Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

SWP expulsions and squabbles

Thanks TT - if that's true (no offence but given that this is your first post I think some skepticism is in order) I think that's where the focus should be - had it been dealt with back then this sorry episode (which does nobody any good - anyone who thinks this will get the SWP out of the way and allow some kind of left rebirth is a fuckwit) might have been avoided. It put them in an impossible situation.
 
What will be the consequences of all this?

I am barely politically active at all these days, but when I bump into the acquaintances I have who are members of the SWP I'm sure I'll be wanting to know how they can justify being in a party that behaves so disgracefully. I imagine that as this transcript flies around the left and beyond, life will become quite uncomfortable for many. But then I guess you need a thick skin to be a member in the first place. So, mass defections (with or without a split) or a resolute, defensive posture from most?
 
bolshiebhoy said:
When I was a lot younger one of my best mates in the party was expelled from the SWP over a charge of rape. I know for a fact that the experienced comrades who sat in judgement at that time made it their business to make sure that the woman involved knew all her legal options, including going to the police before during and after the party's ruling on her claim. It was her choice and her's alone whether to go to the police and she didn't, largely because she'd had sex with the guy before the rape and wasn't prepared to subject herself to the inevitable police nastiness on that front. She couldnt have had more support from the party. He was told in no uncertain terms never to go near her again, never to go near anyone in the party again. In fact I never saw him again or even spoke to him cause he felt so isolated he went back home to the country he was from. if the woman had gone to the police she'd have been totally within her rights and maybe she should have for the benefit of other women, I don't know, that's a huge dilemma. What I do know is that the party handled it exactly as it should have been. And at least some of the people involved were involved in judging this dispute. Unless they've undergone some massive transformation in the intervening years I'm inclined to believe they approached this case in the same spirit.

Now the huge difference here people say is the fact the bloke is a cc member and not just any cc member. But even allowing for that I'm totally convinced that if the likes of Pat and Candy thought he was guilty of rape they would have said so. yes they know him well, value him etc. But their whole reason for being the committed lifelong socialist revolutionaries they are would be totally undone if they had knowingly let this one slide. I just can't see that happening. But equally what Pat said about the woman not being taken seriously enough initially or people in positions of power seeing her as a problem with some agenda against the party because of her accusations now that is something that anyone in the SWP should be worried about. So is the fact that Pat, who has heard the facts when we haven't, believed the balance of probability was that she had been harassed by the guy concerned. If I was still in the party that would keep me awake at night.
Click to expand...

To some extent, you're missing the point. I don't know whether or not Pat or Candy would have let things slide intentionally. But, even if it wasn't intentional, the fact that they were friends with the accused meant that they could not judge him on the evidence alone. Plus there's the issue of apparent bias, and justice not being seen to have been done.
 
Athos said:
To some extent, you're missing the point. I don't know whether or not Pat or Candy would have let things slide intentionally. But, even if it wasn't intentional, the fact that they were friends with the accused meant that they could not judge him on the evidence alone. Plus there's the issue of apparent bias, and justice not being seen to have been done.
Click to expand...

Another good point - I don't see how it could be possible not to be biased if you're asked it pass judgement on a long-term friend a colleague. Doesn't matter how fair you're trying to be or how principled you might be it's always going to influence your decision.
 
One thing about the Counterfire lot. They are remaining totally silent on this, to their credit. I hadn't been following their split away closely enough at the time to know that this was a subtext as others have suggested. But if it was they've never made hay on it. About six months ago I approached Rees to ask why if an old soak like me was getting bored of life in the Labour party should I consider joining his lot vs going back to the SWP. he made some general political points about the party having become schloretic (sp?) but even though he knew I had strong feelings of loyalty to certain people he had broken with he never once even hinted at any of this. With hindsight he gets extra brownie points.
 
SpineyNorman said:
Another good point - I don't see how it could be possible not to be biased if you're asked it pass judgement on a long-term friend a colleague. Doesn't matter how fair you're trying to be or how principled you might be it's always going to influence your decision.
Click to expand...
Someone in the transcript gives an example where they had done precisely that in another case despite the cost to them personally and their branch politically. Sorry cant remember who it was exactly. But it rang true, these people will drop you in a moment if they think you have betrayed what is quite a rigid moral code. Anyone who has ever had swpers who were their close friends struggle to treat them as anything but pariahs after they have only had the temerity to leave the org will vouch for that. How much more quickly will they cast aside feelings of a personal nature if they are shown evidence that you've done something as heinous as rape?!
 
Athos said:
How could they possibly investigate a rape without the victim's evidence regarding a lack of consent?
Click to expand...

I imagine with great difficulty. But there could be CCTV or witnesses that could maybe make it possible in certain situations.

As for BBs comments about whether it is entirely the victims choice to report a rapist, I don't know if I agree with that 100%. If I thought I could stop a rape by reporting someone, I might do it even if a previous victim didn't want me to. It would be a very difficult situation to be in.
 
Just spent some time in the pub with some people from the SWP. Not got much to add to the thread as most of the conversation was just going over the same ground. The table

One interesting thing I have learnt is that the the 4 people who were expelled are still fighting against their expulsion as their cases were never referred to the disputes committee it was the CC which took the decision to expelling them. So I was wrong earlier in the thread when I said even the SWP CC wouldn't try that.
 
bolshiebhoy said:
Someone in the transcript gives an example where they had done precisely that in another case despite the cost to them personally and their branch politically. Sorry cant remember who it was exactly. But it rang true, these people will drop you in a moment if they think you have betrayed what is quite a rigid moral code. Anyone who has ever had swpers who were their close friends struggle to treat them as anything but pariahs after they have only had the temerity to leave the org will vouch for that. How much more quickly will they cast aside feelings of a personal nature if they are shown evidence that you've done something as heinous as rape?!
Click to expand...

