Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

John McDonnell Calls For Re-Founding Anti Nazi League !

Pickman's model said:
it is not only possible, it is more than probable.
Click to expand...
That is the first time I have ever got that impression from your writings on this board.

The way several people speak on here you would literally believe the SWP were a government front organisation. It all comes across quite conspiracy theory for somebody like me and by experience in life.

So thanks for putting me straight.
 
Ralph Llama said:
Yes... I presume your aware of the Golden Dawn?Golden Dawn (political party) - Wikipedia

it basically is highly organised street confrontation utilising patrols and turf warfare.
Because it is mainly physical these videos will give you a good idea :






Oh... and a vice documentary here:


It works :)
Click to expand...


We dont have an equivalent of Golden Dawn here so who would these tactics be used against?
 
TremulousTetra said:
I am in the process of reading it now. Just interested to know, what you think I should get from this.
Click to expand...

An understanding of politics and the power hungry whores that corrupt it .

39th Step - Right so if it escalates past a certain level the S.W.P. (or some other equally in-effective group) get out their kick arse division ?
 
convictions? there's one of the swp in particular who should have been convicted and i think the swp should cease to exist because of a certain person who didn't even get booted out never mind convicted. what convictions do they hold about women's rights and sexual violence?
 
ETAin fairness, I've changed some of the sentences to past tense instead of present tense, as the SWP does seem a past tense organisation now.
Ralph Llama said:
An understanding of politics and the power hungry whores that corrupt it .

39th Step - Right so if it escalates past a certain level the S.W.P. (or some other equally in-effective group) get out their kick arse division ?
Click to expand...
Which "power hungry whores" in the SWP? WHAT "power" did they have (none to my eyes)? or Which power did they seek to attain? Power over whom?

I need to understand clearly what you are saying. As in my discussion with Pick earlier, for somebody from my background this language comes across as conspiracy theory.

I stand corrected by Pick as he has clearly said the SWP et cetera are just wrong, genuine political's who have a wrong point of view, rather than being some kind of alternative kings and queens politicians "philosopher kings" et cetera, who INTEND, their aim is, rule over the people.

I suppose this is MY important distinction. Are the SWP (Marxists) INTENDING to rule over the people, or INTENDING to promote people power, in your opinion?

ETA I have read the article I am just starting to read Mein Kampf now.


Pickman's model said:
it is not only possible, it is more than probable.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
People like the trappings of establishment TT. They like power over other people, they like power over movements and they like a comfortable middle class intellectual existence or better.
I do not think people are aware of their real motives , so they can easily lie to themselves.
People like Lenin and Stalin fuck everything up basically.
You can not expect an individual to act in the interest of others when they have too much power because it will effectively have driven them mad.
 
Ralph Llama said:
People like the trappings of establishment TT. They like power over other people, they like power over movements and they like a comfortable middle class intellectual existence or better.
I do not think people are aware of their real motives , so they can easily lie to themselves.
People like Lenin and Stalin fuck everything up basically.
You can not expect an individual to act in the interest of others when they have too much power because it will effectively have driven them mad.
Click to expand...
thanks for your interesting reply.

I will address one of your points, because you are doing most of the answering this point.

Tony Benn would argue that anyone wiith power you should ask two questions about, how did you get power and how can the citizens take it off him? (Think that was what she said). So I think most leftists/Democrats would agree with you about people with power, and that there should be social structures in place to limit any such power. Is that not sufficient for the likes of Lenin Stalin and the SWP?





I can see your logic with regard to Lenin and Stalin (and I would like to pursue that topic), but how does that pertain to the SWP in the article you had me read?

"Which "power hungry whores" in the SWP? WHAT "power" did they have (none to my eyes)? or Which power did they seek to attain? Power over whom?"

I'm thinking, are you talking about the rank-and-file membership of the SWP, subconsciously wanting power over people in the here and now, or sometime in the future? Or the leadership?

If they are not aware of their subconscious motivations, they are not really lying as the article suggests?
 
Last edited:
Ralph Llama said:
Yes. Are you going to keep awnsering with a question ?
Click to expand...
to be fair to 39, I was awaiting your response too, to that question. You offer a strategy for when things worse, but what about here and now?

This is pertinent to our discussion about the ANL. If you don't have another strategy, why not theirs?
 
TremulousTetra said:
thanks for your interesting reply.

I will address one of your points, because you are doing most of the answering this point.

Tony Benn would argue that anyone wiith power you should ask two questions about, how did you get power and how can the citizens take it off him? (Think that was what she said). So I think most leftists/Democrats would agree with you about people with power, and that there should be social structures in place to limit any such power. Is that not sufficient for the likes of Lenin Stalin and the SWP?
Click to expand...

Chomsky says somthing similar but slightly more to the point than T.Ben and that is that any format of coercion/position of power should stand up to reason if questioned .

I would say that Stalin and the S.W.P. or more importantly the people 'underneath' them did not put the correct measures in place to prevent corruption .
In my opinion these measures are simply not having a state/party line.


