Photograph by Nermina Filipovic.

In the late '90s there was a film called Injustice about deaths in police custody and the bereaved families' struggle to bring the perpetrators to trial. I saw it with a couple of undergraduate friends at the Showroom in Sheffield. South Yorkshire Police had tried to take an injunction out to stop the film being shown. To my mind, Injustice is still one of the best documentary films ever made.

Fast forward to the summer of 2006. The director of Injustice, Tariq Mahmood, is promoting his new book at a poetry night in Fallowfield. The book is the story of the Iraq war told in the style of a children's fairytale. After the reading, Mahmood prevents the DJ from playing a record and announces that there will now be a "discussion session" about the issues raised in the book.

I ask him about the Syrian jihadis who are murdering Iraqi socialists and trade unionists. Where woiuld they fit into a kid's book about the evils of the Iraq war? Mahmood tells me that these fundamentalists are a national liberation movement and a resistance to the US occupation. "All they have to use are their bodies," he tells me. A blazing row ensues. Shaken with anger, I hit the bar.

This anecdote seems to encapsulate what's gone wrong with the left over the last few years. Mahmood is not the only one of my heroes who had walked off an intellectual cliff. I got into politics at the time of the anti-globalisation movement and the Seattle riots. We believed that capitalism was not the best of all possible worlds; we believed in comradeship and justice and freedom. The atmosphere evoked Hunter Thimpson's words that "there was a fantastic universal sense that whatever we were doing was right, that we were winning." Now the anti-war movement demonstrates in Manchester and hold up placards calling for an Islamic caliphate and the right of theocratic regimes to develop nuclear bombs. What happened? What the hell happened?

Anti-imperialism was a part of it. The main idea about Iraq was that it was part of George Bush's plan to turn the entire Middle East into an Enron client state. The apparent next step in the argument was that any group that resists US imperialism must be supported - no matter how far they may be from left-wing ideals and principles. Thus we have Alex Callinicos, an academic in the British Socialist Workers' Party, talking about whose side he'd be of in the event on war with Iran: "I would be for an Iranian victory despite [Ahmadinejad's] anti-Semitic rantings, despite the regime's capitalist class base, despite the repression it perpetrates." The left had now adopted Henry Kissinger's doctrine of realpolitik. Ahmadinejad may be a vicvious right-wing bigot, but he's our vicious right-wing bigot.

Callinicos's SWP allied itself with a group called the Muslim Association of Britain. At the great London march in 2003, this organisation handed out leaflets proclaiming that the punishment for apostasy (leaving the Islamic faith) should be death. The MAB also supports the establishment of a caliphate, and its views on homosexuality prompted one Indymedia reader to write, "I give this warning to the next SWP paper seller I see on Gay Pride: keep the hell away from us." In response to criticism, Stop the War figure Lindsay German claimed that gay rights should not be a "shibboleth" that prevented alliances with religious groups. In fact, there shouldn't be any of these shibboleths - not gay rights, not women's rights, not even a basic concern for humanity. Essentially, the anti-war left has sold itself out to the religious right.

This is a disgusting betrayal. Everything we take for granted - sexual freedom, freedom of speech, the separation of church and state - was fought and won in the face of massive faith-based opposition. Now we may have to fight for these basic freedoms all over again - and it doesn't help when the established left is not only forming alliances with declining reliigons, but with the most conservative minorities inside these religions. 

We forget that most victims of Islamic zealotry are Muslims - from the bombings ordered by the cleric Sheik Abdullah bin Jabreen to the genital mutilation suffered by countless young women in the Islamic world. It shouldn't make the slightest difference that some of the fanatics also have a problem with Dubya. By supporting these fanatics, the left is backing the oppressor over the oppressed and the rich over the poor.

 These facts help to explain why the antiwar protests have shrunk to a few thousand, and why - unlike the 1960s protests - it has not produced a single writer or artist of distinction. Yet we need a revitalised left more than ever. We have been targeted by a gang of religious plutocrats who want to impose a theorcratic dictatorship stretching from Spain to Iraq. As if that wasn't enough, we have to contend with our government's free market evangelism and onslaught on civil liberties. The divide between rich and poor is growing, and we are becoming an increasingly closed society. 

