The Socialist Party (CWI)

[The Feral Underclass]

Revolutionaryism Lite: For all your moderate needs.

[GPDP]

Apparently they have a branch where I live. Yet I've never seen them at any of the demonstrations I've gone to, nor have they updated their website in over a year or so. Makes you wonder...

[Aesop]

You talking about the socialist party of great britain?

[The Feral Underclass]

I'm talking about the entire CWI.

[The Feral Underclass]

Apparently they have a branch where I live. Yet I've never seen them at any of the demonstrations I've gone to, nor have they updated their website in over a year or so. Makes you wonder...

Oh and boy, if they were there, it would make the world of difference.

[Q]

You talking about the socialist party of great britain?

Given that you're in the CWI, I don't think you mean with "SPGB" the SPGB (http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/), but SPEW (http://socialistparty.org.uk/).

Ontopic: What is this about? A split perhaps from the SPUSA thread (http://www.revleft.com/vb/sp-usa-t138131/index.html)?

[The Feral Underclass]

It is my attempt to seriously analyse the Socialist Party of England and Wales (SPEW).

[Q]

It is my attempt to seriously analyse the Socialist Party of England and Wales (SPEW).

... In chit-chat?

I smell trolls.

[Aesop]

Given that you're in the CWI, I don't think you mean with "SPGB" the SPGB (http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/), but SPEW (http://socialistparty.org.uk/).

Ontopic: What is this about? A split perhaps from the SPUSA thread (http://www.revleft.com/vb/sp-usa-t138131/index.html)?

Yer, at first i thought it was the CWI from the title of this thread. Then i saw 'Revolutionaryism Lite' so i assumed it was a typo:).

[The Feral Underclass]

The CWI: Championing Inertia and Celebrating Mediocrity since 1926.

[Wanted Man]

They're real working-class heroes. Everyone else is part of petty-bourgeois sects.

[Q]

:rolleyes:

Poor form TAT

[Wanted Man]

:rolleyes:

Poor form TAT

Yes, very poor. We must make more threads dancing on the IMT's grave and attacking the SWP. But don't ever make fun of the CWI; they are serious business! :mad:

[Lyev]

Revolutionaryism Lite: For all your moderate needs.Ah bugger I've been found out! I am actually a Labourite reformist: ban me straight away!

[Lyev]

Yes, very poor. We must make more threads dancing on the IMT's grave and attacking the SWP. But don't ever make fun of the CWI; they are serious business! :mad:I don't think it was exactly "dancing", more "pondering analytically", and if there's valid criticism to found in the actions of the SWP, there's nothing wrong with bringing it up. It just seems that, because everyone is always accusing us of reformism and whatnot, we need some ammunition to fire back with. :lol: Having said that, I bet sometimes looking in from the outside at the Trotskyist movement must be like looking at some chimps squabbling over a banana, or something.

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

wuts dat? SPEW being nothing more than the left of the Labour party?

[Widerstand]

I bet sometimes looking in from the outside at the Trotskyist movement must be like looking at some chimps squabbling over a banana, or something.

Quite accurately.

[Muzk]

Quite accurately.


Tendency: Anarcho-pacifism (http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=428)


wat

[Widerstand]

Tendency: Anarcho-pacifism


wat

See, for all I care your Forklift Armada can crush as many riot cop cars as you want, but don't expect me to join in.

[The Feral Underclass]

See, for all I care your Forklift Armada can crush as many riot cop cars as you want, but don't expect me to join in.

Pacifism is fundamentally reactionary.

[Widerstand]

Well, I'd agree that the group should be called Pacifist Anarchism instead, but you will have to explain how choosing not to hurt people is reactionary. Surely the future society you have in mind wouldn't be based on violence and force?

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

Well, I'd agree that the group should be called Pacifist Anarchism instead, but you will have to explain how choosing not to hurt people is reactionary. Surely the future society you have in mind wouldn't be based on violence and force?

Sexy Violence and force.

[The Grey Blur]

1) The IMT isn't dead.
2) Nothing wrong being in Labour. Better than an anarchist squat-dweller or stalinist.
3) Ridiculous thread.

