Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

SWP expulsions and squabbles

The relentless hectoring tone of the CC is chilling. They have fucked up, yet they blame the membership. It is very difficult to imagine which working class socialists they would hope to attract and hold following a special conference at which they succeed in reinforcing the dominant cyborg attackers.

Attending a conference which has the declared intention of crushing the dissenters in this way creates an atmosphere only of dread and fear. All power and courage to the opposition, but you have my sincere sympathy for the blood letting that seems now to be inevitable.
 
"Be careful what you wish for, because you might get it."

I think your threat is going to bite you and your owl right up the secure uni job, prof.
 
"Be careful what you wish for, because you might get it."

I think your threat is going to bite you and your owl right up the secure uni job, prof.

A show-down between Seymourists and Callinicosists at the SWSS Revolt! talk on the politics of Leninism might be interesting.

536901_453653794700072_1375386633_n.jpg


I like how there's a Course called 'why the working-class' :D
 
Still there. The platform mob are spitting fur but are sounding rattled.

Oh I'm sure that they are rattled. As of this morning, they were feeling more secure against the threat of imminent expulsion than they had been. Now they are pretty sure that the CC is still intent on driving them out.

But aside from rattling the Platformists, the main purpose here is to call the bluff of the House of Lords. And they aren't offering any olive branches, which is risky. The old boys may have a long record of falling into line, but each and every aggregate will be an opportunity for zealots to aggravate them beyond the point of return.
 
Oh I'm sure that they are rattled. As of this morning, they were feeling more secure against the threat of imminent expulsion than they had been. Now they are pretty sure that the CC is still intent on driving them out.

But aside from rattling the Platformists, the main purpose here is to call the bluff of the House of Lords. And they aren't offering any olive branches, which is risky. The old boys may have a long record of falling into line, but each and every aggregate will be an opportunity for zealots to aggravate them beyond the point of return.

This is the response Callinicos gives to posters on facebook:

Critical Reading Alex, I’m not interested in knowing the details of the case. What is of concern is the process that was used to adjudicate it, including the fact that most members of the Disputes Committee were close personal acquaintances of the accused, and the fact that the woman involved was apparently asked grossly inappropriate questions. If the SWP CC had any sense it was issue a statement saying it has confidence that the DC reached the correct decision, but it acknowledges the concerns about how the investigation was conducted and that it will review its internal processes to ensure that they are fair, impartial and non-sexist. If you did that, you would solve a huge part of the current crisis. Like · 11

Alex Callinicos Thanks, 'Critical', for your characteristically sanctimonious advice on a subject about which you know zip. Like · 3

Critical Reading's response is actually a pro-CC fudge, how can you accept the result of the process was at fault?, but Callinicos doesn't endorse it.
 
Fear not comrades, the revolutionary left is rising from its fifty-year slumber :cool:

New mass workers' party set up

In a revival of the fortunes of revolutionary politics in Britain Proletarian Democracy will be standing candidates in the next election as part of a new mass workers' party called FANG (For A Nuclear Globe), alongside the ghost of Gerry Healy, the Wool-Workers' Union, the Association of Auctioneers and Auctioneers' Lads, the International Bolshevik Tendency, and perhaps many more. Proletarian Action are also offering their support but sadly are playing a disgracefully sectarian role. The support of Gerry Healy's ghost, who in his day led one of the most important revolutionary organisations in Britain, for this important initiative for the proletariat shows FANG's potential to attract broad layers of the working class and to be ever mindful of the perils of creeping feminism in its ranks. It also shows FANG's potential to reach beyond the life-death divide and attract a mass layer of class conscious workers.

Wool-workers' Union General Secretary Matt Jumper, who is standing as a candidate for the local elections in May, said, "FANG is the most important new party set up in Britain in years. People are crying out for an alternative to Labour and as nobody has revolutionarized it by now, it is safe to conclude that nobody ever will."

Other names such as Victor Serge, Hegel and Gary Lineker have also added their support to FANG's electoral campaign. Gary Lineker said, "The reaction I got standing outside selling Workers' Girder with Gerry Healy's ghost by Leicester Square tube station this morning, where people literally screamed in surprise that finally we have a working class alternative to the established parties, is something important to build on for the future."

