Socialist Workers Party [Archive]

Spawn of Stalin

23rd December 2010, 14:34

When I was like 16 I was close to them, never considered myself a Trot, at this point I wasn't even a Leninist, and was never a paying member. It was a bad experience. There was no emphasis on education with the branch I was involved in, despite being a large group of people there were no study groups, I wasn't encouraged to read Marx or Lenin, and for all the Saturday afternoons I spent leafletting for them at the end of the day they were only interested in getting me to join their party. Too much emphasis on numbers, not enough emphasis on cadre development, turning progressive people into revolutionaries. SWP's recruitment policy is basically to let anyone in, I mean they recruited Radical ffs, then some time after leaving one of his old "comrades" sent his picture to Stormfront. But hey, join if it's right for you, I would look at other Trot parties first though, as much as I dislike them all there will always be a cold place in my heart reserved for the SWP.

Sasha

23rd December 2010, 14:37

Selling newspapers never liberated anyone :D

On a less sectarian note, as far as I know the SWP is very similar to their dutch sister org the IS. To be applauded for their accessibility, their diverse membership and the broad range of topics they are active in. On the other hand lots of members burn out fast or join other organisations because the leadership is arch-opportunistic, arrogantly sectarian, they have no problem cooperating with cops and state an that's just the start of an very long list of criticisms.

someone once described the SWP to me as "the fast food joint of radical politics", great for an fast snack but you dont want te be stuck there flipping burgers.

Widerstand

23rd December 2010, 14:48

You might be interested in threads like this: http://www.revleft.com/vb/do-you-think-t144921/index.html?t=144921

On a related note, Sam_b might be best qualified to tell you what you'll actually do in the SWP.

Ninel

23rd December 2010, 15:00

Are there any Leninist parties active in occupied Ireland which you would recommend?

Die Neue Zeit

23rd December 2010, 16:57

The IRSP comes to mind.

Lyev

23rd December 2010, 17:15

Well the Committee for a Workers' International (CWI) has quite an active section in Ireland, with a member, Joe Higgins, having a seat in the European parliament. A user here called Jolly Red Giant will be able to tell you more, as he is a CWI member active in Ireland.

I have never been in the SWP, but from what little I have heard, the structure of their organisation is quite top-down and bureaucratic (although this is often the same for most other leftwing groups). You can perhaps see this in the recent split and rupture in the UK, with Lindsey German being expelled earlier this year. Things might be different in Ireland. And if they are the organisation you want to join, then go ahead. Good luck

EDIT: I do not at all understand what the qualm is with an organisation selling newspapers. Could someone please expand upon that?

Quail

23rd December 2010, 17:43

In my experience, the SWP have always seemed very concerned with recruitment, selling papers and promoting themselves. They seem to be organised in a very top down manner and in the recent action over cuts, the local branch has been an absolute nightmare to work with. That's not to say that all branches are similar, but perhaps you should spend some time with your local group to see how they act and whether you feel as though they're a party you'd like to join. You shouldn't just rush into an organisation; it's perfectly okay to be unaligned if you're not sure about local groups.

Hit The North

23rd December 2010, 18:05

Ignore these ignoramuses who do not understand the role of the revolutionary newspaper. The SWP also hold one of the largest Marxist events in Europe every summer and besides that there is plenty of room for education - especially the best kind of education for a committed revolutionary socialist activist, which is actual activism. And this vital education is supplemented by a weekly newspaper, monthly magazine and an excellent quarterly theoretical journal as well as regular branch meetings. Alongside this, Bookmarks and the local branch book stall can furnish you with books from Marx and Engels through Lenin, Trotsky, Luxemburg, Gramsci, Cliff, Harman, Brenner, Harvey and many others.

If you want to join the SWP simply for the badge, then don't bother. If you want to join in order put your politics into action, then there are few other organisations in the UK which offer such a wealth of opportunity.

The SWP is nowhere near perfect, but no organisation is. It can demand a lot of commitment which is great when you're fuelled up by optimism, but can be a pain when you're running low on it. If commitments are getting on top of you, you need to be firm and scale down to what you're comfortable with.

I hope you join and I wish you good luck.

