SWP expulsions and squabbles

[likesfish]

So feminists who are open about being into such kink can't be taken seriously? Sounds like slut shaming to me.

No I meant anyone male or female ,Politics is in one box
Sexual practices is another bringing BDSM into any discussion about anything not related to BDSM is going to end in disaster as it did here ,most people arnt into it and frankly racial domination games are probably a kink to far for a lot of people.
Bit like reneacting the SS at the weekends most people just like the uniforms and the guns and being seen as the bad guys. But theirs a hint of something really rather sinister hanging about which is sort of unavoidable.
Imperial officers and indian princessess you basically know your dealing with a wrong one

 

[Karmickameleon]

Is there any indication that RS21 actually want them? I mean, the soft opposition weren't too keen on being associated with Seymour during the fight in the SWP, and perhaps more importantly bringing in someone like Walker who is a prominent member of the Left Unity leadership might imply certain political choices that RS21 haven't discussed yet.

While it's true that Seymour and co published a statement in the latest (now quite redundant!) ISN bulletin advocating more or less immeditate merger with RS21, it's very difficult to conceive that the latter would want them. In fact, my information is most definitely NOT, at least as regards Seymour. On the other hand, it will be interesting to see if the departure of what is clearly a rightward moving tendency, facilitates a merger of the more sensible elements of ISN with RS21.

 

[SpackleFrog]

I won't notice most of them have gone. Only magpie and Seymour ever crossed my radar (& china at one meeting). Seymour only cropped upto pick fights of late (almost as if he did it on purpose).

Rs21? Dunno yet, it's not clear if they want to be SWP v2 or summat better.

I'm slightly surprised at that since I thought they were mostly/all members of the SC and would be fairly prominent. That said, I'm beginning to suspect that the internal life of the ISN takes place mainly on teh internetz.

 

[belboid]

Only magpie was sc, Rosie used to be but stopped because, well because she did absolutely nothing. Seymour's star had wained far too much for him to even consider standing. & yeah, there is hardly any internal life, it's all vomited up on the internet.

 

[articul8]

We have been conditioned to internalise and perpetuate the (to expand on bell hooks’s term) white supremacist capitalist heteronormative cisnormative ablist neo-colonialist patriarchy

<explodes>

 

[SpackleFrog]

Only magpie was sc, Rosie used to be but stopped because, well because she did absolutely nothing. Seymour's star had wained far too much for him to even consider standing. & yeah, there is hardly any internal life, it's all vomited up on the internet.

I'm not sure I'd describe Seymour or Rosie as leadership material but surely they'd have made more sense on the SC than Magpie?

 

[treelover]

On the other hand, it will be interesting to see if the departure of what is clearly a rightward moving tendency,

Rightwards to where?

 

[SpackleFrog]

While it's true that Seymour and co published a statement in the latest (now quite redundant!) ISN bulletin advocating more or less immeditate merger with RS21, it's very difficult to conceive that the latter would want them. In fact, my information is most definitely NOT, at least as regards Seymour. On the other hand, it will be interesting to see if the departure of what is clearly a rightward moving tendency, facilitates a merger of the more sensible elements of ISN with RS21.

I'm not sure this "rightward" thing really makes sense (it sounds a lot like how the SWP characterises everyone who leaves as well) if anything they haven't moved to the right so much as (partially) realised they haven't got a clue.

 

[treelover]

<explodes>

Incredible, but sexual politics is moving very fast, what was considered beyond the pale can within a short time period can robustly be defended even by Tory politicians.

 

[belboid]

I'm not sure I'd describe Seymour or Rosie as leadership material but surely they'd have made more sense on the SC than Magpie?

I honestly have no idea about Rosie, never heard her say or do owt. Magpie was very active, had lots of ideas and actually got things done, so she was quite useful. Tho when it came to political discussions.....

I'm not sure this "rightward" thing really makes sense (it sounds a lot like how the SWP characterises everyone who leaves as well) if anything they haven't moved to the right so much as (partially) realised they haven't got a clue.

read Seymours latest thing on Grangemouth in The Exchange, or look at his positions on realignment. They are fairly clear moves to the right, giving up on revolution, or any hope of a revolutionary organisation, he wants a soggy broad left, syriza lite, and a regular column in the guardian.

 

[J Ed]

read Seymours latest thing on Grangemouth in The Exchange, or look at his positions on realignment. They are fairly clear moves to the right, giving up on revolution, or any hope of a revolutionary organisation, he wants a soggy broad left, syriza lite, and a regular column in the guardian.

