SEP socialist equality party [Archive]

21st July 2010, 15:22

I'm curious too. I like their statement of principles on WSWS.org, but I'm not too sure about joining yet. I joined the SEP group here on Revleft, but it's completely and utterly dead and no one has responded to my inquiries about the more specific ideologies of the group.

It's a Trotskyist group. You can read more about their history on wikipedia: About the ICFI (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Committee_of_the_Fourth_Internationa l), the SEP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_Equality_Party) and WSWS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Socialist_Web_Site).

An older account by John Sullivan (written in the late 1980's) about their direct predecessor, the WRP (http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/critiques/sullivan/pub-9wrp.html), the private property of perhaps one of the most eccentric sect dictators on the left ever: Gerry Healy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Healy).

21st July 2010, 15:25

Wasn't 'Thomas Sankara' (the poster on revleft) a member when he first started posting here? Pretty sure I remember he had the SEP listed as his organization. Maybe he will give some insight?

The Douche

21st July 2010, 15:40

We were talking about them in chat last night. Somebody said they were on the rise on the east coast, but I've never met any of them, I think I used to talk to a dude who was involved with them from Boston though.

chegitz guevara

21st July 2010, 23:13

They are the most evil cult on the American left. Run, do not walk, as far away from them as possible.

Kassad

21st July 2010, 23:19

The Red Next Door

21st July 2010, 23:25

They are the most evil cult on the American left. Run, do not walk, as far away from them as possible.

care to explain?

Terminator X

21st July 2010, 23:46

I keep getting mixed up between the delusional groups with really strange leaders. Isn't the Socialist Equality Party led by some dude who turned out to be a business owner? Their party is so inactive that I'm not really concerned in debating an organization with absolutely no activist presence, but am I wrong about their leader being some weird guy?

Apparently the gentleman is named Gerry Healy. I read up on him on Wikipedia and he sounds like a raving lunatic.

To be honest, in my limited dealings (actually, no dealings, as they refuse to respond to my requests for info) with the SEP, they have proven to be inept. I will admit that WSWS.org is a great resource, but it appears they spend their entire budget on that and nothing on recruitment/communication.

Kassad

21st July 2010, 23:51

Apparently the gentleman is named Gerry Healy. I read up on him on Wikipedia and he sounds like a raving lunatic.

To be honest, in my limited dealings (actually, no dealings, as they refuse to respond to my requests for info) with the SEP, they have proven to be inept. I will admit that WSWS.org is a great resource, but it appears they spend their entire budget on that and nothing on recruitment/communication.

You're definitely right there. In all of the rallies, demonstrations and events that I've been to in the last few years, I can't remember ever meeting one of their members or seeing one of their booths. There's very few organizations I can say that about, so that speaks lengths of their activism in the streets.

Chimurenga.

21st July 2010, 23:58

Somebody said they were on the rise on the east coast

I've only heard the exact opposite.

Crux

22nd July 2010, 00:03

WSWS.org is a great place to start.
And, in my experience, where it ends as well.

Blackscare

22nd July 2010, 00:22

I see what people are saying in regards to SEP.

Not all parties are going to be the "whole package", offering strong activism and good analysis/news. I view the SEP (and the ICC, to a lesser extent) as a glorified Leftist news service, and a pretty damn good one at that. In and of itself, that's a pretty decent contribution. Obviously, more is needed than that, but we're not in a revolutionary period and education is very important. It's good that there are organizations putting out coherent arguments, etc.

SocialismOrBarbarism

22nd July 2010, 00:36

The SEP uses public meetings and election campaigns to communicate their ideas/recruit members. They're also leading a campaign against utility shutoffs in Detroit.

Serge's Fist

22nd July 2010, 00:40

The SEP is led by David North (aka David Green) whose day job is as the president of a $20/25 million a year publishing house called Grand River Printing and Imaging, where there is no union funnily enough. They are orthodox Trotskyists who have taken an anti-union standpoint and are largely the remnants of the WRP and their associated groups across the world. They do stand elections under their own name in a number of countries where they have "sections".

SocialismOrBarbarism

22nd July 2010, 01:06

The SEP is led by David North (aka David Green) whose day job is as the president of a $20/25 million a year publishing house called Grand River Printing and Imaging, where there is no union funnily enough.

Yeah, I'm sure you took the time to research this and have tooons of evidence to back that up. As opposed to, say, some article written by sparts.

They are orthodox Trotskyists who have taken an anti-union standpoint and are largely the remnants of the WRP and their associated groups across the world.

No, they aren't. But anyone who actually cares could simply read the wiki page.

SocialismOrBarbarism

22nd July 2010, 01:16

Their party is so inactive that I'm not really concerned in debating an organization with absolutely no activist presence, but am I wrong about their leader being some weird guy?

In all of the rallies, demonstrations and events that I've been to in the last few years, I can't remember ever meeting one of their members or seeing one of their booths. There's very few organizations I can say that about, so that speaks lengths of their activism in the streets.
That's because they're too busy trying to engage workers at the workplace. Y'know, factories and stuff. If only they'd get their priorities straight and set up booths at cross-class anti-war protests! That's obviously the only valid form of activity.

Blackscare

22nd July 2010, 01:25

That's because they're too busy trying to engage workers at the workplace. Y'know, factories and stuff.

Minor point, but can we cut the factory fetish finally? Most of the Proletarian class are not burly steel mill workers anymore. More people by far work in low-end service sector type jobs.

Crux

22nd July 2010, 01:30

That's because they're too busy trying to engage workers at the workplace. Y'know, factories and stuff.

Really? And as you ought to know the Healyite movement have quite a infamous history to it. Who owns Grand River Printing?

SocialismOrBarbarism

22nd July 2010, 01:31

Minor point, but can we cut the factory fetish finally? Most of the Proletarian class are not burly steel mill workers anymore. More people by far work in low-end service sector type jobs.

It's not a fetish. It's just a lot more productive to agitate at a workplace of 500 than a fast food restaurant with 5 workers or something. Not that I'm disagreeing with you.

And as you ought to know the Healyite movement have quite a infamous history to it.

What does that have to do with them agitating among workers? Has the average worker developed some intense interest in leftist trainspotting as of late?

Kassad

22nd July 2010, 01:37

That's because they're too busy trying to engage workers at the workplace. Y'know, factories and stuff. If only they'd get their priorities straight and set up booths at cross-class anti-war protests! That's obviously the only valid form of activity.

Yeah, you're right. Or maybe the immigrant rights struggle? The LGBT equality struggle? Demonstrations for a free Palestine? Or women's rights rallies? Or anti-Tea Party and anti-racism protests? You're right. How could I be so naive in thinking that the struggles of oppressed people would be the business of a revolutionary socialist party!

SocialismOrBarbarism

22nd July 2010, 01:41

Yeah, you're right. Or maybe the immigrant rights struggle? The LGBT equality struggle? Demonstrations for a free Palestine? Or women's rights rallies? Or anti-Tea Party and anti-racism protests? You're right. How could I be so naive in thinking that the struggles of oppressed people would be the business of a revolutionary socialist party!

No one said a party shouldn't adopt those struggles any more than it shouldn't adopt an anti-war stance. You just think the only way to take up those issues is by attending some ANSWER Coalition organized protest.

Kassad

22nd July 2010, 01:50

No one said a party shouldn't adopt those struggles any more than it shouldn't adopt an anti-war stance. You just think the only way to take up those issues is by attending some ANSWER Coalition organized protest.

I'd say the majority of protests I've been to haven't been organized by ANSWER. Most of them have probably been endorsed or sponsored by ANSWER, but not organized to the extent that the national marches on Washington are. Despite this and the fact that I've been to protests across the Midwest and a couple on the West coast, I have yet to meet an SEP member or see them participating in demonstrations or events. The fact of the matter is that if you aren't in the streets opposing war and racism, you're probably just preaching about how much they suck, but you don't want to take any action against it. That, in summation, is the line that the SEP appears to take.

SocialismOrBarbarism

22nd July 2010, 02:02

I'd say the majority of protests I've been to haven't been organized by ANSWER. Most of them have probably been endorsed or sponsored by ANSWER, but not organized to the extent that the national marches on Washington are. Despite this and the fact that I've been to protests across the Midwest and a couple on the West coast, I have yet to meet an SEP member or see them participating in demonstrations or events. The fact of the matter is that if you aren't in the streets opposing war and racism, you're probably just preaching about how much they suck, but you don't want to take any action against it. That, in summation, is the line that the SEP appears to take.

No, they take the line that the only action that can actually solve the problem of ending imperialist wars, social inequality, etc. is a revolution, and that requires winning workers to a socialist program.

Devrim

22nd July 2010, 07:11

Apparently the gentleman is named Gerry Healy. I read up on him on Wikipedia and he sounds like a raving lunatic.

Healy died over twenty years ago.

Not all parties are going to be the "whole package", offering strong activism and good analysis/news. I view the SEP (and the ICC, to a lesser extent) as a glorified Leftist news service, and a pretty damn good one at that.

