SWP expulsions and squabbles

[emanymton]

Interesting to see how many (if any) SWP go on the bedroom tax protests tmw and what reception they get if they do.

They are pushing it hugely localy I did find it quite amusing a couple of weeks ago when a real hack offered up being told to start orginsing around the bedroom tax as an example of how important the leadership of the CC is. I didn't bother to point out that as a so called socialist you shouldn't really need to be told, you should just be doing it.

 

[frogwoman]

while i think the SP are a bit reformist and this is one of the problems/disagreements I've got, I think the SP being accused of reformism by a member of an organisation who thinks that you can get socialism just by voting it through parliament is quite amusing tbh

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

Not sure myself, given that most of the people here have left anyway - london or brum might be a different picture.

I think the ISN types will try and be nice to most of them - as they still will see some of those who have remained in the party, even "loyalists" as potential recruits.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Out of interest, how do you feel about the "witch" Badges, which are still around now?

Totally insulting to witches.

 

[ayatollah]

I was a party member from 1985- 2003, I remember how, within our branch meetings, and Marxisms, we impressed ourselves with our intellectual and theoretical sophistication, and failed entirely to notice that the world around us was changing, and the audience willing to listen was shrinking. I was never instructed not to read non party literature, but it was considered unhealthy, ( the aggression and antipathy which was displayed toward the small groups outside Marxism was well beyond their threat to to the SWP, and displayed a closed mind attitude), and it is noticeable how I self censored my reading, and never strayed beyond leninisms.
I remember being at a Marxism I think in the early 1990s, and cliff declaring that everyone over 30 was 'rubbish'; in a mass rally full of comrades who had struggled and sacrificed through the dark days of the 1980s, and were at last being offered the chance that a new decade might finally give us some reward, some victories after so many defeats, here was our leader telling us that WE were the impediment preventing the SWP from succeeding!
And yet, did anyone protest? I was pissed off and looked around the hall, and all of these same people were laughing and applauding and shouting their agreement.
I remained a party member for another ten years, but that moment, when Cliff stood and insulted virtually his entire party, and they lapped it up, has stuck with me ever since.

18 fucking years ! Blimey barney pig, you certainly put the time in .. and weren't purged during all that time ? Did you just leave ? And the ENTIRE period you were in was a period of massive working class defeat,or at least retreat, pretty much worldwide. Poor sod. In the early 70's when I joined,every week seemed to bring up another mass strike or political strike in the UK , and in Portugal in 74 they even seemed on the brink of a socialist revolution ! And the IS (from nothing of course - the old percentage increase illusion) appeared to be entering a period of unlimited growth ( I remember Wendy Henry, eventually to be editor of the Sun, in a casual pub conversation, calculating that at the then early 70's rate of of exponential growth we'd have a million members in a few years and could seize POWER ! ) Delusional, yep... but motivating ? Not half !

 

[treelover]

18 fucking years ! Blimey barney pig, you certainly put the time in .. and weren't purged during all that time ? Did you just leave ? And the ENTIRE period you were in was a period of massive working class defeat,or at least retreat, pretty much worldwide. Poor sod. In the early 70's when I joined,every week seemed to bring up another mass strike or political strike in the UK , and in Portugal in 74 they even seemed on the brink of a socialist revolution ! And the IS (from nothing of course - the old percentage increase illusion) appeared to be entering a period of unlimited growth ( I remember Wendy Henry, eventually to be editor of the Sun, in a casual pub conversation, calculating that at the then early 70's rate of of exponential growth we'd have a million members in a few years and could seize POWER ! ) Delusional, yep... but motivating ? Not half !

But doesn't that say everything about these sort of groups, or just some of the people who join them...

I can proudly say i have never joined the SWP and indeed have spent my political life in the past attempting to counteract their baleful consequences of much of their actions, sometimes at personal cost...

 

[Jean-Luc]

while i think the SP are a bit reformist and this is one of the problems/disagreements I've got, I think the SP being accused of reformism by a member of an organisation who thinks that you can get socialism just by voting it through parliament is quite amusing tbh

I don't think you can get socialism "just" by voting it through parliament. It requires a lot more than that, including mass organisation outside of parliament in workplaces and communities. Anyway, as SPEW contests elections to parliament presumably they too see a role for it in changing society to what they want, eg an Enabling Act to nationalise the top 200 companies. Or are they committed to armed insurrection and street battles as the way?

 

[two sheds]

No, it's that it didn't mention even mention capitalism, let alone the need to get rid of it and replace it by socialism (not even as they define it). It just blamed the Tories. Openly reformist Old Labour stuff.