Adios.

[ed miliband]

1) The IMT isn't dead.
2) Nothing wrong being in Labour. Better than an anarchist squat-dweller or stalinist.
3) Ridiculous thread.

Adios.

For fuck's sake. Disagreeing with the Labour Party does not make one a lifestylist or a Stalinist, and the fact that you continually make these accusations, yet completely avoid answering our criticisms of the Labour Party, leaves me to believe you are a troll.

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

1) The IMT isn't dead.
2) Nothing wrong being in Labour. Better than an anarchist squat-dweller or stalinist.
3) Ridiculous thread.

Wrong on all three points.

[Lyev]

What? We're not in New Labour :confused: here:
At Labour Party conference after Labour Party conference the trade unions succeed in winning votes against New Labour policies. However, the Labour Party conference no longer has any power and its decisions are brushed aside by the party leadership. Gordon Brown has made it absolutely clear that this will not change under his leadership and that there will be no ‘shift to the left’.

We believe that the chance to reclaim the Labour Party has long past and there is no point in continuing to fuel false hopes. We pledge to do all in our power to bring a new workers’ party into being in England and Wales.And I agree, it's a ridiculous thread; if you actually had a concise and well thought out criticism of the party, you would post it in the proper forum.

[Sam_b]

Nobody said you were in New Labour.

[Lyev]

I thought a few folks implied that we were or something. Anyway, what on earth is "revolutionaryism lite"?

[Sam_b]

My guess is being in a supposed revolutionary party which welcomes cops and prison officers with open arms?

[Lyev]

My guess is being in a supposed revolutionary party which welcomes cops and prison officers with open arms?I'm not sure about cops, but perhaps that is what it's alluding to. Didn't the Bolsheviks rely quite heavily on the support of striking soldiers and sailors, especially in the July Days? Correct me if I'm wrong. And as regards the whole "workers in uniform" debate, I think in some cases, it's counter-productive to generalise with every single police officer, prison officer, soldier etc. and turn them away - often the interests of the people doing these jobs are in a direct contradiction with those of the state. I wouldn't think Caton became a prison officer because he hates proletarians. And I think it's fair to say Caton is an exception; are party isn't wholly comprised of prison officers. But I think Caton has beaten and abused prisoners: I'm certainly not willing to defend that, but I'm not sure if he actually has. Having said that, I don't have to agree with everything the CWI does or says.

[Sam_b]

Didn't the Bolsheviks rely quite heavily on the support of striking soldiers and sailors, especially in the July Days?

Soldiers and sailors are not police officers.


And as regards the whole "workers in uniform" debate, I think in some cases, it's counter-productive to generalise with every single police officer, prison officer, soldier etc. and turn them away - often the interests of the people doing these jobs are in a direct contradiction with those of the state

You can't just pick-and-choose the 'good guys' from the 'bad guys' in the police though. All of them are the arm of coercion by the state, and there to uphold property rights, the position of the tiered class structure.


I don't have to agree with everything the CWI does or says

Oh I know, but you set me up so well for the one-liner.

[Lord Testicles]

TAT says NO!

[Lyev]

Soldiers and sailors are not police officers.Prison officers aren't police officers either - but the same class analysis pertaining their relations to the state can be applied to all these occupations.
You can't just pick-and-choose the 'good guys' from the 'bad guys' in the police though. All of them are the arm of coercion by the state, and there to uphold property rights, the position of the tiered class structure.I agree, but there are definitely those that serve the state that are more reactionary, or more left-leaning than others. The objectivity is of course unequivocal, but, for example, I don't think it's a coincidence that Thatcher had to call in police squads external to the immediate community of the miners' strikes in the 80s. But there is also the added factor that Caton is a member of the trade-union bureaucracy which complicates the matter.
Oh I know, but you set me up so well for the one-liner.You didn't have to type it, this is only chit-chat you know.

[Sam_b]

Prison officers aren't police officers either - but the same class analysis pertaining their relations to the state can be applied to all these occupations.

