SWP expulsions and squabbles

[butchersapron]

The flood of attacks on the SWP originates in some internal arguments that culminated in our annual conference in January. The conference discussed a difficult disciplinary case. But wider political differences emerged. Two factions were formed in the lead-up to the conference to fight for changes in the model of democratic centralism - the system of decision making used by organisations in the revolutionary Marxist tradition - that the SWP has developed.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

I wonder what the answer may be!

Having looked at it, the answer seems to be 'don't look at the handling of the rape alegation, there is nothing to see there, nothing at all...just look into my eyes and listen while I tell you why the SWP still matters, why you still matter, why leninism still matters...it's all ok'.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[Random]

"One thing the entire business has reminded us of is the dark side of the Internet."

 

[Delroy Booth]

Can anyone shed any light on this. Someone mentioned it in conversation and I have no way of knowing if it's true, although it sounds plausible. The reason why Alex Callinicos is actually in charge of the SWP, even though Charlie Kimber (or whoever) is technically National Secretary, is because he gives a substantial portion of his income (as a tenured professor at King's College no doubt that's a tidy sum) to the party and is therefore one of it's major underwriters.

Perfectly ready to be told I'm wrong and to fuck off shit-stirring and gossip-mongering.

 

[emanymton]

Nobody other than an idiot would ever say the things in butchers quote about monopoly. But in private it's a common enough sentiment among cliffites. Other socialists fall into two categories, those yet to be won to The Truth and those rigidly opposed to it (which usually means other marxists and revolutionaries) The former are to be worked with, the latter crushed where possible and in a way that doesn't pee off the former excessively. Pretty much the fulltimers outlook on life and one I shared when a member.

I think this is the attitude of many of the party hacks, sorry BB.

When I was a member my feelings were what's the point in arguing with other revolutionaries, let the be revolutionary in their own way. The important thing was to try and create more revolutionaries. Which i guess amounts to more or less the same in practice.

 

[TremulousTetra]

What on earth are you talking about now? Who said you were motivated by anything other than slavish devotion to the SWP? Regardless of mistakes made by the SP, I think the only sensible interpretation of the actions of the SWP towards the end was that they wanted to get the SA out of the way of Respect. That's it - I'm sure you, like many members, didn't think that was what you were doing. It was though.

my original comment was aimed at the change in the constitution of the SA. One which you interpreted as "grabbing power".

The stated aim of the CC and the membership was completely the opposite. They believed, rightly or wrongly, that a "mass party" was possible. Therefore, should not be hamstrung by organisations of one man and his dog and that a constitution that allowed such a situation, would be a barrier to building a mass party.

The CC and the membership 'manoeuvred' to ensure, any constitution would not pre-empt a discussion with a mass membership of the shape and form that Alliance should take. IE SWP voted against disarming the police.

The prize wasn't control of a political nonentity, the Socialist Alliance as it was, but are significant minority influence amongst a real working class mass organisation.

The SWP, every political party/organisation/ grouping tries to win the vote for what they think be best for the movement. I don't see anything wrong with that.

 

[articul8]

"One thing the entire business has reminded us of is the dark side of the Internet."

This Militant that "fought valiantly to win Labour to socialism" would be the one Socialist Worker attacked with the headline "Sold Down the Mersey"?

 

[TremulousTetra]

I think this is the attitude of many of the party hacks, sorry BB.

When I was a member my feelings were what's the point in arguing with other revolutionaries, let the be revolutionary in their own way. The important thing was to try and create more revolutionaries. Which i guess amounts to more or less the same in practice.

my experience too

 

[SpineyNorman]

my original comment was aimed at the change in the constitution of the SA. One which you interpreted as "grabbing power".

The stated aim of the CC and the membership was completely the opposite. They believed, rightly or wrongly, that a "mass party" was possible. Therefore, should not be hamstrung by organisations of one man and his dog and that a constitution that allowed such a situation, would be a barrier to building a mass party.

The CC and the membership 'manoeuvred' to ensure, any constitution would not pre-empt a discussion with a mass membership of the shape and form that Alliance should take. IE SWP voted against disarming the police.

The prize wasn't control of a political nonentity, the Socialist Alliance as it was, but are significant minority influence amongst a real working class mass organisation.

The SWP, every political party/organisation/ grouping tries to win the vote for what they think be best for the movement. I don't see anything wrong with that.

Nothing to do with Respect then? Yeah right.

 

[Random]

Nothing to do with Respect then? Yeah right.

It doesn't matter what you say. RMP3 just wants to take the CC at face value and think that they were acting out of the highest of motives; that they were just doing what they thought was right."Hello trees, hello flowers, hello sky". You can't argue him out of it.

 

[SpineyNorman]

Can anyone shed any light on this. Someone mentioned it in conversation and I have no way of knowing if it's true, although it sounds plausible. The reason why Alex Callinicos is actually in charge of the SWP, even though Charlie Kimber (or whoever) is technically National Secretary, is because he gives a substantial portion of his income (as a tenured professor at King's College no doubt that's a tidy sum) to the party and is therefore one of it's major underwriters.

Perfectly ready to be told I'm wrong and to fuck off shit-stirring and gossip-mongering.

Wouldn't have thought it would give him that much power. In the SWP and the SP there are members who pay over a grand a month in subs and who don't generally command any more influence than anyone else. I'd be startled if there weren't other members who paid more than him in subs. I suspect the influence he has related more to his credibility - both in terms of being a direct disciple of Cliff and as a respected theorist etc.

 

[cesare]

a grand a month

 

[TremulousTetra]

It doesn't matter what you say. RMP3 just wants to take the CC at face value and think that they were acting out of the highest of motives; that they were just doing what they thought was right."Hello trees, hello flowers, hello sky". You can't argue him out of it.

So why would they want to control the SA? WTF for? It was nothing, it was smaller than the SWP, wasn't it? Give me one logical reason.
Motive?

 

[emanymton]

Can anyone shed any light on this. Someone mentioned it in conversation and I have no way of knowing if it's true, although it sounds plausible. The reason why Alex Callinicos is actually in charge of the SWP, even though Charlie Kimber (or whoever) is technically National Secretary, is because he gives a substantial portion of his income (as a tenured professor at King's College no doubt that's a tidy sum) to the party and is therefore one of it's major underwriters.

Perfectly ready to be told I'm wrong and to fuck off shit-stirring and gossip-mongering.

I heard is true about him giving up a large potion of his salary but the second bit is bollocks, he would still be the most influential member of the SWP even if he paid a normal level of subs, as he has the most intellectual authority within the party, as he is now the SWP leading theorist, and I think he is the only CC member left who was on the CC while Cliff was.

 

[SpineyNorman]

a grand a month

Yep, I admire their commitment but I won't be following their lead any time soon

 

[butchersapron]

Wouldn't have thought it would give him that much power. In the SWP and the SP there are members who pay over a grand a month in subs and who don't generally command any more influence than anyone else. I'd be startled if there weren't other members who paid more than him in subs. I suspect the influence he has related more to his credibility - both in terms of being a direct disciple of Cliff and as a respected theorist etc.

Yep. The profs donations wouldn't keep them going for a week. Daft idea.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Nothing to do with Respect then? Yeah right.

respect didn't exist when the constitution was changed.

 

[butchersapron]

I heard is true about him giving up a large potion of his salary but the second bit is bollocks, he would still be the most influential member of the SWP even if he paid a normal level of subs, as he has the most intellectual authority within the party, as he is now the SWP leading theorist, and I think he is the only CC member left who was on the CC while Cliff was.

And the fact that he's a total dick who has been wrong ever since Cliff died helps.

 

[emanymton]

a grand a month

Bourgeois bastards, I only get paid about a grand a month.

 

[cesare]

Yep, I admire their commitment but I won't be following their lead any time soon

And that's after tax. Some of em must be on a fair old whack.

 

[SpineyNorman]

respected didn't exist when the constitution was changed.

So? Are you saying it wasn't in mind?

Anyway, why not just either contribute to the thread sensibly or fuck off so those of us who want to can? Bolshieboy, discokermit, emanymton and other posters who sympathise with the SWP haven't had any trouble doing so and we were having quite a good debate until you came along. I'm not going to help you derail this any further so your next stream of nonsense will go unanswered.

 

[cesare]

Bourgeois bastards, I only get paid about a grand a month.

Is there some sort of tithe system ... if you earn over a certain amount you have to pay it to the party or get denounced as bourgeois?

 

[Random]

So why would they want to control the SA? WTF for? It was nothing, it was smaller than the SWP, wasn't it? Give me one logical reason.
Motive?

The motive is the old Leninist desire to control or destroy anything that can be a rival for working class leadership. They'd rather have no SA than a SA not under their control.

 

[emanymton]

And the fact that he's a total dick who has been wrong ever since Cliff died helps.

Oddly enough I thought about saying something about him giving up so much of his income shows he is a sincere and committed revolutionary socialist he is still tosser who has shown very poor judgment.

 

[TremulousTetra]

It doesn't matter what you say. RMP3 just wants to take the CC at face value and think that they were acting out of the highest of motives; that they were just doing what they thought was right."Hello trees, hello flowers, hello sky". You can't argue him out of it.

well the link I was given above to the arguments of Tom what's his face, give logical arguments which influence me. You and spinny don't offer anything beyond the CC are lying for some reason never properly outlined.

 

[butchersapron]

What is the class path to the prof? Or the profs path to the class. How can the dialectical relationship between party and class find expression?

 

[SpineyNorman]

Is there some sort of tithe system ... if you earn over a certain amount you have to pay it to the party or get denounced as bourgeois?

LOL there should be, I'd still only have to pay a couple of quid so it wouldn't bother me! They do seem to choose to make that kind of donation - they generally say pay whatever you can afford, but they don't ask how much you earn or anything like that. As far as I can tell these people pay it because they genuinely want to and believe it's for the good. Can't say it's a commitment I'd want to make, even if I could afford to - it's not that they're incredibly loaded and won't miss it (at least with the ones I know of), they do go without stuff.

 

[discokermit]

You've been noticebaly silent on this thread RMP3. Where's your usual "are the SWP finished yet?" comment?

Not supporting the opposition then rmp3?

at this point.

"Noticeably silent" is absolutely right. Usually everyone's "favourite" post-SWP Swappite would be in there lecturing and hectoring anyone who varied from the "party line" (all the while emphasising that he's not partisan and hasn't been a Swappite for years!), and generally making a putz of himself.
Here, though, almost as quiet as the grave. Perhaps he hasn't been reprogrammed by Swap-Central since the conference?

you know you goaded him into talking. now he's talking.

you know, you've let the board down, you've let the posters down, you've let the lurkers down.

but worst of all, and deep down in your hearts you know this, you've let yourselves down.

 

[Delroy Booth]

Yep. The profs donations wouldn't keep them going for a week. Daft idea.

Obviously trying to suggest his money alone keeps the party afloat is a daft idea, but I don't think any small party like the SWP could lose even his income and not feel it. And besides, isn't it more a case of how a small party like that might end up becoming financially dependent on small-ish group of relatively well paid members, who collectively contribute the bulk of a party's finances, rather than just one individual. A layer of professors and other middle-class people who's financial clout means they can have an influence beyond their numbers?

Like most of what I put this is all just thinking out loud, but I don't think it can just simply dismissed. I also don't think that's something unique to the left fringe, I suspect those sorts of dynamics can be found in any small perpetually cash-strapped political group.

Yep, I admire their commitment but I won't be following their lead any time soon

You'll never make it onto the National Committee at this rate comrade.

 

[SpineyNorman]

Good - the NC meet in London and I really fucking hate London.