Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Workers Power have split

That's the SEP isn't it who try to break strikes? They operate round here and it's 2 people - a university professor and a teacher. One of them had a go at me for supporting labour once, when I asked him what the fuck he was on about he said that because I supported the public sector strikes I was supporting the reformist TUC's fake war and therefore supporting the labour party.

Interesting to learn they're owned by a publisher. Makes sense. They stood in the ward next to mine in last year's council elections. Their leaflets were shit - no mention of anything local or relevant at all, it began by stating that they were revolutionary Marxists who stood in the tradition of Lenin and Trotsky, leaders of the Russian Revolution of 1917. That was probably the most sane bit that best tapped into the local mood though. The rest of it was attacks on unions and the rest of the left. The only vaguely reasonable bit was against the labour party, but they even managed to fuck that up, can't remember exactly what it said but I remember thinking that they'd basically called anyone who ever voted Labour a moron. But they were on really expensive glossy leaflets, I'd assumed both members had made big sacrifices to pay for them, but now I know what their scumbag leader does I suspect he did them.

There are loads of SEP in Manchester, all pretty old. They stand outside Man Uni library with leaflets for their meetings under the banner of International Socialist Students Equality or something. Why they have a students group I don't know, not one is under the age of 40. They stand in elections in Manchester Central too. As do the WRP and SLP.
 
Frogwoman I have no idea who the ICC are. The same goes for you, as for the other poster, I am very unlike to convince someone they are in an organsiation that I think is a sect and harming socialist ideas. Good luck in what you do, but I suspect the far left groups will go around in an ever dwindling pool of numbers becoming ever more irrelevant to working class communities, which is shown by the last 30 years. That's not to say I think socialist or marxist ideas are any less relevant today, indeed they should be more relevant than ever in a time like this. As socialist groups still aren't getting anywhere in this kind of climate it should give them a reality check, but it won't. In my view something new will have to come along, an organisation that functions in a very different way to the current crop. I hope that will happen, but there is nothing there as of yet.

im not denying that it could do with some changes. in my opinion it could be a lot more self critical at times. but harming socialist ideas? I don't think so. its nice to know that my friend who helped organise a strike in the local hospital here of previously organised un-unionised workers, a strike which was partially successful, was harming socialist ideas when he did so. it's also nice to know that the meeting we organised the other week on an issue which affects loads of people who live here, which got 16 people to it most of whom had never been involved in any campaign, was harming socialist ideas. Perhaps we should not have bothered eh?

ETA: I'm sorry, that probably came across as quite harsh. seriously though, I get what you are saying, but I don't think it's like that everywhere. I do agree that the left needs to be less sectarian but I do think that is changing especially because people are waking up to the reality of what's going on a lot more. Some of the fallings out are however over serious issues such as the labour party and whether to support them or not, I don't think it's mindless sectarianism that people fall out over it necessarily especially because this is something that's caused such damage in the past.
 
Frogwoman I have no idea who the ICC are. The same goes for you, as for the other poster, I am very unlike to convince someone they are in an organsiation that I think is a sect and harming socialist ideas. Good luck in what you do, but I suspect the far left groups will go around in an ever dwindling pool of numbers becoming ever more irrelevant to working class communities, which is shown by the last 30 years. That's not to say I think socialist or marxist ideas are any less relevant today, indeed they should be more relevant than ever in a time like this. As socialist groups still aren't getting anywhere in this kind of climate it should give them a reality check, but it won't. In my view something new will have to come along, an organisation that functions in a very different way to the current crop. I hope that will happen, but there is nothing there as of yet.

Funny enough that's not too far from the official SP position.
 
im not denying that it could do with some changes. in my opinion it could be a lot more self critical at times. but harming socialist ideas? I don't think so. its nice to know that my friend who helped organise a strike in the local hospital here of previously organised un-unionised workers, a strike which was partially successful, was harming socialist ideas when he did so. it's also nice to know that the meeting we organised the other week on an issue which affects loads of people who live here, which got 16 people to it most of whom had never been involved in any campaign, was harming socialist ideas. Perhaps we should not have bothered eh?