What to do?

 A start would be to abandon realpolitik for international solidarity. We must support our comrades always and everywhere, whether they are striking Iranian bus drivers, Iraqi trade unionists or Mancunian public sector workers. There must be a return to the basic principles of liberty, equality and fraternity. Only then will we have banners worth marching under and slogans worth shouting.

_Max Dunbar

COMMENTS:

Call me boring, but I couldn't agree with Max Dunbar more. Besides, the concept of being a friend to the enemy of our enemy has never made much sense. Such a concept is why the US was funding the Taliban when the Soviet Union was fighting Afghanistan. Does anything else need to be said about that? Also, Max Dunbar mentioned that there weren't any good writers or artists of the modern antiwar generation. Call me a suck up, but I think he is a good start!
Angela Alexander

In just over a week from now, presidential elections will take place in France. The first round will see twelve candidates competing against one another for people's votes, five of them are commonly placed on the extreme left wing of the political spectrum. As the article implicitly suggests this is where the problem lies for the left, although it is hard to see one of those 5 candidates following the SWP stance on Iraq, the issue is similar. Petty disagreements, semantical wars over the communist legacy, differences over details etc. What will be the probable outome of this latent feud? No one can guess, but one thing is for sure; if the left loses next week it will only have a single culprit: itself.
zatopek

What is more interesting then political issues. In our history, there has always been the division between rich and poor, dividing people in two classes. We only have to think about our rights and we will all say that it isn't based on justice. So I agree about the idea that our capitalism society may not be the best world to live in. It divides again people in two groups, rich and poor. But, is the capitalism society the cause of the problem, I don't think so. The principle of capitalism is to use money as a better trade. I think the real problem is the exploitation of men by men. So the solution would be to create a law that would punish that activity. But someone would say that even with that law, it wouldn't stop completely the exploitation. But we only have to think about the law that punish killing people, it doesn't stop completely people killing others but it is legitimate to put the principle as a law.
Guillaume Horvath

A rather nostalgic, idealized and slightly simplified manner of looking at the "old left" and 1960s protests. Research or just plainly remembering will show that at the time, those old time protests also formed many alliances with declining religions such as Catholicism or Judaism. I somehow wonder about those old alliances and how much they have to do with what is going on in our compassionate society today with its humane restraint chairs, designed to forcefeed the Guantanomo prisoners. I am sorry to say that between the lines I am reading the all-familiar fear of the unknown in this article.
Erdag Aksel

Honor and consideration for your fellow man. It's so simple that it doesn't need to be said in flowery language. What you invest and do for your fellow man, is bound to accrue in either direction you'd meant it to be. That's it.
Partha

I agree, and think that many domestic crises that the U.S. faces today, lack of health care, the privatization of all things public, can be largely attributed to the disintegration of the left during the 60's and the refusal to participate in government institutions; the notion that someone can claim to be procivil liberties, proreason and secular government, and antiwar, yet somehow identify more with radical fundamentalists who have stated on numerous occasions their desires to restore the caliphate, is naive and ridiculously hypocritical. It's as if, at some point, a large majority of the left convinced themselves that all they had to do was go to a protest on the weekend, or make a movie (or song) to protect individual freedoms and advance human rights; unfortunately this is not so. The best tool to effect change is, and has always been, participation in, and direct engagement with, large civic institutions, i.e. governments. If more veterans of the Civil Rights and antiVietnam war era were participating in government, and held decision-making positions, we would not be where we are today. Case closed.
M.P.C.

Erdag, you're wrong. We lose our souls if we get into bed with these theocratic fascists.
whitey

The main reason the left lost its relevence lies in the way it does business. There are no concrete actions taken aside from peaceful protest and handing out fliers. When the only things on a politically minded person's To Do list is walking the streets and handing out papers, that person's mind loses focus quickly, and it's an easy path down an intellectual cliff as the article mentions, because people easily lose the delicate balance between making imperfect allies and avoiding to sell out their principles. Civil disobediance is at an all-time low. We have no martyrs to call our own, no deep worship of some icon or legend that would bind our groups together. We are little facts and principles unbounded by mimetic thread, doomed to float around like so many discarded pamphlets handed out on some protest.
Viral

