SWP expulsions and squabbles

[Karmickameleon]

And now again he's really gone to town in this lamentable piece which goes out of its way to insult most of the people he claims to want to remain in the same party with. I'd love to see the DR I recognised at the beginning of this mess resurface but it's probably too late now :-(

Bolshiebhoy, I'm replying to this post and your previous one to me.

First, I would accept that David Renton has been somewhat over the top at times and left himself open to misinterpretation. Apart from the UAF case you mention, an example might be his comments on public service workers' pensions. BUT, given that he has probably been the most outspoken of the oppositionists in terms of his own blog and social media and has often been responding to events in the heat of the moment, this aberration strikes me as inevitable. You should also remember that many oppo members have been "bruised" (to quote Birchall) in the campaign of the leadership/IdooM against them (eg the stitched-up March conference, isolating them in the branches and aggregates...) and it is only natural if a slight note of bitterness should intrude in their writing.

But all that is peripheral to the central question. A trusted friend recently told me that a leading member had confessed to him that the SWP leadership had indeed lied over the Delta business (surprise, surprise...). I would imagine that many loyalists (perhaps even yourself) would accept this in private. However, they undoubtedly believe that what is most important in the current situation is not the lies/cover up, but to defend a party under attack from all sides.

On the other hand, those who have become oppositionists (and those of us who support them on the outside) were not only revolted by the CC's lies and cover up, but for them it revealed that something was rotten at the heart of the party, namely a massive deficit of democracy. Once this Pandora's Box was opened, a whole range of issues have been up for debate, sometimes not in the most measured way.

I understand that people who have devoted most of their lives to the party want to save it come what may. Unfortunately, what they fail to realise is that the situation has degenerated to such a degree, that only a refoundation of the party could rescue it now. But, as we know, that is very unlikely to happen....

 

[barney_pig]

Bolshiebhoy, I'm replying to this post and your previous one to me.

<SNIP>

I understand that people who have devoted most of their lives to the party want to save it come what may. Unfortunately, what they fail to realise is that the situation has degenerated to such a degree, that only a refoundation of the party could rescue it now. But, as we know, that is very unlikely to happen....

Except BB jumped ship years back and only rejoined to love up to a leadership deeply mired in scandal and ordure. He then slanders those who remained loyal to an organisation he was happy to abandon.
I can understand those who remain loyal, though I have little respect for them, they are desperate to reassure themselves that a lifetime of work was not for nothing, a squalid rape cult, but they are wrong.
Bolshiebhoy is not one of them.

 

[Karmickameleon]

Except BB jumped ship years back and only rejoined to love up to a leadership deeply mired in scandal and ordure. He then slanders those who remained loyal to an organisation he was happy to abandon.
I can understand those who remain loyal, though I have little respect for them, they are desperate to reassure themselves that a lifetime of work was not for nothing, a squalid rape cult, but they are wrong.Bolshiebhoy is not one of them.

Thanks for the info. When I referred to those loyalists who had devoted their lives to the party, I wasn't necessarily thinking of BB (whose history I didn't know), but more people like Paul H, Sheila M, John R etc. Of course, it has to be remembered that others like Ian B and Colin B have even longer histories in IS/SWP and have played a much more honourable role in the past year.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

Funny business as usual: apparently the leadership have barred an opposition delegate from conference for mouthing off on Facebook.

 

[redcogs]

Fuck me, socialists silencing dissent is depressing

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

Fuck me, socialists silencing dissent is depressing

I know shocking stuff!!!!11

 

[SpineyNorman]

Except BB jumped ship years back and only rejoined to love up to a leadership deeply mired in scandal and ordure. He then slanders those who remained loyal to an organisation he was happy to abandon.
I can understand those who remain loyal, though I have little respect for them, they are desperate to reassure themselves that a lifetime of work was not for nothing, a squalid rape cult, but they are wrong.
Bolshiebhoy is not one of them.

There are many reasons why people join the SWP. My brother joined after working with them in the anl. I joined after the financial crash cos I was out of work, no hope of getting anything so I was naive and desperate enough to find someone who'd give the the opportunity to do something. We both ended up regretting it.

BB (re)joined after the CC covered up rape allegations.

It takes all sorts as they say.

 

[KeeperofDragons]

The party I joined has come to a sorry state but I say with sadness that the leadership have brought this on themselves by orchestrating aggregates to shut out the fractions in the run up to conferences has time after time stifled the discussion that has long been needed within the whole of the party and the way the rape cases have been dealt with is a symptom of a party leadership that has lost it's way.

 

[Karmickameleon]

Funny business as usual: apparently the leadership have barred an opposition delegate from conference for mouthing off on Facebook.