One shop steward in the Association of Auctioneers and Auctioneers' Lads was said to have promised to vote for FANG in the forthcoming elections, although this cannot be confirmed. As the president of the Meat Packers' Association said, "that single vote is like a tiny acorn from which a mighty oak tree could grow."

Nonetheless we believe this is an important initiative for the class and another giant leap towards overthrowing capitalism.

"The screams of terror at my appearance during village parish council meetings are nothing compared to the screeches we will hear when the Con-Dems discover a mass workers' party capable of resisting their austerity attacks!" Gerry Healy said. We wholeheartedly endorse his sentiments, despite our serious differences and reservations towards him before he became a ghost. Unlike Proletarian Action, we are able to put sectarianism aside and work together in a broad coalition on the issues that matter.


The dissatisfaction shown by honest toilers towards members of all three main parties shows the time for an alternative is long overdue. And who better to lead it than these august veterans of the class struggle with their long experience of leadership in the union and labour movement? Of course, the presence of the Marxist core of Proletarian Democracy inside the party will ensure that the bureaucratic and reformist tendencies present within the union bureaucracy, such as those displayed by the disgraceful comments by the right wing president of the Potato Peelers' Union about "Posadists" trying to cause trouble, are themselves discarded and thrown away. There will be no room in FANG for a leadership that sells out the workers.

The response at our canvassing in Leicester Square demonstrates the complete disaffection the majority of workers have with the capitalist system. Those who came to our stall prior to the launch of FANG's electoral campaign reacted as though they had seen a ghost! But make no mistake - the idea of a union-led party based on Old Labour principles might be dead, but it is no longer buried!
 
Meanwhile, here is an FT blog piece that someone else wrote.

Amidst the ongoing questions of Delta, there's this

costaslap.jpg


I have nothing against Costas and Alexis but why, other than a payment for them, is it good for Costas to be in the FT?

It's behind a subscription paywall, a weekday issue costs £2.50, ordinary libraries in many areas don't buy copies any more for this reason, doesn't really reach anyone except business classes or already keen socialists.

Reminds me of how Paul Mason "moved onto the current generation’s most obvious antecedents – the thinkers that inspired the 1968 student revolts, most notably the doyen of Situationism, Guy Debord, who argued that capitalism has replaced genuine social life with an inauthentic ‘spectacle’. ‘I wish mainstream politicians today had a little more exposure to those sorts of ideas, it might allow them to think a little bit more freely through the problems that they are confronting right now,’ Mason says. With one ear to the street and another to the boardroom, Mason knows better than most the sheer scale of the challenge facing politicians today"
 
M.A. student/graduate on Callinicos' facebook: "A lot of this is nonsense. A debate was had, factions were formed, conference debated the matter, (the whole party debated the matter) a vote was had, and the position of the leadership was endorsed. We are a democratic centralist organisation not a student union debating society. Frankly, if you don't like it suck it up, or walk."

I've seen on another closed facebook (so would be improper to quote) a suggestion from an obvious loyalist that the rebel faction are bringing outsiders into party disputes, and half suggesting that rebel faction controlled branches are fighting/will fight dirty. (Presumably suddenly sign up a bunch of lefties eager for a proper independent investigation over Delta, as SWSS/SWP members, and use them to stack the conference to depose the current CC?).
 
(Presumably suddenly sign up a bunch of lefties eager for a proper independent investigation over Delta, as SWSS/SWP members, and use them to stack the conference to depose the current CC?).
I'm tempted...

The CCs response is astoundingly incompetent. It just says we accept the need to completely reaffirm the decisions we've made, and you will fall in line. It is explicitly rejecting the centrist factions demands, except in the most tokenism if manner. It won't fool anyone, surely.
 
I'm tempted...

The CCs response is astoundingly incompetent. It just says we accept the need to completely reaffirm the decisions we've made, and you will fall in line. It is explicitly rejecting the centrist factions demands, except in the most tokenism if manner. It won't fool anyone, surely.

bolshiebhoy said:
Perfect response from the cc.
 
Did anyone think the cc was going to say oh you know what, our elected dc didn't convict delta, our conference backed the dc's procedures but here you are here's his head on a platter, suit you? No they couldn't, constitutionally and democratically they couldn't! But they could and have given everyone a chance to trash it out properly again once and for all.
 