I'm not sure why you say this. I presume that you are from the US, and I know that our section there nearly collapsed, but at the moment I think we are doing not bad work on rebuilding it. My experience of the ICC is that it gets pretty involved in workers' struggles.

Of course we don't spend our time running around with single issue campaigns like these:

Yeah, you're right. Or maybe the immigrant rights struggle? The LGBT equality struggle? Demonstrations for a free Palestine? Or women's rights rallies? Or anti-Tea Party and anti-racism protests? You're right. How could I be so naive in thinking that the struggles of oppressed people would be the business of a revolutionary socialist party!

Devrim

Blackscare

22nd July 2010, 07:15

I'm not sure why you say this. I presume that you are from the US, and I know that our section there nearly collapsed, but at the moment I think we are doing not bad work on rebuilding it. My experience of the ICC is that it gets pretty involved in workers' struggles.

When I said to a lesser extent, I meant that from what I've seen they seem to be a bit more active than the SEP, while at the same time they put out excellent socialist news and arguments on their website. Still seems that the ICC's biggest contribution is their news service, though. Perhaps they're more active in other parts of the world.

manic expression

22nd July 2010, 09:01

No, they take the line that the only action that can actually solve the problem of ending imperialist wars, social inequality, etc. is a revolution, and that requires winning workers to a socialist program.
You don't think organizing actions against imperialist wars and social inequality and the like wins workers to a socialist program? Will undocumented workers who see communists stand up for their rights and dignity in the streets be less likely to hear what those communists have to say? The goal is revolution, but you don't make revolutions without winning the trust and respect of workers...and you do that by walking the walk while talking the talk.

I'm not sure why you say this. I presume that you are from the US, and I know that our section there nearly collapsed, but at the moment I think we are doing not bad work on rebuilding it. My experience of the ICC is that it gets pretty involved in workers' struggles.
Just a roundabout way of saying you have no presence worth mentioning in the US...but that's hardly a condition owing to locality.

Of course we don't spend our time running around with single issue campaigns like these:Many of the events you're referring to are well-known for not being single issue. But aside from that, I'm very curious as to why you think opposing imperialist aggression, fighting for immigrant and LGBT rights, opposing fascists and promoting internationalist solidarity is a bad thing.

Devrim

22nd July 2010, 11:16

Just a roundabout way of saying you have no presence worth mentioning in the US

Yes, we aren't people who exaggerate our strength. We are virtually non existent in the US, in addition to which one of our leading members there has recently died of a heart attack. It says a lot about the strength of an organisation when the loss of one comrade can be such a severe set back.

What we are having to do is use the other sections to help, and we have sent people there from both Europe and Latin America to help out. We are still managing to bring out a paper, mostly thanks to the hard work of our supporters, and of course have our international quarterly theoretical journal in English. At the moment, we are organising public meetings there again, but yes it is difficult.

...but that's hardly a condition owing to locality.

I think it is. The US possibly has the weakest working class in the 'Western world', and I think that this is reflected in the strength of communist organisations. Just over the boarder in Mexico for example, we have a healthy section.

Devrim

manic expression

22nd July 2010, 14:48

I think it is. The US possibly has the weakest working class in the 'Western world', and I think that this is reflected in the strength of communist organisations. Just over the boarder in Mexico for example, we have a healthy section.
This is incorrect. Communists in the US are growing stronger and more influential every day. Communists' role in the anti-war movement, immigrant rights struggle, LGBT movement and others are enough to confirm this. Further, electoral campaigns are gaining more interest and support from workers.

As for the irrelevance of the ICC, we can discuss that somewhere more appropriate.

Terminator X

22nd July 2010, 14:56

I think it is. The US possibly has the weakest working class in the 'Western world', and I think that this is reflected in the strength of communist organisations. Just over the boarder in Mexico for example, we have a healthy section.

Devrim

Socialism is growing in acceptance in the US as evidenced by recent poll results:
http://www.pslweb.org/site/News2/838022835?page=NewsArticle&id=11853&news_iv_ctrl=1261

I've found that there is a great interest amongst the working class to learn more about socialism and what it really is, rather than listen to the vitriol and inaccuracies spewed by the Tea Party and other members of the US reactionary faction.

Interestingly enough, I am actually appreciative of the Tea Party for raising the profile of socialism/communism through their hate speech. It has spurred many people to learn more about the ideology and study for themselves.

Zanthorus

22nd July 2010, 15:12

Socialism is growing in acceptance in the US as evidenced by recent poll results:
http://www.pslweb.org/site/News2/838022835?page=NewsArticle&id=11853&news_iv_ctrl=1261

Just asking people wether they support "socialism" over "capitalism" is useless though. "Socialism" for a great deal of people has come to mean state direction of the economy or even european style social-democracy with just a few key services nationalised. I have met people who called themselves socialists and yet supported the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan because they were started by the "socialist" Labour party".

Terminator X

22nd July 2010, 15:15

Just asking people wether they support "socialism" over "capitalism" is useless though. "Socialism" for a great deal of people has come to mean state direction of the economy or even european style social-democracy with just a few key services nationalised. I have met people who called themselves socialists and yet supported the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan because they were started by the "socialist" Labour party".

I think the point is more that hopefully people are taking the time to actually read about socialism and determine what it is and isn't. It's a vast improvement over the knee-jerk "Socialism iz teh evil!!!" that most Americans are accustomed to.

Zanthorus

22nd July 2010, 15:19

I think the point is more that hopefully people are taking the time to actually read about socialism and determine what it is and isn't. It's a vast improvement over the knee-jerk "Socialism iz teh evil!!!" that most Americans are accustomed to.

Well Devrim's original point was more about the lack of extensive working-class struggle than ideological reactions to words.

manic expression

22nd July 2010, 15:29

Well Devrim's original point was more about the lack of extensive working-class struggle than ideological reactions to words.
Working-class struggle is happening but it's isolated. Resistance to police brutality, just as one example, draws a lot of workers who are pissed at the pigs, pissed at the state and pissed at white supremacy...but you don't hear about it and until now it's been left-of-center moderates who've had the most control over those actions (and stamped out any militancy as fast as they could). Now, revolutionary groups are taking the stage when it comes to such issues. Really, working-class struggle is there, even if the US media doesn't care enough to report it.

Terminator X

22nd July 2010, 15:30

Well Devrim's original point was more about the lack of extensive working-class struggle than ideological reactions to words.

Education is obviously a part of the struggle.

Serge's Fist

22nd July 2010, 17:30

Yeah, I'm sure you took the time to research this and have tooons of evidence to back that up. As opposed to, say, some article written by sparts.

I am sure I did, thank you. I can't post links yet but I am sure as a supporter of the SEP you know all about the group that split from the ICFI and run a (awful looking) website called permanent-revolution[dot]org ?

They and others, mainly in the United States left have also levelled the same accusation including the ICL and the Internationalist Group.

chegitz guevara

22nd July 2010, 17:54

SoB often claims that there's no proof that David North and David Green are the same person, but the information came from people inside the SEP. when a a then SEP comrade broke the news on the Socialism group in MySpace (and broke with the cult), other SEP members didn't deny it. They said, don't talk about this because it will hurt the group.

SoB has been suckered in by the cult, so you can basically just ignore him.

In addition to that, the SEP, in its former incarnation as the Workers League, used to send its party members into other socialist organizations, to spy on them and expose them as FBI/CIA fronts.

Their Brit branch are out and out traitors to the movement. They collected information on Iraqi and Libyan Communists and sold that info to their respective governments for millions of dollars. Those comrades that were informed upon were then killed.

They are not comrades.

22nd July 2010, 18:29

I can't post links yet ...

Yes you can as you've reached the 25 post limit.

bailey_187

22nd July 2010, 18:37

Their Brit branch are out and out traitors to the movement. They collected information on Iraqi and Libyan Communists and sold that info to their respective governments for millions of dollars. Those comrades that were informed upon were then killed.

woah :blink:

is there anymore info of this online?

chegitz guevara

22nd July 2010, 18:40

Not a lot. It's mentioned in the Wikipedia pages on Healy.

Serge's Fist

22nd July 2010, 20:45

Yes you can as you've reached the 25 post limit.

I was not at 25 in my previous post on this thread. But now I am so I will post one accusation website I have to hand which is from the Internationalist Group: http://www.internationalist.org/wherewasdavidnorth.html

"What do you expect from a charlatan like David North, who denounces unions and justifies scabbing, while as David Green he is the president of a $25-million-a-year non-union printing company, Grand River Printing & Imaging? No one should give an ounce of credence to these scab “socialists.”"

SocialismOrBarbarism

22nd July 2010, 22:15

I am sure I did, thank you. I can't post links yet but I am sure as a supporter of the SEP you know all about the group that split from the ICFI and run a (awful looking) website called permanent-revolution[dot]org ?

They and others, mainly in the United States left have also levelled the same accusation including the ICL and the Internationalist Group.

