Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

SWP expulsions and squabbles

Quite a few SWP sellers at the entrance to Hyde Park when I arrived towards the back of the march.

But hardly any during.

Was at an event about the 1994 CJA protests yesterday where someone showed a slide showing "the traditional SWP banned with 'socialist worker' ripped off the top". Made me smile.
 
Not sure it needs a thread of its own but Bianca Todd one of the leaders of Left Unity has resigned and is demanding to stand again in the election to replace her. Shades of Reckless and Carswell?

it's over her behaviour as a director of a charity and stealing wages from her staff

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...when-youve-got-fancy-restaurants-9215416.html
she is now not standing again - probably having realised she is just rubbish

http://leftunity.org/statement-on-b...ium=rss&utm_campaign=statement-on-bianca-todd
 
Sinn Fein normally have a 'Putting Irish Unity on the Agenda' conference at TUC HQ every February.
Will be interesting to see if the intersectionalistas show up to protest that one
 
Sinn Fein normally have a 'Putting Irish Unity on the Agenda' conference at TUC HQ every February.
Will be interesting to see if the intersectionalistas show up to protest that one
Unlikely you'd have thought, given that their MO seems to be no platforming organisations with less than 1000 members and that are not in fact plausibly scary. SF fits neither category.
 
It will be interesting to see how the SF membership reacts. They do, of course, have a much greater siege mentality and leadership loyalty than the British SWP.
It will be. A sense that there is now a feeding frenzy against them, driven by the mainstream fear of SF being the biggest party in the state, will unite them. But like with the SWP students, there is a newer generation of SF members who are going to be appalled at some of the attitudes of the older men.
 
Out of curiosity is there still a strong Gerry McGough style conservative element within SF?

There are individual SFers with just about every set of opinions, with leftish populism being the dominant brand in the urban parts of the South but less so in the North. There are however no organised currents of any kind, right or left, with a different agenda to the leadership. A high premium is placed on loyalty to the organisation as incarnated in the leadership.

Their moderate anti-choice position on abortion is emblematic of their stance on social issues. "Liberal" enough to be considered abortionists by lifer maniacs but actually opposed to abortion as a choice. And even then one of their TDs refused to back their stance for lifer reasons.

Their members would not by and large have the same level of contact with current feminist ideas through the student movement etc as British SWPers had. There are some SF feminists though I don't know what they are saying, if anything.
 
It will be. A sense that there is now a feeding frenzy against them, driven by the mainstream fear of SF being the biggest party in the state, will unite them. But like with the SWP students, there is a newer generation of SF members who are going to be appalled at some of the attitudes of the older men.

There's some quite hair raising stuff on social media from some SFers, not all older men.
 
Good piece from Dave Renton on this question:

https://livesrunning.wordpress.com/2014/10/26/hollow-threats-hollow-people/

For what's worth, my opinion is that the SWP should definitely NOT be banned from having meetings at unis. However, as Renton points out new members (if there are any!) should be made aware of the rape scandal and older members and especially leaders should be constantly reminded of their cover up.
 
So they do not recognise the police and justice system is fair to working class people and the trade union movement, to the oppressed and rape victims but threaten to use it if students tell lies about them...there are not enough :facepalm: to go round
 
delta's 'Dream Deferred' blog being promoted by Callinicos?! WTF. Is Smithy still on the Party payrole? There seems to be a sickness in the swp that has not been properly purged.
 
So they do not recognise the police and justice system is fair to working class people and the trade union movement, to the oppressed and rape victims but threaten to use it if students tell lies about them...there are not enough :facepalm: to go round

Desperate times call for desperate measures.

This bit is interesting though
The SWP’s problem is that truth is a complete defence to libel. And the only way that a court can establish whether a person has spoken untruthfully is by ordering both sides to disclose all the documents of a case and forming a view for itself. That means that one of the tasks facing any organisation seriously maintaining libel is to disclose to the court and to the party which it accuses of libel all the documents of the case, both those that support its case, and those that potentially undermine its case
Charlie Kimber knows very well the catastrophic impact that the details of what happened during the two investigations would have – even on Smith’s most blinkered supporters, let alone on any new recruits to the SWP – if they were finally made public. He has no doubt been advised, or if he has not been advised, he should have been – that once a document has been part of court proceedings, there is nothing you can do to stop its open discussion. For those reasons, he will not pursue a libel threat to court.

He's basically saying it's all a bluff anyway. I wonder if EUSA will consider calling it.
 
Desperate times call for desperate measures.

This bit is interesting though



He's basically saying it's all a bluff anyway. I wonder if EUSA will consider calling it.
The trouble is even the most basic legal fees make it impossible to take the risk so they may well back off
 
The trouble is even the most basic legal fees make it impossible to take the risk so they may well back off

Yeah, I fear you're right.

Does the SWP resorting to threats of libel count as an example of "bending the stick", BTW? I've never been quite sure exactly what that expression refers to.
 
I hated that saying when I was in the swp.
It was used to excuse bullying behaviour...ie I was shouted at once over something ...and I told the person to talk politely or not at all (I may not have been as polite as that in all honesty) and was told they were bending the stick ... they never shouted at me again after I told them where to put their stick.
I was always considered to be influenced by automonism...nothing to do with them having a fear and mistrust of anyone or thing that deviated from their belief that they knew best
 
this is a time for solidarity surely, the SWP is not rich enough to take on every student newspaper in the country...
10418182_975147212511246_2729869454664296432_n.jpg


easy for me to say, of course, I don't publish a student newspaper
 
I hated that saying when I was in the swp.
It was used to excuse bullying behaviour...ie I was shouted at once over something ...and I told the person to talk politely or not at all (I may not have been as polite as that in all honesty) and was told they were bending the stick ... they never shouted at me again after I told them where to put their stick.
I was always considered to be influenced by automonism...nothing to do with them having a fear and mistrust of anyone or thing that deviated from their belief that they knew best

So what does it actually mean? I assumed it was something to do with reversing a previous position for reasons of cynical expediency detecting objective changes in the balance of socio-economic forces requiring an honest and genuine revision of policy :confused:
 
So what does it actually mean? I assumed it was thing to do with reversing a previous position for reasons of cynical expediency detecting objective changes in the balance of socio-economic forces requiring an honest and genuine revision of policy :confused:

It's supposed to mean what you said in the non crossed out bit but was used to for justifying all sorts of shit...think Iits a phrase used by lenin....including changing branch secretaries, paper organisers, meeting titles etc...i was in the party from 86/87 to 2009...out of those 22 or 23 yrs i only regularly attended meetings from 92-99... i only went to the conference twice, was an organiser for 6 months but quit...so never became a name or developed an ego in the organisation so never went along with shit like that.
I was active in campaigns, my union and workplace so was tolerated but was considered soft ... presumably cos I did not bend the stick enough
 
Back
Top Bottom