SWP expulsions and squabbles

[bolshiebhoy]

Continuing discussions between the prof, Paul Le Blanc and assorted oppositionists on FB. Interesting pitch from Callinicos: "The problem for people like me is that we are being bombarded by distortions, half-truths and outright falsehoods online about a situation about which we are constrained in what what we can say in response. " Implies there's stuff they'd like to say but can't, I suppose that could be about the claims about questions asked by the DC etc. And that confidentiality prevents them giving the full story. God knows but what a mess.

Apologies from some oppositionists for claiming that the rape allegation was known of two years ago. And the revelation that it was a former cc member who made this false claim in the first place?

 

[belboid]

I wasn't suggesting that they were the same person but that one may well have agreed to say they wrote it when they didn't. It may well have been simple cock-up though. And anyway, that quote doesn't contradict the claim in the Kliman review that the USSR wasn't capitalist does it?

Not at all - it seems to entirely be in sync with it, hence my thinking they were both written by the same person

 

[belboid]

Implies there's stuff they'd like to say but can't

it's also a cracking way of avoiding commenting on things he simply doesnt want to comment on

 

[Before Theory]

Apologies from some oppositionists for claiming that the rape allegation was known of two years ago. And the revelation that it was a former cc member who made this false claim in the first place?

Clarification BB as you rush to back pedal and start talking about "false claims". The non consensual nature of the relationship between the victim and Delta was known about 2 years ago - hence his standing down at conference 2011. That the victim came to realize it was actually rape is a development if the past few months.

 

[Before Theory]

So no "false claims" BB, just more slander of a young victim. Par for the course from my ex comrades it would seem.

 

[bolshiebhoy]

Bollox, it was a false claim that people knew of a rape allegation two years ago. And that false claim has been made repeatedly inlcuding by people who should know better.

 

[emanymton]

Apologies from some oppositionists for claiming that the rape allegation was known of two years ago. And the revelation that it was a former cc member who made this false claim in the first place?

One of a number of falsehoods flooring around, there seems to be a lot of people on both sides who struggle with reading and understanding the transcript. Or am I am being too genius there? Which CC member or would you prefer not to say?

 

[bolshiebhoy]

One of a number of falsehoods flooring around, there seems to be a lot of people on both sides who struggle with reading and understanding the transcript. Or am I am being too genius there? Which CC member or would you prefer not to say?

No not at all, nobody is naming them. One oppositionist just said this when asked to withdraw the claim by Callinicos: "To be clear, it was was a former CC who fabricated an abominable slander. I was very, very naive. I cannot believe they stooped to this level. Apologies again Alex."

 

[Before Theory]

Bollox, it was a false claim that people knew of a rape allegation two years ago. And that false claim has been made repeatedly inlcuding by people who should know better.

Bollox right back at you CC Apology Boy. Non consensual sex is treated as rape in some countries, and not in others. It is true that the rank and file of the SWP knew nothing about the victim's statements, but your friend Lord Alex knew exactly what Delta was accused of. His pretense of wishing to set the record straight is nothing more than that.

 

[emanymton]

No not at all, nobody is naming them. One oppositionist just said this when asked to withdraw the claim by Callinicos: "To be clear, it was was a former CC who fabricated an abominable slander. I was very, very naive. I cannot believe they stooped to this level. Apologies again Alex."

I know you don't think the transcript should have been published but it should at least allow us to discuss the facts of the situation. I can't believe people in the opposition not taking the time to read it, it is quite clear from the transcript that the rape allegation was only made recently.

 

[emanymton]

Bollox right back at you CC Apology Boy. Non consensual sex is treated as rape in some countries, and not in others. It is true that the rank and file of the SWP knew nothing about the victim's statements, but your friend Lord Alex knew exactly what Delta was accused of. His pretense of wishing to set the record straight is nothing more than that.

Are you suggesting that Alex should have concluded that rape had taken place from his involvement in the original dispute, even though the women herself only reach that conclusion a few months ago?

 

[Before Theory]

it was was a former CC who fabricated an abominable slander. I was very, very naive. I cannot believe they stooped to this level. Apologies again Alex."

The only abominable slander circulating here is that the CC are bravely holding some imaginary line of decency and circumspection. They knew what Delta was accused of, and that is why they made him stand down as NS at the 2011 conference. They know that the victim's friends and supporters cannot release the details of what happened to her and they are relying on that to let them hide behind their defense of "the Party".

 

[bolshiebhoy]

The only abominable slander circulating here is that the CC are bravely holding some imaginary line of decency and circumspection. They knew what Delta was accused of, and that is why they made him stand down as NS at the 2011 conference. They know that the victim's friends and supporters cannot release the details of what happened to her and they are relying on that to let them hide behind their defense of "the Party".