Not at all, that's not what I'm saying. Obviously people in those groups do some good stuff, such as the things you have mentioned. I'm talking about how the organisations operate as a whole, and how their dogmatism, sect like behaviour and inability to change in any fundamental way means that the far left groups have dwindled and dwindled over the past 30 years and have become ever more irrelevant to working class communities. Despite the fact that have been huge social movements and an economic crisis. Those are the facts. Maybe I'm wrong and those groups will suddenly carry on as they are and but suddenly have a turn around in fortunes. But I doubt it.
 
im not denying that it could do with some changes. in my opinion it could be a lot more self critical at times. but harming socialist ideas? I don't think so. its nice to know that my friend who helped organise a strike in the local hospital here of previously organised un-unionised workers, a strike which was partially successful, was harming socialist ideas when he did so. it's also nice to know that the meeting we organised the other week on an issue which affects loads of people who live here, which got 16 people to it most of whom had never been involved in any campaign, was harming socialist ideas. Perhaps we should not have bothered eh?

ETA: I'm sorry, that probably came across as quite harsh. seriously though, I get what you are saying, but I don't think it's like that everywhere. I do agree that the left needs to be less sectarian but I do think that is changing especially because people are waking up to the reality of what's going on a lot more. Some of the fallings out are however over serious issues such as the labour party and whether to support them or not, I don't think it's mindless sectarianism that people fall out over it necessarily especially because this is something that's caused such damage in the past.

Wasn't harsh at all. When people spout ignorant sectarian shit they need to be called on it. It's not as if we don't already recognise and openly admit to the limitations and shortcomings of our groups, and it's not as if we're asking anyone to join us. But to claim that the work we're doing, sometimes at the cost of very real personal sacrifices, is somehow harming socialism or the working class, especially when we're not really large enough to do anything of the sort, is insulting and frankly out of order.

In other words, well said froggy :)
 
Not at all, that's not what I'm saying. Obviously people in those groups do some good stuff, such as the things you have mentioned. I'm talking about how the organisations operate as a whole, and how their dogmatism, sect like behaviour and inability to change in any fundamental way means that the far left groups have dwindled and dwindled over the past 30 years and have become ever more irrelevant to working class communities. Despite the fact that have been huge social movements and an economic crisis. Those are the facts. Maybe I'm wrong and those groups will suddenly carry on as they are and but suddenly have a turn around in fortunes. But I doubt it.

Until you're willing to actually say precisely what it is that we're doing to harm the spread of socialism, beyond vague allusions to circuses, we're not really going to get anywhere are we?

Interesting that it's "the sects" and not 30 years of neoliberalism that's caused this though. Very "marxist".
 
You can't really say what I'm saying is sectarian. From what I understand being sectarian is putting the interests of your organisation before the interests of the working class. As I'm not in an organisation that's not really possible. It's a word I've noticed the far left groups love to throw around as a petty insult, everyone is sectarian but them.

But as it happens I don't think it was harsh what frogwoman was saying, it's fair enough to put her point of view. But sadly I can't agree at all that the left groups are changing, reality just doesn't bear that out. There was the general secretary election in UNSION, the three competing anti-cuts organisations with barely a political difference between them, the recent meetings organised about the pensions which were a week apart and competing with each other, one by the SWP and one by the Socialist Party. I even remember the Socialist Party member standing up and saying with a snear "congratulations for filling a very small room", and then they SWP having their petty responses. They haven't woken up to anything as organisations. Again that's not to say that there are local activists who aren't like that and raise above it, and I know some great activists who are members of sects, but that doesn't change the organisations as a whole, especially as the leaderships are the worst of the lot.