Sasha

23rd December 2010, 18:16

EDIT: I do not at all understand what the qualm is with an organisation selling newspapers. Could someone please expand upon that?

in principile nothing, but its gets on your nerve when you cant put an foot near any protest, even near an remembrance, without some trot-jehova trying to bully you in buying their overpriced rag.

like kayl already said it seems often that their participation in actions and protests is more to flog newspapers and reqruit new members than the topic at hand.
same with their very anoying habit of mass distribution of placards at protests, cool that they spend an serious buck on protest material but keep it at that and dont go acting in the media that each and every one walking around with one of these placards is an IS/SWP member.
IS/SWP seem very keen to jump on any exposure bandwagon, try and completly take over the groups/coalition/movement busy with said topic, and just desert it again as soon as said topic isnt hot and media friendly anymore.
It makes them come off an insincere opertunists only wanting to reqruit and spread their own brand and it pisses other activists rightly off.

bricolage

23rd December 2010, 18:42

Last time I saw someone from the swp trying to sell a newspaper was while people were getting their heads smashed in by coppers in parliament square. I mean selling papers is one thing but sort your priorities out.

Zanthorus

23rd December 2010, 18:42

Alongside this, Bookmarks and the local branch book stall can furnish you with books from Marx and Engels through Lenin, Trotsky, Luxemburg, Gramsci, Cliff, Harman, Brenner, Harvey and many others.

Apparently during the 70's two of the 'many others' were Anton Pannekoek and Hermann Gorter, and the books in question were 'World Revolution and Communist Tactics' and 'Open Letter to Comrade Lenin'. Reportedly, this material was published with an introduction criticising them for 'ultra-leftism', but the essential point was that the SWP was looking to recruit Left-Communists, since the movement was then in resurgence. The ICC member who recounted this to me also told me that at the time he was told by an SWP recruiter that it would be possible for him to have Left-Communist politics in the SWP. It also appears that originally the Cliff tendency was associated with a 'Luxemburgist' stance on the revolutionary party, and then in the 60's did an about turn when 'hard Leninism' was on the upswing. It would appear then that the SWP has done more than it's fair share in attempting to recruit any and everyone with an interest in socialism.

Die Neue Zeit

23rd December 2010, 18:44

I would say that, despite the Marxist rhetoric, the SWP is doing an anarchist turn. Certainly that's what's happening with Counterfire.

Hit The North

23rd December 2010, 19:06

It would appear then that the SWP has done more than it's fair share in attempting to recruit any and everyone with an interest in socialism.

Is that supposed to be a criticism?

Hit The North

23rd December 2010, 19:08

I would say that, despite the Marxist rhetoric, the SWP is doing an anarchist turn. Certainly that's what's happening with Counterfire.

A. Counterfire isn't the SWP. B. What "Anarchist turn"?

Quail

23rd December 2010, 19:09

I would say that, despite the Marxist rhetoric, the SWP is doing an anarchist turn. Certainly that's what's happening with Counterfire.
Wut?

Palingenisis

23rd December 2010, 19:12

Hit The North

23rd December 2010, 19:13

Wut?

Yes, be afraid. Be very afraid. They're coming for you next... :lol:

IndependentCitizen

23rd December 2010, 19:14

SWP from my experience is top-down, no democratic agreement within branches, and there's no room for discussion about actual socialism. When I attended their branches a year ago, they were more concerned about getting as many people as possible joining, and possible ways of promoting the party. I was never once asked about my experiences in political activism, or the sort. Whenever I asked about socialism, it was 'read books'.

Attending meetings should be about learning about where the party stands, engaging in debate about certain political situations/ contemporary politics. But no, it wasn't like that. More concerned about selling the Socialist Worker, and recruiting.

However, within the party, there's some bloody good individuals who know there stuff. But I feel people tend to join the SWP because they're undeniably the largest socialist organisation in the UK :/

If I were you, attend branch meetings, get a taste of what your local branch is like. Also check out the Socialist Party, Communist Party of Great Britain, and any other local groups. It's about finding the party you most identify the most with.

Hope what I say is helpful, and not that sectarian.

IndependentCitizen

23rd December 2010, 19:14

Given the pro-Imperialist line of the CWI to Irish revolutionary seperatism/Republicanism I dont think Ninel would be happy with you lot.

Also a lot of people I know for the occupied north have a respect for the SWP that never fails to surprise me.

Yeah, because this is completely true.

/sarcasm

Ninel

23rd December 2010, 19:18

Lol Palingenisis.