Did anyone think the cc was going to say oh you know what, our elected dc didn't convict delta, our conference backed the dc's procedures but here you are here's his head on a platter, suit you? No they couldn't, constitutionally and democratically they couldn't! But they could and have given everyone a chance to trash it out properly again once and for all.

They could have said our disputes committee procedures were totally inadequate and the fuzziness of the system as well as having longtime mates of Delta means we have screwed up, fair cop, let's ask someone else outside the party to investigate.

Anyway, Richard Seymour is indirectly being compared to Max Shachtman now.

Seymour's picture above Trotsky's denunciation of Shachtman (via Lenin) in 1940.

http://derekthomas2010.wordpress.co...ys-savage-critique-of-the-swps-factionalists/
 
Did anyone think the cc was going to say oh you know what, our elected dc didn't convict delta, our conference backed the dc's procedures but here you are here's his head on a platter, suit you? No they couldn't, constitutionally and democratically they couldn't! But they could and have given everyone a chance to trash it out properly again once and for all.
But ALL they are giving is a repet of the discussion, and a reaffirmation of the line. They have ignored the factions argument that those that disagree need to be WON, not simply beaten. Such a move cannot resolve anything. Of course they can't agree to Smiths removal immediately, but they have to be prepared for it, or they're doomed.

And quite why they think he is so so worth keeping is just bizarre. At best all you could say of him was that he was a competent organiser, he's never written anything of note theoretically or practically, and I've never known him win anything but the most obvious of political arguments.
 
I'm tempted...

The CCs response is astoundingly incompetent. It just says we accept the need to completely reaffirm the decisions we've made, and you will fall in line. It is explicitly rejecting the centrist factions demands, except in the most tokenism if manner. It won't fool anyone, surely.
i think you'll find it will fool a reasonable number of people.
 
And quite why they think he is so so worth keeping is just bizarre. At best all you could say of him was that he was a competent organiser, he's never written anything of note theoretically or practically, and I've never known him win anything but the most obvious of political arguments.

He's a mate and he knows where the bodies are buried
 
But ALL they are giving is a repet of the discussion, and a reaffirmation of the line. They have ignored the factions argument that those that disagree need to be WON, not simply beaten. Such a move cannot resolve anything. Of course they can't agree to Smiths removal immediately, but they have to be prepared for it, or they're doomed.

And quite why they think he is so so worth keeping is just bizarre. At best all you could say of him was that he was a competent organiser, he's never written anything of note theoretically or practically, and I've never known him win anything but the most obvious of political arguments.
It's not about him, it's about them. The body.
 
And quite why they think he is so so worth keeping is just bizarre. At best all you could say of him was that he was a competent organiser, he's never written anything of note theoretically or practically, and I've never known him win anything but the most obvious of political arguments.

The only reason I can think is precisely because they don't want the Seymours, Bergfelds, Brindellis and others - they see these types as a Counterfire Mark II waiting to happen, and are happy for them to stew before some kind of split.

I think they recognise the jig is up. They are no longer "the smallest mass workers' party in the world but the largest one in Britain", the SP must have certainly taken them over in the non-student numbers game.

Perhaps also they want to keep a hold of UAF. If Delta is booted, UAF's credibility is shot to pieces.
 
This - they're a gang protecting one of their own - because they have to.
He's the buffer. He is a mere mouthpiece for those who actually decide things. They'll defend him, cos they have to, but they can give him up without it coming back too hard on them.
 
The SWP need to get it all out in the open & discuss & debate this properly or it will end up as a festering sore disrupting the party's ability to fight austerity & the condems as an united party. The fact the CC seem unwilling to accept that there is a problem and discuss it makes them look weak & makes their argument look weak. We always talk about democracy & discussion but it looks like the CC are clamping down on it and quite frankly the points in the email regarding the fraction & emergency conference are piss poor.
 
The SWP need to get it all out in the open & discuss & debate this properly or it will end up as a festering sore disrupting the party's ability to fight austerity & the condems as an united party. The fact the CC seem unwilling to accept that there is a problem and discuss it makes them look weak & makes their argument look weak. We always talk about democracy & discussion but it looks like the CC are clamping down on it and quite frankly the points in the email regarding the fraction & emergency conference are piss poor.
Finally, some clarity
 
Back
Top Bottom