Funny how these things work. I read through the leaflet you gave in response, and the word that jarred with me was 'capitalist' as in 'This capitalist system is in an economic crisis'. I think it just puts people-in-the-street off. ("You're fooling yourself. We're livin' in a dictatorship, a self-perpetuating autocracy, in which the working class--" "Oh, there you go, bringing class into it again--").

What's wrong with just 'The system is in an economic crisis"? It's more direct, and you don't sound like axe grinding. I think that's a basic mistake that the left makes - throwing in the multisyllabic buzz words that they think will resonate with people but actually don't - that the right definitely doesn't make.

And as for replacing capitalism by socialism then it depends what you mean by socialism. The effect that Stalin has had on popular consciousness I'm not sure that just rooting for socialism is going to help.

 

[SpineyNorman]

Did it stop the hospital cuts?

Yes. Maltby is now a people's republic 8)

 

[SpineyNorman]

and every other organisation/political etc?

Having said that, I met plenty of ex- anarchists in SWP. LOL

You know that theres a difference between anarchism and not listening to your mum when she tells you to tidy your room, right? [/quote]

 

[two sheds]

You know that theres a difference between anarchism and not listening to your mum when she tells you to tidy your room, right?

ooo i know this one - the second one's anarchy isn't it

 

[SpineyNorman]

Although to be fair, if the ones at Sheffield uni are anything to go on, there's plenty of anarchists who don't get this subtle distinction either.

 

[ibilly99]

Some wise words from Peter Tatchell in How Masculinity Undermines Left Politics

http://www.petertatchell.net/masculinity/masculinisation.htm

It is also evident in the way much of the self-proclaimed vanguardist Left makes a particular virtue of its commitment to tough policies, no compromises, confrontation tactics and the glorification of the armed struggle. To them, being tolerant or conciliatory is an inherent sign of weakness and can never be countenanced. Those who deviate from the correct line - however slightly or sincerely are ferociously denounced as traitors and sell-outs.
Even worse, some on the revolutionary Left extol this masculinisation of socialism as a litmus test to distinguish themselves as true socialists from others whom they dismiss as mere liberals and reformists. For these people, toughness has been elevated into a tenet of socialist commitment.

 

[Jean-Luc]

Funny how these things work. I read through the leaflet you gave in response, and the word that jarred with me was 'capitalist' as in 'This capitalist system is in an economic crisis'. I think it just puts people-in-the-street off. ("You're fooling yourself. We're livin' in a dictatorship, a self-perpetuating autocracy, in which the working class--" "Oh, there you go, bringing class into it again--").

Fair point but since the Occupy movement of a year or so ago the word "capitalism" has come back into a more general usage, by supporters as well as critics and even by people in the street (and the man on the Clapham Omnibus). Maybe "the profit system" would have been better, but the Maltby leaflet didn't even mention this or the economic system at all, only with some of its effects treated in isolation from the system..

What's wrong with just 'The system is in an economic crisis"? It's more direct, and you don't sound like axe grinding. I think that's a basic mistake that the left makes - throwing in the multisyllabic buzz words that they think will resonate with people but actually don't - that the right definitely doesn't make.

Nothing wrong with that. The point the leaflet was trying to make was that it's the economic system that's to blame for current problems, not the politicians who try or want to run it. They're the monkeys, not the organ-grinder. The Maltby leaflet didn't blame the economic system but merely one set of politicians (the Tories).

And as for replacing capitalism by socialism then it depends what you mean by socialism. The effect that Stalin has had on popular consciousness I'm not sure that just rooting for socialism is going to help.

Yes, the association of the word with state-capitalist Russia does cause problems, so you do always need to define what you mean by it. Which the leaflet did: a society where productive resources are owned in common, under democratic control, so that they can be used to produce to meet people's needs and not for profit and where the principle "from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs" applies.

 

[TremulousTetra]

You know that theres a difference between anarchism and not listening to your mum when she tells you to tidy your room, right?

mummy never tells me to tidy my room, no need to I am a mumbot.


Still a fact though. Lots. I remember at a district wide educational, as a joke the organiser fixed it so one of the latest recruits, an anarchist, got the question on Kronstadt. Oh how we laughed.

PS. you're in trouble now.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Although to be fair, if the ones at Sheffield uni are anything to go on, there's plenty of anarchists who don't get this subtle distinction either.

so what's an anarchist them?

