I hope you are right! I think probably I spend too much time with middle class people. Most trade unionists, as you say, have no time for that kind of shit.

If you are unfortunate enough to visit a university campus, you will find plenty of students – and lecturers for that matter – wearing Palestinian scarves and Che t-shirts, who don’t read Workers Liberty very thoroughly. Yes, these folks are marginal to the real left, the left that fights for social justice through the unions and local campaigns. But they come out in force on Stop the War marches.

Perhaps, Bob, you and I move in different circles. I don’t know anyone who vigorously defends the abuses of Chavez’ regime. From extreme left, which is, I suppose, where I stand, to moderate Labour Left, no one I know heralds Chavez, the man, as the outbreak of a new socialism.

The second campism of the idiot left is marginal as far as I have ever seen it. I mean, don’t get me wrong, the Left has anti-American prejudices – but in fairness to that Left, this is something encouraged by both the conservative and the liberal media. It’s not just down to any given part of any political spectrum.

I didn’t shout “We are all Hezbollah” – though I marched beside people who did. And from where I was standing, they weren’t ordinary, run of the mill leftists. They were Muslims, inflamed by ethno-nationalist prejudices, which have been played upon by their ‘community leaders’ in order to whip up political support.

On the marches in London where “From the River to the Sea” was chanted, I didn’t see that many trade union banners. Outside of the beginning of the march, when they were standing around selling their papers, I didn’t see many socialists either.

As for the IRA supporters and the rest, it was the extreme “enemy of my enemy is my friend” idiots I’m calling left-communists. The sort of people who swung from ultra-leftism to popular frontism at the drop of a hat. Who thought that the Red Brigades and so on were going to bring about the revolution.

Those people, though they seem to have had a lot of clout in London because of the preponderance of the Irish, developed an influence out of all proportion. They weren’t representative of the wider movement – representative of the SWP leadership perhaps, who called for critical support for the Provos in NI.

While we’re talking about the SWP leadership, I think that plenty of every-day SWP members were repelled by the tactics of the leadership. To some extent, however large or small we place it, that is bound to have had an effect on the tactics adopted by the leadership. The actual experience of the SWP membership in coalition must have been rough – with even some of the elected RESPECT members voting for reactionary policies.

I think the SWP leadership are barmy – but like most of the sects, their leadership is a clique which reproduces itself. I mean just look at how long Cliff and Grant were in charge of their respective outfits. I don’t necessarily tar all the members of the SWP or SP or any of the sects with the same brush. We’d resent that if people did it to Labour.

Of those I have spoken to, many seem normal, leftist activists whose primary concern is the day-to-day battle of convincing people, supporting workers and all the rest of it. Many of them leave the discussions about Chavez et al to others, beyond being vaguely glad that someone is standing up to the Americans.

While that is a naive political sentiment, it’s certainly one I can understand. It’s one I went through as a kid, while forming my own political opinions. It’s our responsibility to argue against it, and to use reason to undermine the positions of those who espouse it as a viable view.

Overall though, I can only name a handful of people who have even that vague anti-Americanism, support Chavez mentality. Everyone else who takes an interest has heard the stories, regularly published by groups like the AWL, about Chavez and his antics, despite the good things he has done. So I conclude that second campism is marginal.

The Fat Man’s post (and the Jura Watchmaker’s amplification of it) make a similar point to you about the “death of history” brigade. I’ve taken up a similar position here.

However, I think you are wrong to see the second campism of the idiot left as marginal. I have many friends who worhsip Chavez simply because he “stands up” to America – not active Trots, of course, but left-wing ordinary people, cannon fodder on anti-war demos. How many people shouted “We are all Hezbollah” on Stop the War marches? The support for the IRA you describe as “left-communist deviancy” (a bit of an insult to left communists no?) was ubiquitous on the Labour left when I was a Party member in the late 1980s.

I also think it is completely wrong to say “the SWP were repelled by the full consequences of their opportunist politics”. To be sure, many honest rank and file SWPers were only to happy to escape that alliance, but its leadership only made the break because the opportunism wasn’t working for them any more. They continue to spout all sorts of nonsense about Islamists in the Middle East.

Long live modernism. Long live class struggle. Labour and capital WILL dissappear one day.

(Editor: Comment has been edited to insert coding, so that links appear behind text).