It's not a group that split from the ICFI. It's two former members/supporters that left the party 32 years ago.

I was not at 25 in my previous post on this thread. But now I am so I will post one accusation website I have to hand which is from the Internationalist Group: http://www.internationalist.org/wherewasdavidnorth.html

"What do you expect from a charlatan like David North, who denounces unions and justifies scabbing, while as David Green he is the president of a $25-million-a-year non-union printing company, Grand River Printing & Imaging? No one should give an ounce of credence to these scab “socialists.”"

Like I said, an article from the sparts, or in this case one of their offshoots. They don't even cite any evidence.

SoB often claims that there's no proof that David North and David Green are the same person, but the information came from people inside the SEP. when a a then SEP comrade broke the news on the Socialism group in MySpace (and broke with the cult), other SEP members didn't deny it. They said, don't talk about this because it will hurt the group.

You have a screenshot of this? Pretty sure I saw this and pretty sure the people who you're claiming were SEP members weren't. All I remember is one guy who was a supporter, not a member, trying to defend them. But you exaggerate everything hoping that no one will notice.

SoB has been suckered in by the cult, so you can basically just ignore him.
You call every party you dislike a cult. You even said that any party that isn't some broad based SPUSA type formation is a cult.

I'm not even a member of the party. It could be an undemocratic organization, but instead of rejecting it because of some lame internet rumors I'm going to actually check it out before spouting bullshit about a group I don't have any knowledge about.

In addition to that, the SEP, in its former incarnation as the Workers League, used to send its party members into other socialist organizations, to spy on them and expose them as FBI/CIA fronts.Source?

Their Brit branch are out and out traitors to the movement. They collected information on Iraqi and Libyan Communists and sold that info to their respective governments for millions of dollars. Those comrades that were informed upon were then killed.This isn't like some dark hidden secret that they don't talk about, at least the part about Iraqi CP members, the rest of what you said is made up. They have a whole book about the WRP:

Enter text here.How the Workers Revolutionary Party Betrayed Trotskyism 1973 - 1985 (http://www.wsws.org/IML/fi_vol13_no1/fi_vol13_no1_full.shtml)

The current British branch of the ICFI is made up of the people who fought to reveal Healy's crimes. I don't really see what any of this has to do with the current views of the organization.

chegitz guevara

23rd July 2010, 01:11

chegitz guevara

23rd July 2010, 01:13

I highly recommend http://anti-sep-tic.blogspot.com/ as a walk through some fun Trot sectariana. Sure, the Sparts are some of the most vituperative "comrades" out there, but they never make anything up out of whole cloth.

Ismail

23rd July 2010, 01:25

If people wonder why the SEP derides women's rights struggles and the LBGT issue as, say, one-issueisms (I created a new 'ism'!), perhaps this might explain it; from the mouth of Tim Wohlforth, a former member of the Workers League in the 70's (who later left): "The working class hates hippies, faggots and women's libbers, and so do we!" (Source is... the Sparts (http://www.bolshevik.org/1917/no30/no30-GRPI-WSWS.html))

chegitz guevara

23rd July 2010, 01:33

It's funny how SEPtic backdates their struggle with Healy ten years before the IC exploded. North didn't have any problem following Healy when Healy used North to chase Wolforth out of the group as a CIA agent.

SocialismOrBarbarism

23rd July 2010, 05:59

I fucking hate RevLeft sometimes. It just ate the hour's worth of work I did. :mad::mad:

I found pictures of North and Geren. I'm going to try and get confirmation from Tim Wolforth they are the same person.

Lastly, any discussion that involved the exposure of the North/Green scandal involving a SEPtic supporter (other than SoB) does not have any denial. Instead the SEPtic member/supporter tries to rationalize why it's acceptable for a communist leader to have 80 employees.

I've seen most of these discussions. Usually its one internet-based supporter of the SEP who grants the possibility for the sake of argument. How someone who isn't even an actual member defending it in that context somehow means that it's true is beyond me. I've looked up a lot about this myself and David Green isn't even the owner of the printing company.

If people wonder why the SEP derides women's rights struggles and the LBGT issue as, say, one-issueisms (I created a new 'ism'!), perhaps this might explain it; from the mouth of Tim Wohlforth, a former member of the Workers League in the 70's (who later left): "The working class hates hippies, faggots and women's libbers, and so do we!" (Source is... the Sparts (http://www.bolshevik.org/1917/no30/no30-GRPI-WSWS.html))

He didn't leave, he was kicked out.

It's funny how SEPtic backdates their struggle with Healy ten years before the IC exploded. North didn't have any problem following Healy when Healy used North to chase Wolforth out of the group as a CIA agent.

"Struggle" taken loosely. They date the beginning with early internal debates. Wolforth wasn't accused of being a CIA agent.

Devrim

23rd July 2010, 07:00

This is incorrect. Communists in the US are growing stronger and more influential every day. Communists' role in the anti-war movement, immigrant rights struggle, LGBT movement and others are enough to confirm this. Further, electoral campaigns are gaining more interest and support from workers.

Socialism is growing in acceptance in the US as evidenced by recent poll results:
http://www.pslweb.org/site/News2/838022835?page=NewsArticle&id=11853&news_iv_ctrl=1261

I've found that there is a great interest amongst the working class to learn more about socialism and what it really is, rather than listen to the vitriol and inaccuracies spewed by the Tea Party and other members of the US reactionary faction.

I wasn't even talking about 'communists', or the 'acceptance of socialism'. I was talking about the strength of the working class:

The US possibly has the weakest working class in the 'Western world'

I can't really see how anybody can not realise this without being severely delusional. Just ask yourself when was the last time that there was a medium sized strike in the US (let's say 100,000 workers), then compare to other countries. It might give you a bit of a clue.

Devrim

manic expression

23rd July 2010, 10:05

I wasn't even talking about 'communists', or the 'acceptance of socialism'. I was talking about the strength of the working class:
The questions are one in the same: The Communists do not form a separate party opposed to the other working-class parties.

They have no interests separate and apart from those of the proletariat as a whole.

They do not set up any sectarian principles of their own, by which to shape and mould the proletarian movement.

Devrim

23rd July 2010, 10:24

The questions are one in the same: The Communists do not form a separate party opposed to the other working-class parties.

They have no interests separate and apart from those of the proletariat as a whole.

They do not set up any sectarian principles of their own, by which to shape and mould the proletarian movement.

The question remains:

I can't really see how anybody can not realise this without being severely delusional. Just ask yourself when was the last time that there was a medium sized strike in the US (let's say 100,000 workers), then compare to other countries. It might give you a bit of a clue.

Devrim

manic expression

23rd July 2010, 11:00

The question remains:
That question can be answered by someone who puts stock in mere economism.

Leo

23rd July 2010, 11:13

Or by someone who actually knows the answer :rolleyes:

Devrim

23rd July 2010, 11:27

That question can be answered by someone who puts stock in mere economism.

It is not economism. The fact is that the level of class struggle is low in the US, and the working class their is possibly the weakest in the 'Western world'. This is merely a reflection of that.To think that "This is incorrect. Communists in the US are growing stronger and more influential every day. Communists' role in the anti-war movement, immigrant rights struggle, LGBT movement and others are enough to confirm this. Further, electoral campaigns are gaining more interest and support from workers." and that the working class in the US is strong is delusional.

Devrim

manic expression

23rd July 2010, 11:28

chegitz guevara

23rd July 2010, 13:25

I've seen most of these discussions. Usually its one internet-based supporter of the SEP who grants the possibility for the sake of argument. How someone who isn't even an actual member defending it in that context somehow means that it's true is beyond me. I've looked up a lot about this myself and David Green isn't even the owner of the printing company.

As I pointed out, nothing short of David North fucking you in the ass with a backhoe while singing "I own a multi-million dollar company" will convince you that there's something wrong with your cult. Even then, you still might convince yourself it's a test to see if you're truly loyal enough not to believe it.

23rd July 2010, 13:50

Leo, if you want to spend your time with economism, be my guest. At least we've established what I've been saying all along, though. And Devrim, if you want to ignore the considerable and important gains made by communists over the past few years and throw out all political considerations (which is economism), that's your prerogative. Again, communism is undeniably growing in strength in American politics, you can digest that fact as you will.

Like you said yourself, the communists do not form a separate layer of the working class. So Devrim is right to emphasize on a badly organised working class in the US. Relatively speaking the communist movement might have made "considerable and important gains", but in absolute terms - from the perspective of the working class as a whole - these have moved from "totally irrelevant" to slightly more than totally irrelevant", a gain only noticed under a microscope.

Devrim

25th July 2010, 05:48

Like you said yourself, the communists do not form a separate layer of the working class. So Devrim is right to emphasize on a badly organised working class in the US. Relatively speaking the communist movement might have made "considerable and important gains", but in absolute terms - from the perspective of the working class as a whole - these have moved from "totally irrelevant" to slightly more than totally irrelevant", a gain only noticed under a microscope.

