SWP expulsions and squabbles

[Nigel Irritable]

No - I'm suggesting that strands of feminism that acknowledge the importance of class but also offer a critique of vanguardist politics cannot simply be dismissed as "petit-bourgeois" - it's lazy, inaccurate and reflects a crude understanding of social relations

As disingenous as usual. What exactly does "acknowledging the importance of class" actually mean?

 

[SpineyNorman]

Again it was a general point that I can't see what an organisation can do but expel someone if someone sexually assaults another member, and that person wants them expelled. There could be other options, but I can't think what they could be.

I understand that, not having a go. But I think this issue will also be a lot clearer once the investigation has been completed. I really can't say any more than that. (Apart from anything else I don't have all the facts either)

 

[articul8]

As disingenous as usual. What exactly does "acknowledging the importance of class" actually mean?

it means recognising that working class interests are in contradiction with the structural imperatives of capitalism

 

[Nigel Irritable]

it means recognising that working class interests are in contradiction with the structural imperatives of capitalism

And does it mean thinking that class is more than just one in an endless list of structurally independent oppressions?

By the way, I'm even more amused at your defence of the BtF crowd the second time I read through it. We should be clear here, that they left nothing of significance behind anywhere.

 

[articul8]

not structually independent no. But not immediately reducible to each other either.

 

[butchersapron]

it means recognising that working class interests are in contradiction with the structural imperatives of capitalism

That's it?

 

[articul8]

And does it mean thinking that class is more than just one in an endless list of structurally independent oppressions?

By the way, I'm even more amused at your defence of the BtF crowd the second time I read through it. We should be clear here, that they left nothing of significance behind anywhere.

you'd hardly expect me to agree with this - and if it's so irrelevant why is it still the subject of so much interest/discussion?

 

[articul8]

That's it?

that's what I meant by "acknowledging the importance of class" - but obviously what follows from that is identification with and political struggle for working class interests

 

[Nigel Irritable]

you'd hardly expect me to agree with this - and if it's so irrelevant why is it still the subject of so much interest/discussion?

It's not. Someone put up an amusing old document dismissing a long irrelevant current to make a point about other people now. Rightly or wrongly, few people give a shit about BtF.

 

[butchersapron]

that's what I meant by "acknowledging the importance of class" - but obviously what follows from that is identification with and political struggle for working class interests

Meaningless when all it requires is a few magic words saying that this is what you are doing no matter what your actions or those you join in those actions. Utterly meaningless.

 

[articul8]

It's not. Someone put up an amusing old document dismissing a long irrelevant current to make a point about other people now. Rightly or wrongly, few people give a shit about BtF.

So why are the publishers re-printing it, why is Birkbeck holding a conference on it, and why did it come up more than once in the SWP internal debates round the split?

Don't see anyone doing the same with the "red nineties" classics that Taaffe was putting out

 

[butchersapron]

It's not. Someone put up an amusing old document dismissing a long irrelevant current to make a point about other people now. Rightly or wrongly, few people give a shit about BtF.

Hey but if the new SYRIZA is to happen and it's to centre around his shit mag then they have a head start if the author of the weakest part of BTF is on-board. Which means there must be MASSIVE INTEREST. Just like a few months back there was MASSIVE INTEREST in spokesman books from the 70s. It's a form of arrogant individualist substitutionism.

 

[articul8]

Meaningless when all it requires is a few magic words saying that this is what you are doing no matter what your actions or those you join in those actions. Utterly meaningless.

what counts isn't what party card you do or don't have but where you stand on the key questions of the day.

 

[butchersapron]

So why are the publishers re-printing it, why is Birkbeck holding a conference on it, and why did it come up more than once in the SWP internal debates round the split?

Don't see anyone doing the same with the "red nineties" classics that Taaffe was putting out

Because you pathetic pampered soft-leftie bubble type all piss in the same opportunistic publishing house and uni pots.

 

[chilango]

So why are the publishers re-printing it, why is Birkbeck holding a conference on it, and why did it come up more than once in the SWP internal debates round the split?

Don't see anyone doing the same with the "red nineties" classics that Taaffe was putting out

He said "few" people, not "no" people. Your post suggests he's right.

