comrade spurski
Well-Known Member
I aint in the SP, aint affiliated with it so consider myself impartial...recording a meeting without the permission of those taking part is not ok and it ismade worse by then playing that recording to others.
SWP expulsions and squabbles
- Thread starter Nigel Irritable
- Start date
Trotboy
Well-Known Member
It's the 'taken aback' bs again. I'm getting rather sick of that to be frank. Who says anyone 'overlooks his behaviour'? I don't appreciate the way he chooses to debate on occasions. But just because of that he should be suspended? Pathetic. On that basis Brian you and I should have been 'out the door' many years ago, along with many others. In what way have all of us given 'excuse to expel us' ?? Just by putting an alternate viewpoint? Just by challenging the leadership? I'm 'taken aback' by the blasé way comrades seem to just want rid of us because you can't be bothered to read Capital and understand it, or read the documents and engage in meaningful debate and discussion. It's all 'oh so boring'.
Shut up about the SP. Start your own thread.
Nigel Irritable
Five, Ten, Fifteen Years
That's just it. Nobody wants rid of anyone for arguing a different view, for challenging the leadership or even for forcing a somewhat esoteric debate on people who might not regard reading documents on the TRPF as a delightful way to fill their spare time. I'm all in favour of people arguing the toss, generally think that any leadership can do with a bit of challenging and occasionally enjoy a bit of nerdy theoretical debate.
But here are some examples of the sort of thing I do have a problem with. I'm not ok with members ridiculing other people in their branch on a blog because they disagreed with them in a meeting. I'm not ok with members secretly taping branch meetings. I'm not ok with members setting up a Facebook site calibrated to attract every crank on the Internet with a grudge against the CWI.
I don't want any of you expelled, but I do think that the organisation has the right to step in and say that things like that are not acceptable. And if, after they've been warned, certain of your co thinkers refuse to step back from that behaviour, as distinct from not arguing their corner any more, well, they understand and have chosen the consequences.
It's unfortunate that those members of the group of eleven who have been more restrained in their behaviour haven't hauled their wilder cothinkers into line. Instead you seem to prefer to treat any attempt to place limits on their right to do and say whatever they like in pursuit of your argument as evidence of an evil bureaucratic conspiracy to shut you all up. Well, I tend pretty strongly towards the more "libertarian" end of the CWI spectrum when it comes to things like public debate, but even I think that membership carries responsibilities as well as rights. Even if I thought that someone behaving like BW in my own branch was correct on every substantive particular of a given debate, I still wouldn't want them in the branch until and unless they'd agreed to abide by those responsibilities.
The post above is about the CWI not the SWP which the thread was about from the start. Get your own thread.
discokermit
Well-Known Member
what are you on about. it's relevant. if you've read the thread all the way through you would know this.
I have followed this thread from the beginning and there has been a lot of side talk about the SP in particular all along, but now that there is little news about the problems in the SWP the irrelevant stuff about the SP is beginning to dominate. I don't find it possible to be interested in this. I am aware of the rivalry between the two groups and the effect it had on such ventures as the Socialist Alliance but that is not the key to the break up of the SWP or what is to happen to the remnants. More interesting is what Martin Smith is up to these days and I think this needs to be watched.
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
Who made you the board police? This thread STARTED with a specific focus on the internal issues within the SWP, but clearly has taken on a broader series of issues with regard to models of Leninist party and the viability or otherwise of them in the UK - particularly where issues of (sexual) exploitation of power differentials are at stake. Yes, the Cliffite tradition is a major part of that. But it's not the whole of it.
Karmickameleon
Too long in exile
Very well put! I can only add that things are likely to be rather quiet as regards SWP "expulsions and squabbles" at least in the short term. The leadership will be desperate to avoid any further splits and those oppositionists who have remained in the party will keep their heads down until the next conference. Of course, given all that has happened in the past year or so, these could be famous last words...
Meanwhile, the SWP car crash has most definitely raised the broader and very important issues you mention (sexual exploitation of power differentials/models of and viability of a Leninist party) and it is inevitable that contributors to this forum will want to comment on them whenever and whereever they arise.
I have a Police badge and everything. You are a current member of the labour party so you are in no position to speak. You are only here to gloat about problems of minority parties and their rivalries. I am here for information about the SWP. I was at one time a member and still know people who were members at that time. You can sit on your perch like a tennis umpire but have nothing to contribute. "You cannot be serious".
Last edited:
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
I am not gloating - I was in the SP and am by no means simply hostile although I do think there are some serious issues there - which may or may not be inherent to the whole vanguard model. The SWP is not some uniquely significant example of these issues getting played out. It;s reasonable to consider other examples in the light of what happened there.
I'm hardly unaware of the limitations and inadequacies of the Labour party (or the LRC for that matter) - I think an ability to critically reflect on the problems with organisations we nevertheless continue to lay some claim on is essential.
I'm hardly unaware of the limitations and inadequacies of the Labour party (or the LRC for that matter) - I think an ability to critically reflect on the problems with organisations we nevertheless continue to lay some claim on is essential.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
if you do a search for 'Leninist Beef' this thread is the first result
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
What is the use of your 'may or may not' here?
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
Well that is what is under debate - obviously I have not chosen to join another group with a vanguardist idea of itself, nor have I attempted to start a new one, or regroup others into something that aspires to be one. So OK I've essentially drawn the conclusion that the model itself is at fault, not just the SP interation of it. But others haven't drawn those conclusions, but are raising criticisms that might point in that direction.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
So you seek to encompass every single position possible under your posts do you? Why don't you just say what you think? It would make things easier all round.
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
But I was trying to say - this is not my personal beef with the SP or an attempt to gloat at small left groups in general - the issues at stake here are wider, and being actively discussed across the Leninist left. Which is why @Hocus Eye is wrong to insist "shut up about other groups, I only want to discuss the SWP".
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Of course he's wrong in his usual pompous way, but why don't you ever just say what you mean?
And you have actually joined the biggest vanguardist gang on the block - precisely because they are the largest vanguardist gang on the block. Anyway, silly intervention from me - enough.
what about 'Leninist Beef Curtains'?
KeeperofDragons
Crazy dragon lady
Now that sounds like Lady Gaga's interior decorating style
imposs1904
Thread Killa'
Karmickameleon
Too long in exile
Whatever happened to "Neither Washington nor Moscow"?? As the cliché has it, Cliff will be spinning in his proverbial grave:
http://stopwar.org.uk/news/ten-thin...crisis-in-ukraine-and-the-crimea#.UxR2VON5OYC
http://stopwar.org.uk/news/ten-thin...crisis-in-ukraine-and-the-crimea#.UxR2VON5OYC
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
I was going to post that on the Ukraine thread earlier but forgot, ta for reminder:
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
bolshiebhoy
socialism leinster drink
And as if on cue the prof writes a fairly good article for SW that restates the Neither nor position quite well. And takes to task those making excuses for Moscow.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
One other thing, the old stalinists on stw were always going to happy with this shit, but if there's now war any popular reaction will be outside of these clowns.
SpackleFrog
Smash showy bell-bottom pants and sporty haircuts
a former comrade has just posted "nationalise the media under democratic control" under a post about government/BBC censorship.
I'm not being funny, but REALLY????
Yeah, but they probably either don't realise how that sounds or the variations on what it could mean.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
technically the beeb is supposed to be a nationalised industry if you ask frothers from the torygraph. Even though they make most of their money flogging Doctor Who and Top Gear abroad, and the other channels get some of the license money towards their news services.
Similar threads