Says who?


I agree, but there are definitely those that serve the state that are more reactionary, or more left-leaning than othersI agree, but there are definitely those that serve the state that are more reactionary, or more left-leaning than others

So what?


I don't think it's a coincidence that Thatcher had to call in police squads external to the immediate community of the miners' strikes in the 80s

For the pure fact that they required a boost in numbers to smash the miners.


You didn't have to type it, this is only chit-chat you know

Yeah, but most of chit-chat sucks. Do I have to stoop to a certain level to post here?

[Lyev]

Says who?Surely that's what all this contention is over: prison officers are similar to police officers, in that they are organs of coercion, used by the state to defend bourgeois interests, such as defending private property.
So what?

For the pure fact that they required a boost in numbers to smash the miners.Well my point here was that if we fraternize and create some sort of relationships with people in occupations such as the police we can weaken their role as defenders of bourgeois interests. Police officers don't like beating up people they consider comrades.
Yeah, but most of chit-chat sucks. Do I have to stoop to a certain level to post here?A prerequisite for posting in here is accompanying every 10th post with a lolcat.

[Sam_b]

Surely that's what all this contention is over: prison officers are similar to police officers, in that they are organs of coercion, used by the state to defend bourgeois interests, such as defending private property.

This matter of thinking cannot be compared to the army, with regards to the likes of economic conscription. But then again, it was yourself in the 'stooges of the state' thread that tried to compare police officers to teachers and nurses.


Well my point here was that if we fraternize and create some sort of relationships with people in occupations such as the police we can weaken their role as defenders of bourgeois interests. Police officers don't like beating up people they consider comrades.

There were local officers on the other side.


A prerequisite for posting in here is accompanying every 10th post with a lolcat.

Fuck prerequisites.

[Lyev]

This matter of thinking cannot be compared to the army, with regards to the likes of economic conscription. But then again, it was yourself in the 'stooges of the state' thread that tried to compare police officers to teachers and nurses.The way each occupation is recruited for differs, but surely their roles (i.e., "armed bodies of men" and organs of the state) all stay largely the same? And I would use economic conscription as an argument for sympathy towards SPEWs sort of position, because often a career in the army can seem like the only choice for a lot of people around our age. Oh and yes, I'll admit the nurse-police comparison was a shit argument.
There were local officers on the other side.What are you referring to here? That local officers (that are friends with the people they're beating) have sided with the state, rather than their friends?
Fuck prerequisites.I agree: fight the power!

[Sam_b]

And I would use economic conscription as an argument for sympathy towards SPEWs sort of position, because often a career in the army can seem like the only choice for a lot of people around our age

I'm not disagreeing with this though. I was pointing out that this was an important distinguishing factor.


What are you referring to here?

That local officers were sometimes on the side of the police.

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

sam_b are you just upset because you didn't sell enough newspapers this week?

[Widerstand]

sam_b are you just upset because you didn't sell enough newspapers this week?

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/sm/custom/lkgmcrkr.jpeg

[Sam_b]

sam_b are you just upset because you didn't sell enough newspapers this week?

I would venture that I am least active in the struggle, rather than posting 4chan memes from a basement.

It wasn't even particularly funny. Since when does arguing a position equate someone being 'upset'?

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

I would venture that I am least active in the struggle, rather than posting 4chan memes from a basement.

It wasn't even particularly funny. Since when does arguing a position equate someone being 'upset'?

Why I havn't posted a meme in over a week (I think) and i've never been in a basement AFAIK. Also I am active in the struggle rather than selling papers and trying to recturit members endlessly

[Sam_b]

Also I am active in the struggle rather than selling papers and trying to recturit members endlessly

So you don't think its a good position to get workers organised into a party?

[Sam_b]

Though conratulations on posting more than a one-liner.

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

So you don't think its a good position to get workers organised into a party?

Nope.

[Sam_b]

Wow that one word answer really communicates your position.

[Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures]

Wow that one word answer really communicates your position.

I'm glad you agree, its nice that you've seen the error of your ways.