As emanymton says how could they know what she hadn't decided herself until a few months ago

 

[Before Theory]

Are you suggesting that Alex should have concluded that rape had taken place from his involvement in the original dispute, even though the women herself only reach that conclusion a few months ago?

I am suggesting that the faux outrage that Lord Alex and his loyalists are fermenting now is a sickening smokescreen to obscure the fact that they knew their 50 something NS had a non consensual relationship with a teenage girl, and when she eventually managed to end it, he continued to harass her. I don't know if he considers non consensual sex to be rape, why doesn't CC Apology Boy ask him instead of fawning over his fb utterances.

 

[emanymton]

I am suggesting that the faux outrage that Lord Alex and his loyalists are fermenting now is a sickening smokescreen to obscure the fact that they knew their 50 something NS had a non consensual relationship with a teenage girl, and when she eventually managed to end it, he continued to harass her. I don't know if he considers non consensual sex to be rape, why doesn't CC Apology Boy ask him instead of fawning over his fb utterances.

Non consensual? Again I ask considering the women herself only reach this conclusion recently how could they have none at the time? Also considering one of the CC members involved in the original complaint took a position in opposition to the rest of the CC at the last conference I think it is possible not all the facts came out originally.

None of this is to deny that the case was handled terribly both times, but you are trying to imply the CC new of a rape allegation 2 years ago which is not the case.

 

[sihhi]

Bollox right back at you CC Apology Boy. Non consensual sex is treated as rape in some countries, and not in others. It is true that the rank and file of the SWP knew nothing about the victim's statements, but your friend Lord Alex knew exactly what Delta was accused of. His pretense of wishing to set the record straight is nothing more than that.

Welcome BT, what's the chronology here - is this right?

approx Oct 2008 - Mar 2009 "a period of about six months in 2008 and 2009" - Delta's sexual harassment/ accused rape of W.

early Jan 2010: Conference battle between the CC majority (Callinicos leadership, Delta supportive of Callinicos) and the rest of the opposition (future Counterfire) pole. High tension against the opposition.

Jul 2010: complaint from W about Delta's behaviour on the grounds of sexual harrassment.

Jul 2010: W rejects going through the DC route about it - seeks only for the CC to be made aware of the allegations. CC is made aware. CC members Hannah Dee, Charlie Kimber and Alex Callinicos handles this non-formal non-DC process, apparently to W's satisfaction.

Dec 2010/Jan 2011??: rumours of Delta and sexual harassment appear on internet, and then hit the Weekly Worker
early Jan 2011: Delta is dismissed from CC. No one really knows why since Delta supported Callinicos and the majority against the Counterfire splitters.

April 2011: Bambery is pushed/jumps.

Sep 2012: W makes complaint against Delta to DC over rape. Delta is suspended pending investigation.

Oct 2012: DC meets "over a period of four extended days" after/for the investigation. W is asked about drinking habits, sexual behaviour/promiscuity, Delta is given time and opportunity to prepare for the hearing unlike W etc etc. DC clears Delta except for Pat Stack who believes sexual harassment did happen.

Oct 2012??-Nov 2012??: After the inevstigation, X gives a report to the DC about Delta's inappropriate harrassing?? but non-directly-sex-based behaviour. X says she doesn't wish the formal DC route with hearings but wants the report to be on record. DC says OK, reads the report, meets again with Delta (presumably to put the questions to him), but doesn't change the clearance of Delta.

early Jan 2013: SWP Conference narrowly votes to approve this decision by accepting the report of the DC.

 

[sihhi]

I am suggesting that the faux outrage that Lord Alex and his loyalists are fermenting now is a sickening smokescreen to obscure the fact that they knew their 50 something NS had a non consensual relationship with a teenage girl, and when she eventually managed to end it, he continued to harass her. I don't know if he considers non consensual sex to be rape, why doesn't CC Apology Boy ask him instead of fawning over his fb utterances.

Wow.

 

[Before Theory]

Let me make it clear, the CC knew in the summer of 2010 that the victim had made a complaint of coercion and harassment against Delta. It is quite correct that the actual term rape was not used by the victim at that time. However coercion and harassment were the defining words. On the basis that the complaint would go no further, Delta was asked to stand down as NS. He did so at Conference 2011 amid nauseating scenes of cheering and clapping, a standing ovation from about half the conference. I will repeat again that the r & f of the SWP did not realize what Delta was being accused of. Subsequently the victim has come to understand that what happened to her was rape, and has called it such. This is not an uncommon process for victims to go through. Now whether the CC members believed it to have been rape all along I leave to them and their individual consciences. Lord Alex clearly doesn't believe that any untoward behavior occurred and other CC members believed Delta raped the victim.