I read his piece on Grangemouth as a fairly realistic assessment of the present day left in Britain, probably partly a result of his previously having to regurgitate nonsense about how the revolution is just around the corner.

 

[SpackleFrog]

I honestly have no idea about Rosie, never heard her say or do owt. Magpie was very active, had lots of ideas and actually got things done, so she was quite useful. Tho when it came to political discussions.....


read Seymours latest thing on Grangemouth in The Exchange, or look at his positions on realignment. They are fairly clear moves to the right, giving up on revolution, or any hope of a revolutionary organisation, he wants a soggy broad left, syriza lite, and a regular column in the guardian.

Can you link me?

 

[belboid]

Can you link me?

http://internationalsocialistnetwork.org/index.php/downloads/287-exchange-issue-03 - is issue 3, I think you've probly seen the re-alignment stuff.

I read his piece on Grangemouth as a fairly realistic assessment of the present day left in Britain, probably partly a result of his previously having to regurgitate nonsense about how the revolution is just around the corner.

well, there are the bits he just makes up, and it is utterly defeatist. 'Nothing could ever have been done' - its like a pretentious LLETSA

 

[Karmickameleon]

Rightwards to where?

That is the question. As regards Seymour, I agree with belboid when he says:

read Seymours latest thing on Grangemouth in The Exchange, or look at his positions on realignment. They are fairly clear moves to the right, giving up on revolution, or any hope of a revolutionary organisation, he wants a soggy broad left, syriza lite, and a regular column in the guardian.

IMO Seymour will probably end up in Left Unity - although how race play would go down with them I do not know. That said he's moved so rapidly rightwards in the past year anything is possible.

 

[articul8]

he's presumably already in LU? (yes, he's said on FB he plans to remain in LU after leaving ISN) - don't know whether he's given up on revolutionary organisation or will be throwing in his lot with others

 

[Karmickameleon]

he's presumably already in LU? (yes, he's said on FB he plans to remain in LU after leaving ISN) - don't know whether he's given up on revolutionary organisation or will be throwing in his lot with others

Thanks, I noticed his FB post too. He doesn't appear to have been very active in LU. Wonder whether that will change now.

 

[tedsplitter]

They had all written decent, interesting stuff whether for the website or in the Exchange. I’m very sad they’ve felt the need to leave and I do think, personally, as an SC member, that we have fucked up a fair bit in not making these comrades feel welcome. Not just these comrades but others who left over the anathema article. They’re all still comrades as far as I’m concerned. I think the toxicity of debate is in part a hangover from the SWP, and also partly a result of the way online debate escalates - but we can’t keep blaming these for everything. We need to recognise the problem, think of ways to resolve it and start taking responsibility for our actions. On the other hand we need to be mindful that if we dwell too much on it we will become even more introspective and stagnant. There is internal life but it ends up being mostly online since the SC is not London-based but scattered around the country. There is local activity starting to take off, the regroupment talks are going pretty well, we’re meeting jointly with RS21 in many areas and working together, the women’s magazine is progressing well, we’re getting stuck into building lots of events nationally (events diary bit is going up on website soon). And I realise how much that makes me sound like an “everything’s really exciting” delusional SWP full-timer haha. There’s lots of mending and reflection to do IMHO – maybe we will be the first far left steering committee to say sorry, personally I’d like that – but if we don’t crack on with the real work we really will implode.

 

[belboid]

They had all written decent, interesting stuff whether for the website or in the Exchange. I’m very sad they’ve felt the need to leave and I do think, personally, as an SC member, that we have fucked up a fair bit in not making these comrades feel welcome. Not just these comrades but others who left over the anathema article.

the SC statement in response to the race play threads was, imo, a mistake. While Seymour was wrong, and deliberately provocative imo, being wrong on an esoteric matter shouldn't require a statement from the leadership, especially one so one-sided, given all the really fucking OTT he (and magpie) were getting

 

[SpackleFrog]

http://internationalsocialistnetwork.org/index.php/downloads/287-exchange-issue-03 - is issue 3, I think you've probly seen the re-alignment stuff.

I think his point that the workers were possibly not up for the sort of action that would have won might well be right to an extent, although to be honest what I mostly thought was why is somebody who has never been on strike even writing this... The cultural revolution thing was bollocks too.

