Scotland

[glasgowche81]

Hi folks

this is my first post on here. Thought id better introduce who i am. Im from Glasgow, Scotland, and I'm a member of an organisation called the Scottish Socialist Party. We're a left wing anti capitalist, socialist party in Scotland, with about 3000 members.

were doing right now what probably every left wing party is doing, opposing this slaughter in Iraq. We also organise in inner city communities in the likes of glasgow and edinburgh. Whenever a community facility is threatened with closure, we mobilise the local community to occupy. Its through things liek this that working class people get a taste of their own power when they band together. We also campaign on anti poverty issues which can make a tabgible difference to working class people's day to day life. Some on the left call this reformist, but I think its an excellent way of gaining the respect of the working class. Sure, these things wont change the world, but it can open people's eyes to socialism and what could be possible.

Thankfully here we dont have too much of a problem with the far right, like they have in NW england. they occasionally leaflet an area here and there but usually we will try to put out a counter leaflet to educate the local community about their lies and deceit.


perhaps others might like to post here where they come from and what (if any) organisations theyre involved with.

[Just Joe]

more importantly.....'Tic or Huns?

[glasgowche81]

celtic...

by the way, why do you have a picture of saddam hussein on your ID thing??

[Just Joe]

celtic...

i see we will get on fine.

by the way, why do you have a picture of saddam hussein on your ID thing??

you'll know when you delve into the opposing ideologies forum. i absolutly detest the racist dictator Saddam Hussein, but imperialism is worse than anything. i support the Iraqi people in there struggle against US and british imperialism.

if the press want to make Bush and Blair as figureheads, and demand the people come together to support them out of Nationalist idiocy, i'm going to prove how stupid it is by supporting Saddam Hussein.

[canikickit]

#Moderation Mode

Supporting Celtic or Rangers supports sectarianism (that's not why I moved it by the way). :wink:

<url=http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=19&topic=362>Moved here</url>


(Edited by canikickit at 11:09 pm on Mar. 26, 2003)


(Edited by canikickit at 11:54 pm on Mar. 26, 2003)

[RedCeltic]

http://www.esatclear.ie/~johnplynch/rovers/celtic.gif

[Just Joe]

Quote: from canikickit on 11:04 pm on Mar. 26, 2003
#Moderation Mode

Supporting Celtic or Rangers supports sectarianism (that's not why I moved it by the way). :wink:

Rangers are the sectarian team. i've always said, listen to the Celtic songs; very few have any religious words. and the ones that do, i don't sing. then listen to 40,000 at Ibrox singin the bridgeton billy boys and you'll see who are the bigots.

RedCeltic, you going to Seville?

[canikickit]

Yeah - from what I've seen, Joe, the Rangers supporters are far worse, and of course I support the Catholics in the north. But support for Celtic seems to be based on the fact that "they are Catholic" and the others are Protestants. It's a bunch of bullshit basically. The majority of people I know who support Celtic do so on the basis that Rangers are "proddy bastards" - but they're not, they're a football team - I dont think Henrik Larsson is particularily miffed by the situation in the North.

Of course, that's not to say that is your basis for supporting them, actually I quite like them as a team. :wink:

I think a lot of it is just dividing people up further - choosing sides.

[Just Joe]

well i can tell you, if i asked a person if there basis for supporting Celtic and they replied it was because Rangers were proddy bastards or orange fuckers, thats where the conversation would end.

the only sectarian song i know that we sing is 'fuck king billy and john knox', which i don't even bother with.

and not trying to make our lads out to be saints, but i went to the Liverpool away game with an Asian lad, and when we went into the pub, quite a few 'Tic fans came over and said it was good more Asian lads were comin down to games now. not generalising, but i doubt the guy would have made it out the pub alive if he went to a Rangers game.

our main lads have links to the ANL, Rangers main lads have links with C18. what more can you say?

i get what you mean by chosing sides though. this sectarian shit will end one day.

[RedCeltic]

Well for me (as a Yank lol) Celtic is the teem my granddad supported when he lived in Glasgow town. And my dad was a big fan of them... so I was basicly raised as a supporter.

Which is kinda cool being a yank and all, while most people don't know who Celtic is... so it's always been something to make me quite an indivdual, and not be just another idiot supporter of american football which I find dull.