Palingenisis

23rd December 2010, 19:21

The ICC member who recounted this to me also told me that at the time he was told by an SWP recruiter that it would be possible for him to have Left-Communist politics in the SWP. .

Thats weird.....I would agree with a lot of Left Communist views about Parlimentarianism and Trade Unionism as would other Maoists but could you be an actual Left-Communist in a Maoist group? :confused:

The SWP never told people not to vote and always had Trotskyite view of Trade Unions (leadership bad but in themselves good). Plus the SWP never held the negationist idealism of Left Communism on the "national question".

So how could you in all seriousness be a Left-Communist in the SWP?

(The Workers Party of Scotland and Proletarian Left in France gave credit where credit was due to the original Communist Left but thats a long way from saying that they would be happy for someone with the ICC's politics as members).

Palingenisis

23rd December 2010, 19:24

In my experience, the SWP have always seemed very concerned with recruitment, selling papers and promoting themselves. .

Thats my experiance to.

But apparently it doesnt hold for the occupied six counties.

Sam_b

23rd December 2010, 19:28

You can perhaps see this in the recent split and rupture in the UK, with Lindsey German being expelled earlier this year.

German was not expelled from the party. Perhaps you shouldn't pass comment on the SWP if you don't seem to know simple things about what has happened with it.

Ninel

23rd December 2010, 20:19

Also check out the Socialist Party, Communist Party of Great Britain, and any other local groups. It's about finding the party you most identify the most with.
I haven't heard good remarks about the SP either.

Palingenisis

23rd December 2010, 20:37

I haven't heard good remarks about the SP either.

They are the worst you could join.

They supported a loyalist march going through ardoyne.

They condemned our brave Dublin lads who stopped Willie Frazer's march and routed the Free State pigs as sectarian.

My dad is a Dublin Church going Prod and he totally supported and was proud of the lads doing that....Yet they said it was sectarian? :confused:

ed miliband

23rd December 2010, 20:45

I would say that, despite the Marxist rhetoric, the SWP is doing an anarchist turn. Certainly that's what's happening with Counterfire.

Counterfire's Coalition of Resistance seeks to link Labour left figures, TU bureaucrats, 'community leaders', etc. together against cuts. Anarchist turn? Not even slightly.

And re: SWP newspaper selling; at Millbank there was a dude simultaneously selling the Socialist Worker and defying the march stewards by directing protesters over to Millbank (very, very loudly). Fair play to him.

The Idler

23rd December 2010, 21:30

Loads has been written critically about the SWP strategy (or lack of because perhaps tactics might be a better term). I'm slightly surprised you haven't come across it already. Here's a few to get started but searching at the latter two websites can yield much more. Weekly Worker group were never members of the SWP although Workers Liberty were, so you get both outside and inside perspectives.

Jim Higgins: More Years for the Locust (1997) (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.marxists.org%2Farchive%2Fhigg ins%2F1997%2Flocust%2Findex.htm&ei=8r4TTYeSAcGWhQeH64y3Dg&usg=AFQjCNHEhAaVyNbJtcwgh1Mc2TbeEIlezQ&sig2=OYnlLYWghxj3xiqr0BhWSQ)
Permanent Revolution - SWP history: More Years of the Locust: Review (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CDkQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.permanentrevolution.net%2Fent ry%2F2901&ei=8r4TTYeSAcGWhQeH64y3Dg&usg=AFQjCNGpECZVkEOp6xSu-8tFfjdbKYK0bw&sig2=gPigjxDAQX3ZJHbOuhyEKg)

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=swp+site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fcpgb.org.uk%2F (http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=swp+site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fcpgb.org.uk%2F)

SWP/ IS: history and myth | Workers' Liberty (http://www.workersliberty.org/category/awl-labour-and-left/left-groups-and-people/swp)

Read it then judge for yourself by going to meetings and events for a few months. Only then decide whether you want to join.

Just briefly, the anarchist turn is something first described in Weekly Worker when the SWP invaded the BA strike negotiations.

The largest Marxist events in Europe are the Fete de l'Humanitie which attracts hundreds of thousands, and Fete de Lutte Ouvriere which probably still attracts more than the SWP's Marxism.

Die Neue Zeit

23rd December 2010, 23:33

A. Counterfire isn't the SWP. B. What "Anarchist turn"?

Student Left politics, protest fetishes, yelling to get voices heard, etc. but most importantly "Agitate! Agitate! Agitate!" without much pretense to pre-agitational education and post-agitational organization. The BA intervention was merely a symptom of this crap.

