were designed to elicit support, in the main not from the major
international Trotskyist or revolutionary organisations – presumably
because this would attract immediate attention and would be drawn to
the attention of the CWI.

A number of these organisations responded and some sent
representatives to Kiev. It seems that when one of these groups
decided on a visit, the Kiev leadership created, in effect, a dummy
organisation, which would make favourable comments to the visiting
delegation, which in some cases would lead to financial rewards and
support. Some of the Kiev leadership in turn visited a number of
countries, without informing the IS or the leaders or members of the
CWI sections in the countries which they visited. These visits were
undertaken primarily in order to discuss and obtain financial
support.

Financial support was forthcoming, in amounts varying from $1000 to
$1500, to small donations of hundreds of dollars from a number of
organisations. Some of this money, claims the Ukrainian leadership,
was used to finance an office, not to further the aims of the
organisations who supplied the finance but allegedly to continue
with their work as the official section of the CWI in the Ukraine.
In addition to this, equipment, including computers, second-hand
laptops, was furnished to the Kiev and Ukrainian organisations. At
the time that this was done we had no knowledge of these dealings.
Recently, however, some suspicions were generated in our CIS section
because of unspecified rumours about what was happening in the
Ukraine, which were taken up by representatives of the CIS
leadership and were vehemently denied by the Ukrainian leadership.
If any proposals of this character had been made to the CWI, we
would have immediately demanded that they cease or else these
individuals would no longer have been considered to be members of
the CWI.

Precisely because the Ukrainian leadership understood this, they
kept these operations completely secret from the international
leadership and the membership of the CWI. This involved going to
considerable lengths in employing subterfuge in order to hide these
fraudulent operations. In seeking to explain why they adopted such
shameful methods of deceit and duplicity, the Kiev and Ukrainian
leadership have tried to justify this "politically". They insist
that it was not purely for personal financial gain that they
resorted to these methods. In a completely twisted and amoral
distortion of the political opposition that the CWI has to other
groups on the left, these individuals believed that any method was
justified in order to financially exploit them on what was, in
effect, a fake and dishonest political basis.

We totally repudiate these methods and have done so consistently
throughout our history. We conduct an honest, open political
struggle against the ideas and methods of political organisations on
the left opposed to us. We have totally rejected in the past the use
of dishonest financial methods within the labour movement. We have a
spotless banner and honest method on the issue of raising money. For
instance, the right wing in the British Labour Party, together with
the capitalist press in the witch-hunt against the CWI section in
Britain, Militant (now the Socialist Party) in the 1970s and 1980s,
accused us of raising money from all sorts of alleged dubious
and `foreign' sources. We answered these slanders clearly at the
time and we repeat here; every penny which we raise comes from our
members, supporters and from a broad layer of sympathisers within
the organised working class movement in each country where we have a
presence and internationally.

The CWI has never received any political or financial support from
big business, from state organisations, from `foreign powers', etc.
In those cases where we have discovered that groups, individuals or
sections of the CWI have acted in violation of these revolutionary
principles we have not hesitated to separate ourselves from them. In
the neo-colonial world, in particular, with the crushing cultural
and economic deprivation and poverty of the masses, the issue of
finance and how it is raised by the revolutionary movement is a
touchstone. Such are the conditions of the masses in these regions
that historically, the finance to launch and support workers'
organisations, in large parts of Asia, Africa and Latin America, has
sometimes not come, initially at least, from the pockets of the
masses, the poor and the working class.

There are many examples of where mass workers' and even
revolutionary parties were financed by those leaders who came from a
bourgeois background, with considerable resources, who separated
themselves from their class and devoted themselves to the building
of the workers' movement. This always carries inherent dangers. It
exaggerates the role of `great leaders' and individuals. But
conditions in the neo-colonial world mean that if a viable workers
or revolutionary movement is to be constructed it must receive at
least some financial support from outside, in the main from the
workers' movement of the West. However, we have always
differentiated between raising money from the workers' movement on
clear political and solidarity grounds and seeking finance from
bourgeois sources. The latter are ultimately used to corrupt, to
disorientate, and to bend the workers' organisations in the neo- colonial world to reflect the interests of the bourgeois.

Such is the powerful pressure for scarce finance that sometimes the
least politically steeled and opportunist elements, even inside the
Marxist and revolutionary movement, can succumb to the temptations
of receiving finance from unacceptable bourgeois or state sources.
Whenever the CWI has been confronted with such a situation we have
not hesitated to act in a principled fashion.

We believe that what the Ukrainian leadership has done is on a par
with methods we have unreservedly condemned in the past. These are
unacceptable to the CWI. In some ways the actions of the Ukrainian
leadership are more reprehensible than situations we have confronted
in the past. To set out consciously, as they did, to deliberately
defraud and take money on false pretences from other left
organisations is shameful. It is true that the economic and cultural
conditions of the Ukraine are in many respects analogous to the
situation in the neo-colonial world, certainly in terms of the
standard of living, which has plunged since the collapse of
Stalinism and the return of `gangster' capitalism. For instance,
according to the World Bank in 2001, average annual income in the
Ukraine was $720, on average the equivalent of $1.90 a day! This is
combined with the terrible legacy of the methods of Stalinism which
undoubtedly impinges on the consciousness of some layers, including
those who claim to stand on the left.

This can quite easily lend itself to an approach which considers
that duplicity and acting under a false flag of convenience are
legitimate methods of struggle on a political level. Undoubtedly,
these factors played a part in shaping the attitude of the Kiev and
Ukrainian leadership. Even in the West, with a much higher standard
of living, the terrible legacy of Stalinist methods, politically and
organisationally, have had negative effects on some
avowedly `Trotskyist' organisations.

