SWP expulsions and squabbles

[Divisive Cotton]

I don't think people use hooks consciously.

ETA: Sometimes people use hooks consciously. I think in this case the response is too emotional and visceral to be seen in such a way.

I agree yeah it's an unintentional hook, but as you noted it's such an touchy subject, and rightly too I'm not stating that these types of issues are unimportant, it's just not what is at the core of this particular debate.

 

[electric.avenue]

What do people here think of the idea of a code of conduct regarding acceptable/non-acceptable behaviour regarding racism, sexism, behaviour towards other comrades etc for people in parties like the SWP or SP to sign up to, and to have to sign up to when they join? Obviously it could get abused and used to justify expulsions etc, but it could go some way towards addressing the internal culture of the party, although there would obviously have to be other measures put in place as well.

That might be a good idea. Though usually it's fairly implicit that you don't treat other comrades badly, esp in terms of race, gender and so on.

It's my opinion though that the SWP has always been light on rape: from pamphlets of Paul Foot, Cliff's book on Class Struggle and Women's Liberation, through to cases I know of women comrades being actively discouraged from reporting rape.

 

[electric.avenue]

it's very fucking simple: do unto others as you would be done to yourself.

Agreed, but the problem is that we don't all possess the same "self", eg: you might yourself feel safe walking home at night or going into a pub on your own, but for other people this might not feel safe.

 

[butchersapron]

That might be a good idea. Though usually it's fairly implicit that you don't treat other comrades badly, esp in terms of race, gender and so on.

It's my opinion though that the SWP has always been light on rape: from pamphlets of Paul Foot, Cliff's book on Class Struggle and Women's Liberation, through to cases I know of women comrades being actively discouraged from reporting rape.

Can you expand on how those works are 'light on rape'?

 

[rosecore]

Independent use the offensive term "Socialist Sharia Court" but Andy Newman who was quoted accuses the journalist Jerome Taylor of putting those "words in his mouth".

 

[SpineyNorman]

That might be a good idea. Though usually it's fairly implicit that you don't treat other comrades badly, esp in terms of race, gender and so on.

Yeah that's the thing - I don't think it would make any difference. I don't believe for a second that anyone who joins a left group (or any pretty much any group except NAMBLA or something for that matter) isn't aware that sexual harassment etc is unacceptable. Nobody thinks they can so that shit and get away with it if caught (let's not forget that comrade delta was found not guilty by the DC so even with this is place he'd not have been expelled).

I don't think it's really anything more than a token gesture.

I think the only way to address this, if you're serious about it, is to put in place proper processes for dealing with it. That means members should know who to go to with complaints, including complaints against the most senior members. It also means doing everything you can to make people confident that these issues will be dealt with like the serious matters they are, not subordinated to 'party interests' and that they will at all times be treated with respect and cared for. One of the worst things about this case is that it's done the opposite - after this who would be confident that if they made a complaint of this kind it would be dealt with properly?

 

[Athos]

That might be a good idea. Though usually it's fairly implicit that you don't treat other comrades badly, esp in terms of race, gender and so on.

It's my opinion though that the SWP has always been light on rape: from pamphlets of Paul Foot, Cliff's book on Class Struggle and Women's Liberation, through to cases I know of women comrades being actively discouraged from reporting rape.

There's two different aspects.

One is the practical response to rape; in respect of which, recent events show the SWP in a bad light - failing to deal with it properly, caused by putting the party first.

The other is a political position with regard to rape. You are suggesting that the SWP is ideologically soft on rape. I find this unconvincing. Unless, of course, you can point to some concrete examples in the works you mentioned?

 

[electric.avenue]

Can you expand on how those works are 'light on rape'?

Will do, but now I'm going to have to dig out the relevant quotes.

 

[The39thStep]

I agree yeah it's an unintentional hook, but as you noted it's such an touchy subject, and rightly too I'm not stating that these types of issues are unimportant, it's just not what is at the core of this particular debate.

Core of the debate on where? here? LP's article? at the SWP Conference? on Socialist unity? on the CPGB website? the Independent?

I think you might find that there are a number of different agendas.

 

[The39thStep]

Independent use the offensive term "Socialist Sharia Court" but Andy Newman who was quoted accuses the journalist Jerome Taylor of putting those "words in his mouth".

Yup noted earlier. Newman then goes on to defend Sharia Courts.

 

[bolshiebhoy]

You are showing your vintage here.

The "Rees, German, Bambery (and now Serbian IST) line" was the line of the entire SWP CC and therefore the entire SWP for more than a decade, right up to the last couple of years, after the Respect fiasco and the scapegoating of Rees triggered a reorientation.

You might regard Harman pointing out that the Vietnamese Stalinists had murdered the local Trotskyists as a high point in your political tradition (I'd even agree), but that was a long, long, time ago. Them parading Sadrists around the place on anti-war platforms and denouncing anyone who criticises them is much more recent.

That's all anyone who joined the IST within the last fifteen years knows. For them that is the core politics of the SWP's tradition.

Lol. You're probably right. But doesn't anyone in the SWP read any more? Don't get me wrong I prefer the Counterfire approach to discussion, Rees has been nothing but pleasant to me. But the politics is shit. Wholescale pandering to stalinists. The low point was an article by Bamberys lot in Scotland that referred to Syriza as centrist. Cliff audibly turned in his grave at that one.

 

[Divisive Cotton]

Core of the debate on where? here? LP's article? at the SWP Conference? on Socialist unity? on the CPGB website? the Independent?

I think you might find that there are a number of different agendas.

In the debate framed by me. I've read a number of those articles you mentioned and at the core of the best of them is one that centres on accountability and democracy and how they repeatedly sacrifice both for their own gain at the expense of others.