Sorry but I don't buy it. The bias comes in when you're working out whether they've actually betrayed the moral code in the first place. If that decision is made for you by the CC or whoever as it is for the 'footsoldiers' as they call them then yeah, I can see that being the case. But not here.
 
bolshiebhoy said:
Someone in the transcript gives an example where they had done precisely that in another case despite the cost to them personally and their branch politically. Sorry cant remember who it was exactly. But it rang true, these people will drop you in a moment if they think you have betrayed what is quite a rigid moral code. Anyone who has ever had swpers who were their close friends struggle to treat them as anything but pariahs after they have only had the temerity to leave the org will vouch for that. How much more quickly will they cast aside feelings of a personal nature if they are shown evidence that you've done something as heinous as rape?!
Click to expand...

But the point is if they weren't sure a long friendship might well sway them towards giving the benefit of the doubt. I think you have too much faith in them not doing that as if being in the SWP gives you super powers. Anyone would be affected by this.

As you said yourself the bloke called Pat obviously had severe doubts that his behaviour was not good. That in itself should probably have made the others think that expelling him was probably the best option.
 
No offence taken SpineyNorman, I could just be an anti -SWP troll who delights in makin things up about them and watching their members squirm. I'm not though, I'm a saddened ex SWP member who cannot believe a group I gave a substantial part of my youth to help build has degenerated into this state. An earlier post resonated with me from someone saying that when they were around the SWP years ago that allegations of sexual assault (not that there were that many I hasten to add) were treated with much more humanity and nobody ever assumed the woman was making a malicious complaint.

Fast forward 15 years and according to the verbatim conference report, even Pat Stack has been accused of being "out to
get Comrade Delta" ! The complainants supporters were also harassed in their district. That is not the Party I knew, and I am sure I am not the only person who feels that way. The treatment of both X and W by the SWP was absolutely shameful.
 
@ one stop shop

not really in and of itself. Pat shouldn't have been involved in the investigation tbh, along with the rest.
 
One_Stop_Shop said:
I imagine with great difficulty. But there could be CCTV or witnesses that could maybe make it possible in certain situations.
Click to expand...

I think that would be a vanishingly small number of cases. In fact, I'd be amazed if you could point to a single case of a successful prosecution where the victim was alive but did not give evidence regarding a lack of consent. Especially in a cse such as this where there's no CCTV or forensics etc.
 
bolshiebhoy said:
Someone in the transcript gives an example where they had done precisely that in another case despite the cost to them personally and their branch politically. Sorry cant remember who it was exactly. But it rang true, these people will drop you in a moment if they think you have betrayed what is quite a rigid moral code. Anyone who has ever had swpers who were their close friends struggle to treat them as anything but pariahs after they have only had the temerity to leave the org will vouch for that. How much more quickly will they cast aside feelings of a personal nature if they are shown evidence that you've done something as heinous as rape?!
Click to expand...

It's not a question of whether they would boot out a friend if they though he'd raped someone, but rather that their friendship could prevent them from reaching the conclusion that he had done so, because, subconsciously they view the evidence through the prism of their positive experience of him.
 
Athos said:
I think that would be a vanishingly small number of cases. In fact, I'd be amazed if you could point to a single case of a successful prosecution where the victim was alive but did not give evidence regarding a lack of consent. Especially in a cse such as this where there's no CCTV or forensics etc.
Click to expand...

I agree it is probably extremely unlikely but maybe not impossible. I actually think in this case though that if the SWP had found that they thought he did it, then the police would intervence because they would want to get the far left and would find some way to do it.
 
Das Uberdog said:
@ one stop shop

not really in and of itself. Pat shouldn't have been involved in the investigation tbh, along with the rest.
Click to expand...

I agree but the fact that even a mate of Comrade Delta thought he had done something wrong must sound alarms.

In must be an extremely strange experience being in the SWP at the moment. Anyone with any humanity must have been extremely distressed by a potential rape victim standing outside the conference as they discussed the case.
 
One_Stop_Shop said:
I agree it is probably extremely unlikely but maybe not impossible. I actually think in this case though that if the SWP had found that they thought he did it, then the police would intervence because they would want to get the far left and would find some way to do it.
Click to expand...

How could they intervene? What evidence could they gather in this case?
 
sihhi said:
It's the police being allowed back into those areas the whole "We don’t intend to let part of the United Kingdom default from the rule of law" angle
Click to expand...
and did it work? did people in the bogside and the short strand suddenly see the error of their ways and accept the legitimacy of the ruc?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Smokeandsteam
Facebook: Australia content ban, SWP removal and related news
2 3 4
Replies
115
Views
8K
NoXion
NoXion
T
SWP trash AWL stall at Marxism, accusations of violent threats
2
Replies
50
Views
3K
Magnus McGinty
Magnus McGinty
Magnus McGinty
Are the SWP a State Asset?
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
Beats & Pieces
B
P
'SWP urge members to get involved with 'Momentum'
2 3 4
Replies
99
Views
7K
J Ed
J Ed
Das Uberdog
Former SWP members plan to sabotage Steve Hedley's TUSC campaign
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
234
Views
15K
articul8
articul8
Back
Top Bottom