 

[bolshiebhoy]

Some wise words from Peter Tatchell in How Masculinity Undermines Left Politics

http://www.petertatchell.net/masculinity/masculinisation.htm

It is also evident in the way much of the self-proclaimed vanguardist Left makes a particular virtue of its commitment to tough policies, no compromises, confrontation tactics and the glorification of the armed struggle. To them, being tolerant or conciliatory is an inherent sign of weakness and can never be countenanced. Those who deviate from the correct line - however slightly or sincerely are ferociously denounced as traitors and sell-outs.
Even worse, some on the revolutionary Left extol this masculinisation of socialism as a litmus test to distinguish themselves as true socialists from others whom they dismiss as mere liberals and reformists. For these people, toughness has been elevated into a tenet of socialist commitment.

What a pile of shit. He's clearly never met Sheila McGregor, Julie Waterson or any number of other hard as nails women comrades in the swp. How dare he suggest they're being 'masculine' for not suffering fools. That doesn't mark them out as less or more feminine, it's just a trait of many revolutionaries.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Fair point but since the Occupy movement of a year or so ago the word "capitalism" has come back into a more general usage, by supporters as well as critics and even by people in the street (and the man on the Clapham Omnibus). Maybe "the profit system" would have been better, but the Maltby leaflet didn't even mention this or the economic system at all, only with some of its effects treated in isolation from the system..

Nothing wrong with that. The point the leaflet was trying to make was that it's the economic system that's to blame for current problems, not the politicians who try or want to run it. They're the monkeys, not the organ-grinder. The Maltby leaflet didn't blame the economic system but merely one set of politicians (the Tories).

Yes, the association of the word with state-capitalist Russia does cause problems, so you do always need to define what you mean by it. Which the leaflet did: a society where productive resources are owned in common, under democratic control, so that they can be used to produce to meet people's needs and not for profit and where the principle "from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs" applies.

I don't really share two shed's objections capitalism, socialism, class. But I wouldn't really object to replacing socialism and communism/anarchism with the plain word democracy. In some ways it kind of encapsulating what we are about, in a more accessible fashion. However,,,,,,,,,,,,, [next Post]

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

What a pile of shit. He's clearly never met Sheila McGregor, Julie Waterson or any number of other hard as nails women comrades in the swp. How dare he suggest they're being 'masculine' for not suffering fools. That doesn't mark them out as less or more feminine, it's just a trait of many revolutionaries.

This post is the perfect illustration of an SWP understanding of feminism, masculinity, and women's liberation

 

[TremulousTetra]

Funny how these things work. I read through the leaflet you gave in response, and the word that jarred with me was 'capitalist' as in 'This capitalist system is in an economic crisis'. I think it just puts people-in-the-street off. ("You're fooling yourself. We're livin' in a dictatorship, a self-perpetuating autocracy, in which the working class--" "Oh, there you go, bringing class into it again--").

What's wrong with just 'The system is in an economic crisis"? It's more direct, and you don't sound like axe grinding. I think that's a basic mistake that the left makes - throwing in the multisyllabic buzz words that they think will resonate with people but actually don't - that the right definitely doesn't make.

And as for replacing capitalism by socialism then it depends what you mean by socialism. The effect that Stalin has had on popular consciousness I'm not sure that just rooting for socialism is going to help.

I really really appreciate what you're trying to do, but I'm not sure dumbing down, so to speak, is a solution.

One of the reasons, just one of the reasons, people vote BNP is because it is a two fingers to the system [in the eyes of the people I have spoke to].
Now don't get me wrong, I was a wholehearted supporter of the SWP 'pandering' or dumbing down of the socialist Alliance material, to take on a shade of old Labour. Basically a reformist position. But my experience was, this had very little resonance with people. Mimicking the reformists has been tried by revolutionaries over and over, and it hasn't really worked out it?
If I was going to have anything do with an election, think I would much rather be openly revolutionary, than hide it behind any transitionary demands.

PS. Got to say my experience with elections was awful. Bloody awful.

 

[TremulousTetra]

This post is the perfect illustration of an SWP understanding of feminism, masculinity, and women's liberation

why?

 

[electric.avenue]

Speaking with a proletarian accent; being a fan of "the peoples' music" (jazz); wearing sportswear "like the proletarians do"; being a beer-swilling sexist (like all proletarian males are).
I hope that has set your mind at rest, comrade.

So these so called "credentials" are based upon fairly superficial things then ? Plus a hefty dose of stereotype.

 

[bolshiebhoy]

why?