[Reuben]

I think, from a socialist perspective, the best team to support are roma. They have traditionally been the socialist team while zio have been linked with the fascists. Roma, according to an Italian friend of mine, ahave an army of communist football hooligans who get into fights with fascists who support Lazio.

[bolshevik1917]

Im from Fife, my team East Fife are top of div3 with 6 games to go :biggrin:

I must admit though I hate Rangers and Celtic with a burning passion

[Just Joe]

Quote: from Reuben on 5:49 am on Mar. 27, 2003
I think, from a socialist perspective, the best team to support are roma. They have traditionally been the socialist team while zio have been linked with the fascists. Roma, according to an Italian friend of mine, ahave an army of communist football hooligans who get into fights with fascists who support Lazio.


the main left wing teams are, Ajax, Athletic Bilbao, Atalanta, Empoli, St Pauli, Celtic. some teams like Roma and AC Milan have a lot of working class fans and are left wing, but there not really a known politicised team like the ones i mentioned.

[bolshevik1917]

Are Inverness Caley left wing? :biggrin:

[RedCeltic]

"If you know your history"....

In 1875, The Hibs where formed to give poor Irish in Edinburgh something to be proud of... than later in 1888, Glasgow Celtic was formed, also to give poor Irish something to cheer for, but named "Celtic" in an attempt to unite both Irish and Scot celtic pride.

When my granddad was growing up, Celtic was the teem of the downcast Irish living in the overcroweded slums.

Hail Hail, The Celts are here,
What the hell do we care,
What the hell do we care,
Hail Hail, The Celts are here,
What the hell do we care now ...

For its a Grand Old Team to play for,
For its a Grand Old team to see,
And if you know the history, (http://www.celticfc.co.uk/ifyouknow/history.htm#early)
Its enough to make your heart go,
Nine-in-a-row.

We don't care what the animals say,
What the hell do we care,
For its all we know,
Is that there going to be a show,
And the Glasgow Celtic will be there.

[glasgowche81]

I was hoping for a serious political discussion about the chances for the development of socialism in scotland, and the topic gets shifted here?! the lounge???? cmon man!!!

[bolshevik1917]

I think the SSP will make massive gains in the next elections, but Tommy Sheridan is too much of a reformist to take things any further, the party also lacks a trade unions base. New Labour will be wiped out, but the real fight will be inside the Labour party as a new left emerges to give oppurtunities to revolutionary ideas

all in my opinion anyway

[Just Joe]

i think the SSP as it stands, has a good chance of Socialism in Scotland. many will write this off, but i think they best stand a chance if they make a loose alliance with the SNP. i think the cause of independance should come first in Scotland. the English will never allow you to create Socialism while youre in the UK.

[canikickit]

So, I guess I'll move it back. Blame Joe, he brought up football. :cheese:

I don't know about the SSP FC, but I must say that Sunderland have my money on them....

....to be relegated.

[bolshevik1917]

The SNP are a capitalist petty bourgeoise party and have nothing to do with socialism.

I also think you are wrong in saying that 'the english' wouldnt allow us to build socialism in the UK. The socialist revolution is not a national question but a class question, it is the working class who will build socialism and England, like Scotland is made up of 95% working class.

The 'independance' thing is nothing more than an attempt to win votes, nationalism is incompatable with socialism. To split up the UK under capitalism would split the trade unions - and this is nothing but a huge step backwards

[Just Joe]

but what if Scotland could break away and form there own Socialist Republic? they need to use whatever means available to do this. even if it means going in the SNP.

i don't support the SNP, but i think Socialism could be advanced if SSP went in with them just on the national question. i don't think England is gonna revolt any time soon to be fair. i think Scotland has always been more left wing and working class. and i think they have a better chance of Socialism breaking away from the UK. theres nothing to stop a Socialist Britain at a later date.

[bolshevik1917]

As a Marxist and an internationalist I would reject this class collaboration and petty bourgeoise nationalism at all costs. The SNP want an independant capitalist Scotland, this would fail miserably as we dont have anything to export.

The fact is independance wont 'free' Scots, the only way to free workers is socialism. Forget nationalism, its something we can do without.

[glasgowche81]

theres a few things id like to reply to here, so excuse me if i mix things up a little.