Of course this is true. I think the view that " communism is undeniably growing in strength in American politics" is not at all connected to reality.

Devrim

KlÃ©ber

25th July 2010, 12:36

As I pointed out, nothing short of David North fucking you in the ass with a backhoe while singing "I own a multi-million dollar company" will convince you that there's something wrong with your cult. Even then, you still might convince yourself it's a test to see if you're truly loyal enough not to believe it.
Excellent imagery. You should be the next RevLeft poet laureate. However, one who judges should be careful lest they should be judged. From up on your high horse, thundering condemnations about a dude (Healy) whom the ICFI broke with, exposed and denounced long ago, you seem to have forgotten you are part of the SPUSA which, in addition to once having run numerous newspapers and print shops, was historically racist and sexist against female members and supporters and those of color, kicked out a majority of its membership when they voted to join the Comintern, played a hand in taming the American labor unions and reducing them to servile instruments of capital, and supported US imperialism during the Cold War..

chegitz guevara

25th July 2010, 19:41

Hey, I got no problem pointing out my own organization's deficiencies or some of its terrible past. But, I'm fighting the descendants of those types in the organization today, not trying to cover it it and pretend it never existed. Plus, whatever you want to say about the SPUSA, it's not a cult. SEPtic is.

BTW, they didn't kick out those who wanted to join the Comintern. The splits of 1919 were over the delegations to the convention. The left won massively, and the central committee overturned the elections, selected its own delegates, and the majority of the Party split away. A year later, in 1920, the SPA petitioned to join the Comintern, but the Comintern didn't reply, and then issued the 21 points, after which, the SPA withdrew its petition, since some of the 21 Points were aimed directly at the SPA's leadership.

In the mean time, I found a picture of David Green, CEO of Grand River Printing & Imaging, sent it to Tim Wolforth, who was the former leader of the Workers League, and he confirms it's definitely David North.

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_65nii9V8Gcg/TExpAxC_IdI/AAAAAAAAADY/ubR4lIY78KI/david_green.png

DaringMehring

25th July 2010, 20:00

Or by someone who actually knows the answer :rolleyes:

The strength, and the militancy of the class are two different things.

As Marx said, the proletariat is a sleeping giant. It doesn't matter how strong the giant is, when its asleep. Right now the US proletariat is pretty drowsy, but that doesn't mean that when it wakes up it will not be the strongest force in the world.

DaringMehring

25th July 2010, 20:02

As I pointed out, nothing short of David North fucking you in the ass with a backhoe while singing "I own a multi-million dollar company" will convince you that there's something wrong with your cult. Even then, you still might convince yourself it's a test to see if you're truly loyal enough not to believe it.

I am in no ways associated to the SEP, nor do I really care about them. I just want to say, that it is possible for a group to be headed by a successful businessperson, and be revolutionary and militant. Take the example of the Lutte Ouvriere in France.

SEP should be criticized on their politics and actions (the affair with selling out other communists to bourgeois murder seems pretty damning), not the class of one member of the organization.

chegitz guevara

25th July 2010, 20:14

I wonder how many times it needs to be said that the issue is that they hide the fact that he is a multi-millionaire CEO, and that many (probably most) of his employees are also members of the "party." In SoB's case, he steadfastly refuses to believe it's true, despite the fact that SEPtic has never denied it.

How do you vote against your boss? I have a lot of complaints about Solidarity, but one of the things I think is a good ideas is that no one who has a business with more than five employees can be a member.

The Red Next Door

25th July 2010, 22:05

I am in no ways associated to the SEP, nor do I really care about them. I just want to say, that it is possible for a group to be headed by a successful businessperson, and be revolutionary and militant. Take the example of the Lutte Ouvriere in France.

SEP should be criticized on their politics and actions (the affair with selling out other communists to bourgeois murder seems pretty damning), not the class of one member of the organization.

The Guy is anti union as well, and no I do not see how you can be a leader of a communist group and be a fucking multi billion or million dollars ceo.

DaringMehring

25th July 2010, 23:38

The Guy is anti union as well, and no I do not see how you can be a leader of a communist group and be a fucking multi billion or million dollars ceo.

I do not know about the SEP guy. However, it is possible for rich businessperson to donate huge resources to a Party and also to work for it whole heartedly. Like Adolf Joffee for the Bolsheviks, or the Red Prince for the Bolsheviks, etc.

KlÃ©ber

26th July 2010, 03:27

Hey, I got no problem pointing out my own organization's deficiencies or some of its terrible past. But, I'm fighting the descendants of those types in the organization today, not trying to cover it it and pretend it never existed.
It's good that the SPUSA permits members to ask questions about its shady history. However the ICFI as a whole has come to terms with Healy's betrayal and published an extensive explanation (http://www.wsws.org/IML/fi_vol13_no1/fi_vol13_no1_index.shtml), from which your accusations about the past are drawn. Where is such a thorough repudiation of the SPUSA's reformism, collaboration with the bosses and the imperialists, from the party's own mouth?

Plus, whatever you want to say about the SPUSA, it's not a cult. SEPtic is.Peddling piffle. Is there some kind of standardized international rating system that says a group with this many members is a club, this many members is a cult, etc.? It's a meaningless subjective curse-word. Paul and his acolytes were a "cult" while James of Jerusalem led a true "church." Plekhanov's RSDLP was a "cult" while the Narodniks were a vast revolutionary organization. They huffed and they puffed and they slandered away, but history proved these "cults" to be something else.

BTW, they didn't kick out those who wanted to join the Comintern. The splits of 1919 were over the delegations to the convention. The left won massively, and the central committee overturned the elections, selected its own delegates, and the majority of the Party split away.Tearing up the majority's votes and asking them to sit down and applaud some delegates they didn't vote for is all but kicking them out.

In the mean time, I found a picture of David Green, CEO of Grand River Printing & Imaging, sent it to Tim Wolforth, who was the former leader of the Workers League, and he confirms it's definitely David North.That does not mean he personally owns a controlling share in the business or brings in an exorbitant salary.

This whole slander campaign is typical of the decline of the left. A century ago, decades back even, it was common for large socialist parties to operate print shops and engage in business ventures. At its height, the German SPD had dozens of daily newspapers, and those required presses, workers, managers etc. to get things done. Now that those mass workers' organizations have collapsed and their oh-so-sacrilegious worldly activities have been forgotten, we see a bandit detachment of sparts, reformists, orthodox maoist-stalinists and other carrion animals, united in their historical illiteracy, have joined forces to attack the only organization that still has its shit together.

The Guy is anti union as well, and no I do not see how you can be a leader of a communist group and be a fucking multi billion or million dollars ceo.
I guess we have to erase Engels' name and chisel his portraits and statues to dust because he was a bourgeois factory owner.

The Red Next Door

26th July 2010, 07:13

It's good that the SPUSA permits members to ask questions about its shady history. However the ICFI as a whole has come to terms with Healy's betrayal and published an extensive explanation (http://www.wsws.org/IML/fi_vol13_no1/fi_vol13_no1_index.shtml), from which your accusations about the past are drawn. Where is such a thorough repudiation of the SPUSA's reformism, collaboration with the bosses and the imperialists, from the party's own mouth?

Peddling piffle. Is there some kind of standardized international rating system that says a group with this many members is a club, this many members is a cult, etc.? It's a meaningless subjective curse-word. Paul and his acolytes were a "cult" while James of Jerusalem led a true "church." Plekhanov's RSDLP was a "cult" while the Narodniks were a vast revolutionary organization. They huffed and they puffed and they slandered away, but history proved these "cults" to be something else.

Tearing up the majority's votes and asking them to sit down and applaud some delegates they didn't vote for is all but kicking them out.

That does not mean he personally owns a controlling share in the business or brings in an exorbitant salary.

This whole slander campaign is typical of the decline of the left. A century ago, decades back even, it was common for large socialist parties to operate print shops and engage in business ventures. At its height, the German SPD had dozens of daily newspapers, and those required presses, workers, managers etc. to get things done. Now that those mass workers' organizations have collapsed and their oh-so-sacrilegious worldly activities have been forgotten, we see a bandit detachment of sparts, reformists, orthodox maoist-stalinists and other carrion animals, united in their historical illiteracy, have joined forces to attack the only organization that still has its shit together.

I guess we have to erase Engels' name and chisel his portraits and statues to dust because he was a bourgeois factory owner.

Well the guy anti Union, the SEP is shit and they need to go eat shit and die. people need to stop defending SEP and NOI.

KlÃ©ber

26th July 2010, 08:18

Well the guy anti Union, the SEP is shit and they need to go eat shit and die. people need to stop defending SEP and NOI.
The SEP is not anti-union it is anti- the AFL-CIO labor aristocracy which seeks not to defend the workers but to minimize and sell out every major workers' struggle in the interests of capital.

chegitz guevara

26th July 2010, 14:10

Kléber, you're being a tool. You're deliberately ignoring the real arguments and setting up strawmen to knock down, as well as engaging in ad hominem arguments.

chegitz guevara

27th July 2010, 01:58

The size of an organization has zero to do with whether or not it is a cult. The Scientologists are many times larger than the biggest communist organization in the U.S., the ISO. Scientologists, cult. ISO, not cult.