I think workers should organize, but not in a centralized party a la the SWP where the CC controls everything, but a more flexible organization able to respond to their individual needs (by individual needs I mean groups of workers who's struggle is and would be diffrent to other groups of workers).

[Sam_b]

but not in a centralized party a la the SWP where the CC controls everything

This is not the only stucture in the SWP.

[Lyev]

I'm glad you agree, its nice that you've seen the error of your ways.

I think workers should organize, but not in a centralized party a la the SWP where the CC controls everything, but a more flexible organization able to respond to their individual needs (by individual needs I mean groups of workers who's struggle is and would be diffrent to other groups of workers).From my experience and from talking to other people, I think this is simply the nature of organisation: more often than not the rank-and-file become more and more marginalised, and the upper most layers of the party become more and more centralized and bureaucratized. It happens in every organisation, in trade-unions and in socialist parties. The bureaucracy stifles and (tries to) control debate. As with most things, there needs to be found a balance, I'd say - too much decentralisation means fuck all gets done, and too much centralisation is undemocratic, and nothing gets done. I could be wrong though, this is just from talking to people about how parties and organisation are structured, and people's own experiences.

[Lyev]

That local officers were sometimes on the side of the police.I think creating some sort of dialogue with the police and similar professions (i.e., those reproached with being "stooges of the state") will increase the chances of them siding with the working class, rather than defending bourgeois interests and siding with reaction. I won't deny their role as often downright reactionary and I'm not sure they're strictly proletarian, but I do think "bodies of armed men" can be (and have been, many times) won over to a more leftward position.

[Jolly Red Giant]

During the miners strike, the police used to send snatch squads in the middle of the night into mining villages and districts to lift union activists and cart them off to jail. It was not unusual for rioting to break out during such incursions. Regularly the local bobby in the village or district (who lived next door to the miner) would participate on the side of the miners in combating the snatch squads.

[Sam_b]

I'm not sure they're strictly proletarian

They aren't proletarian in the slightest.

[Lyev]

They aren't proletarian in the slightest.Obviously, the petit-bourgeoisie aren't proletarian either, but often their class interests are quite similar to proletarian interests. I think it can sometimes be the same with "bodies of armed men"; as JRG said, the local policeman would rather side with the proletarians being attacked, than join in with the raiding squad and beat up his friend.

[Sam_b]

The class interests of the police really aren't, there are threads on this.

[Lyev]

The class interests of the police really aren't, there are threads on this.Yes I know, it's obvious that most of the time their interests sway unquestionably to the side of the bourgeoisie in defence of their interests, but as I have said, their relationship with the ruling class isn't always set in stone, nor is it always completely homogeneous.

[Sam_b]

You haven't said that the police's relationship with the ruling class is not set in stone, which it clearly is as an institution.

[Lyev]

You haven't said that the police's relationship with the ruling class is not set in stone, which it clearly is as an institution.I didn't say it those words exactly but I think I probably alluded to it. As an institution yes it's quite static (which I think is why SPEW call for a democratisation of the structure of the police, could be wrong here though), what I mean is we have seen the police's interests come into conflict with bourgeois interests, and we have seen, on occasion, police officers siding with the proletariat. 99% of the time, police play a reactionary role, but I don't think all policemen and women are, unequivocally, right-wing and institutionally racist reactionaries. A lot will side with the bourgeoisie: but there are examples that show they can be won over to a view sympathetic to working class interests. I'm going to bed now, this debate seems to be circling a bit.

[Hit The North]

The CWI: Championing Inertia and Celebrating Mediocrity since 1926.

I think you're confusing them with the CICM.

[Sam_b]

on occasion, police officers siding with the proletariat. 99% of the time, police play a reactionary role, but I don't think all policemen and women are, unequivocally, right-wing and institutionally racist reactionarie

Yes, but nobody's been saying this. It doesn't matter if all members of the BNP are nazis though, does it?

[Hit The North]

I'm glad you agree, its nice that you've seen the error of your ways.