I disagree with Bolshevik1917's assertion that 'tommy sheridan is too much of a reformist to take things forward'. Do you have anything to back up that claim? He's a marxist, and a former member of the militant tendency of the Labour party, which was a marxist revolutionary current. The SSP may not be a 'revolutionary party' as yet, but nobody in the SSP claims it to be. However, it can claim to have a revolutionary leadership, and future events will determine whether the SSP does indeed become a revolutionary party, capable of leading the working class to power. Again, is there anything Tommy has said that has made you draw those conclusions?

I also disagree that the way ahead for socialists is to fight within the Labour party (hence why im in the SSP!). I think the Labour party is nothing more than a nakedly capitalist party. Nor is 'Blairism' a phase through which the Labour party will eventually pass. That party's transition from a working class and left wing party to a capitalist and centre (and at times blatantly racist) party has been mirrored by similar parties throughout the world. For example the German social democrats. Gerhard Schroder is basically a German version of Blair. The French Socialist party are no longer representative of working class aspirations in that country. The Australian Labor party and its New Zealand counterpart are the vanguards of privatisation after previously claiming to stand for workers.

In short, the Labour party is merely the British example of an international gallop from left to right by former social democratic parties. The current economic climate of easy transfer of capital has meant that these parties are left with two choices, go with the flow of the capitalist establishment or take the option of confronting capitalism. They are not up for the latter. theyre too respectable for that. Too be quite honest, I believe theres as much to be gained from operating within the Labour Party as there is from working within the Democrats in the US.

I would accept your criticism however that our trade union base is too narrow, but remember we are only a young party, and were working to rectify it. were holding a trade union rally in glasgow on april 2nd, with Mark Sewotka and Bob Crow both speaking at it, which I think is a reflection of growing respect for us from within the TU movement.

Finally, the SNP. Ive little time for them as I consider them a bunch of opportunists, who are attempting to steal our slogans and claim credit for our policies. The best way I can think to discribe them is as an 'all-class alliance'. Yes they have working class members, and they attempt to put on a left wing face, especially in places like Glasgow, however the respectable bouregois face of the party will always win in any internal confrontation. This section has the links to big business and the cash that it brings in return for electoral favours. they will always have this internal advantage over the left wing of the party who want it to be more radical and attract a more working class vote.

for example throughout much of the 1990s the SNP were opposed the railway renationalisation in an indepndent scotland. why? because one of their conference sponsers was the railway maintainance company, railtrack. Now that theyve went bust, the SNP now believe that railway renationalisation is a good idea again.

I am in favour of independence however. Whether it would split the trade unions I dont know, but remember some unions operate on a cross border basis between the UK/Ireland and also throughout Scandanavia, so your prediction wouldnt necesarily come true. What is clear however is that Scotland leaving the UK would be an attack on capitalism. The imperialist powers see Scotland as important strategically. The UK's entire nuclear submarine fleet is based in Scotland, for example. Scotland's natural resources are of great importance to the UK. To break up the UK through Scottish independence would be a democratic advance - albeit a limited bourgeois one - however I think all democratic advances must be welcomed by socialists. This is the likely outcome of devolution here in Scotland. The people will become disillutioned with the limited nature of the parliament's powers, and therefore the option of full independence from the UK will be seen as a more viable - even necessary - option for Scotland, whether the SSP existed or not. To stand aloof from this debate on Scotland's future would be a mistake in my opinion.

[Just Joe]

i don't think something stops being so because it is an un-Marxist position, Bolshevik1917. we shouldn't not protest against the war on Iraq just because there might be some non-Communists there too. you have to be flexible.

there is a saying amongst Socialist Republicans in Ireland. no socialism without 32 counties, no 32 counties without socialism. i think this applies to Scotland.

even if the UK was to go Socialist, would that stop English imperialism in Scotland?

[bolshevik1917]

I almost joined the SSP last year but became quickly disillusioned at the way the party was operating. I had just started reading revolutionary material (Marx, Lenin, and Trotsky) and could see no clear link between their message and the party. I searched the internet for something that would offer explanations and solutions to working class problems, I was basically sick to the back teeth of reformism, I did not want to campaign for free school meals…I wanted to help build a revolutionary Marxist organisation.

I joined Socialist Appeal (www.marxist.com) last year, which is a continuation of the Militant, its founder Ted Grant, the editor of the paper Alan Woods and the general secretary Rob Sewell are all active comrades within the tendency. This was precisely the people I needed to be in touch with, true revolutionaries who were not scared to show the links between capitalism and the every day problems of the working class. I base my conclusion on Tommy Sheridan by the fact that he stood up in front of 100,000 people on Feb 15th and did not even hint that the roots of this war were capitalism itself! And he has continually avoided saying so ever since. In my opinion if he is a Marxist, then he hides it to win votes.

