below is part of longer article

Anti Capitalist movement split

Much debate was held in the lead up to APEC about protest tactics and how to best deal with the massive crack down on civil liberties. These debates were often heated and in the end led to the anti-capitalist movement being split down the middle.

The two main left groups who were organizing the demonstration in Sydney were the Democratic Socialist Perspective (DSP) and Socialist Alternative (SA), who are a split from the International Socialist Tendency in Australia. They organized the demonstration mainly through the Stop the War Coalition in Sydney.

The state was adamant that no disruptions would be caused to the event and they bragged that no protester would get within a kilometre of Bush, hence the massive security operation. There were months of negotiations about the march route and how close it would go the declared zone and the 5 kilometre barrier.

During the case the NSW police commissioner came out saying that no matter what the outcome he would not let the march go anywhere near the declared zone. Even after this the DSP in particular continued to sow illusions in the outcome of the court case and argued against the idea of coming out and saying that we would march to the police line on the day if numbers were permitting. We had a situation where the police were refusing to accept the decisions of the capitalist courts but so the called socialists in the DSP were prepared to accept them no matter what the outcome!

The night before the rally 500 mainly young people packed a Newtown Church hall for the final ‘Stop the War Coalition’ meeting. There were two clear points of view on offer on the night. DSP / SA argued that the march route should stick strictly to the one approved by NSW Supreme Court that week. They under-estimated the big anger amongst Sydney residents over the 2.8 meter fence surrounding their city and the big impact of this Baghdad-style Green Zone on small businesses and thousands of workers who lost at least one days pay.

The other left groups, including SP, as well as the anarchists and the vast bulk of non-aligned people – argued that caving into the Supreme Court set a dangerous precedent for the movement. Obviously if the rally the next morning was small, we might have to stick to the ‘sanctioned’ route – but if the balance of forces was more favourable to us, we should undertake some (at least symbolic) defiance of the anti-democratic laws introduced for APEC.

The virulent opposition to this position from the DSP was not unexpected, as they play the role that the Stalinist CPA and ALP used to do in the activist movement, before those organizations either ceased to exist or became out and out capitalist parties. What was more surprising to some was the turnaround by Socialist Alternative, from ultra-left in the past, to advocates of the NSW Supreme Court position today. This turn to opportunism has parallels to a similar shift to the right by the UK SWP.

Unfortunately for the DSP and Socialist Alternative, they lost the vote by about 30 out of 500+ voting. After they lost the vote the DSP/SA called to put the proposal to the rally on the day. This was supported as many of the more militant activists in the meeting were confident that there is massive sympathy in society against the crack down on civil liberties. Most people in Sydney were disgusted at lockdown of the city and support the right to protest. This has been seen even more in the lat few days with even sections of the capitalist press having to come out against the approach of the police.

However, like any labour movement bureaucrat, the DSP and Socialist Alternative simply ignored this decision the following morning through using their control of the marshalls (which for years Socialist Alternative were opposed to!) as well as the PA and stage.

They did not put the proposal to the rally and the marshals did not call for a sit down at the lines. These two groups have now been exposed as not only being the conservative elements in the movement but also for their undemocratic approach. They successfully de-radicalised the rally played the role of a handbrake on the movement similar to what the trade union leaders are doing today and the Labor Party has done in the past.

The rally, as a consequence, was more like a peace or environment rally, and the expressing of non-violent but active opposition to the anti-democratic laws and the stealing of Sydney by the APEC leaders was not undertaken. In this sense, the march was a bit flat for some of the more advanced layers of the youth on the day.