I guess you're referring to the American comrade, Bill C, who thought he had joined the SWP on his arrival in the UK and was sent Party Notes/IBs, attended student aggregates etc However, once it was discovered he had been selected as a delegate for the faction, his "request to join" was refused. An additional misdemeanour which good old Charlie has thrown up against him is that he was very critical of the leadership on Facebook.

But Bill C, somewhat naively, thought that his critical comments were only destined to his Facebook friends and therefore not for public consumption. All of which raises some interesting questions...... How far can a member's (or aspiring member's) comments be used against them? An indiscrete conversation in a pub, a private email to a friend, a document found on your computer... It all smacks Healyism (some would say Stalinism) to me.

 

[butchersapron]

Impeccably anti-stalinist stalinism of course.

 

[bolshiebhoy]

Except BB jumped ship years back and only rejoined to love up to a leadership deeply mired in scandal and ordure. He then slanders those who remained loyal to an organisation he was happy to abandon.
I can understand those who remain loyal, though I have little respect for them, they are desperate to reassure themselves that a lifetime of work was not for nothing, a squalid rape cult, but they are wrong.
Bolshiebhoy is not one of them.

Love up to a leadership? Get over yourself barney, my only dealings with the likes of the prof were over 20 years ago. The people I respect most in the SWP and have any dealings with are the middle cadre who stayed in when folk like me drifted away through burnout and other causes. Quite a few of us have indeed drawn closer to the party over the last year. But not because we missed the prof. Or because we can't wait to beat our chests and congratulate the party for its handling of the rape cases. Lets be honest, its despite all that shit. No it's cause we took the existence of the SWP for granted and valued the work it did all the years we were largely inactive. But now we're more than a little worried that if the faction has its way the swp will cease to exist or will be transformed into something else, something softer and maybe nicer but ultimately not the useful weapon of Marxist ideas that the SWP has been all these years. Now maybe I'm wrong and it doesn't matter if the SWP survives in its present form. But your comical suggestion that I only care about that because I want to be on the prof's Xmas card list does make me smile.

I'm not slandering Renton, I like him. But I've tried to explain why I think he's lost the plot politically. The SWP has always needed folk like him, it's a shame he seems on a one way journey out.

 

[J Ed]

This has to be an elaborate troll

 

[bolshiebhoy]

I'm far too hungover tonight to be an elaborate anything.

 

[butchersapron]

Martin Smith: a retrospective

 

[Nigel Irritable]

Not exactly a run of amazing success under his stewardship, was it?

 

[Karmickameleon]

Not exactly a run of amazing success under his stewardship, was it?

Not exactly. He should have remained a district organiser, a role in which he was apparently quite successful. Whether that would have avoided the rape scandal is another question.
David Renton's article misses out on one crucial event in Martin Smith's history: his leading role in the ousting of Rees/German. This is important because it partly explains the leadership's cover up for him. Rees and German left the party in early 2010 and Bambery was to go a year later. Meanwhile, in the summer of 2010 the CC was made aware of the allegations against Smith. With Harman now gone, they must have been very nervous about rocking the boat and jettisoning such a key player. Of course, no excuse for their cover up.

 

[comrade spurski]

Rentons article is wrong ... Smith was NOT the east london organiser until 6 months AFTER the BNP councillor had lost his seat on the Isle of Dogs.
Sue Cauldwell was the organiser when Derek Beacon won the election in september 1993. Ade walters was the organiser when Beacon was kicked out in My 1994. Smith took over in nov 1994 when the previous organiser quit.
I dont blame renton for this mistake as the Swp has always led people to believe smith was the organiser in east london throughout this time ...presumably to massage his ego as the 'key anti nazi'

 

[Karmickameleon]

Rentons article is wrong ... Smith was NOT the east london organiser until 6 months AFTER the BNP councillor had lost his seat on the Isle of Dogs.
Sue Cauldwell was the organiser when Derek Beacon won the election in september 1993. Ade walters was the organiser when Beacon was kicked out in My 1994. Smith took over in nov 1994 when the previous organiser quit.
I dont blame renton for this mistake as the Swp has always led people to believe smith was the organiser in east london throughout this time ...presumably to massage his ego as the 'key anti nazi'

Just in case you haven't seen it, David Renton has acknowledged your correction on Facebook.

 

[sandinista GB]

As a newbie to this forum and a veteran of the Anti Nazi League and Rock Against Racism of the 1970's the demise of SWP can only be a bad thing. One hopes they shall rise again.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

Some anarcho-students are gloating about burning the SWP's placards and papers at a demonstration in Sussex University in solidarity with five suspended students. They were tweeting their success to the Socialist Worker twitter feed, but hadn't noticed that they were in fact talking to the ISO.