Socialist Appeal believes that the Labour Party and the trade unions will play a huge role in the transformation to socialism and Britain. I think we should look at the role of the Labour Party dialectically. That is, to see things not only as they are, but as they were and as they will be, and not to see things just as they appear but how they are under the surface and with all the contradictions they contain (for contradiction is the source of all movement).

The Labour Party can be, and has been described in many different ways. Lenin once talked of a bourgeois-workers party (that is a contradictory definition, but one which reflects the contory nature of this party. It basically means that it has a bourgeois leadership and a mass working class base or following.

I think that since Lenin's times the LP has changed a lot. Over the years it has moved to the right and it has moved to the left, it has been full of workers, and then emptied out again (and full of middle class careerists). What has happened over the last few years with the advent of New Labour is nothing new (although it must be said that this time the shift to the right in the leadership has gone further probably than at any time in the past).

Why is this? If we look at the history of the LP we can see that it is generally the case that in periods of lull in the class struggle the party tends to shift to the right, since there is no active participation of workers in its ranks. Periods of heightened class struggle tend to get reflected also inside the LP (with more or less delay) in a radicalisation, which eventually reaches the tops as well and produces a general movement to the left in the party. For instance during the late 70s and early 80s there was a shift to the left in the party as a result of big clashes and battles of the labour movement. It was at that time that the left (a reformist left, but left nevertheless) nearly won the general secretary election (was it in 1981?), and that a revolutionary Marxist tendency (Militant) won massive influence in the party (including 3 MPs, the Liverpool City Council, and majorities in many local parties and wards).

In the mid-80s, after the defeat of the miners' strike a general mood of disillusionment and despair set in in the labour movement, there was a lowering down of active political participation of workers in their organisations (Labour and trade union) and this set the ground for the rise of the Blairite right within the party in the 1990s.

Now, for the last say two or three years, or maybe a little bit more, we have seen the beginning of a recovery in the class struggle and a general move to the left in society. Inevitably this was bound to create conflicts within the party, precisely because of its contradictory nature. High points of this can be seen in the battle over Ken Livingstone mayoral candidacy, the resolutions passed at last year's party conference against PFI and the narrowly defeated one against the war, etc.

In fact the situation has changed a lot within the party. If you went to a party meeting say 5 years ago, everyone, more or less, would support Tony Blair. Today you will be hard pushed to find a single member who openly declares to be a Blairite, and you will be able to pass any number of resolutions you want calling for the nationalisation of the railways, support for the firefighters strike, opposition to the war, etc. However the point is that there has not been YET an influx of new people into the party, so this (though it might be necessary to do) will have little effect. But these changes can also be seen at other leves, for instance in the fact that 122 Labour MPs rebelled against the war (this would have been unthinkable just 2 years ago), and now maybe up to 200 could vote against the war this week. Some have even demanded a special recall party conference and the resignation of Tony Blair.

Now, we do know that most of these left Labour MPs are reformists (some of them even left reformists) and not genuine revolutionary socialists. The point however is to see in what direction is the process going (to the left) and what does it reflect (a movement further to the left amongst the ranks and in public opinion which is pressuring them).

There are other symptoms. For instance there was an attempt to force the de-selection of Oona King, LP MP for Bethnal Green in East London because she supported the war. The move had the support of 5 of the 10 local wards and was only defeated at the last minute due to a bureaucratic manouvre. Though the move was defeated is nevertheless significant since Bethnal Green was always a solidly right wing LP. Also a majority of the local councilors has come out against the war and they even spoke at an anti-war rally on Saturday.

In the unions the same process has gone further (it is usually the case that the process of political radicalisation of the workers starts in the unions and is then transferred onto the LP). There have been in the last two years elections in many unions in which left wing general secretaries have been elected (some of them even calling themselves socialists): RMT, ASLEF, NUJ, AEEU-AMICUS, NATFHE, CWU, FBU, PCS. And in other unions left wing candidates are likely to win this year (GMB and TGWU). It was actually union delegations which moved the resolutions against privatisation and the war at the LP conference last year (remember the unions have 50% of the votes at LP conference).