RedHal

27th July 2010, 03:40

I am in no ways associated to the SEP, nor do I really care about them. I just want to say, that it is possible for a group to be headed by a successful businessperson, and be revolutionary and militant. Take the example of the Lutte Ouvriere in France.

SEP should be criticized on their politics and actions (the affair with selling out other communists to bourgeois murder seems pretty damning), not the class of one member of the organization.

it's true that the SEP has a millionaire CEO as their party leader, that speaks for their politics!

KlÃ©ber

27th July 2010, 06:01

Devrim

27th July 2010, 06:36

Funny how the Stalinists, the same people who offer uncritical support for bourgeois nationalists like Gaddafi and cheer every butchering of dissidents by a regime like his, are aghast in horror that some of Healy's goons didn't just idly "uphold" Gaddafi against his critics on an online blog or forum, they actually helped the guy kill his enemies. Where was the righteous outrage when Stalin handed Trotskyist prisoners over to the Gestapo during Molotov-Ribbentrop? Maybe it's jealousy - "What, a dictator paid TROTS to help him do his purges? What about us, we're perfectly good for the job! Gaddafi, that philandering slut!" And how do we know that this even happened? Because the cadres of the ICFI were disgusted at Healy's treacherous actions, exposed him and threw him out.

This occured to me the other day. All of these people who talk of support for 'oppressed nations' are pretty horrified when somebody does actually give them some support. Of course, the actions of the WRP were crimes against the working class, and personally I think that the ICFI's repudation of Healy is more than a little shallow in that it rejected the man himself, but not the politics that led to those actions.

I have no interest in defending the ICFI, but I do reject the idea that left wing organisations are cults. You can find enough of that in the mainstream press allready.

Just to comment briefly on another couple of points:

Well the guy anti Union, the SEP is shit and they need to go eat shit and die. people need to stop defending SEP and NOI.

So was Rosa Luxemborg.

it's true that the SEP has a millionaire CEO as their party leader, that speaks for their politics!

Nobody has presented any evidence for him being a millionaire. What has been stated is that he is a CEO of a multi-million dollar company (it isn't even mentioned if that is turnover or profit). I think that there are two questions that stem from this.

1) Do people think it is wrong for political organisations to run their own press, or bookshops or other companies that make a profit?

2) Do people think it is wrong that members of those organisations are involved in the management of these businesses?

For all I know David North could be a millionaire profitering from this business Equally it could be untrue.

Nobody has really suggested anything except that he is the CEO of this company.

Devrim

Die Neue Zeit

27th July 2010, 06:52

Rosa Luxemburg carried over her sectarianism from her SDKPiL days, but nobody should place a political death wish on her.

1) Do people think it is wrong for political organisations to run their own press, or bookshops or other companies that make a profit?

No. The pre-war SPD had for-profit enterprises. I don't see a problem with this.

2) Do people think it is wrong that members of those organisations are involved in the management of these businesses?

Define "management." David North's printing company is quite separate from the WSWS operation, unlike the SPD's, where profits were plowed into party coffers. Left-coms could call this "state capitalism within state capitalism."

Devrim

27th July 2010, 08:52

Define "management." David North's printing company is quite separate from the WSWS operation, unlike the SPD's, where profits were plowed into party coffers. Left-coms could call this "state capitalism within state capitalism."

I know very little about this organisation at all, let alone how it is run. There are advantages to having a legal existance though. An example on a much smaller scale would be the press of the ICC which in France is legally registered as a newspaper, which gives us advantages in Distrubution. To do this somebody must be registered as the responsible editor. I imagine that to run a company in the US somebody must also be registered as CEO.

As I said I know virtually nothing of how this organisation works, and for all I know North maybe a millionaire from his ownership of the press. I don't think that the fact that he is the CEO of this business proves that though.

Devrim

DunyaGongrenKomRevolyutsi

27th July 2010, 10:15

Apparently he goes by the name "David Green" as well?

27th July 2010, 10:47

Apparently he goes by the name "David Green" as well?

North is the name he uses for the SEP, Green for his business.

SocialismOrBarbarism

27th July 2010, 11:17

Of course, the actions of the WRP were crimes against the working class, and personally I think that the ICFI's repudation of Healy is more than a little shallow in that it rejected the man himself, but not the politics that led to those actions.

Actually if you read their writings on Healy they were opposed to the groups in the party that tried to ignore the political issues involved.

All the liquidators, with a host of petty-bourgeois academics at their head, are propounding all sorts of theories to explain the collapse of the WRP. But not one of them has undertaken a serious analysis of the political and class line of the WRP during the past decade. This is not merely a question of personal weaknesses. They do not want any objective analysis of how the WRP degenerated, lest the working class should be armed with the lessons of the experience. Instead, they prefer an atmosphere where there is a maximum of confusion and demoralization and in which they can leave their question marks dangling over the viability of Trotskyism and the socialist revolution.

I wonder how many times it needs to be said that the issue is that they hide the fact that he is a multi-millionaire CEO, and that many (probably most) of his employees are also members of the "party." In SoB's case, he steadfastly refuses to believe it's true, despite the fact that SEPtic has never denied it.

Why should they have to deny an internet rumor? I don't see how you could say I steadfastly refuse to believe it's true. Most of my posts(earlier threads) have been me asking you for some concrete evidence, like photographic. I don't know what the situation in the party is and I had suspicions but that's a bit different than going around in every thread claiming I know the truth because of some dubious information from Sparts. Even with North being Green, we still don't really know the situation. Green doesn't own the business, he's the CEO. Who owns it? What's it's relation to the party? etc.

No. The pre-war SPD had for-profit enterprises. I don't see a problem with this.
...
Define "management." David North's printing company is quite separate from the WSWS operation, unlike the SPD's, where profits were plowed into party coffers. Left-coms could call this "state capitalism within state capitalism."

Well if you're talking about for profit enterprises it makes perfect sense having them seperate. How many businesses want to pay money to a business where the money goes to a revolutionary socialist party?

Zanthorus

27th July 2010, 11:27

Rosa Luxemburg carried over her sectarianism from her SDKPiL days, but nobody should place a political death wish on her.

Eh? How was the SDKPil "sectarian" and what does that have to do with Luxemburg's stance on trade unions?

DunyaGongrenKomRevolyutsi

27th July 2010, 12:06

Why should they have to deny an internet rumor? I don't see how you could say I steadfastly refuse to believe it's true. Most of my posts(earlier threads) have been me asking you for some concrete evidence, like photographic. I don't know what the situation in the party is and I had suspicions but that's a bit different than going around in every thread claiming I know the truth because of some dubious information from Sparts. Even with North being Green, we still don't really know the situation. Green doesn't own the business, he's the CEO. Who owns it? What's it's relation to the party? etc.

Well if you're talking about for profit enterprises it makes perfect sense having them seperate. How many businesses want to pay money to a business where the money goes to a revolutionary socialist party?

An ex-SEP Trotskyist with a bitter attitude towards the party does well in slandering Green/North with photographic evidence, you can find it on google with a little bit of searching.

I personally can't be bothered to dig up 'dirt' on a man, but it seems rather bizarre to have a highly profitable company and presumably, a CEO with quite a lot of money as a head of a revolutionary organisation. Not that this is unique to the SEP of course, other famous communists actually owned factories and what have you, although that's a little different to being a CEO.

chegitz guevara

27th July 2010, 14:23

Funny how the Stalinists, the same people who offer uncritical support for bourgeois nationalists like Gaddafi and cheer every butchering of dissidents by a regime like his, are aghast in horror that some of Healy's goons didn't just idly "uphold" Gaddafi against his critics on an online blog or forum, they actually helped the guy kill his enemies. Where was the righteous outrage when Stalin handed Trotskyist prisoners over to the Gestapo during Molotov-Ribbentrop? Maybe it's jealousy - "What, a dictator paid TROTS to help him do his purges? What about us, we're perfectly good for the job! Gaddafi, that philandering slut!" And how do we know that this even happened? Because the cadres of the ICFI were disgusted at Healy's treacherous actions, exposed him and threw him out.

As for "ad hominem" arguments I hardly said the first or the worst nasty post, look at your own posts in this thread.

So David North might manage the print company, so what? The claim that he is a millionaire is unfounded.

If this is directed at me:

#1, I'm not a Stalinist. You might note in the Cuba thread in Politics that became a Hoxhaist glee club, I was just as disgusted by their happiness over the murder of Trotskyists. Comrades should not be killing comrades. That's the fucking ruling class' job.

#2 An ad hominem is not about nastiness. And ad hominem, in logic, is attacking the poster, rather than the post. So instead of dealin with critiques of SEPtic, you said, "oh yeah, well what about your party?" Even if everything you claimed about the SPA was true (and it pretty much was, to some extent), it changes nothing about what is claimed (and proven) about David "North" Green and SEPtic. It only distracts people.