Mike Marqusee writes well in this article: http://www.mikemarqusee.com/?p=1360

 

[The39thStep]

In the debate framed by me. I've read a number of those articles you mentioned and at the core of the best of them is one that centres on accountability and democracy and how they repeatedly sacrifice both for their own gain at the expense of others.

Mike Marqusee writes well in this article: http://www.mikemarqusee.com/?p=1360

Well lets hear your debate then, in your own words.

 

[bolshiebhoy]

Fuck me, Lenins Tomb. Saw this one coming, he was doing his best to be even handed between the Prof and Counterfire over both Syria and Syriza. Never did like the little shit, quite glad he's broken ranks on this. "Old polemics against 'feminism' from the 1980s, always somewhat dogmatic" Q.E. fucking D. The opposition are feminist autonomists and I demand my £10.

And yes clearly Seymour never got the core of the politics either

 

[bolshiebhoy]

They've lost Mieville too! How will they survive.

 

[SpineyNorman]

Feminist autonomists lol

 

[One_Stop_Shop]

BB there appears to be a marked difference between what you think the core of the SWP politics are and what the reality of the situation is today. It seems to the case that the majority of the members in the organisation don't think the core of the SWPs politics are what you imagine them to be.

Also you do seem to be going down the well worn path where leaders of the SWP (and other far left organisations in the UK are all the same at this, look at the vitriol between the SP and Socialist Appeal), where when people are members nothing is said, but as soon as they leave a whole catalogue of crimes come out. They never got the politics, they were feminists, they were autonomists, they had never read anything. Hell, fuck it, lets just call them little shits, that'll do.

Bit strange though that the SWP thought it was ok to have hundreds of these exact same people as members of year after year and promote them to the full timers, the editorial board and the central committee.

Your posts seem to read more and more like some stalinist show trial. Cliff is dead. Long live Cliff.

 

[bolshiebhoy]

You don't get it. There is of course a place in a revolutionary org for centrists like these. Until they challenge for leadership. It's just nice that they're finally revealing the political reasons for their exit. Nobody actually in the swpwill put it like that of course but it's what the people left clinging to the lifeboat will be thinking.

 

[kavenism]

A couple of my old comrades from West London quit last night, and made it public on Facebook their dissatisfaction. In fact no-one seems to be adhering to the vow of silence, and there are angry exchanges erupting all over the place.

 

[bolshiebhoy]

Someone put this on the Prof's FB wall this morning:

"i am deeply saddened by the conflict in the swp-you really should have a lawyer look at your procedures for making decisions on allegations by comrades against each other-the procedural safeguards for rape victims won in the bourgeois courts over 50 years of struggle are real gains and must form part of any socialist organisation-they were won by women's struggle and not easily granted by male dominated courts please take this comment in the comradely way it is intended ianxx"

Interestingly he hasn't deleted or commented on it.

 

[Belushi]

I think we should thank bb for demonstrating the mindset that's got the Swappies into this mess..

 

[SpineyNorman]

You don't get it. There is of course a place in a revolutionary org for centrists like these. Until they challenge for leadership. It's just nice that they're finally revealing the political reasons for their exit. Nobody actually in the swpwill put it like that of course but it's what the people left clinging to the lifeboat will be thinking.

Yes, that's why they dislike the way this woman was treated. Because they're centrists

 

[bolshiebhoy]

Oh please people. Haven't you got a political bone in your bodies. That one sentence from Seymour on Lenin's Tomb proves what this is really about. I just had a long chat with another ex member who had the honesty to say look this is the end of the UK's leading leninist org and that's a good thing. I disagreed with him but at least we had a political chat and it wasn't all about the way the DC handled this mess.

 

[Belushi]

 

[Athos]

Oh please people. Haven't you got a political bone in your bodies. That one sentence from Seymour on Lenin's Tomb proves what this is really about. I just had a long chat with another ex member who had the honesty to say look this is the end of the UK's leading leninist org and that's a good thing. I disagreed with him but at least we had a political chat and it wasn't all about the way the DC handled this mess.

You just don't get it, do you?

Scary.

 

[frogwoman]

Surely how the DC handled this mess is political though? Isnt sexism a political issue?

 

[The39thStep]

BB there appears to be a marked difference between what you think the core of the SWP politics are and what the reality of the situation is today. It seems to the case that the majority of the members in the organisation don't think the core of the SWPs politics are what you imagine them to be.

Also you do seem to be going down the well worn path where leaders of the SWP (and other far left organisations in the UK are all the same at this, look at the vitriol between the SP and Socialist Appeal), where when people are members nothing is said, but as soon as they leave a whole catalogue of crimes come out. They never got the politics, they were feminists, they were autonomists, they had never read anything. Hell, fuck it, lets just call them little shits, that'll do.

Bit strange though that the SWP thought it was ok to have hundreds of these exact same people as members of year after year and promote them to the full timers, the editorial board and the central committee.

Your posts seem to read more and more like some stalinist show trial. Cliff is dead. Long live Cliff.

cliche alert

 

[bolshiebhoy]

Yes it is and I feel like an utter shit for talking about anything other than the way these women were treated. But you'd have to be totally blind not to see the rest of the picture.

 

[SpineyNorman]

Oh please people. Haven't you got a political bone in your bodies. That one sentence from Seymour on Lenin's Tomb proves what this is really about. I just had a long chat with another ex member who had the honesty to say look this is the end of the UK's leading leninist org and that's a good thing. I disagreed with him but at least we had a political chat and it wasn't all about the way the DC handled this mess.

Fucking hell.

 

[The39thStep]

Surely how the DC handled this mess is political though? Isnt sexism a political issue?

Exactly. Its has been seen by a considerable minority as a cover up whether or not it is.For LP and other identity handwringers it is seen as some sort of inherent failure of the a theoretically class based left .