I think workers should organize, but not in a centralized party a la the SWP where the CC controls everything, but a more flexible organization able to respond to their individual needs (by individual needs I mean groups of workers who's struggle is and would be diffrent to other groups of workers).

Do you ever stop talking out of your arse?

[Lyev]

Right I have had a good think about this, so I’ll and try and get my thoughts and ideas across as concisely as possible.





“Workers in uniform”: it’s clear that the police, prison officers, soldiers etc. aren’t proletarian. And there’s an interesting concept I’ve heard DNZ talking about: “circles of awareness”, which is basically that we should only be recruiting proletarians at the moment, before becoming a “people’s party”. However, we have often seen the interests of these “bodies of armed men” coming into direct conflict with those of the bourgeoisie, such controversy over police pensions and the inadequacy of the equipment of soldiers in Afghanistan. Now, it’s quite obvious that no-one likes being abused and beaten by police, so, as I have mentioned, if we fraternise and create a dialogue with police officers right now the chances of them siding with bourgeois interests is decreased.





Democratisation of the police: I realised that calling for better democracy in the way the layers of the police service are administrated is largely ineffectual, unless there’s serious pressure from rank-and-file police officers, from below. The highest paid, leading members of the police aren’t going to want to democratise the police because it comes into conflict with the interests of the state they serve. If riot police are given the choice of whether they want to forcibly round up trade-unionists or break a strike etc., they might say no, and clearly the state doesn’t want them to refuse. But then does this mean we (the CWI, SPEW etc.) should be agitating amongst rank-and-file police officers, so that they themselves can urge for better democracy and decision-making in the police service? I’m not sure, maybe this is something someone else can answer.





Is Caton an exception?: After a bit of research, no he most certainly isn’t. Here: http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?do=discuss&group=&discussionid=2561 (http://www.revleft.com/vb/../group.php?do=discuss&group=&discussionid=2561) shows us the true nature of where his interests lie.
The POA oppose voting rights for prisoners, they oppose prisoners forming unions, they want their members to be able to use metal batons against working class children in YOI's meaning under 18's as at present they cannot be used against this age group.Caton was part of the riot squad at the Strangeways uprising in 1990 that furthered a prisoner’s sentence for a further 9 years. Also, whilst he does speak out against the privatisation of prisons and talks about better conditions and wages for prison officers etc., he completely opposes rights for prisoners. POA members frequently call for compensation for assaults, stress over seeing suicides etc. and they’re rewarded too: “In 2006 over £1 million was paid to six Cardiff prison officers for trauma caused by finding the mutilated body of a prisoner murdered by his cell-mate, while prisoners who have witnessed suicides and murders rarely receive any counselling, let alone compensation for the trauma. The government has even capped the compensation payments to innocent prisoners released following the over-turning of wrongful convictions.” Prisoners call for compensation just as much POA members, but invariably get nothing.





Soldiers etc. in the Bolsheviks: I’m not sure this argument really works because, firstly as far as I know, conscription in Tsarist was mandatory for many working class people. Secondly, the class composition of the army is clear to see; out of all the occupation that are considered “bodies of armed men”, the way the army is laid out is at least outwardly much more hierarchal. Thirdly, as we discussed, economic conscription entails a career in the army being presented as seemingly the only path for those just coming out of school. Youth unemployment, last time I checked, is at around 700,000 but it could be in excess of 1 million, with a new layer coming out of university and college this spring and summer. In fact, many of my peers (I’m just leaving secondary school) are going straight into Marines or RAF. Above all, it's just quite sad that they put their hopes in such an occupation.

Caton shouldn't be in our party, as things stand. Maybe if he can show that he isn't on the side of reaction, and that he is willing to fight for socialism, then he should be accepted, but not only does he serve the state, he is also a member of the trade-union bureaucracy. There are often individual cases where police and such have abandoned defence of bourgeois interests in favour of proletarian interests (re. JRG's example of police siding with the miners in the 80s), and actually I think it was a police officer that hid Lenin during the July Days, but, more often than not, police officers etc. side with capitalism. And it's pretty much incidental, in this case and similar ones, that these people just happen to be policemen.