#3, he owns the company, which is worth more than $25 million. Even if he shares it with another person (at least one, as it is a certified woman-owned business), that still means he's a multi-millionaire

So, what does all this mean?

Are we saying it's wrong for comrades to won companies? No.

Are we saying it's wrong for comrades to be multi-millionaires? No.

Why is his owning a company a problem? Because his employees are also members of his organization. He's their boss at work and in the Party. What if they decide (unlikely, cuz it's a cult) that they no longer want him running things in the Party. How do they vote out their boss?

And, if you move up in the cult, you get to work for your Party leader and generate profits for him.

That's sick.

chegitz guevara

27th July 2010, 14:33

Why should they have to deny an internet rumor?

Because it's a serious fucking accusation made by several former members of the organization.

I don't see how you could say I steadfastly refuse to believe it's true.

People have pointed you to the evidence and you plucked your eyes out. What else should we call it?

How many businesses want to pay money to a business where the money goes to a revolutionary socialist party?

How many companies pay that much attention? Grand River used to list it's officers. As soon as it came out that North owned the company, and their list of officers was listed among the pieces of evidence, that page disappeared. They aren't hiding from capitalists. They're hiding from communists.

Die Neue Zeit

27th July 2010, 14:37

I know very little about this organisation at all, let alone how it is run. There are advantages to having a legal existance though. An example on a much smaller scale would be the press of the ICC which in France is legally registered as a newspaper, which gives us advantages in Distribution. To do this somebody must be registered as the responsible editor. I imagine that to run a company in the US somebody must also be registered as CEO.

Yes, but there's formal "management" that you're talking about, and then there's the likes of David North who's anti-union and multi-millionaire. It's all about the perks attached to being a CEO.

Capitalists have no businesses leading worker parties (even if it's fine and dandy to contribute money and resources).

KlÃ©ber

27th July 2010, 19:38

#3, he owns the company, which is worth more than $25 million. Even if he shares it with another person (at least one, as it is a certified woman-owned business), that still means he's a multi-millionaire
This seems to be the largest misconception here. A CEO is an administrator, not a business owner like Engels. You could be a CEO of a company and not own a single share. So no, he's not a multi-millionaire.

The first part of that post wasn't directed at you, but some of the people who jumped on the bandwagon.

And ad hominem, in logic, is attacking the poster, rather than the post.Like I said, you posted some unsavory comments in this thread.

Why is his owning a company a problem? Because his employees are also members of his organization. He's their boss at work and in the Party. What if they decide (unlikely, cuz it's a cult) that they no longer want him running things in the Party. How do they vote out their bossIt sounds like a conflict of interest, but I haven't seen any indication that this sort of overlap is occurring.

And, if you move up in the cult, you get to work for your Party leader and generate profits for him.This dynamic happens everywhere, right down to a tiny anarchist organization that operates a café (where the manager does not necessarily own the place). You could also say that Engels, who actually personally owned a capitalist enterprise, was motivated to oppose Bakunin's true revolutionism because he was a factory-owning class traitor, and Marx went along with it because he was dependent on his stipend and couldn't "vote out" the Engels who paid him.

I see your point but also think it's much easier to sit on the internet and list ways that X organization has committed sacrilege than actually run a party and finance its operations. This whole thing really serves one purpose whether that is your intention or not: to circumvent any discussion of the ICFI's political positions.

Communist

27th July 2010, 21:13

I have no interest in defending the ICFI, but I do reject the idea that left wing organisations are cults. You can find enough of that in the mainstream press already.
Exactly.
Is there an ironclad definition of 'cult', because I think the word means different things to different people. Nearly every socialist party has been referred to as a cult at one time or another.

.

chegitz guevara

28th July 2010, 05:03

I have no interest in defending the ICFI, but I do reject the idea that left wing organisations are cults. You can find enough of that in the mainstream press allready.

Why? What is magical about the left wing that prevents tiny organization that control their members lives from being cults?

You might want to do a little research on the worst groups, like the Democratic Workers Party, or the worst one ... The O. But they no longer exist.

These groups use various types of psychological manipulation to recruit and retain members. They exploit them for the leaders own egotistical wants, as well as well as financial desires. The fact that these cults use politics, instead of religion or therapy or marketing as their thing is irrelevant, except in how it effects the rest of the movement.

I speak from experience. I was in a Trotskyist cult in 1990. I was told what to think, what to do. If I had a question, no matter whom I asked, I got the same exact answer. If I disagreed, the answer was repeated to me until I stopped asking. Comrades weren't allowed to marry, have children, buy homes. Our lives revolved around the organization. I lasted six months. That group is The Spark, the U.S. branch of Lutte Ouvrière.

SEPtic is worse.

SocialismOrBarbarism

28th July 2010, 05:43

Why? What is magical about the left wing that prevents tiny organization that control their members lives from being cults?

You might want to do a little research on the worst groups, like the Democratic Workers Party, or the worst one ... The O. But they no longer exist.

These groups use various types of psychological manipulation to recruit and retain members. They exploit them for the leaders own egotistical wants, as well as well as financial desires. The fact that these cults use politics, instead of religion or therapy or marketing as their thing is irrelevant, except in how it effects the rest of the movement.

I speak from experience. I was in a Trotskyist cult in 1990. I was told what to think, what to do. If I had a question, no matter whom I asked, I got the same exact answer. If I disagreed, the answer was repeated to me until I stopped asking. Comrades weren't allowed to marry, have children, buy homes. Our lives revolved around the organization. I lasted six months. That group is The Spark, the U.S. branch of Lutte Ouvrière.

SEPtic is worse.

Have you been a member of the SEP? No one should ever stay in a party like that, but I don't think you really know anything about what it's like in the SEP. You seem to just think that trotkyist parties = cults.

Also, where do you get that the SEP is tiny? As far as I've read it's the largest group of the ICFI.

Homo Songun

28th July 2010, 06:04

I guess we have to erase Engels' name and chisel his portraits and statues to dust because he was a bourgeois factory owner.

You could also say that Engels, who actually personally owned a capitalist enterprise, was motivated to oppose Bakunin's true revolutionism because he was a factory-owning class traitor, and Marx went along with it because he was dependent on his stipend and couldn't "vote out" the Engels who paid him.

One problem with this type of argument is that David North is no Frederick Engels.

28th July 2010, 06:58

One problem with this type of argument is that David North is no Frederick Engels.

One problem with this type of argument is that it places Engels on the pedestal of an untouchable deity.

Die Neue Zeit

28th July 2010, 14:02

Eh? How was the SDKPil "sectarian" and what does that have to do with Luxemburg's stance on trade unions?

Luxemburg's stance on trade unions developed after her SDKPiL days. The SDKPiL was sectarian in this manner:

http://thecommune.wordpress.com/2008/08/29/revolutionary-strategy/

If you think the fruits of Luxemburg’s policy – the SDKPiL hyper-centralist sect in Poland, no *organised* left in Germany before the war broke out – or those of Trotsky’s policy – the August bloc, perhaps? – are comparable to the construction of the Bolshevik party to the point where it had the majority in the workers’ curia before the outbreak of war and still had tens of thousands of members, under complete illegality, at the outbreak of the February revolution – then you are certainly no Trotskyist, since Trotsky criticised both himself and Luxemburg for their attitude to the party question before 1917 (e.g. on himself, in My Life, in several places)

[...]

This spontaneist aspect is, I think, considerably stronger in The Mass Strike. Moreover, Luxemburg’s anti-factionalism and idea that the class movement will be spontaneously revolutionary when the time comes comes out in the SDKPiL in the form of creating a small sect in order to avoid factional warfare within it.

[...]

In contrast the SDKPiL was a sect which proved unable to address the masses, and the Spartacists were a small improvised group which had probably (both Luxemburg and Levi’s view) split from the USPD prematurely, and hence did not have the sort of roots which allowed the Bolsheviks to survive the July Days as a mass party.

Zanthorus

28th July 2010, 14:33

Well I don't know about avoiding "factional warfare". I thought the SDKPil split from the Polish Socialist party because the latter was highly nationalistic.

Die Neue Zeit

28th July 2010, 14:38

I would say that the Polish Socialist Party itself, had it belonged to the original Socialist International, was sectarian on the basis of it not being part of the RSDLP. I'm sure Scottish comrades will pop in to try to rebutt me in this subtle jab at the SSP and advocacy of a British Left Party.

chegitz guevara

28th July 2010, 14:39

Have you been a member of the SEP? No one should ever stay in a party like that, but I don't think you really know anything about what it's like in the SEP. You seem to just think that trotkyist parties = cults.

I've known several former members of the WL/SEPtic cult.

And no, I don't think Trotskyist Parties equal cults, though Trotskyism is certainly more susceptible to it, given its tendency to dogmatism. But, the two worst (that I know of) communist cults in the U.S. (excluding the LaRouchies, ex-Trots who moved to the right) were Maoist, the Democratic Workers Party and The O. I have no idea what the political orientation of the Fred Newman cult is.