Lyev

23rd December 2010, 23:59

German was not expelled from the party. Perhaps you shouldn't pass comment on the SWP if you don't seem to know simple things about what has happened with it.Sorry, I thought she was - there was a split or expulsion of some kind earlier this year, wasn't there? And I just want to say, this isn't as if I am trying to dig up dirt on another socialist organisation. Indeed, in the period we're going through now, I think we cannot stress relations between leftwing groups enough. As Bob mentioned earlier, every group has faults, and obviously the CWI/SPEW is no exception either. And actually, after hearing countless stories about how "thuggish" or sectarian SWP members are, I actually met one for the first time in London the other week; she was actually really amiable and enthusiastic to answer my questions.
They are the worst you could join.

They supported a loyalist march going through ardoyne.

They condemned our brave Dublin lads who stopped Willie Frazer's march and routed the Free State pigs as sectarian.I would be interested in seeing a source for some of these claims.

Die Neue Zeit

24th December 2010, 00:07

I think Palingenisis has more problems with the CWI in Ireland than the ex-Militant tendency that is SPEW.

Ninel

24th December 2010, 01:00

Ok then, another question to add to my original post what are the non-political opinions on the Socialist party? (Occupied Ireland) www.socialistpartyni.net

Rosa Lichtenstein

24th December 2010, 01:08

Idler, Higgins book is a self-serving series of excuses why he left the SWP, interspersed with personal attacks on those he once called 'comrades' (many of whom I knew, and about whom he is wrong) and little more.

The others are just sectarian diatribes.

Seems this thread had morphed into yet another opportunity for the 'left' to tear itself apart -- one of the few things we are good at! :lol:

Ninel

24th December 2010, 01:29

Seems this thread had morphed into yet another opportunity for the 'left' to tear itself apart -- one of the few things we are good at! :lol:
D: Sorry

Hit The North

24th December 2010, 01:29

I read Higgins book and enjoyed it. However, whatever faults he attributes to Cliff and others, he has proved himself as even more clueless than those he attacks.

Student Left politics, protest fetishes, yelling to get voices heard, etc. but most importantly "Agitate! Agitate! Agitate!" without much pretence to pre-agitational education and post-agitational organization. The BA intervention was merely a symptom of this crap.

The only reason you can dismiss any of the above as "crap" is that you belong to an archaic tradition of neo-Marxism where agitation was a word treated with mistrust and disdain.

The sooner you actually engage in political action and stop making up bizarre neologisms the better it will be for your education, comrade.

Hit The North

24th December 2010, 01:31

D: Sorry

Not your fault, comrade. Revleft is a lurid ghetto of poisonous vipers. Welcome!

Palingenisis

24th December 2010, 01:39

.I would be interested in seeing a source for some of these claims.

Its in the archives here...CWI are more than happy to defend their reactionary positions.

Palingenisis

24th December 2010, 01:40

I think Palingenisis has more problems with the CWI in Ireland than the ex-Militant tendency that is SPEW.

The heroic positions taken by Red Action and Class War are well remembered in Ireland.

Red Salute to their militants.

Die Neue Zeit

24th December 2010, 01:46

OK, I don't get it. So you're saying the CWI section in Ireland is better than the one in the UK?

IndependentCitizen

24th December 2010, 01:56

Okay, join the SWP.

The local branch down here did an Anti-War demonstration outside an Army careers office, on a Sunday afternoon - it was shut, epic win for the anti-war movement. If you want more of this style protests, then go ahead and join them.

But for heaven's sake, don't go by the words of members on this forum. They can complain about x,y,z being sectarian and what not, and claim they support imperialism. Or they do pointless demonstrations.

Or better yet, just be a non-partisan Marxist. A lot of the time, party politics is all about who's the better *****er.

I also have a question to all the Northern Irish - Out of curiosity, say the RIRA got their way, and the Unification of Ireland happens. What will happen to those who don't want it? And wish to see themselves as a seperate state? I fully support reunification, but unless you have a plan for the Loyalists, then what are you going to do? Kill them all? Boot them out of a land they did actually grow on? This is a big issue about the complexity of the Northern Ireland situation. As far as I'm aware, members of my branch don't appear to be supporters of the UVF, infact the other week we complained about the RIRA's threat of bombing the banks, we don't wanna wait any longer :(

Sorry to go off topic, OP. Research yourself, go to party meetings, and etc. Get your own experience, don't rely on us, we'll just continue to tear each others' assholes till our fingers get sore from all the typing.

