Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

SWP expulsions and squabbles

Honourable people? Questioned a possible victim of rape about her sex life? Had a DC where ALL those on it knew the accused? Spoke about a potential victim but didn't let her in the room? Allowed the accused access to info but not the victim? Your definition of 'honourable' is frankly ludicrous and is in a dictionary that i'd hate to read.....
Quite a list. It does exclude all the things Candy mentioned that they did differently in this case precisely because they were aware it was different and that the accused being a cc member made it more problematic. Like not allowing him in the room while they heard her evidence, letting her nominate one dc member to ask questions etc. But clearly that was just them covering themselves I guess in your worldview and not genuinely trying to apply their bloody politics to a messed up situation?

Done think your list holds up. The juicy one of course is the asking about her sex life issue. But they made clear why that happened. if they'd only been investigating rape then they wouldn't have asked it. But precisely because he was a cc member they broadened their remit to look at issues of sexual harassment and a relationship that might have had a predatory or abusive nature. And to investigate that they had to ask her about her sex life as it overlapped with him and what the context of the relationship was within her sex life more broadly. That's a difficult area, terribly so, to discuss without being insensitive or making someone feel put on the spot. But I honestly don't see how you can get into the harder to prove issue of harassment or abusive power relations (as opposed to the much simpler in comparison question of rape) without going into some of that uncomfortable area of discussion. But only because they wanted to be clear if this cc guy had been inappropriate in a broader sense beyond straightforward rape.
 
Er they do hold up. The DC members knowing Comrade Delta? They admit it, it holds up.
Spoke in a session re the possible victim whilst not allowing her in, yeah that happened too, ergo it holds up.
Allowed the accused acces to info but not the accuser, they admit it in the transcript, ergo it holds up.

Pretty easy really. Do try a buit harder....

Yeah, there's always an excuse in probing a victims sex life..... Did they ask the ';accused' about his sex life, who he'd slept with?
 

:D what the fuck is that?

Is this MB?

If so, that's the third time I've heard about him falsely accusing someone of an ism in the past couple of months.

Same thought went through my mind too. Do I know you by any chance?

PS: Might be worth editing that to initials - the person in question strikes me as a classic vanity googler.
 
I bloody well hope they did yes.

You're quite right, didn't answer all your points, got work soon. But neither did you acknowledge the things they did to accommodate her needs given the special circumstances.
 
PS: Might be worth editing that to initials - the person in question strikes me as a classic vanity googler.

Edited it, as for whether you know me or not, I have no idea :)

As far as vanity googling goes, I can only assume he has alerts...
 

Haha that website is great.

"A spectre is hustlin Europe — tha spectre of communizzle fo' realz. All tha powerz of oldschool Europe have entered tha fuck into a holy alliizzle to exorcise dis spectre: Pimp n' Tsar, Metternich n' Guizot, French Radicals n' German five-o-spies.
Where is tha jam up in opposizzle dat has not been decried as communistic by its opponents up in power, biatch? Where is tha opposizzle dat has not hurled back tha brandin reproach of communism, against tha mo' advizzled opposition parties, as well as against its erectionary adversaries?"
 
Da decision by Synaspismos ta launch Syriza was part of a general turn ta tha left under tha influence of tha anti-capitalist n' anti-war movements. For example, while up in 1992 Synaspismos supported tha Maastricht Treaty, by tha time Syriza was formed it had repudiated dis stizzle. It later campaigned against tha European Constipationizzle Treaty, n' joined tha Greek Social Forum up in 2006. It was tha only parliamentary jam ta support tha student rebellions up in 2009, n' played a blingin role alongside Antarsya up in tha “movement of tha squares”. Right back up in yo muthafuckin ass. Synaspismos’s traditionizzle opennizz ta tha hood movements played a blingin role.
 
I bloody well hope they did yes.

You're quite right, didn't answer all your points, got work soon. But neither did you acknowledge the things they did to accommodate her needs given the special circumstances.

But there is zero evidence they did is there?
What accomodation? Not allowing her access to the same info they allowed Comrade Delta? How very caring. Talking about her behind her back? How very caring.

By the way, what do you say to the revelation that the SWP tried to deal with the rape allegation informally? Classy that....
 
As tha CGT n' tha CCOO-UGT regroupin five different unions up in Spain called fo' yet another 24-hour ‘general strike’ fo' October 31 n' November 14 respectively, comradez of tha Assembly movement - Indignant n' Self-Organized Alicante Workers - published n' distributed a thugged-out declaration called "In tha grill of tha 24-hour strikes: What strike do our crazy-ass asses want, biatch? Da mass strike!".
 
Is this MB?