Also, where do you get that the SEP is tiny? As far as I've read it's the largest group of the ICFI.

So it's the biggest group of a tiny, insignificant "international." Are you really making that argument? If there's a 100 people in the international and four groups, the biggest group could have as few as twenty six people in it. I doubt SEPtic has more than 100 people.

Of course, tiny is a relative term. The ISO may be the "giant" on the American left, but it's still a tiny sect. One thousand people out of three hundred million is tiny. Though, I'll bet the ISO has branches that are bigger than some entire "parties."

The Guy

28th July 2010, 16:16

The layout of their official website appears somewhat professional in comparison to others.

Devrim

28th July 2010, 17:13

Why? What is magical about the left wing that prevents tiny organization that control their members lives from being cults?

You might want to do a little research on the worst groups, like the Democratic Workers Party, or the worst one ... The O. But they no longer exist.

These groups use various types of psychological manipulation to recruit and retain members. They exploit them for the leaders own egotistical wants, as well as well as financial desires. The fact that these cults use politics, instead of religion or therapy or marketing as their thing is irrelevant, except in how it effects the rest of the movement.

I speak from experience. I was in a Trotskyist cult in 1990. I was told what to think, what to do. If I had a question, no matter whom I asked, I got the same exact answer. If I disagreed, the answer was repeated to me until I stopped asking. Comrades weren't allowed to marry, have children, buy homes. Our lives revolved around the organization. I lasted six months. That group is The Spark, the U.S. branch of Lutte Ouvrière.

SEPtic is worse.

This is pretty far gone. I have never heard anything about any organisation like that. The worst I have heard about is people being 'encouraged' to get particular jobs. I used to know some people from LO in France, and I never got the impression it was like that there.

Is this sort of behaviour common?

Devrim

chegitz guevara

28th July 2010, 17:42

Is this sort of behaviour common?

Devrim

I've heard similar stories from a few different organizations. They all have rationales.

Marriage, children, and property can all be used as weapons against you by the state. The American state has deliberately broken up marriages by sending fake evidence of infidelities to partners, they've taken kids away declaring the parents for being unfit because of their politics, etc. Having a house means you're less likely to be able to move where ever the organization decides to send you (a comrade I know has parents in the SWP, they'd just moved to a new location on orders from the Party, bought a house, and were then ordered to move someplace else within a few months), plus it means you're less likely to engage in activity which could cause you to lose your home.

One of the more disgusting bits of behavior I heard (from Louis Proyect) was in the SWP (US), where a comrade inherited a not small bit of money. The Party asked for it at his parent's funeral. I don't know if this occurred in the 70s or 80s.

Look, in a revolutionary situation, or in a police state, these are all pretty reasonable. LO's modis operandi was developed during the Nazi occupation of France. But France isn't occupied anymore, and most of us don't live under police repression in the U.S.

This hyperactivity and fake clandestine behavior all serve to prevent comrades from having the time to learn and question their leaders. The intellectual ferment that is at the heart of dissent and socialism is quelled. And comrades have a right, not just to question their own leadership and develop their own ideas, they have a right to live human lives.

SocialismOrBarbarism

28th July 2010, 20:36

I've known several former members of the WL/SEPtic cult.

Such detailed background. What, a guy from the internet that spends his free time writing haikus about how much he hates David North?

So it's the biggest group of a tiny, insignificant "international." Are you really making that argument? If there's a 100 people in the international and four groups, the biggest group could have as few as twenty six people in it. I doubt SEPtic has more than 100 people.The Australian SEP has more than 500 members. Most estimates of the SEP in the US size have been 300-500 members. If it's the biggest in the ICFI then it's >500.

chegitz guevara

28th July 2010, 20:49

Sure it does.

Devrim

28th July 2010, 21:12

Marriage, children, and property can all be used as weapons against you by the state. The American state has deliberately broken up marriages by sending fake evidence of infidelities to partners, they've taken kids away declaring the parents for being unfit because of their politics, etc. Having a house means you're less likely to be able to move where ever the organization decides to send you (a comrade I know has parents in the SWP, they'd just moved to a new location on orders from the Party, bought a house, and were then ordered to move someplace else within a few months), plus it means you're less likely to engage in activity which could cause you to lose your home.

:ohmy::ohmy::ohmy: I am really genuinely shocked by this

One of the more disgusting bits of behavior I heard (from Louis Proyect) was in the SWP (US), where a comrade inherited a not small bit of money. The Party asked for it at his parent's funeral. I don't know if this occurred in the 70s or 80s.

It sounds like rumour to me. It is a pretty shocking way to behave if it is true though.

In the ICC we are pretty open about money. People pay 5% of their salary (one working day a month) to the organisation.

Of course there are people in our section who pay less, basically because they earn so little that 5% is a big amount to them, and I know of at least one person in France who pays more. That is the general guideline though.

Look, in a revolutionary situation, or in a police state, these are all pretty reasonable. LO's modis operandi was developed during the Nazi occupation of France. But France isn't occupied anymore, and most of us don't live under police repression in the U.S.

I don't think that LO operates like that today.

This hyperactivity and fake clandestine behavior all serve to prevent comrades from having the time to learn and question their leaders. The intellectual ferment that is at the heart of dissent and socialism is quelled. And comrades have a right, not just to question their own leadership and develop their own ideas, they have a right to live human lives.

Yes, it sounds really problematic. Is it a US thing?

Devrim

DunyaGongrenKomRevolyutsi

28th July 2010, 21:14

SDKPiL had almost as many members as the PPS before it basically got broken, 40,000 in fact, how was it a 'sect'?

Zanthorus

28th July 2010, 21:26

Because they failed to rigorously uphold Kautsky's Road to Power to a t :D

bailey_187

29th July 2010, 00:56

Die Neue Zeit

29th July 2010, 03:09

Because they failed to rigorously uphold Kautsky's Road to Power to a t :D

Kautsky's book was written in 1909, while Rosa Luxemburg moved from the SDKPiL to the SPD earlier in the 1900s. :p

I don't think there was an organizational book or pamphlet written back then on building party-movements, something which would make WITBD, One Step Forward, Two Steps Back, etc. truly look like amateurs' work. In other words, there was no early 1900s equivalent of Revolutionary Strategy. :(

chegitz guevara

29th July 2010, 14:22

Marriage, children, and property can all be used as weapons against you by the state. The American state has deliberately broken up marriages by sending fake evidence of infidelities to partners,

Comrade Lewis asks for a source on this. I've only seen this in books. The first place to start would be War at Home: Covert action against U.S. activists and what we can do about it, by Brian Glick. You might find some in Ward Churchill's The COINTELPRO Papers, as well.

Elaine Brown talks about something similar in her book, A Taste of Power, where she accuses the government of deliberately spreading a rumor in the gossip news about a young American actress (married to a French director) being pregnant by a Black Panther (she had been supporting the Panthers with money and fund raisers), rather than her husband. She was so distraught over it she committed suicide. During the autopsy it was determined the baby was white.

Some the other stuff was told to me by activists who witnessed it.

Needless to say, if your marriage is breaking up, or denied access to your children, or you're losing your home, you're gonna be a less able activist because you'll be emotionally distraught.

29th July 2010, 17:50

The Australian SEP has more than 500 members. Most estimates of the SEP in the US size have been 300-500 members. If it's the biggest in the ICFI then it's >500.
Do you have any sources on that? Because it sounds pretty ludicrous. I think chegitz is closer to reality and the ICFI has perhaps a few hundred members worldwide. I'll ask on the 'spotters list though and see if they know more.

Soviet dude

29th July 2010, 21:47

chegitz guevara

29th July 2010, 22:23

A guy a the SEP table in Detroit basically admitted to me the party is lead by a millionaire. He also told me revolution is gonna come about, not through organized labor, but through getting the workers to accept some socialist program.

So just keep passing out those newspapers, boys and girls...

And there's the rub, the SEP is correct on a lot of things. The WSWS is an excellent site for news and analysis, as long as it's not about other groups.

But it's still a cult.

Die Neue Zeit

30th July 2010, 02:18

Marriage, children, and property can all be used as weapons against you by the state. The American state has deliberately broken up marriages by sending fake evidence of infidelities to partners

I wonder if a small preview of this can be found in Spiegel's allegations of an affair between Sahra Wagenknecht and Oskar Lafontaine using "fake evidence of infidelities."

SocialismOrBarbarism

30th July 2010, 03:20

Do you have any sources on that? Because it sounds pretty ludicrous. I think chegitz is closer to reality and the ICFI has perhaps a few hundred members worldwide. I'll ask on the 'spotters list though and see if they know more.

Well some countries require parties to list their membership during elections and such. The information on their Australian section and German section are available on government websites. The Australian has at least 510 and the German has 237. According to the ICFI the creation of WSWS lead to increases in party membership:

The launching of the World Socialist Web Site in February 1998, which rapidly developed into the most widely read Internet-based socialist publication in the world, led to the expansion of the political influence of the ICFI and a significant influx of new members into the Socialist Equality Party.