 

[belboid]

I think his point that the workers were possibly not up for the sort of action that would have won might well be right to an extent, although to be honest what I mostly thought was why is somebody who has never been on strike even writing this... The cultural revolution thing was bollocks too.

oh its certainly right that the workers weren't up for that kind of action - tho its not true that anyone wrote occupations will definitely win, as he claims. And, as you say, it does come over quite clearly that he's never been on strike or been a union militant type in his life. He writes some good stuff on various subjects, but hasn't got a clue when it comes to workplace based stuff.

 

[Mustn't grumble]

. . . I’m very sad they’ve felt the need to leave and I do think, personally, as an SC member, that we have fucked up a fair bit in not making these comrades feel welcome. Not just these comrades but others who left over the anathema article . . . We need to recognise the problem, think of ways to resolve it and start taking responsibility for our actions.

did you vote to reject last week's SC resolution criticising Seymour & co.?

If you voted in support do you now regret doing that?

Added: the SC resolution is no longer on the ISN website. Is that a decision of the SC, or someone else? Thanks.

 

[tedsplitter]

did you vote to reject last week's SC resolution criticising Seymour & co.?

If you voted in support do you now regret doing that?

Added: the SC resolution is no longer on the ISN website. Is that a decision of the SC, or someone else? Thanks.

There was discussion about what was to be done. People were contacting us and asking about it and some were threatening to resign. I voted against the statement to begin with (and some other suggestions such as formal censure which were rejected quite decisively). I said we ought to speak privately to people to try and resolve it. But once I'd lost that one I voted against putting it on the website (not against it being public particularly we appear enough like a bunch of ferrets fighting in a sack as it is, without advertising it further on the front page of the site) - and instead just to email it out to members. I also made suggestions to make the wording a bit less inflammatory.

 

[Mustn't grumble]

There was discussion about what was to be done. People were contacting us and asking about it and some were threatening to resign. I voted against the statement to begin with (and some other suggestions such as formal censure which were rejected quite decisively). I said we ought to speak privately to people to try and resolve it. But once I'd lost that one I voted against putting it on the website (not against it being public particularly we appear enough like a bunch of ferrets fighting in a sack as it is, without advertising it further on the front page of the site) - and instead just to email it out to members. I also made suggestions to make the wording a bit less inflammatory.

Thanks for replying, ted, & so swiftly. It's how the teachers should relate to the class.

Added: splitting over war credits is one thing, but over this? Some of these people are in their thirties or forties, some are not impulsive or prone to raging, so their action is non-justifiable. And to think, one day everyone may all be together again in one organisation, BURP, the British United Revolutionary Party.

 

[SpineyNorman]

lol

 

[emanymton]

Thanks for replying, ted, & so swiftly. It's how the teachers should relate to the class.

Added: splitting over war credits is one thing, but over this? Some of these people are in their thirties or forties, some are not impulsive or prone to raging, so their action is non-justifiable. And to think, one day everyone may all be together again in one organisation, BURP, the British United Revolutionary Party.

Thinking I would prefer to be in the federal alliance of revolutionary parties myself.

 

[SpineyNorman]

Thinking I would prefer to be in the federal alliance of revolutionary parties myself.

Federal Alliance of Revolutionary Tendencies would be even better

I'd probably hold my nose, ignore the identity politickers and join that just for the name.

 

[imposs1904]

Federal Alliance of Revolutionary Tendencies would be even better

I'd probably hold my nose, ignore the identity politickers and join that just for the name.

thing is, the smell might be too bad and then you might spew.

 

[J Ed]

tedsplitter even if you, or someone else, agrees with the shrillistas over this issue or any other how can anyone possibly expect to do anything of any worth within an organisation in which members are willing to tear each other apart over something so minor? Just curious.

 

[SpineyNorman]

tedsplitter even if you, or someone else, agrees with the shrillistas over this issue or any other how can anyone possibly expect to do anything of any worth within an organisation in which members are willing to tear each other apart over something so minor? Just curious.

That's the sum total of the shrillistas politics isn't it? Denouncing people as [insert bad thing here]ists, refusing to discuss properly on the basis of privilege theory 'you're a bloke/white/not a sex worker/straight/[insert 'privilege' here] so you should just stfu and defer to the oppressed', then bullying them into submission. The irony is that the wankers think this is a strategy for making those excluded from politics feel 'safe' and 'welcome'. It really does beggar belief.

 

[Mustn't grumble]

. . . the shrillistas . . . a strategy for making those excluded from politics feel 'safe' and 'welcome'

The Tribune of the Oppressed welcomes you all with open arms! Join us, & together we can vanquish the exploiters & oppressors! Onward revo soldiers, . . .