Presumably cause not going along with stereotypes about nurturing women an aggressive men marks me out as a sexist!

 

[electric.avenue]

and every other organisation/political etc?

Having said that, I met plenty of ex- anarchists in SWP. LOL

Me too. But I think I've met more anarchists who are ex-swp.

 

[TremulousTetra]

This post is the perfect illustration of an SWP understanding of feminism, masculinity, and women's liberation

look at the SWP's track record. In the socialist Alliance they bent over backwards to accommodate the 'reformist' working class, in the material and composition of the socialist Alliance, in order to attract them into the socialist Alliance. And what happened, fuck all. The same again in Respect, bent over backwards. The UAF, the same.

The SWP has always been accused of selling out, precisely because they have been being tolerant or conciliatory [let me be clear here. They weren't tolerant and conciliatory to everyone. Not to fellow revolutionaries. They kept their tolerance and conciliatory actions, in fact their complete concentration was always focused on the working class. The reformist working class. Whether this was right or wrong is another issue. Whether this was a correct definition of the English working class, is another issue. But they were always tolerance and conciliatory to non-revolutionaries amongst who they considered were the English working class.)

The only reason Vanguard party's support the armed revolution, is because it is most likely going to be necessary. If we could shag the ruling class into submission, what the heck, I'd even do Boris Johnson

 

[TremulousTetra]

Me too. But I think I've met more anarchists who are ex-swp.

you're probably right mate.

 

[TremulousTetra]

His impeccable proletarian credentials?
I mean, obviously they're not actually impeccable by any stretch of the imagination, but certainly more so than some of his contemporaries on the CC.

you mean like Marx and Engels. Workerist.

 

[ayatollah]

I don't think you can get socialism "just" by voting it through parliament. It requires a lot more than that, including mass organisation outside of parliament in workplaces and communities. Anyway, as SPEW contests elections to parliament presumably they too see a role for it in changing society to what they want, eg an Enabling Act to nationalise the top 200 companies. Or are they committed to armed insurrection and street battles as the way?

If you think the capitalist class (yep them, the ones who actually do own and control the means of production and exchange , not the Jews, the illuminati, the lizard creatures from the Planet Zog) will allow a mere Parliamentary majority to expropriate their centuries of wealth and power from them - even with maybe "mass organisation" outside of Parliament in workplaces and communities as a "back up" , without trying to drown us all in blood via economic sabotage, fascism and/or a military coup, then I'd say you haven't been paying attention during history classes !

Sadly, defensive armed struggle and street battles will undoubtedly be required by the working class simply to defend any majority decision of the population expressed through "democratic" institutions to radically transform the economic and social status quo - in any country at all where this is attempted. For socialists committed to genuine root and branch social transformation (ie, expropriating the current ruling class of their wealth and entirely self-serving control - rather than Labourist reformist tinkering ) Parliamentary struggle is indeed a necessary part of the much wider socio economic struggle, but cannot be viewed as invalidating the harsh reality of absolutely guaranteed ruling class violent resistance to this expropriation.

Name me a single country where this has not been so ?

 

[Pickman's model]

If you think the capitalist class (yep them, the ones who actually do own and control the means of production and exchange , not the Jews, the illuminati, the lizard creatures from the Planet Zog) will allow a mere Parliamentary majority to expropriate their centuries of wealth and power from them - even with maybe "mass organisation" outside of Parliament in workplaces and communities as a "back up" , without trying to drown us all in blood via economic sabotage, fascism and/or a military coup, then I'd say you haven't been paying attention during history classes !

Sadly, defensive armed struggle and street battles will undoubtedly be required by the working class simply to defend any majority decision of the population expressed through "democratic" institutions to radically transform the economic and social status quo - in any country at all where this is attempted. For socialists committed to genuine root and branch social transformation (ie, expropriating the current ruling class of their wealth and entirely self-serving control - rather than Labourist reformist tinkering ) Parliamentary struggle is indeed a necessary part of the much wider socio economic struggle, but cannot be viewed as invalidating the harsh reality of absolutely guaranteed ruling class violent resistance to this expropriation.

Name me a single country where this has not been so ?

utopia

 

[Delroy Booth]

Jean Luc's criticism is as useless as his 'the personal isn't political' gem and as sneering as his lynch mob accusations (still no sign of an apology). He's now added misrepresentation - only linking to half the leaflet is a pretty cheap shot - but maybe that's where a century of irrelevance and the hostility clause get you.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

I wonder will the SWP look like the SPGB in 100 years time?