What happened is the whole simulacra of knowledge that U so-called intellectuals had finally became obviously sick and fake to everyone – or everyone who wants to fight the captialists instead of making money or careers off of making fun of them (Like Adbusters does...). Pay me and I will try to explain how messed up you are – it might take years and cost millions – but it would be worth it.
DaveSmarterthanAnyAmericanBuff

I have disagreements with several things raised in the article: capitalism is indeed the problem; the true "realpolitik" issue for the left is the support of the Democrats and capitalism; the SWP UK does NOT call for political support of Islamists. It calls for the defense of Muslims against racism, and it calls for the support for those who resist imperialism, not for any politics that are against human liberation. Socialists, of the general tendency in which the SWP UK stands, struggle alongside people who do not share our politics, but in the process we do NOT subvert our own politics to those with whom we struggle. All those genuinely interested on this should not only consult critiques of the revolutionary left, but also what the revolutionary left itself has to say: http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?articleid4105
D

It is clear that alliances, such as the ones that provoke people to talk about war in the terms of "I think so and so will win," have been taken too far. But there is a far out left that makes alliances based on fraternity, tolerance. These alliances are small numbered and short lived because the capitalist system and its main benefactors are much stronger and more powerful than in the 1960s. Socialism, even in places like Barcelona, is strangled to the point that persons striving to achieve socialism are depressed, scared, and crazy...which is the beginning of all of the great '60s writing to which Dunbar refers.
Drew Lundgren

D says it all, the SWP calls for defence of a religion.
unahaclosp

Bipolar culture has brought us down to this. Through time, we gained an incredible amount of intelligence. Meanwhile, we failed to bring wisdom to it's level. Power without understanding is meaningless and dangerous. Also, communications are now worldwide, but decreasing at the same time our ability to understand those right next to us. We need moral fiber contrasting the ever increasing individuality of consumerism. Why are we in society if we mean to profit alone from it at the cost of the others. I manage to live with 8000 a year and income coming from sources morally compatible with my values. And still there are articles in the newspaper about some professional not making enough with 400k... and she is displayed as a victim. Incestuous money is the source of the problem. Bad communications, a catalyst. Missing values are amplifying the source. And loss of hope into each other is killing what binds us together. If we could at least smile to each other when walking in the streets. Not have that bland, defensive look in our faces.
G. Pinard

Angela, while I agree with most of what you say, I have to correct your statement that the US funded the Taliban. It did not. The Taliban arose after the Soviet withdrawal and was a creature of the Pakistan intelligence services – and arguably still is. That is not to say that the US didn't make mistakes in Afghanistan under Reagan. Max, Great article. Have you read the Euston Manifesto? http://eustonmanifesto.org/manifesto
Anthony

It strikes me you're all a bit crazy, and overly concerned with being better than everyone else... knowing the answer... solving the problem. If the left has anything going for it, it's a deep human sympathy, and a respect for justice in its most abstract and concrete forms. There is no system which is better than any other. Systems should be no more than expedient forms which we create for a specific use. If that form happens to include an unlikely alliance, then the question to ask is why are you entering into that alliance. If there is a USE... if you are doing something in the name of humanity and justice and not just trying to gain power and influence then it is worthwhile. This isn't realpolitik – a system reinvented by Kissinger to enforce orthodoxy and consent – it is real life. Get your heads out of your collective arseholes and start fighting for humanity and justice. Give someone a helping hand, speak out when something's wrong. Smile. Prove everyday in a small small way that we're not all fundamentally arseholes who must be subdued and coerced in order for any form of society to flourish. What would you rather fight for... human decency and respect or a bunch of words and invented absolutes?
Sam