If so, that's the third time I've heard about him falsely accusing someone of an ism in the past couple of months.

no actually, not this time! but MB is profligate in that regard. this was another who so far as i know never quite bonded with MB, both of them too much on a personal identity power-politics binge to ever really get on imo
 
It is also strange that the only person who knew W, withdrew on that basis.

not necessarily. for the purposes of purely fact free speculation

there's an assumption running through the thread that the person who withdrew would have otherwise acted as friend and champion of W. There are all sorts of reasons why someone may not wish to take part in a weird quasi-judicial hearing about a friend or acquaintance, most of which do not reflect badly on anyone involved. The role was judge, not advocate.

Think it through: would you want to sit in judgement on your mate, or your sisters best friend, or someone on your team at work, or on someone you'd had a massive falling out with, or have a huge crush on?

The point is that all the other members of the DC should have abdicated because they knew the accused, not that the one person who knew the accuser did anything necessarily wrong or suspicious.
 
One quick point re "frightened liberals", calling the cops etc.

This might be a valid avenue of criticism if the SWP was a genuine working class revolutionary org capable of administering "workers justice", and with a mandate from the class to do this.

It's not.

...and neither is anyone else in England.
 
I don't think there's much point in this but.... one of the DC worked a large part of her professional life with victims of rape. As it says in the transcript, she did her phd on rape. My personal opinion is that questions about W's sex life would only have been asked for the reasons that they state and that bolshiebhoy repeats.
 
Yes the police and courts may have a disputed conviction rate or whatever but it's a darn site better than anyone on the revolutionary left

ETA: At Chilango

Edited in light of the info below so as not to reinforce negative stereotypes
 
That's interesting, thanks cesare.
I'm still not altogether convinced by that 58% figure. The Guardian piece sources the Telegraph piece as you probably noticed http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/7442785/Rape-conviction-rate-figures-misleading.html

But it's improved so much over the past 30 years. Not just in the prospect of conviction, but also in how victims are treated. For example, There's a recent long post on the Savile thread where someone describes in detail their recent experience of recently reporting sexual abuse from a long time ago, I'll see if I can find it.

Edit: here it is http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/the-sir-jimmy-savile-obe-thread.300406/page-72#post-11855328
 
What was needed here was a process in which everyone concerned had confidence. The police cannot provide it, because they would be suspect - with good reason - of wanting to cause harm to an organisation whose members have often clashed with them on marches and over civil rights cases. But what the CC and the DC seem to have had a blind spot for is that being a longstanding member of the SWP is not a qualification for objectivity because of institutional bias. Tony Cliff used to say for similar reasons that the whole judiciary should be scrapped and that he looked forward to the day that a young, black, working class, lesbian presided over court cases. In the same spirit, they should have brought someone who was respected in the labour movement, acceptable to both parties, to conduct proceedings.
 
I think a clear political point can be made here about the dangers of assumptions of unique competence (by virtue of filling in a membership form!) and how that is fostered developed and utilised by vanguardist forms of organisation (no matter what open or participatory icing they put on their cake).
 
What was needed here was a process in which everyone concerned had confidence. The police cannot provide it, because they would be suspect - with good reason - of wanting to cause harm to an organisation whose members have often clashed with them on marches and over civil rights cases. But what the CC and the DC seem to have had a blind spot for is that being a longstanding member of the SWP is not a qualification for objectivity because of institutional bias. Tony Cliff used to say for similar reasons that the whole judiciary should be scrapped and that he looked forward to the day that a young, black, working class, lesbian presided over court cases. In the same spirit, they should have brought someone who was respected in the labour movement, acceptable to both parties, to conduct proceedings.
out of curiosity, are young black working class lesbians more likely to be good judges than young black working class straight men? or was this some sort of perviness on tc's part?
 
In my branch it was very well behaved although a few years before I joined one of the members had allegedlly tried to rob a local AWL member at knife point

No allegations about one former member, around in the 70's, who went out and robbed a bank at gunpoint. Went on to take pot-shots at the police, as he tried to escape and ended up doing serious jail time. There was a TV dramatisation made of it, presented by film director, Michael Winner. Wonder if it ever made it onto YouTube? Interesting decade that.
 
No allegations about one former member, around in the 70's, who went out and robbed a bank at gunpoint. Went on to take pot-shots at the police, as he tried to escape and ended up doing serious jail time. There was a TV dramatisation made of it, presented by film director, Michael Winner. Wonder if it ever made it onto YouTube? Interesting decade that.
Are you on about Eddy Horner and Paul Sitwell?
 
Don't remember any specific names. The TV dramatisation involved just the one bloke, as I recall, whose character, as you would expect, was filmed attending a branch meeting calling for workers to be armed. How this was to be achieved at the time is anyone's guess. Ask the WRP maybe.
 
Back
Top Bottom