Internal democracy for the ISO here in the US is pretty non-existent. One of their group told me that although they argue a lot you have to agree with their their executive committee or leave.
The real thing about groups like the ISO is that they have put a veneer of "internationlism" over a body theory and tactics that are indistinguishable from those of the traditional stalinist parties. Doesn't the SWP platform still call for "nationalisation with workers control" or some similar nonsense. Even their treatment of the subject of state capitalism in Tony Cliff's book is a superficial and pathetic treatment of the subject. One of their militants told me that they thought that the SWP/ISO had invented the term state capitalism. They use a critique of other state-capitalists to cover up the opportunist and anti-revolutionary nature of these organizations. I feel that this serves as an inocculation against any truly revolutionary program from taking root.
What national liberation movement can take power in any state today without the support of an imperialist power? It can't happen. East Timor is a case in point. Even small nations have imperialist designs on their neighboring states, Rwanda helped overthrow the Mobutu regime. What is not in question is the motives of individuals, however well meaning, who support these movements or see their salvation in them. It is the task of national liberation regimes to enforce the economic priorities of capitalism and to provide a basis for this acceptable to workers.
If anyone would like to show me where I am wrong here they are more than welcome to.