But to claim that the work we're doing, sometimes at the cost of very real personal sacrifices, is somehow harming socialism or the working class, especially when we're not really large enough to do anything of the sort, is insulting and frankly out of order.

I don't think it's out of order to say that I think sects that represent socialism harm socialism because they are sects. That doesn't mean I don't recognise that people are making personal sacrifices. It's a political criticism, not a personal one.

and it's not as if we're asking anyone to join us.

https://www.swp.org.uk/forms/join-swp

http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/main/join

http://www.counterfire.org/index.php/join-us
 
Until you're willing to actually say precisely what it is that we're doing to harm the spread of socialism, beyond vague allusions to circuses, we're not really going to get anywhere are we?

Interesting that it's "the sects" and not 30 years of neoliberalism that's caused this though. Very "marxist".

You're just going in to demagogy now. Of course 30 years of neoliberalism has taken its toll. But there have been mass social movements and there have been economic circumstances which socialist organisations should have grown in, in my view.

I have given examples of why the socialist sects harm the spread of socialism in terms of the anti-cuts movement and the behaviour in trade unions (I gave the example of UNISON).

You could look at the way the competing sects behaved in the anti-capitalist movement, the anti-war movement, the Socialist Alliance, there are a thousand and one examples.
 
With respect One Stop Shop, even though I agree with the bulk of what you're saying, could you knock it off? It's killing the thread. None of this is news to any of us, we know what the trot left is like, even the better groups like the SWP and SP are capable of behaving in the most childish sectarian way at times, infact some of us probably have more first hand experience of that kind of stuff than even you do. We get it. We know.

First thing you've got to understand is that some of the people, maybe even a majority of the people, involved in those parties are aware of these problems too. Some of the people involved may be trying to change the way these groups operate, change the outlook they have and to try and get them to leave the far-left ghetto they've made for themselves. Some of the people who have got involved may only be doing so because it puts them in touch with local socialists and gives them an entry point into community based anti-cuts work. Very few of the people in these groups are doing it because they want to advance the revolutionary vanguard, that's something I worked out a long time ago. Making generalisations about the motives for people joining these groups is a mugs game because the reasons for doing so are usually pretty varied.

At some point there's going to have to be a new democratic socialist movement to hoover up all the disaffected ex-SWP'ers and so on because these groups, as they stand, are circling the drain of history and will die a slow protacted death otherwise. When that happens I suspect all the members of these groups who have a clue will leave, if there was a viable alternative to the left of Labour which was not j just another Trotskyite sect then half the people in this thread would be in it.

Anyway I've had a good laugh reading through this thread, gonna try and rack my brains for more funny shit I've encountered on the left over the years.
 
look, i don't deny there's been some problems in the unions and in anti-cuts groups. i don't think anyone is saying there hasn't. but a lot of the fallings out, as i've said, have been over important stuff like the labour party, not some life of brian bollocks. there have probably been some petty and stupid idiots on both sides, there have been points where SP have been wrong, or where others have been wrong or whatever (and when i have thought i disagreed, I have said so on here), but that doesn't mean that the sp and swp etc don't have real differences that could cause problems in an anti cuts campaign or any other sort of campaign (on the approach to labour/green councillors doing the cuts and the like).

And as others have pointed out on here it's not necessarily a trot thing, it's a human thing. My dad used to be a member of this volunteering organisation and you would not believe the tales he used to tell of the splits and huge arguements that went on and the sort of malicious gossip that went on in particularly between a few long standing members. It's always going to happen. It's a question of how you deal with it.

And why shouldn't these types of parties have a join page? nobody is forcing anyone to click on it. urban75 has a join page, so does the cats protection league etc. it doesn't mean they are trying to force people to join it.
 
To be fair I haven't said anything about why people join the groups, and I totally agree with what you are saying in that respect.

I like the circling the drain of history bit, very poetic!

