IMT rip off left communist articles

[Devrim]

We received this article from a reader of marxist.com about the ongoing struggle of the Tekel workers in Turkey. Tekel is a tobacco and alcohol producing company which has announced the closure of plants affecting 12,000 workers. This is a very militant struggle and desreves the attention and support of workers around the world. “Dear Editor of marxist.com,
“Here is the article that I have written about the situation of Tekel workers' resistance in Turkey. Today (January 15) the families of 12,000 workers have travelled to the capital, Ankara to join the resistance. The plan is this: 12,000 workers with their families will start a 3-day sit-in action; after that they will go on a 3-day long hunger strike. If they still can not get an answer from the government to their demands (the alcohol and tobacco factories they are working were sold to BAT and 12 factories will be closed down at the end of the month, they want to maintain their rights with respect to salary and other benefits) they will go on a death fast. I want the IMT to show its solidarity with the Tekel workers in Turkey.”
http://www.marxist.com/turkey-12000-tekel-workers-death-fast.htm

Actually, This isn't true at all. It is a combination from three different sources. The vast majority of it from an ICC member's post on Libcom:
http://libcom.org/forums/theory/wildcat-strikes-02012010#comment-359440
The second paragraph of Leo's post is the sixth paragraph of this article, and then it continues with Leo's writing all the way through.
Before that it quotes myself also from Libcom: http://libcom.org/forums/news/12000-workers-death-fast-08012010
And it starts by quoting a trade union site: http://cms.iuf.org/?q=node/157

I don't know who is lying here, either the IMT's contact in Turkey, or the IMT centre have just cobbled it together themselves.

It is particular disgraceful Leo's piece is mostly written in first person describing our activities in the strike, and thus implies that the IMT have contacts in Turkey active in this dispute.

Somebody is being very dishonest here.

Devrim

[ls]

What do you want from the most entryist Trots in the world? :)

When I was down in Hastings this xmas, I spoke to one such member of the IMT, he quite hilariously kept referring to his org as "In Defence of Marxism". In any case, he told me that we need to unite every section of the left and "bring everyone together under the banner of anti-capitalism".

I think ripping people's articles off will certainly bring the left together, especially when one rips off and cobbles together pieces of every section of the left. :cool:

[Jolly Red Giant]

I think ripping people's articles off will certainly bring the left together, especially when one rips off and cobbles together pieces of every section of the left. :cool:
The IMT actually (mis)quote me in an article on their website - and included several inaccuracies of fact in the article - despite contacting them and outlining the errors - they didn't even acknowledge the communication.

[Serge's Fist]

Have you wrote to them asking why they have done this?

[Holden Caulfield]

It is at all possible that a junior comrade of theirs has hobbled the article together, and is more of a moron than a dirty idea stealer?

[Devrim]

It is at all possible that a junior comrade of theirs has hobbled the article together, and is more of a moron than a dirty idea stealer?

I don't really care about 'idea stealing'. It is the way it implies that they have militants active in this struggle.

Devrim

[Devrim]

Have you wrote to them asking why they have done this?

No, I have only just seen it.

Devrim

[BobKKKindle$]

To be fair - and I have no reason to defend the IMT - it could simply be that the IMT took the person who sent the article at their word, and printed it without knowing that it had been taken from other people who don't share the IMT's politics. I mean, if I did the same thing with Socialist Worker, claiming that I lived in Turkey, there would be no reason for them not to print it.

[Devrim]

To be fair - and I have no reason to defend the IMT - it could simply be that the IMT took the person who sent the article at their word, and printed it without knowing that it had been taken from other people who don't share the IMT's politics. I mean, if I did the same thing with Socialist Worker, claiming that I lived in Turkey, there would be no reason for them not to print it.

Yes, it is possible. I said it in the post:


I don't know who is lying here, either the IMT's contact in Turkey, or the IMT centre have just cobbled it together themselves.

As you say the contact may not even be in Turkey, especially as all the source material is English, and it doesn't draw on any Turkish language sources.

Devrim

[Jolly Red Giant]

I don't really care about 'idea stealing'. It is the way it implies that they have militants active in this struggle.

And that they are in contact with activists engaged in struggle.

Something they have a habit of doing -

[The Idler]

All property is theft - perhaps it was a veiled critique of intellectual property.