Again what this reflects is a process of a shift to the left in the working class which has pushed a number of trade union leaders to the left, and those who have not moved in that direction have been replaced. Many of them are not revolutionary Marxists, but it is nevertheless VERY significant.

All these left trade union leaders (I think with only one exception) have called for trade unionists to reclaim the LP and to fight against Tony Blair and his domination of the party (including some who are not particularly left like Edmonds of the GMB).

These are all little symptoms but they all point in the same direction and they confirm historical experience.

You mentioned Bob Crowe, he is all for the workers reclaiming the LP, as are numerous other trade unionists. The important thing though is to join an international revolutionary organisation like at www.newyouth.com and spread the revolutionary (I cannot emphasise the word enough) ideas of Marxism in colleges, workplaces, trade unions, schools.

The SSP will make huge gains in the up and coming Scottish elections and will continue to attract youth in this period of Labours demise. However, this will not last forever (to say it would is like the capitalists saying the next boom will last forever)

My advice to you comrade is to spread revolutionary ideas inside the SSP, most importantly towards the youth. But join with your comrades around the globe, and keep your eye on the Labour Party


(Edited by bolshevik1917 at 11:58 am on Mar. 28, 2003)

[trotskylives]

Hello all
My first posting on this site. I'm from Ireland and its interesting to c the first thing that comes up is which football team you support. Probably not going to make any friends here but already some of the statements here smacks of sectarianism. Whatever happened to approaching things from a class point of view

[Just Joe]

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt as some of your other posts are ok, but this one is bull shite.

show me one show of sectarianism in this entire thread. I take my football seriously but it was a light hearted question as to which side of Glasgow his football loyalties lie.

Go down Ibrox while there singing songs gloryfing a gang of KKK supporters and fascist strike breakers and talk to them about class positions.

(Edited by Just Joe at 8:52 pm on April 8, 2003)

[celticsocialist]

Just Joe is right, there is only one sectarian team in Glasgow. Celtic have NEVER had any problem with people of any religion. In fact when the team was founded one of the first things agreed on was that people of any religion would be welcome(1887, before the team actually competed) Compare that to Rangers and the fact from 1873 to the 1980s they refused to sign a catholic player. 3 of the greatest names ever associated to Celtic Jock Stein, Kenny Dagleish and Danny Mcgrain all protestant. In fact Danny Mcgrain was watched by Rangers but the name Daniel Francis Mcgrain put them off, too Papish!!
When people here (Glasgow) talk about bigotry it really pisses me off that we get tarred with the same brush.
They think it should be tackled by catholics forgetting about where they came from (any Irish affiliation Celtic have is frowned on by the media here)
To me it is like tackling racism by telling black people to stop being black and it will go away.
I know this is not supposed to be about football but I had to say it.

As for the SNP, they dont even offer real independance. We would still be queen elizabeth I and II subjects and any Australian will tell you what that can lead to ie Gough Whitlam being kicked out.
SSP are the only true choice for any Republican or Socialist (or Republican socialist)



iri

[Sandanista]

Hello my name is Martin Coyle, I come from Port Glasgow in Scotland and like some other members of this forum, I am a member of the SSP.

That said I am slightly more militant than what the party line is.

P.S supporting any football team is support of capitalism.

[ScottishSocialist13]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2003, 03:15 PM
As a Marxist and an internationalist I would reject this class collaboration and petty bourgeoise nationalism at all costs. The SNP want an independant capitalist Scotland, this would fail miserably as we dont have anything to export.

The fact is independance wont &#39;free&#39; Scots, the only way to free workers is socialism. Forget nationalism, its something we can do without.
How can you say Scotland has nothing to export? Scotlands North Sea oil rigs produce £30M a day alone. Thats around £15 billion a year. Not to mention our whiskey/alcohol exportation?

Why should we not care about wanting to rule ourselves? Why should we be ruled by Westminster? We can and should rule ourselves. Independance is the only way socialism could ever become reality.


Sorry to drag this up, im pretty new so was just browsing through old topics to do with Scotland and the UK.

[bolshevik butcher]

Hi glasgowche.

I am also an internationalist, and the increasingly left nationalist stance of the ssp is really conerning. Militant were indeed a marxist reovlutionary organizaion, but most of the old militant leadership that went onto form ssp have lost these policies in favour of libreal reformisim and petty attacks on teh &#39;british state&#39;, basically an excuse to attack the english.