And fair enough about the thread, will leave you to it :)
 
Frogwoman I would debate more but don't think it's a good idea on this thread, I think people want to carry on with the more light hearted stuff :) But I genuinely wish you well in what you are doing and the join links were just a jokey response to SN.
 
At some point there's going to have to be a new democratic socialist movement to hoover up all the disaffected ex-SWP'ers and so on
Do you really think so? I'm not hopeful, I can't see where it could come from.
if there was a viable alternative to the left of Labour which was not just another Trotskyite sect then half the people in this thread would be in it.
I would, like a shot.
 
There are loads of SEP in Manchester, all pretty old. They stand outside Man Uni library with leaflets for their meetings under the banner of International Socialist Students Equality or something. Why they have a students group I don't know, not one is under the age of 40. They stand in elections in Manchester Central too. As do the WRP and SLP.

Yeah I remember them turning up to a debate at Salford University about Greece a few years ago and making absolute fools of themselves. There was a discussion on Greek fascists and whether or not the crisis would lead to a growth in fascist politics over there, which turned into a debate on the BNP. At some point working class support for the BNP was mentioned, which made the SEP guys erupt with anger, shouting about how fascism was alien to the working class and an inherently bourgeosis phenomenon, that by even suggesting that the working class had an inclination towards far-right politics we were smearing the working class and behaving like bag carriers for the fascists. When someone pointed out that the majority of the BNP's vote came from working class, traditionally Labour areas, and that some of the people in the room (Prof Jocelyn Evans for example) were involved in serious academic research on that very topic, they denounced them as "bourgeosis fantasists projecting their middle-class anxieties onto the working class" before going on to make some spurious claim about how inter-racial relationships were more common amongst the working class than any other section of the population, therefore they could not be fascist.

Of course less than a few hundreds yards from the building this debate was taking place were a number of working class estates, with practically every house there flying an England flag out of the window, where I'd been leafletting and campaigning on a number of occasions and where I can assure any members of the SEP there was vocal support for the BNP and for a lot of racist policies and ideas. To be so ignorant of something that's literally on your own doorstep is something that's only possible if you live your life in a tiny echo-chamber where everyone you know or speak to re-inforces a crude trotskyite view of the world.
 
You can't really say what I'm saying is sectarian. From what I understand being sectarian is putting the interests of your organisation before the interests of the working class. As I'm not in an organisation that's not really possible. It's a word I've noticed the far left groups love to throw around as a petty insult, everyone is sectarian but them.

But as it happens I don't think it was harsh what frogwoman was saying, it's fair enough to put her point of view. But sadly I can't agree at all that the left groups are changing, reality just doesn't bear that out. There was the general secretary election in UNSION, the three competing anti-cuts organisations with barely a political difference between them, the recent meetings organised about the pensions which were a week apart and competing with each other, one by the SWP and one by the Socialist Party. I even remember the Socialist Party member standing up and saying with a snear "congratulations for filling a very small room", and then they SWP having their petty responses. They haven't woken up to anything as organisations. Again that's not to say that there are local activists who aren't like that and raise above it, and I know some great activists who are members of sects, but that doesn't change the organisations as a whole, especially as the leaderships are the worst of the lot.



I don't think it's out of order to say that I think sects that represent socialism harm socialism because they are sects. That doesn't mean I don't recognise that people are making personal sacrifices. It's a political criticism, not a personal one.



https://www.swp.org.uk/forms/join-swp

http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/main/join

http://www.counterfire.org/index.php/join-us

You're just being a cock for the sake of it now aren't you? And your attitude suggests to me that effectively you are in a sect - yours only has one member though.

And you're completely ignoring the fact that we share many of those criticisms. But it is personal, you're just being dishonest now. Let's recap on where this started shall we? It was you arguing that there were people in this thread mocking the microsects despite being in sects ourselves. The implication was that we were hypocrites with no self-awareness. That's personal - stop squirming.