Ninel

24th December 2010, 02:17

Get your own experience, don't rely on us, we'll just continue to tear each others' assholes till our fingers get sore from all the typing.
If I don't like it how do I go about leaving and aren't meetings for members only?

Rosa Lichtenstein

24th December 2010, 17:38

Independent:

Unification of Ireland happens. What will happen to those who don't want it? And wish to see themselves as a seperate state? I fully support reunification, but unless you have a plan for the Loyalists, then what are you going to do? Kill them all? Boot them out of a land they did actually grow on?

That's right, accommodate to the reactionary part of the population. After all, we'd have argued the same with the Africaans in S Africa or the Whites in Russia in, say, 1920.

They can complain about x,y,z being sectarian and what not, and claim they [don't]support imperialism. Or they do pointless demonstrations.

Or 'successfully' go from 8000+ members back in the mid 1980s to less than 1000 now...:lol:

Wanted Man

24th December 2010, 19:14

The largest Marxist events in Europe are the Fete de l'Humanitie which attracts hundreds of thousands, and Fete de Lutte Ouvriere which probably still attracts more than the SWP's Marxism.

That, and probably about a dozen similar events all over Europe, some by the CPs, some by different Trotskyist groups in France and the like, etc. So Marxism is really only "one of the biggest" if 13th or 14th is included in that.

But to be honest, I doubt most people on this forum would even know or care about any of that continental stuff. As far as they're concerned, nobody's ever built a tunnel between Britain and France and the world still effectively ends at England's east coast.

Rosa Lichtenstein

24th December 2010, 23:42

^^^And my dad's bigger than yours...:rolleyes:

Widerstand

25th December 2010, 05:17

Student Left politics, protest fetishes, yelling to get voices heard, etc. but most importantly "Agitate! Agitate! Agitate!" without much pretense to pre-agitational education and post-agitational organization. The BA intervention was merely a symptom of this crap.

maybe pick up an anarchist book once in a while.

Hit The North

25th December 2010, 05:36

So Marxism is really only "one of the biggest"

Which is exactly what I wrote. :rolleyes:

Sam_b

25th December 2010, 23:09

If I don't like it how do I go about leaving and aren't meetings for members only?

You're more than welcome to come along to a meeting - just get in touch with your local branch. Details are available on the SWP website. Almost all of our meetings start with a political lead-off on some topic, with plenty of room for discussion afterward, before coordinating party activity, paper sales and the likes.

Vladimir Innit Lenin

25th December 2010, 23:19

As an overview:

It is the biggest Socialist organisation in England, by quite some margin. It is also a very active party with a particularly dedicated base. As has been said previously, a lot of their activity is focused on selling newspapers and they tend to focus on heading up their own demos/events/protests, rather than following the lead of events organised by others.

For me, their membership base is admittedly impressive. Sam_B on here, for instance, despite being a sometimes prickly character, is clearly a knowledgeable Socialist.

Often it is said that the SWP is quite a top-down organisation, with a lot of wranglings at the top of the party at the expense of intra-party democracy. Local members often seem to be used as newspaper sellers and number-swellers at demos.

At best, the SWP could be described as a radically energetic organisation with a very active membership that is unfortunately misguided ideologically and tactically, from above.

Ninel

26th December 2010, 00:00

You're more than welcome to come along to a meeting - just get in touch with your local branch. Details are available on the SWP website. Almost all of our meetings start with a political lead-off on some topic, with plenty of room for discussion afterward, before coordinating party activity, paper sales and the likes.
Is it educational or do they rely on you to find your own knowledge from books?

The Grey Blur

26th December 2010, 00:00

Ninel:

Take your time. You don't need to join any organisation immediately. There is a saying that youth is wasted on the young, before you go about joining a 'revolutionary party' (which mostly involves boring stalls and selling papers) you should read up more on Marxism generally, and the Irish situation specifically. I committed the mistake of spending at least a year or so of my teenage life doing stalls and selling papers for the Socialist Party (SP) when I should have been dabbling in drugs and chasing girls. This dull frustrating experience turned me off left-wing politics/politics generally for at least 2 or 3 years.