I can see your logic with regard to Lenin and Stalin (and I would like to pursue that topic), but how does that pertain to the SWP in the article you had me read?

"Which "power hungry whores" in the SWP? WHAT "power" did they have (none to my eyes)? or Which power did they seek to attain? Power over whom?"

I'm thinking, are you talking about the rank-and-file membership of the SWP, subconsciously wanting power over people in the here and now, or sometime in the future? Or the leadership?

If they are not aware of their subconscious motivations, they are not really lying as the article suggests?
Click to expand...

I belive people internalise the values of the society they live within subconsciously.
The society we live within exudes the values of career and status along with the trappings that go with it.
People will often revert to these values even if they identify as anarchist or Socialist.
Yes I am talking about the rank-and-file and file of the SWP wanting power over people.
I do also have the opinion that a percentage of SWP are career driven in that they care more about their individual status than the movement.
This is another ballpark all together.
These people simply lie to others to further their status... or possibly what they see as a greater good.
This activity can be seen reported in that pdf I have also seen this behaviour first hand .... too many times:
I once caught a SWP member playing a 9/11 conspiracy film in the corner of a radical fundraiser in Bristol... to mention one extreme.
This technique is the mainstay of politicians and I think these people have internalised the 'tricks' perhaps unconsciously.
 
Ralph Llama said:
Chomsky says somthing similar but slightly more to the point than T.Ben and that is that any format of coercion/position of power should stand up to reason if questioned .

I would say that Stalin and the S.W.P. or more importantly the people 'underneath' them did not put the correct measures in place to prevent corruption .
In my opinion these measures are simply not having a state/party line.
Click to expand...
bingo! Thoroughly agree with you. However, what you say below is what was cited by the SWP leadership as the reason for the "vanguard party".and does present a problem to you and I in implementing the above.




Ralph Llama said:
I belive people internalise the values of the society they live within subconsciously.
The society we live within exudes the values of career and status along with the trappings that go with it.
People will often revert to these values even if they identify as anarchist or Socialist.
Yes I am talking about the rank-and-file and file of the SWP wanting power over people.
I do also have the opinion that a percentage of SWP are career driven in that they care more about their individual status than the movement.
This is another ballpark all together.
These people simply lie to others to further their status... or possibly what they see as a greater good.
This activity can be seen reported in that pdf I have also seen this behaviour first hand .... too many times:
I once caught a SWP member playing a 9/11 conspiracy film in the corner of a radical fundraiser in Bristol... to mention one extreme.
This technique is the mainstay of politicians and I think these people have internalised the 'tricks' perhaps unconsciously.
Click to expand...
a lot of that is absolutely true. There is Status beyond what society can provide. And status within the SWP did play a role, significant role.


The SWP leadership and membership, say the same thing as you are abovebut in a different language;

"The dominant ideas in any society or those of the ruling class". But it isn't just the SWP and anarchist who are affected by this. The working class is too. Perhaps even more so because they are unaware of it. And so likely to undermine anarchist and socialist endeavours in the interests of the working class.So, those with an understanding of what you say and this quote from Marx, it is argued by the SWP/Leninist, must organised and seek to act as an influence upon the working class ONLY in the interests of the working class. BUT the SWP "higher level of consciousness" FAILED!

I did ask Pick the other day, I've never known him to be shy before :-D so can you do any better?
Pickman's model said:
Labour can be said to be pro-working class. Can they really?
Click to expand...
Pickman's model said:
no you can't. or you wouldn't fart on and on about tory voters. i don't know if you can recall the years 1997 to 2010. but the labour government then was every bit as venal and as vile as the conservative government you abominate. the labour councils in london demolishing housing estates safe in the knowledge they won't be themselves turfed out: they do not seem to attract your ire as much as the tory voters. simply voting means agreeing to take part in the system, whereas refusing to vote is taking a step outside, really saying 'not in my name'. it is not voting tory which is the vilest act, it is voting for any party and legitimating the whole. and if you can not understand that, and if you cannot understand why people vote, then you're not going to be able to change their habits. you make out they're a load of sheeple, which really isn't a triumph of thought - critical or otherwise. your moaning about the msm - a term i first saw some years ago on the bnp website, incidentally, is simple frothing - what would you propose to do to change people's minds and to supply them with the accurate information they would need to make up their minds?
Click to expand...
agree with you massively, but how do we get from where we are to people "refusing to vote (…) Taking a step outside"?

Thanks, I'm really enjoying an honest and genuine conversation.
 
Last edited:
TremulousTetra said:
bingo! Thoroughly agree with you. However, what you say below is what was cited by the SWP leadership as the reason for the "vanguard party".and does present a problem to you and I in implementing the above.






a lot of that is absolutely true. There is Status beyond what society can provide. And status within the SWP did play a role, significant role.