[ScottishSocialist13]

Originally posted by Clenched [email protected] 28 2005, 09:41 PM
Hi glasgowche.

I am also an internationalist, and the increasingly left nationalist stance of the ssp is really conerning. Militant were indeed a marxist reovlutionary organizaion, but most of the old militant leadership that went onto form ssp have lost these policies in favour of libreal reformisim and petty attacks on teh &#39;british state&#39;, basically an excuse to attack the english.
I disagree. I think that the only reason the SSP attack the British State is that they see the only way that Scotland can become a Socialist nation is first by gaining independance.

[Rockfan]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2005, 09:54 AM
[QUOTE=Clenched Fist,Nov 28 2005, 09:41 PM] Hi I disagree. I think that the only reason the SSP attack the British State is that they see the only way that Scotland can become a Socialist nation is first by gaining independance.
Come on sing it with me:
Oh Flower of Scotland
When will we see
Your light again...........

I play in a pipe band so have a bit of a connection. Did you know New Zealand has more pipe bands per head of population than Scotland, haha. I&#39;ed love to go to Scotland aye, Have any of you been at a world pipe band champs?

[ScottishSocialist13]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2005, 01:19 AM

[QUOTE=Clenched Fist,Nov 28 2005, 09:41 PM] Hi I disagree. I think that the only reason the SSP attack the British State is that they see the only way that Scotland can become a Socialist nation is first by gaining independance.
Come on sing it with me:
Oh Flower of Scotland
When will we see
Your light again...........

I play in a pipe band so have a bit of a connection. Did you know New Zealand has more pipe bands per head of population than Scotland, haha. I&#39;ed love to go to Scotland aye, Have any of you been at a world pipe band champs?
:D Hullo. i dont play the pipes but they make the hair on the back of my neck stand up whenever i hear them. I hope to move to australia or new zealand in the future, but i&#39;ll need to learn a good trade first if im to have a good chance of getting in.

:Pyou were close but its

...When will we see
Your likes again..
That fought and died for
Yer wee bit hill and glen...

Good attempt ;)

[bolshevik butcher]

Originally posted by ScottishSocialist13+Nov 28 2005, 09:54 PM--> (ScottishSocialist13 &#064; Nov 28 2005, 09:54 PM)
Clenched [email protected] 28 2005, 09:41 PM
Hi glasgowche.

I am also an internationalist, and the increasingly left nationalist stance of the ssp is really conerning. Militant were indeed a marxist reovlutionary organizaion, but most of the old militant leadership that went onto form ssp have lost these policies in favour of libreal reformisim and petty attacks on teh &#39;british state&#39;, basically an excuse to attack the english.
I disagree. I think that the only reason the SSP attack the British State is that they see the only way that Scotland can become a Socialist nation is first by gaining independance. [/b]
:lol: Socialism in one country.

I&#39;m an internationalist, I want to smash borders, not create more.

[Rockfan]

[QUOTE=Clenched Fist,Nov 28 2005, 09:41 PM] Hi I disagree. I think that the only reason the SSP attack the British State is that they see the only way that Scotland can become a Socialist nation is first by gaining independance.
Come on sing it with me:
Oh Flower of Scotland
When will we see
Your light again...........

I play in a pipe band so have a bit of a connection. Did you know New Zealand has more pipe bands per head of population than Scotland, haha. I&#39;ed love to go to Scotland aye, Have any of you been at a world pipe band champs?
:D Hullo. i dont play the pipes but they make the hair on the back of my neck stand up whenever i hear them. I hope to move to australia or new zealand in the future, but i&#39;ll need to learn a good trade first if im to have a good chance of getting in.

:Pyou were close but its

...When will we see
Your likes again..
That fought and died for
Yer wee bit hill and glen...

Good attempt ;)
Haha thats it. When ever I sing that I&#39;m pissed anyway :D . If you come to Rotorua PM or something. Oh yeah and I play Side Drum, way better than pipes :P

[Andy Bowden]

YAAAAAAAAAYYYY :D


Lots more SSP&#39;ers on Revleft&#33; Quality :D


Are any of you guys in the SSP&#39;s yoof wing? Click on the SSY bit for more details. SSY is well the best part of being in the SSP

:)

[Wanted Man]

Amazing how people actually manage to dig up threads from TWO AND A HALF years ago.