You also know full well that I wasn't claiming the parties weren't trying to recruit - I was saying that none of the people on this thread are asking you to join. Thank fuck.

And those examples you've given - that's a few twats acting like twats. You'd still get that in the kind of larger party we both want to see.

Demagogy lol - do you even know what that means? I'd suggest not.

There haven't been mass social movements, there's been occupy which we largely left alone. What a monumental success that was in our absence. The SA was a monumental cock up, I agree. And so was the anti-war movement, though think the roots of its failure went far deeper than the SWP's sectarianism.

You're basically determined to have a dig. It's a bit pathetic to be honest.

And that's me done with you now.
 
Yeah I remember them turning up to a debate at Salford University about Greece a few years ago and making absolute fools of themselves. There was a discussion on Greek fascists and whether or not the crisis would lead to a growth in fascist politics over there, which turned into a debate on the BNP. At some point working class support for the BNP was mentioned, which made the SEP guys erupt with anger, shouting about how fascism was alien to the working class and an inherently bourgeosis phenomenon, that by even suggesting that the working class had an inclination towards far-right politics we were smearing the working class and behaving like bag carriers for the fascists. When someone pointed out that the majority of the BNP's vote came from working class, traditionally Labour areas, and that some of the people in the room (Prof Jocelyn Evans for example) were involved in serious academic research on that very topic, they denounced them as "bourgeosis fantasists projecting their middle-class anxieties onto the working class" before going on to make some spurious claim about how inter-racial relationships were more common amongst the working class than any other section of the population, therefore they could not be fascist.

Of course less than a few hundreds yards from the building this debate was taking place were a number of working class estates, with practically every house there flying an England flag out of the window, where I'd been leafletting and campaigning on a number of occasions and where I can assure any members of the SEP there was vocal support for the BNP and for a lot of racist policies and ideas. To be so ignorant of something that's literally on your own doorstep is something that's only possible if you live your life in a tiny echo-chamber where everyone you know or speak to re-inforces a crude trotskyite view of the world.

Stay well away from them.
 
SN you've just decended in to personal insults now. I'm sorry if I've offended your sensibilities about your group, as said, it's political, not personal. The self-awareness bit could be taken as personal I guess, but I'd get a bit more thick skinned if that offends you that much. As said the joining links were light hearted.

Anyway cheer up and leave it there, people want to go back to trot spotting.
 
Joe Hargrave said:
A Tale of Two Men
By Joe Hargrave

Here is a story you might find interesting:

I know of two men. One of them is the leader of a small Trotskyist political party in the United States. He is known as David North. The other is the CEO of Grand River Printing & Imaging, a company that earns 25 million dollars a year according to its website. They call him David W. Green.

For nearly 30 years, Mr. North ran his political party and Mr. Green ran his business. Mr. North gave speeches about the exploitation of the working class. Mr. Green exploited his workers, deriving surplus value from their unpaid labor. Mr. North thundered against the corporations that dominate American political life. Mr. Green sought those corporations out as clients, and probably did lunch with some of their executives. Mr. North would talk about the disgusting climate of corporate greed that pervaded the American cultural atmosphere. Mr. Green helped actualize that corporate greed by printing advertisements to help them push their products on consumers.

Of course Mr. Green was no black-hearted tycoon. No, surely Mr. North would have to exempt from his tirades against the corporations that dominate American politics and exploit the entire world certain capitalist leaders who stood out as genuine pillars of their community. Why, Mr. Green had gone to great lengths to make his workers as comfortable as possible. He invested in their training and education, he included them as part of his "larger vision". But surely Mr. North, who understood Marxism very well, would point out the absence of democratic control of the workplace, or the usual separation of the worker from the instrument of production that is the requisite of capitalist production. After all, his party published in statement after statement that the aim of socialism was to create a democratic economy. Yet none of the reports on Grand River suggested anything about "democracy" or "worker ownership" - Mr. Green may have been a nice man who saw the value in keeping his work horses happy, but he was also a businessman. So surely, should Mr. Green and Mr. North ever meet one another, they would disagree on a great many things.