However, to describe the objective circumstances is not to excuse
the totally unacceptable methods that were used by the Ukrainian
leadership. It has come as a profound shock to the leadership and
members of the CWI that such methods can be used and, by their own
admission, carried out in a "secret nature". CWI comrades in the neo- colonial who have been consulted with regarding these developments,
such as Nigeria, have expressed their anger and indignation at the
use of such methods. The CWI has been the main victim of this
duplicity. The CIS section of the CWI has also been damaged by the
use of such methods by the Kiev organisation.

The Ukrainian leadership has admitted that their actions were "not
discussed with other city organisations or with any higher organ in
the International". Up to recently, however, the Ukrainian
leadership has gone to elaborate and quite extraordinary lengths in
their political duplicity. When some of the CIS leadership did
become aware, because of rumours that were circulating amongst the
CIS left, and with one of the Kiev leadership breaking ranks, some
nine months ago, they confronted the Kiev leadership on the veracity
of the allegations that were being made. The leading group of Oleg
Vernik and Boris Pastukh, faced with these allegations – which by no
means revealed the full scale of their involvement with other
organisations internationally at that stage –point blank denied that
anything of the kind had transpired. Even the source in Kiev who
leaked this information at the time then blatantly denied that he
had alerted the CIS leadership to this situation. He, in effect,
closed ranks with Oleg Vernik and Boris Pastukh.

On previous occasions the CIS leadership had warned the Kiev
leadership against contact with non-socialist, non-revolutionary
organisations who had offered financial help. The Kiev leadership
gave an undertaking to desist from any such contact but again "in
secret" carried on with these contacts and concealed it from the
CWI. This is not the first time in the history of the revolutionary
movement that malpractices of this kind – although not in this
precise way – have been carried out. For instance, Trotsky
confronted the unacceptable methods of Raymond Molinier in business
dealings, raising cash, etc. in the 1930s and took the drastic step,
together with the Movement for the Fourth International, of
separating himself and his supporters from Molinier. The workers
movement internationally has been occasionally faced with examples
of fraud and deception, sometimes concealed over a considerable
period of time, before they are brought to light. Only when the
position had then become clear were the appropriate disciplinary
procedures adopted.

In the past, the CWI, like others, has on a few occasions been duped
into supplying limited resources to groups in the neo-colonial world
and even in Europe, who have subsequently turned out to be
completely unscrupulous and who did not agree with us politically.
The only way to guarantee against this situation is not to make any
attempts to build genuine alliances and contacts with viable
socialist, Marxist and revolutionary forces internationally. We
reject the idea of abandoning attempts to build alliances and
establish contacts because of what has transpired in the Ukraine.
The CWI receives many letters, e-mails etc from different
organisations who initially agree with our approach, perspectives
etc. We do not provide resources to any organisation or grouping
without first of all working together with them and where possible
establishing on the ground that there is a common approach in terms
of perspectives, organisation, strategy, tactics, etc. In other
words, we reject the idea of building or linking up with groupings
which can have a hollow and phantom existence, purely for reasons of
international prestige.

Even then, there is a danger, as this incident has revealed, that
dishonest and unscrupulous individuals and organisations can carry
out a policy of deception. This can occur particularly when access
to a country is difficult, language problems are unsolved, etc.
However, it is essential that once the deception has been
discovered, prompt and decisive action follows. The example of Kiev
and the Ukraine is so shocking to us because it stands out as the
only example of this kind of deception being carried out against
other left organisation by people purporting to represent the CWI.

In the light of what has been stated here, and after investigation,
the International Secretariat of the CWI is taking the following
steps to:
1. Immediately suspend Oleg Vernik, a member of the IEC of the CWI,
and to recommend his expulsion to the next meeting of the IEC. To
immediately expel Boris Pastukh, Zakhar Popovich, Alexander
Zvorskii, Yuri Baranov, Yaroslav Ganzenko, Alexei Aryabinskii. These
individuals are primarily responsible for this shameful incident.
They will have the right to appeal against their expulsion to the
appropriate bodies.
2. To suspend immediately the Kiev and Ukrainian organisations. We
recognise that within the ranks of the Ukrainian organisation are
some very good comrades, some of whom acquiesced to the dishonest
methods that were used and some of whom were ignorant of what was
done. We intend to recommend to the CIS section of the CWI that the
rebuilding of the Ukrainian organisation is undertaken, in
conjunction with the IS of the CWI. This will have to be done in
such a way as to completely separate the organisation that comes out
of this from the methods of the previous leadership, who will have
no influence on the direction, deliberations or actions of any
Ukrainian or Kiev organisation which adheres to the CWI. A full
political discussion will be necessary in Kiev and the Ukraine on
the perspectives of the CIS organisation as a whole and the CWI, in
order to ensure that those who wish to remain in the CWI do so on a
clear political and organisational basis, in consonance with the
ideas of the CWI.

Despite the disappointment that we feel at the deception which has
been perpetrated against other left organisations, and even more
shamefully against the CWI and its membership – we are confident
that we can rebuild a genuine force of Marxism and Trotskyism in the
Ukraine and Kiev. We hope in this way a line can be drawn under this
shameful episode and we can recommence the task of rebuilding a
strong powerful workers' movement in this region. We would also add
that if any organisation believes they have been duped by these
individuals and requires further information we would be prepared to
discuss in complete confidence and supply, where possible,
information which would help them to clarify their position in these
events.

International Secretariat of the CWI
29 August 2003.

by Curious Tue Sep 02, 2003 17:32

"They will have the right to appeal against their expulsion to the appropriate bodies."

Does that mean that you will finally also allow John Throne a right of appeal?