Couldn't agree more with Doug, I've sent this as a letter to the Magazine but in case it doesn't get printed here it is for this blog. Let's start with the things Max just gets wrong. The Stop the War Coalition, has organised demonstrations with the Muslim Association of Britain, MAB did not hand out leaflets on February the 15th calling for any of the things Max claims, more extremist radical groups like HizbutTahrir did. In fact the MAB called for the usual things it does, to end the occupation and free Palestine, which is one of its main causes, which is what was on their placards and leaflets. Max then uses that lie to attack Stop the War's convener Lindsay German for saying that differences over opinions like attitudes to gay rights should not stop people working together in the antiwar movement, is this not the basics of building a movement? Would Max for instance say we should not work with Catholics or Christians who can often have reactionary views on homosexuality or abortion? Of course if Max had ever talked with most ordinary Muslims he would know that for most they have no problem with how people want to live there lives, much the same as most moderate Christians. And is it any surprise that oppressed people turn to religion for answers? A richer understanding of the role of faith in social struggles shows it to be a contradictory phenomenon, both reactionary and progressive in different times and places. Max then goes into an extended racist islamophobic rant about how working with Muslims is to blame for the decline of the Antiwar movement, in fact nothing could be further from the truth. The antiwar movement in the UK mobilised by the Stop the War Coalition has consistently brought the largest amount of people onto the streets during the last 6 years, in the past year alone 50,000 at the Labour party conference in Manchester (that city's biggest ever protest), and just a few weeks ago another 100,000 in London (this in addition to the largest protests in the world), one of 20,000 at a few days notice, another of 100,000 a few weeks later over the Israeli war in Lebanon in the summer. In fact since the movements high point in 2003, around 100,000 people have demonstrated at least twice a year, hardly a dying movement! And this is not all, 3 people's parliaments, the last one a 1000 delegate conference in London on the 4th anniversary of the war starting, numerous demos at airbases, peace camps, vigils and lobbies of parliament. Plus innovations like helping to set up Military Families against the War, an organisation run by families of dead and serving Servicemen and women, which is the first time in UK history during a war that anything like that has happened. Crucially, Stop the War has also been involved in the Cairo Conference (a yearly gathering of the left, arab organisations and Muslims in the middle East) which is directly linking the struggle in the West with those fighting Imperialism there. As for Max's claims that no writer or artist of distinction has been produced by the movement, well I wonder under what rock he must be living! A small list would include Mark Wallinger's superb 'State Britian' currently showing at the Tate, the rise in value and notoriety of grafitti artist Banksy's work, the revitalization of older artists like Peter Kennard, the Televised Nobel prize speech by Harold Pinter, the mushrooming of work on war on the Theatre, both at fringe and national level, musicians such as Damon Albarn, Massive Attack or Pete Doherty all supporting the movement by playing gigs to packed crowds in Trafalgar Square and major Uk venues to name but a few examples. Alongside this is the enormous amount of creativity of ordinary people on the demos and in the movement some of which I documented when I designed the book on the movements 'Stop the War' in 2004. Of course you could argue this is not of the cultural heights of the 60's but then the revolts of then were not just an antiwar movement but the last major wave of revolutionary struggle worldwide, we aren't quite at that level currently. But more important than all this, the Stop the War Coalition has helped to shift politics in this country, it has brought about the demise of Tony Blair, brought the most oppressed and vilified group in society, Muslims, into constructive political action and enabled a dialogue between formerly seperate groups that will help create a new left in the UK, in the same way as working with Jews and immigrants helped build the left in the earlier part of the 20th Century. It has also, crucially, popularised a general anti-imperialist consciousness among the general population that now means any UK politician can not only not avoid the question of the war, but any new attack on Iran (or whoever) will be very hard to go along with without serious political consequences. It has done all this by building a broad united front that encompasses well known people like ex-Labour MP Tony Benn and Mayor Ken Livingstone, to every major union in the UK, members of most political parties, CND and many others all united by three simple demands: stop the war; ending the attack on civil liberties; and no racist scapegoating for the errors of the war. Max doesn't seem to be able to understand this, he'd rather snipe with his perfect ideals untouched by nasty Muslims, than engage in the often difficult task of building unity amongst diversity. The Stop the War Coalition would not, for instance take a position of supporting Iran against the US as it would be divisive, the SWP or the groups within the coalition can. Max seems astonished that leading SWP member Alex Callinicos would critically support Iran against a US attack! What exactly is the alternative? Supporting the most powerful, violent state on earth the US? Not supporting Iran or more accurately trying to force our government to not attack them in such a situation only means that those progressive groups in Iran that are challenging the backward ideas of the regime there would have an even harder time. Such 'ABC's' should be obvious, as to need not mentioning. Which is why all of us 'comrades' in the UK interested in building a real new left and not one developed from crude racist stereotypes, static thinking and abstract sloganeering like Max's will continue to do so, maybe those of you in North America who want to build a new left should stop giving space to this empty rhetoric and learn a few lessons?
Noel Douglas