[zimmerwald1915]

All property is theft - perhaps it was a veiled critique of intellectual property.
But Devrim's already pointed out that intellectual property is not the issue here. The issue is that the IMT publishing what they did implies that they are involved in a way in which they may or may not be. The fact that they are using an article someone else wrote suggests that they are, in fact, not very involved at all, and are misrepresenting themselves.

[Niccolò Rossi]

Devrim, will the ICC be writing to the IMT on this issue? I believe that you should.

[MilitantWorker]

don't lie to the workers.

we get enough of that from the bourgeoisie all you IMTers

..oh wait.

:lol:

[Devrim]

Devrim, will the ICC be writing to the IMT on this issue? I believe that you should.

We hadn't planned to. Why do you think we should?

Devrim

[Devrim]

Does anybody from the IMT wish to comment on this?

Devrim

[Niccolò Rossi]

We hadn't planned to. Why do you think we should?

As other posters have noted, the IMT may not be aware that the author is lying. As such it might be hoped that if the IMT would remove the article and acknowledge the error publicly, setting the record straight. If not, this would publicly undermine the integrity of the IMT as a whole. Both outcomes are preferable to attacking the IMT by association with certain duplicitous sympathisers.

[Yehuda Stern]

I certainly think you should write to the IMT, Devrim. They're not below claiming they have power that they don't have in reality, but I would like to believe they are above ripping off articles from other organizations. Be sure to post the reply here when and if you get it. I'm saying if because, knowing the mindset of IMTers, they probably will write the ICC off as just a sect that they don't need to pay any attention too. If that happens, we'll know that even if the IMT doesn't know its contact is lying, at the very least it doesn't care enough to check its sources when such things are pointed out by other groups.

[Guerrilla22]

As Devrim already stated I believe the plagiarism of articles isn't so bad it is the taking credit for being involved in events they had no part in that is offensive.

[Devrim]

As other posters have noted, the IMT may not be aware that the author is lying. As such it might be hoped that if the IMT would remove the article and acknowledge the error publicly, setting the record straight. If not, this would publicly undermine the integrity of the IMT as a whole. Both outcomes are preferable to attacking the IMT by association with certain duplicitous sympathisers.


I certainly think you should write to the IMT, Devrim. They're not below claiming they have power that they don't have in reality, but I would like to believe they are above ripping off articles from other organizations. Be sure to post the reply here when and if you get it. I'm saying if because, knowing the mindset of IMTers, they probably will write the ICC off as just a sect that they don't need to pay any attention too. If that happens, we'll know that even if the IMT doesn't know its contact is lying, at the very least it doesn't care enough to check its sources when such things are pointed out by other groups.

I don't really see the point. If they created a contact to 'write' the letter in the first place, I am pretty sure that they would then blame that contact rather than admitting they made it up. If they really did get it from a contact, then they will also blame the contact. Either way, we would get the same reply if they even bothered to reply to us.

Devrim

[Niccolò Rossi]

I don't really see the point. If they created a contact to 'write' the letter in the first place, I am pretty sure that they would then blame that contact rather than admitting they made it up. If they really did get it from a contact, then they will also blame the contact. Either way, we would get the same reply if they even bothered to reply to us.

Do you think it would stop there though? Certainly if they didn't want to damage their image they would have to remove the article or ammend it in such a way to indicate the real source of the article. If they didn't reply, again you would have real basis for criticism, not just by association.

[Devrim]

Do you think it would stop there though? Certainly if they didn't want to damage their image they would have to remove the article or ammend it in such a way to indicate the real source of the article. If they didn't reply, again you would have real basis for criticism, not just by association.

Somebody said earlier in the thread that:


The IMT actually (mis)quote me in an article on their website - and included several inaccuracies of fact in the article - despite contacting them and outlining the errors - they didn't even acknowledge the communication.

I doubt they would even reply.

Devrim

[Q]

I doubt they would even reply.
Maybe, but now IMT members can always say "you didn't even bother to contact us about it, apparently not worthy enough to complain about it". If only for political clarity, a response should be made.

[Yehuda Stern]

I agree with Q. You have to go on the record as trying to fix this error, otherwise they can always claim they didn't know any better.