Random
Ethnic nalgocrat
I am in favour of ethno-political self identification, and your ortho-logocentric oppressive statements have been noted and will be entered into the MULTIVAC of intersectionality to decide your fate.
SWP expulsions and squabbles
- Thread starter Nigel Irritable
- Start date
if it was a northern thing surely they would call it t'Millitant, as in trouble at t'Militant
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
your login's been taken by santiagotalk
sihhi
Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered
This is the real reason the Weekly Worker is going down the pan. They've forgotten how to mole in other organisations, admitting your organisation as soon they ask - amateurs.
http://www.cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/948/letters
CPGB comrades noticed that Sheffield’s two SWP branches were each holding meetings on ‘The politics of feminism’. In light of the crisis which has engulfed the organisation recently, we thought this particular topic could make for an interesting discussion.
The five or so comrades waiting to start at Sheffield South must have low expectations for their 'all welcome' ‘public’ branch meetings, since they immediately twigged we were - shock, horror - other leftists! On being questioned, we admitted our affiliation, and were informed that “We don’t want people who blog [sic] about our members at the meeting”. Presumably a reference to the Weekly Worker’s scandal-free coverage of the crisis in the SWP, but the comrade did not wish to elaborate.
After being stonewalled for several minutes, we asked if they definitely didn’t want other comrades at the meeting. To which one SWPer replied, “I’m not feeling very comradely”.
http://www.cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/948/letters
CPGB comrades noticed that Sheffield’s two SWP branches were each holding meetings on ‘The politics of feminism’. In light of the crisis which has engulfed the organisation recently, we thought this particular topic could make for an interesting discussion.
The five or so comrades waiting to start at Sheffield South must have low expectations for their 'all welcome' ‘public’ branch meetings, since they immediately twigged we were - shock, horror - other leftists! On being questioned, we admitted our affiliation, and were informed that “We don’t want people who blog [sic] about our members at the meeting”. Presumably a reference to the Weekly Worker’s scandal-free coverage of the crisis in the SWP, but the comrade did not wish to elaborate.
After being stonewalled for several minutes, we asked if they definitely didn’t want other comrades at the meeting. To which one SWPer replied, “I’m not feeling very comradely”.
sihhi
Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered
Brilliant
I know. This week's edition is a corker.
http://www.cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/948/left-press-and-the-swp-the-dog-that-didnt-bark
It's attacking the Socialist Party as hopelessly sectarian for not devoting The Socialist to discussing it all.
This reality ‘on the ground’, as it were, is very unevenly reproduced at the level of the left press. Most of the smaller groups have weighed in - Workers Power, Permanent Revolution, Counterfire and others. But the silence from other quarters is deafening. The Socialist Party in England and Wales is a case in point. It is, broadly, competing for the same people as the SWP. It is jostling for the same union positions (a little more effectively), and the affections of the same union tops; it is the other relatively substantial Trotskyist group in the country and, while it remains smaller than the SWP (although who knows how long that will last?), it fights in broadly the same weight bracket, with a thousand or so members. In short, it has every interest in the crisis afflicting the SWP. Yet it is entirely absent from its press. The last month’s worth of The Socialist, SPEW’s sleepy weekly, consists of the usual monotonous gabble about resisting the cuts, fighting back against the cuts, and striking against the cuts - not a word is inked on the enormous bust-up which is provoking, at the very least, morbid curiosity on the part of its members and periphery.
SPEW has condescended to comment on the affairs of other groups in the past. Its ‘international’ issued a gloating statement on the matter of a series of splits in the International Marxist Tendency, which split from Militant in the early 90s, taking founder-leader Ted Grant with it.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
how long have you live here? No one ever uses 't' in that way*! It'd be 'there's trouble at' militant' - with an extra stress on the final t of 'at' and a glottal stop befor the 'militant'
* except, maybe, in Barnsley
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Oh look, a "subtle" reference to the length of your
Swappite, please!!!
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
And who knows what Owen Oyston's parents were, besides being the parents of a sex offender!
Santiagotalk
New Member
He hasn't attempted to estimate the number of working comrades in the SWP, therefore underestimating the number would be impossible, and your "claim" is merely a poorly-executed rhetorical device on your part, aimed at making you look knowledgeable, but successful only in doing the opposite.
I think you like the sound of your own voice. It tried to make a relevant point about my own branch of which I have a little bit of knowledege.
barney_pig
Po-cha-na-quar-hip
The socialist league split in 1884, those who later formed the ilp split in 1888, and more split off to the ilp in 1892, your lot left, of course, in 1904, but that Scottish bunch split in 1903. The SDf were far better than modern leftist sects, and its splits were far more interesting than the mini me Trotskyisms of today, but your split was not alone.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Although his alleged crimes are more accurately described as a form of Stalinism, surely?
Santiagotalk
New Member
Oh look, a "subtle" reference to the length of yourreligiousideological conviction, and an attempt at (false) humility!!!
Swappite, please!!!
I think you are taking the piss, however I can enjoy a joke its part of our swp training. Lol.
barney_pig
Po-cha-na-quar-hip
I am sure that they will be by a future new party, in order to exonerate their clean and pure Trotsky-Lenin- perdido street stationism.
Santiagotalk
New Member
Ok that is funny.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Your reply (to which I responded):
"You completly underestemate the number of working comrades in the SWP. Its conveniant to say we are all students, sorry that wont wash. As for your other comments I am at a loss to understand what point you are trying to make?"(my emphasis).
You weren't trying "to make a relevant point" about your own branch. Your own reply to butchersapron specifically speaks of "the number of working comrades in the SWP", not of anything to do with your branch.
Try again, and set the bar a bit higher this time, eh?
Santiagotalk
New Member
I have been involved in the movement for 40 years, in three politcal organisations and a member of four different trades unions. My father was a miner and my mother was a factory worker that were my class consciousness comes from.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Santiagotalk
New Member
Yes you are right I made a mistake. I mixed up two differnt commets.
Random
Ethnic nalgocrat
Just as well, since making a working Leninist group in the UK these days is sheer science fiction. Signed, Mike GigglerAh, so Mievillist Trotskist-Leninism, eh?
damn you
Halleys and..?
imposs1904
Thread Killa'
But 1903 and 1904 wasn't the Victorian era, was it? I was being specific about the Victorian period.
Who split off in 1888? Genuinely interested in all this sort of stuff. And didn't the ILP formally found itself in 1893?
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Oh fuck, here it comes, the "considerably more working class cred than yow" argument.
That might mean something in the SWP. It means fuck-all when most of the people you're saying it to have the same "credentials".
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
I remember Kilgore Trout saying something similar. So it goes.
electric.avenue
lots of work to be done
Interesting to know. Ta.
Santiagotalk
New Member
ViolentPanda. (well named) I have tried to post comments on here in a constructive and informative way. I have not tried to take the piss out of anyone. I responded to you sarcastic point about my 40 years in the movement in a factual way. I certanly do not think I have any more working class credentials than any other contributor on this site. Have you ever considered that you come across as an offensive and disruptive individual. Why dont you stop having a go at people and say something constructive.
Solidarity and goodbye for today
Random
Ethnic nalgocrat
Idris2002
canadian girlfriend
Now there's an in-joke not many will get.
Similar threads