Unless, of course, they were the same man.

Could it be a case of multipule personality disorder? Not exactly. You see, David Green, alias David North, is a fraud. He is the biggest fraud to hit the socialist movement since James Robertson of the Sparticist Leauge or "Chairman" Bob Avakian of the Revolutionary Communist Party. He owns a multi-million dollar corporation, and the upper echelons of his political cult and members of their family occupy key executive positions.

The rank and file members of the party are completely unaware of the existence of North/Green's corporate empire, which includes Grand River Printing, Merhing Books, and who knows what else. They assume that the party sustains itself through the donations that it begs for on its website and at its conferences, as well as the regular contributions that members are expected to "pledge" every month. I was exempt from this particular requirement only after I reminded one of its leaders of the considerable amounts of money I had invested in my own local branch. How nice of them. I can only imagine the giddy internal glee that North/Green must have felt every time some naive sucker wrote the SEP a check for a few thousand dollars. To North/Green, and the other party leaders, such donations were in fact chump change.

I can also only begin to imagine the difficult decisions that had to be made on a daily basis, such as, "how little can we put into this whole socialist thing to keep it viable while we live in the lap of luxury?", and, "should I use a 50 dollar bill or a 100 dollar bill to do this next line of cocaine?" All kidding aside, anyone who is serious about building a revolutionary movement, and who also happened to own a multi-million dollar company, would invest the maximum amount of profits into the former.

What I mean to say is, I could accept the fact that North/Green exploits the labor-power of his workers if the surplus value created by their unpaid labor was being used to build a movement that would one day end all exploitation. The ends, as I generally believe, justify the means if the ends themselves are justified. But this is obviously not taking place. The SEP has full branches in three cities - LA, NY, and Detroit. With the profit margins we can assume a 25 million a year company is capable of, there should be a fully-staffed branch in every major city in the United States. There should be an SEP radio station, a public access program on television, etc., etc., etc. Those profits, in sum, should be used to promote the movement, to expose not tens of thousands but millions of people to socialism.

What could possibly account for a failure to do these things? There is only one inescapable conclusion - that North/Green and his cronies enjoy the good life more than they do the revolutionary life. And they enjoy that life at the expense of the wage-laborers they employ. To dance around these uncomfortable realities they invent all sorts of paternalistic schemes where they provide top quality education and training for their workers - while, of course, "keeping wages competitive". To read the website of Grand River Publishing & Imaging is to be sickened. Every line is infused with phony corporate enthusiasm and politeness, in order to impress the equally phony corporate clients looking to get their ads published and printed. Contrast that to what you normally read on the WSWS. How can these people sleep at night? They might respond like the fictional Renier Wolfcastle: "On top of piles of money with lots of beautiful ladies".

It seems that every other week brings some new revelation about this political cult that I could have only wished I had known earlier. I tell you these things so that you can avoid my mistakes.
 
SN you've just decended in to personal insults now. I'm sorry if I've offended your sensibilities about your group, as said, it's political, not personal. The self-awareness bit could be taken as personal I guess, but I'd get a bit more thick skinned if that offends you that much. As said the joining links were light hearted.

Anyway cheer up and leave it there, people want to go back to trot spotting.

Nothing to do with the group - you're deliberately misrepresenting me now - I'm happy to criticise the group myself, as I have done on here in the past and no doubt will again. I have no emotional attachment to it and your attempts to paint me as a hack are, again, dishonest and pathetic. It's about the personal stuff that you're refusing to admit to. "It's just political" is a kop out and you know it - anyone who wants to look can check the thread and see that you're lying.

Now pack it in and grow up.
 
