Just a few thoughts:
It seems the non-aligned ULA members/supporters here were hoping for something that the SP, at least, wasn’t expecting to happen, or happen for some time – the formation of a new left party. I am not convinced the SP set out to mislead. I think it more likely that the independent ULA members were hoping for much more. I can understand that as someone who has “been around” but finds it hard to commit to one of the small left groups that exist at present and being hungry for a political formation I would be happy to commit too. The same sort of thing has happned in the UK I suppose (Respect?).
Sadly, in a way, I think Mark P’s views, and it appears the SP position, is more realistsic at present. The ULA would be a huge step forward if it could bring together various groups and individuals in an alliance that could campaign, work well with single issue groups and bring some coherence to a left view. If it can succeed on that level then that would surely improve the chances of forming a genuinely mass party in the future. Forcing the SP and SWP together now would seem to be a recipe for disaster.
How would making the ULA a part now really help anyway? It is still small, wouldn’t it be yet another small far left party? I think the Alliance should be made to work first.
On Mark P’s “role” on this board, it seems clear enough to me as he describes it. He is not an official SP representative, his views are not SP “statements”, but they do pretty much represent the SP position on issues on which the SP has a position – as you might expect from a party member. Not a problem for me. He does express himself rather sharply at times though!
I’m not an SP member or have any connection with them apart from being broadly sympathetic to their politics.