I could go deeper into the specific problems I have with groups like the SWP and SP but it would take a while. Suffice to say my experience within the SP, and working alongside the SWP while at university, have not been positive ones. Both contain a few genuine and intelligent members but the SP's Marxism is a rigid system laid out by their recently deceased chief Peter Hadden which is not to be challenged within the party. This dogma is an exportation of British Trotskyist analysis and tactics to the Irish context without any understanding nor engagement with the indigenous Republican struggle. The SWP while more sympathetic to Republicanism, are run in a top-down, opportunistic, and over-agitational manner. They face the same problems of being an exported version of British Trotskyism rather than an organic working-class movement.

If you feel you want to get in touch with some sort of organised grouping to protest the fees increase then I recommend the recently organised Northern Ireland Student Assembly, where you can hear all shades of leftist opinion engaged in debate with one another and make up your own mind. If you want something more local then I recommend getting in touch with either the IRSP, Sinn Féin, Éirígí or an independent Left-Republican grouping in the west of the city. When i'm living full-time in belfast again I will most likely join the IRSP but any of the above groups would be fine for educating yourself on the basics and history of republicanism and socialism, being much more handy than the predominantly city centre-based Trotskyist groups (the SP had 5 members in West Belfast a few years ago, they have successively haemmoraghed this base with their red-Unionism and only retain one member, who lives in Crumlin). The recently formed Republican Socialist congress at Queens (modelled on the left-republican grouping of the same name active in the 30s) is an example of an independent left-republican club and their meetings are open to all, not just Queens students. A few weeks ago they organised a debate around the topic of Republicanism & Socialism and a personal friend of mine who is a member gave a speech at the original anti-fees protest on the 9th of December. He also instigated the sit-down protest which certain left-wing elements (guess who) weren't too happy with and did their best to break up. I may have linked this before but here's their blog which you should keep an eye on - http://comhdhailpoblachtach.wordpress.com/

To clarify: the SWP is not going to eat your brain like some of the posters here suggested, if you feel you can get something useful out of associating with them; using the resources they have available to protest the education cuts then you should take full advantage of that. But you should retain a critical mind and the first time someone tries to brainwash you (whether it be sectarian attacks on other left groups, or trying to convince you that selling papers is a replacement for a social life, whatever) you should rebutt them politely but firmly. If you're ever interested in meeting up for a political chat then I'd be more than happy to meet you somewhere in the west for a subway or something and we could discuss this stuff. Here's the facebook event for the next NISA meeting - http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/event.php?eid=114548891948255 (http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#%21/event.php?eid=114548891948255) it's on the 7th of january if you fancy going along then I could always meet you on the way into town.

You remind me so much of myself at your age, it's quite scary. Even down to the music taste (I saw SLF in the Ulster Hall when I was about 16 too).

Ninel

26th December 2010, 00:42

Heh the Grey Blur, that was very helpful, thank you very much. One problem is the word Republicanism, I doubt my parents would let me attend anything with that word in it, although I agree with it.. I've got quite a bunch of books to keep me going for a while but 'field work' and engaging with others. Also, I don't have a social life, I'm quite a nerd, the only time I go out is when I'm with my girlfriend.

Rosa Lichtenstein

26th December 2010, 00:46

Ninel:

Is it educational or do they rely on you to find your own knowledge from books

When I was a member, it was a mixture of both.

black magick hustla

26th December 2010, 19:34

Is that supposed to be a criticism?

of course it is. i mean it sounds like a good quality at first - after all we are all the children of liberal democratic ideology. however, in practice it means that there is a hard kernel of leadership that works out the political positions while you have a larger base that follows orders

gorillafuck

26th December 2010, 20:01

maybe pick up an anarchist book once in a while.
How is that relevant to what he said?:confused:

The heroic positions taken by Red Action and Class War are well remembered in Ireland.
Is anarchism popular in Ireland? That'd be cool.

revolution inaction

26th December 2010, 20:20

How is that relevant to what he said?:confused:

if you don't understand then you should probably read some anarchist books to :)

Sam_b

26th December 2010, 21:32

Is it educational or do they rely on you to find your own knowledge from books?

Well, it's both, but then it should be. Revolutionary politics isn't a spoon-feeding process. I'd be a bit worried if all I took was from what members of the party were saying and I didn't read up on something, or question what was being said. It also helps your own political development to read widely anyway, and puts you in a better position to do lead-offs in branch meetings - which in turn helps the theoretical development of the party.

