Comments on: Libel and the left

By: bobbie

bobbie — Mon, 20 Oct 2003 12:30:43 +0000

erm, sorry about the 206000000 trackbacks. some kind of technical problem with my site. ARGH!

By: Jason McCullough

Jason McCullough — Thu, 16 Oct 2003 00:17:01 +0000

“The most interesting part of this is Foot’s explanation for why socialists frown on getting the law involved.” I’d go with “socialists tend to have a history of extremely unfair treatment by the legal system.”

By: Doug Muir

Doug Muir — Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:01:08 +0000

Workers Aid does indeed seem to have done some real good in Bosnia. I wasn’t there during the shooting, but I heard nothing but good about them afterwards. But otherwise… well, my experience matches Lee’s. I was in the former Yugoslavia for two years and a bit. I didn’t see any other leftist organization making itself useful, and I don’t recall hearing about any either. —Well, not unless you count the National Democratic Institution, which is the international NGO spun off from the US Democratic Party. NDI’s Belgrade office was doing some good stuff. Milosevic and Kostunica both hated them, which is IMO a very good sign. But I suspect that most of the Crooked Timber crew would have some difficulty identifying any American party to the right of Ralph Nader as “leftist”, so maybe they don’t count. Anyhow. I freely grant the possibility that the Socialist Workers Party of Britain may have done some wonderful things in Yugoslavia. I just never saw or heard of any, is all. Doug M.

By: Doug Muir

Doug Muir — Wed, 15 Oct 2003 19:48:21 +0000

“For those of us who were directly involved, the fact that such people literally couldn’t identify an anti-fascist struggle even on their doorstep means they are irrelevant to internationalism.” I couldn’t agree more. Well spoken, er, commented, Lee. Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo managed to confuse hell out of both right and left. The right seemed to suffer less from it—possibly because they had a working default response to fall back on (“a whiff of grapeshot will set the wogs straight”) and partly because, well, a lack of intellectual coherence on foreign policy issues has not kept the European right awake nights for a while now. But the European left… oh, my. Intellectual and philosophical contortions that were painful to watch. Still going on; it’s not that long since I read in the Guardian that Milosevic was being persecuted because he was, you know, a socialist. Daft? Hell, sweet reason compared to some of the stuff that was said and printed about Bosnia. In retrospect, this libel suit comes as no surprise. And if nations or peoples could sue for defamation, well, dunning e-mails for Socialist Workers would be running neck-and-neck with herbal viagra in the battle for your in-box space. Doug M.

By: Lee Bryant

Lee Bryant — Wed, 15 Oct 2003 18:38:00 +0000

You could always donate it to the Bosnian Institute ;-)

By: Chris Young

Chris Young — Wed, 15 Oct 2003 18:11:08 +0000

I’m a bit strapped cos it’s the wrong end of the month, but if Branka and Quintin could use a tenner to tide them through till they get their money I’d be happy to ante up.

By: James Surowiecki

James Surowiecki — Wed, 15 Oct 2003 18:00:50 +0000

The most interesting part of this is Foot’s explanation for why socialists frown on getting the law involved: “As soon as lawyers get involved in these arguments, the expense of the action in almost every case far exceeds both any damage done by the libel and anything a socialist publisher or author can possibly afford.” This sounds weirdly Coase-ian for someone on the left. Effectively, Foot’s arguing that Hoare and Magas should pay—by not recovering the cost of the utility they lost by being libeled—Callinicos and German to get them to stop committing libel. “Yes, the factory I own did pollute the river, but if you bring me to court, the transaction costs to me will be greater than the costs of your lost utility. So I’ll promise to stop and we’ll just call it even.”

By: jdsm

jdsm — Wed, 15 Oct 2003 17:14:32 +0000

It seems odd to hear this “we on the left don’t go to lawyers” argument from the left. It sounds like the military where everything has to be handled internally because civilians have no understanding of justice. It’s not very pleasant to hear the left using such an “us against them” phrase, as if the socialist workers are better able to dispense true justice than the law courts. Is it also a covention on the left that you don’t print trash? If so, surely one good turn deserves another.