The SWP leadership and membership, say the same thing as you are abovebut in a different language;

"The dominant ideas in any society or those of the ruling class". But it isn't just the SWP and anarchist who are affected by this. The working class is too. Perhaps even more so because they are unaware of it. And so likely to undermine anarchist and socialist endeavours in the interests of the working class.So, those with an understanding of what you say and this quote from Marx, it is argued by the SWP/Leninist, must organised and seek to act as an influence upon the working class ONLY in the interests of the working class. BUT the SWP "higher level of consciousness" FAILED!

I did ask Pick the other day, I've never known him to be shy before :-D so can you do any better?

agree with you massively, but how do we get from where we are to people "refusing to vote (…) Taking a step outside"?

Thanks, I'm really enjoying an honest and genuine conversation.
Click to expand...

Basically ... what people are already doing.

Respectable established indipendant journalism is important. People are not stupid and do mot need to be led, they just need access to decent information.
The anti-war and civil rights movements utilising direct action act as constant passifiyier and watchdog of the daily atrocities.
All positive social change has come from the working classes... but most effectively when they are of the leash of the political system.

Personally I think occupation is the crux of revolution, so I live and organise in occupation (squat) effectively ignoring mainstream politics and testing alternatives . This model manifests itself in anti-capitalist social centers and occupations which I have found to be incredibly effective as well as flexing our muscle on the streets.

Looking back through history I favour anarchist/autonamous/horizontal revolutions but am a great admirer of some socialist leaders (even though they shoot anarchists ) like Hugo Chavez .

To an individual I would say ... look at your strengths and utilise them anywhere in the movement you think might move things forward.
 
Ralph Llama said:
Basically ... what people are already doing.

Respectable established indipendant journalism is important. People are not stupid and do mot need to be led, they just need access to decent information.
The anti-war and civil rights movements utilising direct action act as constant passifiyier and watchdog of the daily atrocities.
All positive social change has come from the working classes... but most effectively when they are of the leash of the political system.

Personally I think occupation is the crux of revolution, so I live and organise in occupation (squat) effectively ignoring mainstream politics and testing alternatives . This model manifests itself in anti-capitalist social centers and occupations which I have found to be incredibly effective as well as flexing our muscle on the streets.

Looking back through history I favour anarchist/autonamous/horizontal revolutions but am a great admirer of some socialist leaders (even though they shoot anarchists ) like Hugo Chavez .

To an individual I would say ... look at your strengths and utilise them anywhere in the movement you think might move things forward.
Click to expand...
I wish you every success, and I'm glad it works for you.

my question is more about society. How do we organise to change society. Have an effect beyond the individual, and on the working class.

I just look at the right, and how they organise, and wonder whether ANY tactics on the left are as effective. It's a complete mystery to me how we are not in a better situation than we are. How the message has got lost. For the product/message has to be the simplest and the most saleable in the world, democracy. Why can't the left sell the idea that the PEOPLE should check control of their destiny, I don't know. :-(

Even reformism is better than capitalism. And yet the pseudo-religious neo-economic liberalism, which doesn't even benefit millionaires, is dominant.the result of a better organisation?

Anyway, thanks for your input. Best wishes, tremulous tetra
 
The mystery to me is dispelled when you realise that they are pumping right wing propaganda out of every corporate news outlet combined with the funding they receive from Corporate and Government sources.

Take the Guardian. We ( a group at a peace news event) analysed it using Chomsky`s method and discovered it is deliberately dumbed down with, we suspected, the intention of knobling the opposition.
 
butchersapron said:
You're stuck in 1999, he's stuck in 1917. Let's split the difference and call it 56? 68?
Click to expand...
Your still begging for attention . It is pathetic.

And anyway ... if your soooooooooooooo fucking right on please educate us . Prick.
 
Last edited:
Ralph Llama said:
The mystery to me is dispelled when you realise that they are pumping right wing propaganda out of every corporate news outlet combined with the funding they receive from Corporate and Government sources.

Take the Guardian. We ( a group at a peace news event) analysed it using Chomsky`s method and discovered it is deliberately dumbed down with, we suspected, the intention of knobling the opposition.
Click to expand...
yes that's true. However, Democrats/the left, seem more intent upon fighting each other and expressing what they are against rather than carefully and diligently defining what they are for. It seems to me, rank and file wise, you could unite ordinary people left and right around democracy. Real democracy.

People are just fairness monkeys. It's in our DNA.
 
The trick is to present a form of real democracy (mob rule effectively) to the people ... or even better; a real consensus based society . Historically Anarchists do this best. Just look at the difference between Communist/Facist and Anarchist examples.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

RevolutionSound
Tory councillor accuses Dawn Butler of anti semitism on LBC
Replies
1
Views
572
GarveyLives
G
TopCat
Anti coronation protests
Replies
4
Views
591
FridgeMagnet
FridgeMagnet
HeAthen
BBC accused of antisemitism
2 3 4
Replies
97
Views
4K
Gramsci
Gramsci
W
Anti social behaviour in local authority centres
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
tim
tim
friedaweed
Gwynedd council calls for abolition of title Prince of Wales
Replies
2
Views
393
Serene
Serene
Back
Top Bottom