Shouldn't be hard to believe considering that WSWS is viewed by more than half a million people a month.

Chambered Word

30th July 2010, 15:37

Do you have any sources on that? Because it sounds pretty ludicrous. I think chegitz is closer to reality and the ICFI has perhaps a few hundred members worldwide. I'll ask on the 'spotters list though and see if they know more.

I'm surprised too:

The Australian has at least 510 and the German has 237.

Can anyone explain the SEP's stance against 'protest politics' to me (from the SEP's point of view)?

chebol

2nd June 2011, 08:12

The Australian has at least 510 and the German has 237.

This is incredibly misleading. The "500" figure has nothing meaningful to do with their actual membership.

Australian electoral law requires a party to have at least 500 "members" (they need not be financial members, let alone active) in order to get registered for federal elections.

The SEP spent a good deal of time a couple of years back doing stalls on street corners (an activity which they almost *never* do around here the rest of the time) in order to get people to sign up to help them get registered (and that was the request that they were making too - not that people join, or get active, but that they sign a form saying they were a "member" for electoral purposes).

The *actual* SEP membership in Australia is *well* below 100.

By contrast, if we used the SEP methodology to count "members", the Socialist Alliance would have several thousand.

Lacrimi de Chiciură

4th June 2011, 03:14

Just one more example of the WSWS being a disservice to the socialist movement. (http://www.socialistworld.net/doc/4060)

Impulse97

4th June 2011, 03:28

Give me the download on them. please.

OTP: It's down low, not download :D

RedSunRising

4th June 2011, 04:53

Just one more example of the WSWS being a disservice to the socialist movement. (http://www.socialistworld.net/doc/4060)

Their work exposes social-fascists is a disservice to the Socialist movement?

You couldnt make it up! :laugh:

Blackscare

4th June 2011, 17:54

Labor Shall Rule

4th June 2011, 19:02

I'm not sure if someone noted this already, but the SEP national secretary, 'David Green,' has cultivated an alternate identity to be one of the key members of his party. In reality, he owns a printing press that "is one of the best employers in the city" and that generates tens of millions in revenue yearly. This news was revealed by a former member years ago, so I'm not aware if his membership was revoked or at least put into severe question since then.

4th June 2011, 19:14

SocialismOrBarbarism

4th June 2011, 19:31

Just one more example of the WSWS being a disservice to the socialist movement. (http://www.socialistworld.net/doc/4060)

Opposing a popular front is something unexpected from a Trotskyist party?

Lacrimi de Chiciură

4th June 2011, 20:35

Opposing a popular front is something unexpected from a Trotskyist party?

The issue here is lying about your opponents' positions. Case in point; calling it a popular front (or "social-fascist" :rolleyes:).

RedSunRising

4th June 2011, 21:16

The issue here is lying about your opponents' positions. Case in point; calling it a popular front (or "social-fascist" :rolleyes:).

Evidence that the WSWS was lying? :rolleyes:

Devrim

4th June 2011, 21:44

RedSunRising, your constant reference to the CWI as social fascists (without, as far as I see, any explanation or backing of your assertion) is counter-productive and constitutes trolling.

Either use such terms in topical debates and back up your claims, or stop baiting CWI members mindlessly. This is an administrative warning.

You should actually think about what you are saying here. I don't think that the CWI are 'social fascists'. In fact I don't think that the term has any real meaning. It is a term that Stalinists used to slander Trotskyists in the 1930s.

However, there are many people who I would typify as Stalinist who would object to the term 'Stalinist'. Are you going to 'warn' everyone who uses the term 'Stalinist'? Similarly with terms like 'revisionist'. Do you think that the 'revisionists' like being referred to as such?

Different political groups uses different terms to describe others, some of them accurate, and some of them complete slanders and insults. How you view them depends upon your own political opinions.

The CWI has a history of referring to basically every other left wing group as 'the sects'. Are you going to warn every CWI member who uses this term or links to an article which contains it?

I think that you have to accept that different groups charecterise others in different ways. I think that the term 'ultra-left' is a meaningless slander, but I am not about to cal for administrative action about people who use it to describe me. Many people say that anarchism has it roots in petit-bourgeois ideology. Is that 'trolling' anarchists?

Whether calling the CWI 'social-fascists' is going to win people like that to RSR's politics is something that I seriously doubt. It will probably just annoy them. You can't ban one groups charecterisation of another though.

Devrim

Lacrimi de Chiciură

4th June 2011, 21:48

Evidence that the WSWS was lying? :rolleyes:

From the article:

The [WSWS] article slanderously accuses the USP and its presidential candidate, Siritunga Jayasuriya, of campaigning for Sarath Fonseka, the United National Party (UNP) candidate........Siritunga was quite correct to point out that the ‘Platform for Freedom’ will need to continue the campaign for democratic rights, as there is no hope of change regardless of which pro-capitalist leader wins the election.

Blackscare

4th June 2011, 21:55

A lot of good points there, Devrim.

But I've witnessed RedSun's hit-and-run tactics before and I think the manner in which the users does it constitutes trolling. As I said, if this user was using the term in the context of a post that actually made some sort of coherent points or argument, I wouldn't warn them, as I haven't in many other threads.

But the post was totally unproductive and clearly was only made in the first place so that the user could throw that word around and leave. That is trolling, and after a complaint from another user about this gratuitous and totally unnecessary use of a sectarian slur solely for the purpose of annoying CWI members, I acted.

In a discussion of Leninist tactics v. those of the KAPD, the use of the term ultraleft could well come up in the logical course of debate. This is an instance of clear baiting with no bearing on the actual discussion taking place, however.

If you want to extrapolate this to the rest of the board's daily happenings, that's your business. I'm not trying to dictate forum policy regarding sectarian slurs, I just acted in a situation that seemed to me pretty cut-and-dry.

RedSunRising

4th June 2011, 22:05

From the article:

That is the point. I dont trust the source of the article, have you another source to back it up?

SocialismOrBarbarism

5th June 2011, 00:55

From the article:

How do you know if someone is lying if you haven't read their position? I'm pretty sure you haven't read the wsws articles in question, this is what they claim:

None of this stopped the “socialist” Jayasuriya participating in this fraudulent “Platform for Freedom”, praising the right-wing politicians for their defence of democratic rights and being showered with praise in return. For the UNP and the SLFP-PW, Jayasuriya has carried out an important service in helping to give them democratic credentials to boost Fonseka, who ruthlessly waged the Rajapakse government’s communal war against the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).
...
While he remained silent on Fonseka, he had no compunction about praising Fonseka’s backers. He boasted that at Wickrematunge’s graveside last year he, together with UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe and SLFP-PW leader Mangala Samaraweera, decided to form the Platform for Freedom “in order to ensure democracy and end the unlawful murders”. He declared: “I am proud to admit that it is I who proposed this idea to set up this Platform for Freedom”.
Jayasuriya’s boasting continued: “Haven’t we advanced considerably one year since then! I proposed that instead of an open bloc of political parties, a new variant should be introduced. Now that idea has gained ground. Our sole aim is defending democracy and freedom. For that we must end the presidential dictatorship. We have come so far in the face of politically directed police violence and repression.” The front had “managed to bring together social forces that many thought were so disparate that it would be impossible to get them together”. He concluded by declaring that the Platform for Freedom had to continue, no matter who came to power.
...
Wickremesinghe paid tribute to Jayasuriya, declaring: “He took the initiative in forming this force. We followed him. Today we have advanced far. I salute Siritunga. Threatened with assassination we were afraid to come out. Then Siritunga came forward. It paved the way for us to be able to challenge the incumbent president.” Indeed without the USP and NSSP, it would have been far more difficult for the UNP, which has a long history of anti-democratic thuggery, including the operation of death squads in the late 1980s, to put on a democratic mask.
...
To date, the USP has avoided openly backing Fonseka, but that may still happen if the election goes to a second round.

It's the CWI article that is lying about what the WSWS said. From their later reply:

Before proceeding to the more fundamental issues, it is necessary to deal with the distortions on which the USP’s reply rests. The writer denounces the SEP’s “scurrilous article” that “slanderously accuses the USP and its presidential candidate, Siritunga Jayasuriya, of campaigning for Sarath Fonseka,” the UNP’s presidential candidate. No quotes were produced, nor could they be. The SEP article explained the process quite precisely: the USP did not directly support Fonseka but by joining the UNP in the “Platform of Freedom” in January 2009 it helped provide this discredited bourgeois party with democratic credentials. In turn, these were of great service to the UNP when it backed General Fonseka as its presidential candidate in elections last month.

Case in point; calling it a popular front

It's a "practical arrangement"(semantics) with one of the two major parties of the bourgeoisie to "defend democracy" and not only that they would even continue the "arrangement" if said bourgeois party returned to power. What else do you expect it to be called? :confused: