SWP expulsions and squabbles

[J Ed]

How do you guys find this shit on facebook. I have an account, and I use it to organise poker meetups, laugh at people online, and show family pictures of my family. I recently re-friended Renton, who I've always respected. But how would I find people "all over this"?

Surveillance via facebook, and I guess via any medium really, really is about gaining confidence. Luckily, those who should know better are very vain and entirely too open with friend requests. If you are having problems getting people in the SWP to accept friend requests I suggest setting up a facebook account with a profile picture of an attractive young woman, you won't have any problems with people accepting your friend requests.

Once you have a couple of swappie 'mutual friends', you can be friends with whoever.

Enjoy.

 

[Oisin123]

That's odd, Brenner has removed his name. The Prof must have rung him:
http://openletterswp.wordpress.com/

 

[Pickman's model]

Lol but I'm convinced there must be thousands of us dotted round the place. for evey person who leaves the SWP in disgust or in disagreement there must be at least one who left or never joined just out of lack of revolutionary zeal or whatever. And those of us like that will still tend to instinctively side with the party on most things.

By 'instinctively' you mean 'without thinking things through'

 

[Random]

SWP will never be pro-Labour. SP might be pro-Labour in order to encourage a left split from Labour - note that TUSC didn't stand against Labour Lefts - to form what the CNWP wants. AWL will always be pro-Labour. Those differences will basically not change.

From where I'm standing the SWP seem to be basically pro Labour. They've called for a vote for Labour. They have labour members speaking at their meetings. Like the SP/Militant, they think labour should be replaced by a real mass working class movement. They just disagree on time scale of exactly how and when to get there.

If you have a socialist party that allows permanent factions, I just don't see why lots of these groups could basically be factions in the same party, arguing for their own priorities. Because the day-to-day work of activism and organising will look very much the same. So many socialists would really rather be in a tiny group, than argue for their position in a larger one? Out of pure belief that they are so very very right, and the otehrs are very very wrong?

I think the real reason is that in a Leninst group the minority is always going to get squashed and silenced in favour of the leadership's policies, rather than different factions getting their own way at different times.

 

[DaveCinzano]

From where I'm standing the SWP seem to be basically pro Labour...

...with a heavy heart?

 

[butchersapron]

So, this week the mutterings, next week the open declaration of takfir, week after Potemkin party

 

[two sheds]

... then we invade Moscow!!!

 

[articul8]

From where I'm standing the SWP seem to be basically pro Labour. They've called for a vote for Labour. They have labour members speaking at their meetings. Like the SP/Militant, they think labour should be replaced by a real mass working class movement. They just disagree on time scale of exactly how and when to get there.

Actually, in terms of their approach to Labour in "united front" work, the SWP are frequently to the right of the LRC - basically insisting that the political basis of co-operation has to have the broadest possible reach, and hence muting very proper criticisms of the record of Labour figures.

 

[butchersapron]

... then we invade Moscow!!!

Not far off! There will be some large initiative to keep peoples minds occupied then steadily as the year goes on a process of closing down and re-education about the nasty outside world and how it hates our tradition.

 

[butchersapron]

Actually, in terms of their approach to Labour in "united front" work, the SWP are frequently to the right of the LRC - basically insisting that the political basis of co-operation has to have the broadest possible reach, and hence muting very proper criticisms of the record of Labour figures.

Give an example.

 

[Oisin123]

Ho, ho, ho. Some good lines in this.

 

[cesare]

Heh

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

Give an example.

Something about that bloke on the ANL board

 

[two sheds]

Not far off! There will be some large initiative to keep peoples minds occupied then steadily as the year goes on a process of closing down and re-education about the nasty outside world and how it hates our tradition.

liberate I meant liberate Then we liberate Moscow!!!

 

[butchersapron]

Something about that bloke on the ANL board

You mean Martin Smyth being an UAF signatory? LRC would go for that as well.

(Noted a8's slide back to the LRC recently? Valuable piece of the Syrizia chess board)

 

[articul8]

You mean Martin Smyth being an UAF signatory? LRC would go for that as well.

(Noted a8's slide back to the LRC recently? Valuable piece of the Syrizia chess board)

What do you mean "slide back"? Peter Hain has spoken at UAF conference - and the chair moved very quickly to stop him being heckled on his record in government (for example)

 

[butchersapron]

What do you mean "slide back"? Peter Hain has spoken at UAF conference - and the chair moved very quickly to stop him being heckled on his record in government (for example)

What's that supposed to show? Can you give an example of the LRC being to the left of the SWP in fancily titled united front work (i won't bother pointing out that this is popular front work)

I mean slide back, but as all you do is slide it's sometimes hard to tell i admit.

 

[articul8]

well, when has LRC invited a cabinet minister under Blair/Brown a platform to shuffle on stage and polish up their "radical" credentials?

 

[butchersapron]

well, when has LRC invited a cabinet minister under Blair/Brown a platform to shuffle on stage and polish up their "radical" credentials?

Look a brown/blair slide - meaning that you know they have or been on plenty with shadow ministers under miliband right?

 

[articul8]

Look a brown/blair slide - meaning that you know they have or been on plenty with shadow ministers under miliband right?

I would struggle to think of any (which of course you'll then cite as proof they have no influence )

 

[butchersapron]

You say that LRC are to the left of the SWP in united front work but cannot give a single example (leaving aside what UF work actually is and with who). telling that you see the content of a groups work as being defined by what big-knob speaks at some event that no one is at.

And if you would struggle to think of any, then on earth did you add in your little brown/blair slide if not to suggest that under miliband and his golden dawn it would now be acceptable to share a platform with a shadow minister?

 

[sihhi]

From where I'm standing the SWP seem to be basically pro Labour. They've called for a vote for Labour. They have labour members speaking at their meetings. Like the SP/Militant, they think labour should be replaced by a real mass working class movement. They just disagree on time scale of exactly how and when to get there.

If you have a socialist party that allows permanent factions, I just don't see why lots of these groups could basically be factions in the same party, arguing for their own priorities. Because the day-to-day work of activism and organising will look very much the same. So many socialists would really rather be in a tiny group, than argue for their position in a larger one? Out of pure belief that they are so very very right, and the otehrs are very very wrong?

SWP do not have Labour speaking at their meetings, only at 'united front' campaign meetings. TUSC on the other hand do invite Labour Left people into their platforms.

I respect the general idea - but the practicalities are the SP organise a campaign for vote for Len McCluskey while SWP organise heavily for Jerry Hicks - to have one combined party calling for a different UNITE make-up would likely lead to a split of those in the minority engaged in UNITE.

Over the six counties of northern Ireland there are massive differences. Even the flag protests throw it up SP sees them as a legitimate social expression to be met with compromise and not organised counter-force - ie some flying of the Union Jack is inevitable. But the SWP is pushing for counter-protests and working-class organisation to stick to the original SDLP/SF motion which was for no flags (of any type) at all on civic buildings or other public spaces.

I do agree that they should at least be able to investigate one another's cases of sexual harassment.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

Goldsmiths SWSS have a belated statement out. It reflects soft oppositionist views, although it is public.

More significantly perhaps apparently at least one District Committee has sent off a list of local oppositionists to the CC for disciplinary purposes.

 

[butchersapron]

I would struggle to think of any (which of course you'll then cite as proof they have no influence )

I note that her Lady Wainwright, along with Smyth, David Cameron and David Gray all signed the uaf founding statement. Which makes Red Pepper to the right of the SWP in your world.

 

[articul8]

I only meant that having served under a New Labour government, they had eg. voted for war in Iraq and all the rest of it.

Do the SWP ever use a Unite the Resistance rally to demand Labour councillors table a needs budget? I've never heard them.

 

[butchersapron]

Goldsmiths SWSS have a belated statement out. It reflects soft oppositionist views, although it is public.

More significantly perhaps apparently at least one District Committee has sent off a list of local oppositionists to the CC for disciplinary purposes.

Where did you hear the latter?

 

[articul8]

I note that her Lady Wainwright, along with Smyth, David Cameron and David Gray all signed the uaf founding statement. Which makes Red Pepper to the right of the SWP in your world.

Bit different - a founding statement like that is deliberately written to be so unobjectionable that virtually everyone can sign it. I agree this makes it meaningless. But the act of signing it isn't to endorse a lowest common denominator politics.

 

[butchersapron]

Bit different - a founding statement like that is deliberately written to be so unobjectionable that virtually everyone can sign it. I agree this makes it meaningless. But the act of signing it isn't to endorse a lowest common denominator politics.

You have no fucking politics worth talking about if you can sign a statement alongside Smyth, Cameron and David Gray.

 

[articul8]

You have no fucking politics worth talking about if you can sign a statement alongside Smyth, Cameron and David Gray.

She wouldn't have known this at the time. It's like being asked "will you say you're against racism" and then finding out your name's been added to something which Rose West and Ian Huntley have signed.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

Where did you hear the latter?

An occasional poster here with very good SWP contacts mentioned it on leftist train spotters.