[ScottishSocialist13]

Originally posted by Clenched Fist+Nov 30 2005, 04:46 PM--> (Clenched Fist @ Nov 30 2005, 04:46 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2005, 09:54 PM

Clenched [email protected] 28 2005, 09:41 PM
Hi glasgowche.

I am also an internationalist, and the increasingly left nationalist stance of the ssp is really conerning. Militant were indeed a marxist reovlutionary organizaion, but most of the old militant leadership that went onto form ssp have lost these policies in favour of libreal reformisim and petty attacks on teh &#39;british state&#39;, basically an excuse to attack the english.
I disagree. I think that the only reason the SSP attack the British State is that they see the only way that Scotland can become a Socialist nation is first by gaining independance.
:lol: Socialism in one country.

I&#39;m an internationalist, I want to smash borders, not create more. [/b]
Cuba? :huh:

[ScottishSocialist13]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 04:12 PM
Amazing how people actually manage to dig up threads from TWO AND A HALF years ago.
Whats your point?

it doesnt make it any less important.

[bolshevik butcher]

Originally posted by ScottishSocialist13+Dec 1 2005, 04:17 PM--> (ScottishSocialist13 @ Dec 1 2005, 04:17 PM)
Originally posted by Clenched [email protected] 30 2005, 04:46 PM

Originally posted by S[email protected] 28 2005, 09:54 PM

Clenched [email protected] 28 2005, 09:41 PM
Hi glasgowche.

I am also an internationalist, and the increasingly left nationalist stance of the ssp is really conerning. Militant were indeed a marxist reovlutionary organizaion, but most of the old militant leadership that went onto form ssp have lost these policies in favour of libreal reformisim and petty attacks on teh &#39;british state&#39;, basically an excuse to attack the english.
I disagree. I think that the only reason the SSP attack the British State is that they see the only way that Scotland can become a Socialist nation is first by gaining independance.
:lol: Socialism in one country.

I&#39;m an internationalist, I want to smash borders, not create more.
Cuba? :huh: [/b]
Cuba has not reached socialism yet. It lacks fundemental parts of socialsim including workers control. Socialism is progressing in latin america jsut now though, with venezuela being seen a sa new beakon of socialism, and the socialsimt movement in many countries growing stronger.

On scotland i still dont see why fighting for independance brings us any closer to socialism. It doesnt seem to advance the working class, onlydivide them by nationality.

[ScottishSocialist13]

Originally posted by Clenched Fist+Dec 1 2005, 06:32 PM--> (Clenched Fist @ Dec 1 2005, 06:32 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 04:17 PM

Originally posted by Clenched [email protected] 30 2005, 04:46 PM

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2005, 09:54 PM

Clenched [email protected] 28 2005, 09:41 PM
Hi glasgowche.

I am also an internationalist, and the increasingly left nationalist stance of the ssp is really conerning. Militant were indeed a marxist reovlutionary organizaion, but most of the old militant leadership that went onto form ssp have lost these policies in favour of libreal reformisim and petty attacks on teh &#39;british state&#39;, basically an excuse to attack the english.
I disagree. I think that the only reason the SSP attack the British State is that they see the only way that Scotland can become a Socialist nation is first by gaining independance.
:lol: Socialism in one country.

I&#39;m an internationalist, I want to smash borders, not create more.
Cuba? :huh:
Cuba has not reached socialism yet. It lacks fundemental parts of socialsim including workers control. Socialism is progressing in latin america jsut now though, with venezuela being seen a sa new beakon of socialism, and the socialsimt movement in many countries growing stronger.

On scotland i still dont see why fighting for independance brings us any closer to socialism. It doesnt seem to advance the working class, onlydivide them by nationality. [/b]
No, thats true, Cuba hasn&#39;t managed it just yet, but they are working towards it, proving socialism can grow in one nation.

We should be rusling ourselves. Edinburgh not London, should be.

[bolshevik butcher]

I&#39;m for a socialist federation fo the world. It would be very decentralized of course. But i dont see what difference it makes if the ruling class rules from edinburgh or london. In that case everywhere hsould be independant. Hell galsgow shouldnt be ruled form edinburgh. And different parts of glasgow, they should be independant, rather than ruled from one part.

[ReD_ReBeL]

hey man i too live in Scotland(the scottish borders) but am originally from London, and sympathize with both countries since im from both and also half Maltese as my dad is from Malta, but yea i think Scotland should be independant, and also England should be socially ruled coz Blair and most other PM&#39;s give England a bad name