I also remember being at an anti-fascist meeting in Nottingham, at a community centre near The Meadows estate, not long after the whole Bolton EDL demo fiasco that mortally wounded the UAF, discussing what to do next. It was the usual lefty stuff, I think called by the local trades council, with vegan food and various working groups before a meeting at the end to sum it all up. There was a few lefty groups there, Labour left people, SWP and SP, a few trades union types and a few unaffiliated. And Comrade Lenin from the IBT was there, with a female member who was wearing those weird fox-hunting horsey pants that rich people (and occasionally Chris Eubank) wear. I think she was trying to look like Rosa Luxembourg as a counter-point to his Lenin look.

A draft statement was decided upon and was about to be voted on, I can't remember the details, but just before this formality took place Mr Lenin raised a point of order, and demanded a debate on whether or not the EDL could be accurately described as fascist or not. This "Point of order" was a 15 minute rant about the technicalities of whether the EDL are traditionally fascist organisation, or crypto-fascist etc. After a very long-winded speech, with numerous quotes from Trotsky, he set out his idea that the EDL were "a deformed cryto-fascist off-shoot of the BNP" and proposed that any future propaganda should refer to them as such and not as simply fascists.

There were lots of groans about this, I got the feeling it wasn't the first time Comrade Lenin had been here and done this very same thing. I spoke next, and in my normal understated way said that the EDL at the time hadn't even made any coherent political demands, or shown any degree of interest in politics beyond beating up asian people, and so going to any sort of lengths to categorize them political was a waste of time. And I also mentioned that even if they were "cryto-fascists" or whatever, what practical difference does that make towards our opposition to them? I got a rapterous round of applaus for that and a lot of dirty looks off Comrade Lenin afterwards. Infact he wouldn't even shake my hand after the meeting was over when I approached him, so somewhere in IBT HQ I have a feeling my name is on a list of "counter-revolutionary social democrats" or something.
 
Joe Hargrave said:
A Tale of Two Men
By Joe Hargrave

Here is a story you might find interesting:

I know of two men. One of them is the leader of a small Trotskyist political party in the United States. He is known as David North. The other is the CEO of Grand River Printing & Imaging, a company that earns 25 million dollars a year according to its website. They call him David W. Green.

For nearly 30 years, Mr. North ran his political party and Mr. Green ran his business. Mr. North gave speeches about the exploitation of the working class. Mr. Green exploited his workers, deriving surplus value from their unpaid labor. Mr. North thundered against the corporations that dominate American political life. Mr. Green sought those corporations out as clients, and probably did lunch with some of their executives. Mr. North would talk about the disgusting climate of corporate greed that pervaded the American cultural atmosphere. Mr. Green helped actualize that corporate greed by printing advertisements to help them push their products on consumers.

Of course Mr. Green was no black-hearted tycoon. No, surely Mr. North would have to exempt from his tirades against the corporations that dominate American politics and exploit the entire world certain capitalist leaders who stood out as genuine pillars of their community. Why, Mr. Green had gone to great lengths to make his workers as comfortable as possible. He invested in their training and education, he included them as part of his "larger vision". But surely Mr. North, who understood Marxism very well, would point out the absence of democratic control of the workplace, or the usual separation of the worker from the instrument of production that is the requisite of capitalist production. After all, his party published in statement after statement that the aim of socialism was to create a democratic economy. Yet none of the reports on Grand River suggested anything about "democracy" or "worker ownership" - Mr. Green may have been a nice man who saw the value in keeping his work horses happy, but he was also a businessman. So surely, should Mr. Green and Mr. North ever meet one another, they would disagree on a great many things.

Unless, of course, they were the same man.

Could it be a case of multipule personality disorder? Not exactly. You see, David Green, alias David North, is a fraud. He is the biggest fraud to hit the socialist movement since James Robertson of the Sparticist Leauge or "Chairman" Bob Avakian of the Revolutionary Communist Party. He owns a multi-million dollar corporation, and the upper echelons of his political cult and members of their family occupy key executive positions.

