The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
Can't see how that would make 'the fight against fascism' any better.
If they don't get new members they will stagnate and become much more irrelevant, much as the SWP is becoming, without new ideas there is no growth and the old guard will look out of touch. When you are perceived as out of touch that is what you will eventually become
It won't and that's the problemCan't see how that would make 'the fight against fascism' any better.
The rank and file should but I think the most likely scenario is people will let their membership lapse, though they will likely go to demos against the fascists more locally, they may be less likely to remain members.Yes, but who in UAF do you think should - or could - declare UDI? That was what you suggested should happen.
The rank and file should but I think the most likely scenario is people will let their membership lapse, though they will likely go to demos against the fascists more locally
There is a membership & I was a paid up member until I was put on short-time at & had to cut down on my outgoings so my membership lapsed.There is no rank and file ffs. There is no membership. wtf do you think the UAF is? You'e in the bloody party that runs it. What on earth have they told you that it is?
There is a membership & I was a paid up member until I was put on short-time at & had to cut down on my outgoings so my membership lapsed.
There is a membership & I was a paid up member until I was put on short-time at & had to cut down on my outgoings so my membership lapsed.
It had a bit more independence when it first started I think. And I think there are a few areas were it has a little bit it of a life of its own, but not in any significant way.There is no rank and file ffs. There is no membership. wtf do you think the UAF is? You'e in the bloody party that runs it. What on earth have they told you that it is?
It had a bit more independence when it first started I think. And I think there are a few areas were it has a little bit it of a life of its own, but not in any significant way.
The whole point of setting up UAF, according to the SWP was to reach out to a wider audience than the ANL could manage, basically by being more moderate. Hence we get the famous statement signed by David Cameron. I think this actually worked for a while but it dropped of pretty quickly and it ended up being the SWP and a few others in most areas same as the ANL.I'd be interested in this why did UAF have independence before but no longer?
UAF is a direct descendent from the ANL mark 2, the ANL effectively ceased to exist when UAF was formed.The UAF's just the modern equivalent of the ANL, isn't it? Or is that too simplistic?
So the UAF is the modern day equivalent then?UAF is a direct descendent from the ANL mark 2, the ANL effectively ceased to exist when UAF was formed.
Pretty much so, for the SWP it does pretty much the same thing and plays the same role.So the UAF is the modern day equivalent then?
Yawn. UAF played a huge role this weekend. And the SWP too.
It had a bit more independence when it first started I think. And I think there are a few areas were it has a little bit it of a life of its own, but not in any significant way.
Yawn. UAF played a huge role this weekend. And the SWP too.
don't let the truth get in the way of a bloody good strawman argument. There are no tensions in the UAF! It is totally controlled by the SWP.The whole point of setting up UAF, according to the SWP was to reach out to a wider audience than the ANL could manage, basically by being more moderate. Hence we get the famous statement signed by David Cameron. I think this actually worked for a while but it dropped of pretty quickly and it ended up being the SWP and a few others in most areas same as the ANL.
Eta: There have tensions within UAF and with others outside about street demonstrations and how confrontational they should be. Which I think is part of the reason the SWP has been all over the place on this for years.
stop telling lies about "50 something men"! The SWP was/is entirely students and the CC.Last Friday I spoke to a long time SWP member, who I haven't seen for years and years; in the past he has always been happy to defend the party against all criticism.
Unsurprisingly, I had him down as a super loyalist and so was encouraged when he told me that he had resigned - as he put it from the party not from being active - and that from his perspective those who are still in are 'only the 50 something men'.
He had subsequently been approached by the Socialist Party as a potential recruit; but he hadn't been convinced by what he heard of their disputes procedures when he enquired about them.
He seemed quite happy not to be in a party...which surprised me given his decades long commitment to the SWP and its particular brand of Leninism.
What do I take from all this?
If the SWP has lost people like this, and lost them so completely, then it is curtains for them; long drawn out curtains certainly, but it is over in any meaningful sense.
If a long time Leninist can get to grips with life outside 'the party' (whichever party that is) then there are a whole layer of people out there, with skill and experience to draw on, who can usefully contribute to a pro-working class politics; that doesn't mean that they necessarily will but there is a potential there.
Cheers - Louis MacNeice
"led by anarchists".They mobilised some people, but the leaders in London were trying to actively stop people confronting the BNP. It was laughable as the young people on the demonstration eventually ignored Charlie Kimber's efforts to control the demonstration. Many CC members stayed near the Cenotaph even when the mass of UAF organised people had gone to join the South London contingent.
The actual confrontation with the BNP was led by anarchists.
Don't know about elsewhere, and I don't say this likely, but having Kimber demand of me I stay behind a banner otherwise (according to him) I'm not a part of the demo was eye-opening.
yeah, I had to pay subs to both the SWP and the socialist alliance. As did the Socialist party. And every other organisation involved in the Socialist Alliance. But if you want to be a member of two organisations, that's what you have to do. I can see how you would want to believe it is a racket, but it isn't really.So you had to pay subs to the SWP and to UAF?, what a racket...
UAF is a direct descendent from the ANL mark 2, the ANL effectively ceased to exist when UAF was formed.
mainly ( ANL Mark 2) because it was getting to a situation after the Bradford debacle when it could have been banned by Labour. It had to re group politically with Labour's support
there wasn't really any chance of that happening tho, was there? I recall Marsha Singh proposing it a day or so after the riots, but there was zero chance of them actually doing it.