dennisr
the acceptable face
to say that people who criticise the SWP usually are keyboard activists is ridiculous, IMHO.
not on these boards it ain't
to say that people who criticise the SWP usually are keyboard activists is ridiculous, IMHO.
Fat chance!
Anyway...you're right of course, the SWP are not alone in making mistakes. Take a look at the Plane Stupid thread to see an example of a DA (or not) that generated a lot of criticism and debate.
The differences being that the SWP has until recently been in a position to shape the strategy of pretty much most campaigns when it wished to, so its mistakes had a wide repurcussion.
...and two, the almost blanket defence on here by you lot of positions that prominent SWPers are now admitting were wrong. Not something you'll see amongst the anarchos for example who seem more than happy to debate their mistakes on here (though too ooften this descends into bickering).
Perhaps most interesting though, is your reliance upon activism as a kind of defence. Something almost universally shared amongst the Left and Anarchists is a kind of moralism based upon activity. That those who are "active" have a stronger position to comment than those who are "armchair". Now, certainly there is an element of practicality about this position, involvemnet leads to more detailed knowledge of whats going on, sure. But, as the point must be to engage with those who are not currently active, then the viewpoints of those who are in that position are perhaps the most important, no?
Just a thought.
not on these boards it ain't
just cos that's all you do these days MC5, you really shouldn't project that belief onto everyone who disagrees with you
I just find it a bit high and mighty when someone lays into an activist organisation for it's mistakes, whose only ever activity up to the present is to fart just before they sit down and boot up windows.
Of course.
I get that,
But do you not see the problems of this mindset?
Enlighten me?
Perhaps most interesting though, is your reliance upon activism as a kind of defence. Something almost universally shared amongst the Left and Anarchists is a kind of moralism based upon activity. That those who are "active" have a stronger position to comment than those who are "armchair". Now, certainly there is an element of practicality about this position, involvemnet leads to more detailed knowledge of whats going on, sure. But, as the point must be to engage with those who are not currently active, then the viewpoints of those who are in that position are perhaps the most important, no?
Just a thought.
I just find it a bit high and mighty when someone lays into an activist organisation for it's mistakes, whose only ever activity up to the present is to fart just before they sit down and boot up windows.
...but just as a quick example.
here you assume that there is a clear dichotomy between activists and people who do nothing.
Well surely its not thhat black and white.
and more importantly surely people are engaged in the class struggle daily as they try to survive, or go beyond survival to living, The antagonism between capital and labour remains regardless of "actvism" or consciousness,
My ire is not targeted at people generally though. More at the keyboard cynics on here.
Well, if the critics of the SWP are all 'keyboard cynics' on here, you won't mind naming names, will you?
I just find it a bit high and mighty when someone lays into an activist organisation for it's mistakes, whose only ever activity up to the present is to fart just before they sit down and boot up windows.
Do you unconditionally support the Climate Camp and other activists then?
It all depends on the activity and the politics of course, which are notable by their absence.
It all depends on the activity and the politics of course, which are notable by their absence.
My ire is not targeted at people generally though. More at the keyboard cynics on here.
It all depends on the activity and the politics of course, which are notable by their absence.
Again you're completely dodging the questions regarding moralism, volutarism and substitionism.
I genuinely would like to hear the views of people on these questions. I think its importnat, and applies to both Trots and Anarchos equally.
...as to your ire, if you'd like, as suggested, to name names, feel free. Put up, or shut up in other words!
you could mention lots of things, but all you do is miss the point.
just cos that's all you do these days MC5, you really shouldn't project that belief onto everyone who disagrees with you
So, what are the politics of 'climate change', because I honestly don't know.
Involvement in a 'climate change camp' darn south is out of the question just now I'm afraid.
If you're not even interested in the issue of climate change, why are you bothering to snipe at those who are? You do the work you want to, we'll carry on doing ours.
The point being?
that deciding that someone is simply a 'keyboard warrior' is a great way of choosing to ignore anything they have to say.
a good point is a good point, whoever makes it.
So, what are the poitics of 'climate change', because I honestly don't know?
As for activity? I was phoning around today speaking to people about trying to organise at work and trying to recruit people to the union. This as a rank and file member in between doing a fucking stressful, low paid, front-line job in housing. I'm also a member of a local tenants federation.
I could mention the many past years of activity, where I have been threatened with physical violence by fascists, when involved with RAR and ANL mk1. My time organising against mass unemployment. The numerous industrial struggles I've been involved with, including the year long miners strike back in 1984. Also, the anti-poll tax campaign, in my very own community, dodging bailiffs. But then that would mean I would come under some criticism for living in the past and likely to be called an 'old git with arthritis' by at least one well known fuckwit on here.
Involvement in a 'climate change camp' darn south is out of the question just now I'm afraid.
As for 'naming names'? That is probably one of the dumbest requests I've ever had on here.
Well of course, but I haven't ignored any good points that way.