SWP expulsions and squabbles

[ViolentPanda]

apologies for my shit reading then of
general defense of swp in all this matter +
post of remember that youngsters can be the predators of oldies (negating the problem of the power relationship of age and position that has been put forward about that situation) +
liberatory pic of young woman @ slutwalk
= "inference that what went on in the SWP can be constructed as an outcome of a liberatory discourse on sexuality"

Even though you've laid it all about before him exactly the narrative he's constructed, he'll still deny it. He always denies it.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Well, exactly. Your interpretation is how I'm perceiving this too.

This isn't about hippy type free love discourse, it's about a fucking rape complaint.

And about, let us not forget, about harrassment and misuse of position both pre- and post-alleged sex offence.

What riles me is that when I knew Smith (from union seminars etc) as a union rep more than 20 years ago, he was an unreconstructed "lady's man" type who was never able to subliminate that behind his politics. The bloke would ask women for a date repeatedly until they "gave in". Perhaps he's changed since then.
I'm not saying this is indicative of a rapist, but it was certainly indicative of an inability to appreciate boundaries.

 

[cesare]

And about, let us not forget, about harrassment and misuse of position both pre- and post-alleged sex offence.

What riles me is that when I knew Smith (from union seminars etc) as a union rep more than 20 years ago, he was an unreconstructed "lady's man" type who was never able to subliminate that behind his politics. The bloke would ask women for a date repeatedly until they "gave in". Perhaps he's changed since then.
I'm not saying this is indicative of a rapist, but it was certainly indicative of an inability to appreciate boundaries.

There's a very fine line between persistence and harassment, and one that might not be obvious to someone lacking in judgment.

 

[SpineyNorman]

J ed is right, you know. Some of them are completely and utterly insufferable. But on the other hand there's some of them, especially a couple of their Fe students, who I really rate as activists and whose stand over this has earned my respect, especially as its led to them being smeared as identity politickers (see bbs posts to see how this is done) even though they're.nothing of the sort. It would be a great shame if this ended up pulling them away from more 'adult' things.

The worst of the lot, someone who's a complete liability to have involved in anything due to his constant desire to look all hard and wadical is in fact a hardened loyalist.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Its part of the schtick to imagine relevancy. When talking to mate on this one when I've said 'you know the SWP sort of held a rape trial?' the question hasn't been 'how the fuck did they think that was a good idea' but 'who are the SWP'

It's a good question.

Personally, when the relevance of the SWP comes up, I always think back to the 1980s, a saturday morning, walking past Woolies in Clapham Junction, where the leaflet stall would be set up and the paper-sellers would gather, and the question "have you heard of a man called Trotsky?" would be asked.
My favourite reply was from a crusty old Polish bloke (prewar Polish communist who fled here in the '30s) off my estate who said "yes, and he'd string you lot up with your own entrails!".
Lovely bloke, and repairer of many bicycles for neighbourhood kids.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Stealth feminist.

Does that mean you're invisible to radar?

 

[ViolentPanda]

I don"t know about you, but this "creeping feminism" shit when women pull them up on how they've dealt with this, really pisses me off.

You're questioning the hegemonic narrative. How else will those in power react, other than to imply that you're somehow beyond the pale/politically unreliable/sectarian?

 

[treelover]

the sheffield resignations, http://internationalsocialismuk.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/resignations-from-sheffield-swp.html


this bit shows the degeneracy and sectarianism of the cc faction,

*The final point, for those who are unaware, is in reference to the Unison women’s statement
The CC were informed about the statement published, and about several comrades being approached to sign it. In response, the CC proposed the following amendments (highlighted in bold):
“We recognise the enormous challenges faced by women victims of male violence, and the pressures which women face, including from abusive men, not to complain about violence and abuse. We therefore believe that, when women complain of male violence within our movement, our trade unions and political organisations should start from a position of believing women but without making presumptions about guilt or innocence."
"We believe that all women who complain of male violence have the right to be listened to and supported, and to have their complaints properly and sympathetically investigated through due process .”
The amendments were immediately rejected with comments attacking the Party.
The CC position then became that no comrade should sign the statement.

none of the usual suspects on the resignation letter...

 

[ViolentPanda]

There's a very fine line between persistence and harassment, and one that might not be obvious to someone lacking in judgment.

Even someone who, as a union rep, is likely to have dealt with many complaints on the subject of sexual harrassment? See, this is where I keep getting stuck - how can someone who's had to deal with such situations in the workplace be that lacking in judgement? Is it reasonable to give them the benefit of the doubt because they've been out of that situation for a while and have been an SWP fulltimer?

 

[cesare]

Even someone who, as a union rep, is likely to have dealt with many complaints on the subject of sexual harrassment? See, this is where I keep getting stuck - how can someone who's had to deal with such situations in the workplace be that lacking in judgement? Is it reasonable to give them the benefit of the doubt because they've been out of that situation for a while and have been an SWP fulltimer?

How long was he a union rep for/until btw?

 

[ViolentPanda]

How long was he a union rep for/until btw?

Not sure. I was a CPSA rep from '88-'94-ish, and I don't remember not seeing him at training days etc, so probably at least 5 years, although I may just have not noticed him (I was often busy being a swot and taking notes ).

 

[laptop]

if [Hedley is] not telling the truth with some of his claims he could come badly unstuck

This is what I was referring to when I said some of his claims are easily checkable (at least by the police).

 

[J Ed]

http://www.angelfire.com/journal/iso/ist.html this is brilliant

 

[laptop]

http://www.angelfire.com/journal/iso/ist.html this is brilliant

Beyond satire:

... The leaderships of the SWP and of other groups were accused of 'technophobia' and a desire to suppress debate.

