This analysis is so insightful, it makes me truly wonder what radicaly different outcomes might have emerged had the CWI ever really debugged the core structural issues of state power instead of just patching over its symptoms.
There are at least three factors here. One is the long impact of deep entry on Militant, which led to the defensive and dishonest rhetoric about Enablng Acts and the peaceful transition. And a second was the reification and deification of Ted Grant, which made it impossible to have a reasoned discussion with him or others in the traditional organisational structures. Then these things multiplied, where Ted was the infallible and sole theoretician, and then everything he did had to be perfect and defended like a dogma, or suppressed (the way that volume two of his collected work has been taken out of print).
This analysis is so insightful, it makes me truly wonder what radicaly different outcomes might have emerged had the CWI ever really debugged the core structural issues of state power instead of just patching over its symptoms.
There are at least three factors here. One is the long impact of deep entry on Militant, which led to the defensive and dishonest rhetoric about Enablng Acts and the peaceful transition. And a second was the reification and deification of Ted Grant, which made it impossible to have a reasoned discussion with him or others in the traditional organisational structures. Then these things multiplied, where Ted was the infallible and sole theoretician, and then everything he did had to be perfect and defended like a dogma, or suppressed (the way that volume two of his collected work has been taken out of print).