By: Lee Bryant

Lee Bryant — Wed, 15 Oct 2003 16:45:29 +0000

You probably know better than me, so I will defer to your optimistic interpretation. I only know of one small group who were very active as Workers Aid for Bosnia – aside from that we rarely came across supportive leftist orgs, but that may be just circumstantial.

By: dsquared

dsquared — Wed, 15 Oct 2003 16:02:31 +0000

Some of us will never forgive the left (with some honourable exceptions) for its singular failure to deal with these events (SWP) and in some cases to actively deny they were taking place (LM/RCP). While I appreciate your position, it’s a bit unfair to talk about “honourable exceptions” on the British Left. The SWP and RCP were the exceptions and lost almost all their remaining friends by taking their weirdo stance.

By: Lee Bryant

Lee Bryant — Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:56:55 +0000

With any luck, the loss of £13k might make these SWPers pause for thought the next time they get their position on an international issue so very, very wrong. Branka and Quintin have been stalwarts of the anti-fascist pro-Bosnian movement around the world, and they continue to produce some great analysis for the Bosnian Institute (www.bosnia.org.uk) that outdated pscyhosclerotics like Callinicos would do well to read. By coincidence, the most recent Institute meeting was an update on the situation in Prijedor a decade on from the genocide in that region. Some of us will never forgive the left (with some honourable exceptions) for its singular failure to deal with these events (SWP) and in some cases to actively deny they were taking place (LM/RCP). For those of us who were directly involved, the fact that such people literally couldn’t identify an anti-fascist struggle even on their doorstep means they are irrelevant to internationalism. I shared a platform with Callinicos at their annual shindig at Ally Pally in ‘94 or ‘95 for a Bosnia discussion. I was presumably supposed to say “boo hoo, please help us” whilst big daddy Alex stepped in with his socialist analysis to explain that intervention is wrong. Instead I just pointed out that the arms embargo was an act of imperialist intervention and all the Bosnians wanted was freedom to fight alongside their friends to defeat Serbian fascism. This trashed his poition in an instant, which rather confused the audience, but he didn’t care. Our struggle at that time was just a peg on which to hang his own dogma. £13k for a lesson in international affairs is not a high price to pay, even if some of it goes to a libel lawyer ;-)

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:54:40 +0000

On some points raised above: I don’t support the no libel on the left line advocated by Foot, though, obviously, people should use their judgement sensibly and the libel laws are imperfect. The SWP are bullies and deserve what they get. Doug M is probalby correct in thinking that costs could have been lower if the defendants had handled things more promptly. There were some details of where to send money at the end of the email. But I’m not fundraising for them – those desperate to contribute and phone them up or use google (but I wouldn’t bother as they have plenty of resources). The purpose of Foot’s letter is less about raising funds than about saying nasty things about people who have stood up to the SWP.

By: Doug Muir

Doug Muir — Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:32:55 +0000

Actually, if Chris supports the tradition of “no libel suits on the left”, then he /shouldn’t/ contribute—and neither should anyone else. If the plaintiffs recover, then they reap a financial reward despite breaking the taboo. Whereas if B & C go bankrupt, and plaintiffs recover nothing, then future would-be plaintiffs are deterred. A more effective response would be to give nothing, but ostracize and (within the law) harass the plaintiffs—drum them out of the party, write unpleasant letters to the Guardian, what have you. It occurs to me that this e-mail may be an invitation to just this sort of behaviour. Which might explain my initial confusion. Doug M.

By: Doug Muir

Doug Muir — Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:26:58 +0000

A further thought. Even at City Lawyer rates, it takes some time to run up a $16,000 legal bill. If Bookmark and Callinicos had really sought “from the outset” to settle the matter “as soon and as cheaply as possible”, then it could have been settled well before legal fees had reached that level. Doug M.—passed the Bar exams for Illinois, Oregon, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas

By: dsquared

dsquared — Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:17:03 +0000

I think it’s also possible that the actual email ended with some bank details that Chris has snipped off … though shurely you should be supporting this appeal, Chris, as it increases the chance that your mates will get their money?