Is Adbusters now tailing the cruisem-issile left. Will Christopher Hitchens be featured in the next issue? I certainly hope not. Maybe Adbusters feels the need to open up a debate, but why give a platform to ideas that thrive quite well in the corporate press? Dunbar's rant is premised on a quote from Alex Callinicos which is ripped from its context. The passage in question is embedded in a much lengthier and nuanced discussion of why the left should support the right of people to resist imperialism regardless of the views the hold. People can read the entire discussion here: http://www.istendency.net/pdf/CallinicosIBMEFInterviewFinaledited.pdf Furthermore, Dunbar's discussion of the MAB distorts the picture of the SWP's relation to Muslims, and also lends to the idea that all Muslims are on the religious right. This vast majority of British Muslims are not in the MAB, and British Muslims have traditionally voted Labour (an ostensibly leftwing party) while others are building the new left wing party, Respect. One does not have to agree with the MAB to respect their right to oppose the war or participate in anti-war coalitions. To clarify, the SWP has only allied with the MAB over one issue: opposition to the War on Terror. What a sellout of socialist principles! That the leaders of the MAB don't support gay rights should not be a barrier to working with someone to oppose a blatantly imperialist war. Only through common struggle will the left ever be able to win over people with rightwing ideas. Yelling at people or refusing to cooperate with them because they're wrong won't work. Furthermore, only through this cooperation can the left undermine the influence of rightwing ideas that emanate from all corners of society. Dunbar thinks the left's alleged capitulation to religious fanatics explains why antiwar protests have shrunk. Dunbar uses entirely British examples, yet it is Britain's antiwar movement which is the strongest in the West and consistently draws massive antiwar demos, numbering in the tens of thousands. Dunbar effectively draws an equal sign between Western imperialism and the crimes of the Iranian state. Should the left sit on the sidelines and declare our opposition to both enter the fray? Callinicos's organization supports the longtime socialist position of unconditionally but CRITICALLY supporting antiimperialist resistance. People have the right to resist imperialism regardless of the views they hold, but this does not make their ideas immune from criticism. Like Dunbar, I was politicized by Seattle and the antiglobalization movement. But Dunbar needs to graduate beyond the ranks of the leftwing purists who are debilitated by their unwillingness to work with anyone who doesn't agree with their laundry list of demands.
Doug Nesbitt

Its sad that these antiwar persons are selling their souls to the fundamentalist nucleus in order to portray negativity towards imperialism. It greatly damages the appeal of the movement in general among crucial individuals located in the gray areas of the political spectrum, which will cause greater numbers of people to support those the antiwar people are against.
Felix

I think the basic question in this matter is: would I live in a country ruled by the people I'm supporting?
Egmont Labadie

If you gave up trying to save the world, and prevent suffering...and stopped participating in compromise and tried to just be instead of being just....who would complain? And acknowledge the fact that it's all temporary and nobody chose to be born and it's our parents fault for reproducing on a whim ....then just do what you do and stop trying to make it purposeful loving or vegan.....avoid humanity ...especially the male part..it's troublesome and permanently lost
martino vegano

In Iran, Putin Warns Against Military Action: http://salihome.info/show/index.html
sali

Saudi Arabia and Libya were the source of about 60 percent of the foreign fighters who came to Iraq in the past year to facilitate attacks.
Kic Shania

Name:
Your thoughts:

Note: To eliminate spam and other abuses, all comments must be manually approved by a moderator before posting. Rarely, this can take up to a couple of days. Legitimate comments may be subject to light editing for the sake of clarity.

To foster open dialogue, pointlessly abusive or threatening comments will be deleted, as will comments that clearly violate hate speech laws in Canada (where Adbusters' servers are located). A note from the moderator will always be posted to indicate that such a comment has been deleted.

If you have any comments or concerns about this process, feel free to email websubmissions[at]adbusters[dot]org.