The Central Committee has decided that members of the SWP should not use the IS-List. This is not intended as a blanket ban on comrades' communicating by e-mail...

 

[SpineyNorman]

Was 1995 before or after the CC started steering the party on a path that deviated from the IS tradition?

 

[muscovyduck]

On the Steve Hedley thing: As with everyone else I don't feel that it is my place to make assumptions about the allegations being true or false.
I was just a bit peeved with how he put assault in speech marks. He (I think) is saying that the allegations are false, rather than saying that he did do it but there's been an overreaction. I know it's most likely that I'm reading way to much into it, and that he's probably just saying it to emphasise everything else he's said, but it really irks me when put into context with with what was apparently said on Facebook. Then again, I haven't come across evidence of him saying stuff on Facebook, and am just going on the word of people who I have no reason to distrust.

To be honest I feel uncomfortable dissecting anything that's been said about this situation, but this kind of thing happens a lot on the internet and it's really getting to me (see: Julian Assange)

The quote I was talking about:

Firstly she said she had no photographic evidence of the alleged “assault” saying that it had been deleted and only laterproduced some very dubious and undated pictures more than a yearafter the event claiming to show her injuries.

 

[SpineyNorman]

On the Steve Hedley thing: As with everyone else I don't feel that it is my place to make assumptions about the allegations being true or false.
I was just a bit peeved with how he put assault in speech marks. He (I think) is saying that the allegations are false, rather than saying that he did do it but there's been an overreaction. I know it's most likely that I'm reading way to much into it, and that he's probably just saying it to emphasise everything else he's said, but it really irks me when put into context with with what was apparently said on Facebook. Then again, I haven't come across evidence of him saying stuff on Facebook, and am just going on the word of people who I have no reason to distrust.

To be honest I feel uncomfortable dissecting anything that's been said about this situation, but this kind of thing happens a lot on the internet and it's really getting to me (see: Julian Assange)

The quote I was talking about:

How's your progress on the Laurie Penny thread going?

 

[Nigel Irritable]

I know it's most likely that I'm reading way to much into it, and that he's probably just saying it to emphasise everything else he's said, but it really irks me when put into context with with what was apparently said on Facebook

"What was apparently said on Facebook" was One Stop Shop showing that he has no sense of proportion, or indeed sense full stop. Whether or not someone has been an arsehole in a facebook row has nothing at all to do with actually important allegations. In fact, it trivialises the actually important issues to mix that sort of shit in.

 

[muscovyduck]

How's your progress on the Laurie Penny thread going?

Having a break now at page 355, I'm off on holiday over the Easter and reading a derail on Trade Unions or childcare isn't my main priority right now

 

[muscovyduck]

"What was apparently said on Facebook" was One Stop Shop showing that he has no sense of proportion, or indeed sense full stop. Whether or not someone has been an arsehole in a facebook row has nothing at all to do with actually important allegations. In fact, it trivialises the actually important issues to mix that sort of shit in.

I'm trying not to mix the allegations - but if someone working for a trade union is making openly misogynistic comments then people, particularly women are going to lose faith in it.

 

[SpineyNorman]

Having a break now at page 355, I'm off on holiday over the Easter and reading a derail on Trade Unions or childcare isn't my main priority right now

This is the problem with the left these days - no fucking stamina

 

[muscovyduck]

This is the problem with the left these days - no fucking stamina

Did I read more or less than Laurie Penny though, that is the question

 

[SpineyNorman]

Did I read more or less than Laurie Penny though, that is the question

Laurie doesn't read the thread, the thread reads Laurie!

 

[DotCommunist]

Laurie doesn't read the thread, the thread reads Laurie!

in sovt internet thread reads you

 

[One_Stop_Shop]

"What was apparently said on Facebook" was One Stop Shop showing that he has no sense of proportion, or indeed sense full stop. Whether or not someone has been an arsehole in a facebook row has nothing at all to do with actually important allegations. In fact, it trivialises the actually important issues to mix that sort of shit in.

Except of course just a few posts back I made it clear I wasn't conflating the two things, something that seemed clear to other posters.

It wasn't apparently said on facebook, it was sent on Facebook, and I've sent the quotes to SP members on here. And given he is the deputy general secretary of the RMT I think it's fair enough to comment on. I'm sure if a Lib Dem or Tory MP had made those comments most on the left would be condemning them and saying they should step down.

It wasn't Steve Hedley just being an arsehole on Facebook was it. It was him making vile sexist and misogynistic comments to a young woman on Facebook and by you commenting that this was just a spat on Facebook with him being an arsehole it is trivialising it. There is no reason this shouldn't be commented on entirely separately from the other case.

 

[SLK]

Had a not-fraternal conversation with Yunus Bakhsh on facebook this evening. He's sorry I don't like democracy (and when challenged said he's not talking about it) He then lined me up with the Daily Mail and Nick Cohen. He didn't argue, just informed me I should not contact him again.

 

[belboid]

Laurie doesn't read the thread, the thread reads Laurie!

fuck off, ya post-modernist twat

 

[Nigel Irritable]

Except of course just a few posts back I made it clear I wasn't conflating the two things... There is no reason this shouldn't be commented on entirely separately from the other case.

Then go and start a sexist gobshitery on facebook thread rather than raising it here, in a thread about much more serious issues.

 

[SpackleFrog]

check PMs mate

PM me too?

 

[bolshiebhoy]

http://internationalsocialismuk.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/the-social-project-strategy.html

Firebox with free handouts