Like I said before the CC PR machine is in overdrive now, Alistair Campbell would be proud of them all.

 

[sihhi]

Let me make it clear, the CC knew in the summer of 2010 that the victim had made a complaint of coercion and harassment against Delta. It is quite correct that the actual term rape was not used by the victim at that time. However coercion and harassment were the defining words. On the basis that the complaint would go no further, Delta was asked to stand down as NS. He did so at Conference 2011 amid nauseating scenes of cheering and clapping, a standing ovation from about half the conference. I will repeat again that the r & f of the SWP did not realize what Delta was being accused of. Subsequently the victim has come to understand that what happened to her was rape, and has called it such. This is not an uncommon process for victims to go through. Now whether the CC members believed it to have been rape all along I leave to them and their individual consciences. Lord Alex clearly doesn't believe that any untoward behavior occurred and other CC members believed Delta raped the victim.

Like I said before the CC PR machine is in overdrive now, Alistair Campbell would be proud of them all.

Again, wow.

 

[emanymton]

Let me make it clear, the CC knew in the summer of 2010 that the victim had made a complaint of coercion and harassment against Delta. It is quite correct that the actual term rape was not used by the victim at that time. However coercion and harassment were the defining words. On the basis that the complaint would go no further, Delta was asked to stand down as NS. He did so at Conference 2011 amid nauseating scenes of cheering and clapping, a standing ovation from about half the conference. I will repeat again that the r & f of the SWP did not realize what Delta was being accused of. Subsequently the victim has come to understand that what happened to her was rape, and has called it such. This is not an uncommon process for victims to go through. Now whether the CC members believed it to have been rape all along I leave to them and their individual consciences. Lord Alex clearly doesn't believe that any untoward behavior occurred and other CC members believed Delta raped the victim.

Like I said before the CC PR machine is in overdrive now, Alistair Campbell would be proud of them all.

Thanks, this is a much fairer picture.

Eta, I share your anger I really do.

 

[Before Theory]

Welcome BT, what's the chronology here - is this right?

approx Oct 2008 - Mar 2009 "a period of about six months in 2008 and 2009" - Delta's sexual harassment/ accused rape of W.

early Jan 2010: Conference battle between the CC majority (Callinicos leadership, Delta supportive of Callinicos) and the rest of the opposition (future Counterfire) pole. High tension against the opposition.

Jul 2010: complaint from W about Delta's behaviour on the grounds of sexual harrassment.

Jul 2010: W rejects going through the DC route about it - seeks only for the CC to be made aware of the allegations. CC is made aware. CC members Hannah Dee, Charlie Kimber and Alex Callinicos handles this non-formal non-DC process, apparently to W's satisfaction.

Dec 2010/Jan 2011??: rumours of Delta and sexual harassment appear on internet, and then hit the Weekly Worker
early Jan 2011: Delta is dismissed from CC. No one really knows why since Delta supported Callinicos and the majority against the Counterfire splitters.

April 2011: Bambery is pushed/jumps.

Sep 2012: W makes complaint against Delta to DC over rape. Delta is suspended pending investigation.

Oct 2012: DC meets "over a period of four extended days" after/for the investigation. W is asked about drinking habits, sexual behaviour/promiscuity, Delta is given time and opportunity to prepare for the hearing unlike W etc etc. DC clears Delta except for Pat Stack who believes sexual harassment did happen.

Oct 2012??-Nov 2012??: After the inevstigation, X gives a report to the DC about Delta's inappropriate harrassing?? but non-directly-sex-based behaviour. X says she doesn't wish the formal DC route with hearings but wants the report to be on record. DC says OK, reads the report, meets again with Delta (presumably to put the questions to him), but doesn't change the clearance of Delta.

early Jan 2013: SWP Conference narrowly votes to approve this decision by accepting the report of the DC.

That is my recollection of the chronology of events. Only added piece of information is that Comrade W was pursuing a Disputes Committee hearing over her complaint, and was not leaving it to the good offices of the CC to deal with.

An extra little f - bomb in here for the loyalists is that a female UAF worker was also constructively dismissed when she raised the Delta question with Weyman Bennett sometime in the autumn of 2010, so the coverup and clampdown is even more sickening than it would first appear.

 

[Pickman's model]

As emanymton says how could they know what she hadn't decided herself until a few months ago

loyal to the bitter end

 

[mk12]

That is my recollection of the chronology of events. Only added piece of information is that Comrade W was pursuing a Disputes Committee hearing over her complaint, and was not leaving it to the good offices of the CC to deal with.

An extra little f - bomb in here for the loyalists is that a female UAF worker was also constructively dismissed when she raised the Delta question with Weyman Bennett sometime in the autumn of 2010, so the coverup and clampdown is even more sickening than it would first appear.

It isn't "Comrade W", it's just "W". "Comrade" is reserved for Delta.

 

[Pickman's model]

It isn't "Comrade W", it's just "W". "Comrade" is reserved for Delta.

because some people are more equal than others

 

[sihhi]

That is my recollection of the chronology of events. Only added piece of information is that Comrade W was pursuing a Disputes Committee hearing over her complaint, and was not leaving it to the good offices of the CC to deal with.

An extra little f - bomb in here for the loyalists is that a female UAF worker was also constructively dismissed when she raised the Delta question with Weyman Bennett sometime in the autumn of 2010, so the coverup and clampdown is even more sickening than it would first appear.

OK just so we're clear:
Karen Reissman said in the leaked transcript: "We looked at how the complaint was handled in 2010. She’d raised concerns of harassment, about these same incidents, with the central committee. Central committee members had met with Comrade Delta, who denied them. And at that time W was asked if she wanted to go to the disputes committee, but she confirmed that she didn’t want to do that. She wanted an apology, for her views to be recognised, and for the CC to be made aware of them. An informal resolution was reached which was agreed and accepted by W."

Are you saying that that is wrong?

Also what do you think about Maxine Bowler's assertion here that the opposition within should have stood a slate against the current DC?

"I urge you to vote for this report that we’ve made, and to be honest, nobody else has come forward to stand for the disputes committee. I do not know, if people are so angry about the way in which the disputes committee have dealt with this then really they should have come forward with an alternative slate."

The final bit: was the woman dismissed an SWP UAF member-worker or just an UAF worker?

 

[Before Theory]

loyal to the bitter end

It's classic PR rebuttal spin. Pick on one part of a damaging story that has a timeline confused or a quote in the wrong place and hammer away at that until the audience forgets what the original article was about. The CC have had their briefing and now with the help of their apologists they are attempting to reframe the parameters of the debate. Suddenly it's about when did the victim decide it was rape, not why was our National Secretary free to coerce and harass young women and why are we covering it up for him ?

 

[Before Theory]

OK just so we're clear:
Karen Reissman said in the leaked transcript: "We looked at how the complaint was handled in 2010. She’d raised concerns of harassment, about these same incidents, with the central committee. Central committee members had met with Comrade Delta, who denied them. And at that time W was asked if she wanted to go to the disputes committee, but she confirmed that she didn’t want to do that. She wanted an apology, for her views to be recognised, and for the CC to be made aware of them. An informal resolution was reached which was agreed and accepted by W."

Are you saying that that is wrong?

That is factually what happened. A young woman makes a complaint against the National Secretary of the SWP, three CC members visit her in her home town to "talk" to her, and she ends up not making an official complaint to the DC. How very very surprising. The very fact that they made Delta stand down as NS shows they didn't think for one New York minute that he was innocent.

Also what do you think about Maxine Bowler's assertion here that the opposition within should have stood a slate against the current DC?

The opposition did not know the true level of cover-up and skulduggery that had transpired. Very few people did. Anyone who had asked awkward questions had either been sacked or expelled or told a bunch of lies aimed at undermining the character of the victim.

I have sympathy for the good honest SWP members on whom this was hastily sprung last month.

How could they possibly be able at a few hours notice, knowing only a handful of facts, to pull together an opposition DC.

"I urge you to vote for this report that we’ve made, and to be honest, nobody else has come forward to stand for the disputes committee. I do not know, if people are so angry about the way in which the disputes committee have dealt with this then really they should have come forward with an alternative slate."

The final bit: was the woman dismissed an SWP UAF member-worker or just an UAF worker?

An SWP UAF worker.

 

[bolshiebhoy]

Lord Alex clearly doesn't believe that any untoward behavior occurred and other CC members believed Delta raped the victim.

The cc isn't the issue here. The only body which heard all the evidence available (something none of us have done) was the DC which found unanimously that no rape had been proven. One member agreed that rape hadn't happened but believed that harassment probably had. The majority disagreed with him.

 

[Before Theory]

Sorry I messed up my reply to Sihhi by trying to answer his/her questions in the body of his/her text. If it isn't clear ask me again and I'll try to repost.

Btw where's CC Apology Boy gone ? Is he awaiting his master's words on the issues I raised ?

 

[Before Theory]

Spoke to soon !

Yes Apology Boy, your CC is the issue here because they've been orchestrating the response to the victim's complaints from day one. The only thing is, they thought they were doing it under the cover of the night. Wrong. Welcome to the real world, SWP speak and selective quotes from Lenin don't cut it here.