The rank and file members of the party are completely unaware of the existence of North/Green's corporate empire, which includes Grand River Printing, Merhing Books, and who knows what else. They assume that the party sustains itself through the donations that it begs for on its website and at its conferences, as well as the regular contributions that members are expected to "pledge" every month. I was exempt from this particular requirement only after I reminded one of its leaders of the considerable amounts of money I had invested in my own local branch. How nice of them. I can only imagine the giddy internal glee that North/Green must have felt every time some naive sucker wrote the SEP a check for a few thousand dollars. To North/Green, and the other party leaders, such donations were in fact chump change.

I can also only begin to imagine the difficult decisions that had to be made on a daily basis, such as, "how little can we put into this whole socialist thing to keep it viable while we live in the lap of luxury?", and, "should I use a 50 dollar bill or a 100 dollar bill to do this next line of cocaine?" All kidding aside, anyone who is serious about building a revolutionary movement, and who also happened to own a multi-million dollar company, would invest the maximum amount of profits into the former.

What I mean to say is, I could accept the fact that North/Green exploits the labor-power of his workers if the surplus value created by their unpaid labor was being used to build a movement that would one day end all exploitation. The ends, as I generally believe, justify the means if the ends themselves are justified. But this is obviously not taking place. The SEP has full branches in three cities - LA, NY, and Detroit. With the profit margins we can assume a 25 million a year company is capable of, there should be a fully-staffed branch in every major city in the United States. There should be an SEP radio station, a public access program on television, etc., etc., etc. Those profits, in sum, should be used to promote the movement, to expose not tens of thousands but millions of people to socialism.

What could possibly account for a failure to do these things? There is only one inescapable conclusion - that North/Green and his cronies enjoy the good life more than they do the revolutionary life. And they enjoy that life at the expense of the wage-laborers they employ. To dance around these uncomfortable realities they invent all sorts of paternalistic schemes where they provide top quality education and training for their workers - while, of course, "keeping wages competitive". To read the website of Grand River Publishing & Imaging is to be sickened. Every line is infused with phony corporate enthusiasm and politeness, in order to impress the equally phony corporate clients looking to get their ads published and printed. Contrast that to what you normally read on the WSWS. How can these people sleep at night? They might respond like the fictional Renier Wolfcastle: "On top of piles of money with lots of beautiful ladies".

It seems that every other week brings some new revelation about this political cult that I could have only wished I had known earlier. I tell you these things so that you can avoid my mistakes.

Where did you find that? There's a couple of people I'd like to speak to about it ;) and I want to know it's legit before I do.
 
One of the anti war demos I went on I got given a leaflet by some strange guy, in tiny print, going on and on about North Korea and its right to have (and use!) nuclear weapons. It could have been the sparts but I don't remember now.
 
One of the anti war demos I went on I got given a leaflet by some strange guy, in tiny print, going on and on about North Korea and its right to have (and use!) nuclear weapons. It could have been the sparts but I don't remember now.

That's definitely IBT. Thats the reason they split from the sparts, because they disagreed on A deformed workers state right to nuclear weapons. You shoudl read their paper 1917 it just goes on and on about North Korea and why the Sparts are imperialist running dogs every edition they print.
 
That's definitely IBT. Thats the reason they split from the sparts, because they disagreed on A deformed workers state right to nuclear weapons. You shoudl read their paper 1917 it just goes on and on about North Korea and why the Sparts are imperialist running dogs every edition they print.

Seriously? I remember some of the IBT "interventions" and they were relatively pleasant and polite. There is also someone from the IBT who I've met on a few demos and she seems OK, pretty normal (well i know that's a relative term but anyway). They always seem quite reasonable even if their ideas are a bit mental. I don't know anything about them tbh.
 
Who are the ones who love Milosevic? There used to be one of them (in Chesterfield of all places) who came up to the SWP stall every week to shout at us about it.
 
Back
Top Bottom