 

[butchersapron]

what counts isn't what party card you do or don't have but where you stand on the key questions of the day.

Let's hold handa tory comrades, lib-dem comrades, labour comrades - comrades all, we're all in it together. I think that you're demonstrating exactly where btf leads.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

So why are the publishers re-printing it, why is Birkbeck holding a conference on it, and why did it come up more than once in the SWP internal debates round the split

Have you any idea of the sort of shit that can find a publisher? You should, given your job.

As for a couple of mentions in the SWP's row, those were negative examples. They were being used as an example of the dreadful fate that awaits those who disagreed. Scarecrows to frighten the pests, nothing more.

 

[articul8]

well it's all relative - it's not Harry Potter or 50 Shades of Grey I'll grant you that much

 

[articul8]

Let's hold hand tory comrades.

Fuck off - I said no such thing

 

[butchersapron]

Fuck off - I said no such thing

You didn't have to - it matters not what card you hold - all that matters is the muttering of a handily remembered phrase and your back is covered. Apoliticism expressed politically. Which, of course is why you are in the labour party and work in parliament.

 

[articul8]

You didn't have to - it matters not what card you hold - all that matters is the muttering of a handily remembered phrase and your back is covered. Apoliticism expressed politically. Which, of course is why you are in the labour party and work in parliament.

what counts is where you stand on the issues - think that makes it perfectly clear I'm not giving a free pass to any and every allegiance

 

[butchersapron]

No compromise with the bourgeois media! Unless it's one of the loyalists.

Why we had to rejoice after Margaret Thatcher's death, by the editor behind the Socialist Worker front page

 

[butchersapron]

what counts is where you stand on the issues - think that makes it perfectly clear I'm not giving a free pass to any and every allegiance

Do you honestly think people on this thread are so crude that they can't see through your twisting? That they can't see though the gap between what you say that you think class analysis is and what you do and what you say?

 

[Nigel Irritable]

what counts is where you stand on the issues - think that makes it perfectly clear I'm not giving a free pass to any and every allegiance

A rather idealist way of looking at things. What difference does it make what positions some New Labourite holds in her heart of hearts if her actual political work is devoted to strengthening New Labour's influence? Of what possible interest is the state of the apparatchik's soul?

 

[articul8]

A rather idealist way of looking at things. What difference does it make what positions some New Labourite holds in her heart of hearts if her actual political work is devoted to strengthening New Labour's influence?

I didn't say secret innermost beliefs. But people who take a public stand in advancing w/c interests don't in my view automatically vitiate this by being involved in the Labour party for tactical reasons. If this becomes impossible - and it might - then I won't be keeping hold of the party card.

 

[butchersapron]

What sacrifices you make for the class!

And what weaseling words you use to justify them - 'for tactical reasons'. Do you have any idea how pompous this sounds?

 

[Nigel Irritable]

I didn't say secret innermost beliefs. But people who take a public stand in advancing w/c interests don't in my view automatically vitiate this by being involved in the Labour party for tactical reasons.

You cannot "take a public stand in advancing working class interests" if your idea of advancing those interests is to convince workers to join or vote for New Labour. It's a contradiction in terms.

Tell me though, what important "tactics" are open to you as a New Labour member that necessitate being a member? In what way would those "working class interests" be damaged by your resignation?

 

[butchersapron]

You cannot "take a public stand in advancing working class interests" if your idea of advancing those interests is to convince workers to join or vote for New Labour. It's a contradiction in terms.

It's alright, it's tactical - and he's covered his back by a ritual incantation of "it means recognising that working class interests are in contradiction with the structural imperatives of capitalism".

Absolute mess.

 

[articul8]

This is old ground. I still think that a realignment of left forces - of a kind BtF was also gesturing towards - is still necessary. But that isn't happening - and won't - simply by sticking your TUSC flag in the ground and saying "come hither".

 

[Nigel Irritable]

This is old ground. I still think that a realignment of left forces - of a kind BtF was also gesturing towards - is still necessary. But that isn't happening - and won't - simply by sticking your TUSC flag in the ground and saying "come hither".

Why don't you explain to us how you being one of a few hundred bewildered Labour leftists brings that "realignment" closer?