 

[pir]

Some anarcho-students are gloating about burning the SWP's placards and papers at a demonstration in Sussex University in solidarity with five suspended students.

The gloating may seem a bit off putting when it's about something as serious as rape, but the anger is justified. People found the contribution by the one SWP loyalist remaining at Sussex university after the previous SWSS group resigned of how he is using the Sussex campaign as a case study in de-toxifying the SWSS brand. In the pre-conference IB, (nb 2, p.81) he acknowledges that "SWP members face difficult arguments with potential members [...] to explain the events of the last year that have caused many students to leave the party" but then explains that their strategy of targeting "freshers with little political experience", a "conscious decision" "to build outside from the typical hard left on campus" has been successful so far.
Do you think it's surprising that some student activists feel revulsion at being used like this in an experiment to de-toxify the brand? That inexperienced 17 year olds are being targeted? That suddenly 2 out of 3 speakers at rallies are SWP loyalists? It's the typical SWP instrumentalist approach - the same one that led to the SWP covering for comrade Delta.

The SWP stall got turned over and their placards were binned at today's rally btw.

 

[sandinista GB]

Why turn against the SWP en-bloc. Why simply not turn against those who have damaged the SWP. For decades it has been at the core of the anti-establishment and anti-racist cause.

 

[frogwoman]

no it hasnt

 

[butchersapron]

Why turn against the SWP en-bloc. Why simply not turn against those who have damaged the SWP. For decades it has been at the core of the anti-establishment and anti-racist cause.

Who are you talking to?

 

[DotCommunist]

so if I have this right, the remaining loyal but really unhappy people within the party are being sidelined, disciplined and told to stfu?

How is that even logical? You bled a huge number of people over a series of botched kangaroo rape trials (really?) and then those who have remained party loyal but frantically want to make this thing never doable again but still within the party, loyal to the tradition. Those people get the full treatment? Correct me if I am reading it wrong but isn't that just mental?

 

[Nigel Irritable]

The gloating may seem a bit off putting when it's about something as serious as rape, but the anger is justified. .

1) Off putting? No shit.
2) You have no way of knowing whether the SWP members you are harassing are oppositionists, or even if one of the complainants is amongst them.
3) Am I correct in thinking that one of the Sussex5 is actually in the SWP?
4) I'm glad that the anarchist scene has such a spotless record of handling sexual assault, harassment and rape in its own circles, organisations, social centres etc that some of its supporters feel comfortable adopting a pose of total self-righteousness on the issue.

 

[butchersapron]

Nasty pointless #4 nigel.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

Nasty pointless #4 nigel.

Not really intended as such. I just get irritated by people on the left whose response to the SWP's disgusting shit is 100% self-righteousness, 0% introspection. Please note the words "...some of...".

 

[pir]

2) You have no way of knowing whether the SWP members you are harassing are oppositionists, or even if one of the complainants is amongst them.

Not sure why you're addressing this at me as I'm at best peripheral to it. But yes, you can tell that someone is a loyalist if they (1) attack the opposition in the pre-conference IB for not having faith in the SWSS brand, and (2) if they tell a student occupation they are convinced Comrade Delta is innocent because of the rigorous investigatory process the SWP applied, with lots of women and even a genuine rape councillor on their disputes committee; and if they make out they are a committed feminist who'd never stay in the party if they believed it had actually happened etc. etc.

3) Am I correct in thinking that one of the Sussex5 is actually in the SWP?

Yes that's correct, and he receives the same support and solidarity as the rest of the Sussex 5.
Does that mean they get the right to impose the SWP brand on the campaign by swamping demos and rallies with their placards, again targeting "freshers with little political experience"?

4) I'm glad that the anarchist scene has such a spotless record of handling sexual assault, harassment and rape in its own circles, organisations, social centres etc that some of its supporters feel comfortable adopting a pose of total self-righteousness on the issue.

Where do you get that idea from? Most anarchists i've seen are careful to point out that this is a much wider problem also found in their circles. Even the are people who burnt the SW paper say very clearly in that very post (not sure how you missed it):
"It is also important to emphasise abuse and the protection of abusers is not limited to the SWP, but is endemic across the left. We will fight it wherever we find it."

Do you have nothing to say about the plan to use one of the most exciting campaigns around to detoxify the SWSS brand, using 17-18 year old freshers precisely because of their inexperience?

 

[butchersapron]

"It is also important to emphasise abuse and the protection of abusers is not limited to the SWP, but is endemic across the left. We will fight it wherever we find it."

Is this true?