A good example is what we're doing in Glasgow, I think. There are political lead-offs at our SWSS (Socialist Worker Student Society) meetings, as well as branch meetings; we hold regular Marxist Forums at the universities, and some of the student members have set-up a city-wide Capital reading group.

Jolly Red Giant

27th December 2010, 20:26

They are the worst you could join.

Says the person who praises the crowd that supports the right-wing sectarian loyalist UWC strike in the North and defended the warped reasoning behind supporting it.

The heroic positions taken by Red Action and Class War are well remembered in Ireland.

Apart from a handful of lefts, no one has a clue who they are.

Now to deal with some of the more substantive comments about the SP/CWI

I committed the mistake of spending at least a year or so of my teenage life doing stalls and selling papers for the Socialist Party (SP) when I should have been dabbling in drugs and chasing girls. This dull frustrating experience turned me off left-wing politics/politics generally for at least 2 or 3 years.
Joining the SP/CWI is not for everybody. Some people join and remain (like me), some people join, leave and never become involved in politics again, some people join and leave and join something else etc. But the SP/CWI is not unique in this on the left - it is the nature of organisations on the revolutionary left.

Both contain a few genuine and intelligent members but the SP's Marxism is a rigid system laid out by their recently deceased chief Peter Hadden which is not to be challenged within the party.
I would actually question your experience as a member of the CWI with this statement. The SP's 'Marxism' is far from 'rigid' - after being a member of the CWI for almost 30 years I can assure you that the CWI has consistantly debated the method of marxism and its application in an Irish and international context. In relation to Peter Hadden, not a chief, but the former Northern Secretary and a man who had a remarkable understanding of the 'national question'. However, to suggest that Hadden or the leadership of the CWI were 'not to be challanged' is nonsense. The SP is a democratic organisation and an organisation that engages in intense internal debate and the leadership have been and are challanged on an ongoing basis.

This dogma is an exportation of British Trotskyist analysis and tactics to the Irish context without any understanding nor engagement with the indigenous Republican struggle.
This is abject nonsense. The Irish SP/CWI have no more connection with the British SP/CWI than with any other section of the CWI. In relation to the 'Republican Struggle' the Irish section of the CWI is responsible for the development of the SP/CWI's position on the national question (indeed the British SP/CWI initially adopted a left republican position on the the North). The analysis carried out by the Irish SP/CWI has since been adapted by CWI sections in many other parts of the world to deal with the national question in the neo-colonial world.

being much more handy than the predominantly city centre-based Trotskyist groups (the SP had 5 members in West Belfast a few years ago, they have successively haemmoraghed this base with their red-Unionism and only retain one member, who lives in Crumlin).
With all due respect - the Socialist Party would hardly be standing a candidate in the Lower Falls if it had no base of support in the area. It is also interesting that you are incapable of recognising that the SP/CWI can attract some individuals who were previously left republicans - as demonstrated by the fact that a former Sinn Fein councillor is standing as a Socialist Party candidate in Enniskillen.

The recently formed Republican Socialist congress at Queens (modelled on the left-republican grouping of the same name active in the 30s)
For clarification - The Republican Congress formed by Peadar O'Donnell and George Gilmore were not a left republican organisation, they were a Marxist organisation and had a significant base on the Shankill Road (among other areas). This group could be regarded as closer to a Peoples Democracy type group after the PD had caved into republicanism. This group is nothing more than another example of the myriad of other left republican groups that have cropped up in response to the antics of SF in the North and there is little to distinguish them from other left republican groups.

On a final point to the person who posted the op - I would agree with GB on this - take your time - and I would suggest that you make contact with a variety of different left groups and request a political discussion to clarify your own political views and that of the different political groups. I most definitely would not rely on what you read here - the forum is full of distortion and sectarian bile that does little to clarify the political positions of various left groups.

The Grey Blur

27th December 2010, 22:50

i would define a marxist with republican views or vice versa as a left republican or a socialist republican, connolly, o'donnell, costello, ta power, and the qub congress all stand in this tradition. the SP in northern ireland is incredibly rigid and dogmatic and you are almost as bad as the british SWP for bringing in young people and then burning through them. i've seen one of your full-timers there tell a young guy to "fuck off" when he complained about a pointless leafletting session. the SP are parachuting into west belfast, i've done the routine myself and i know how it goes. do you think i'm inventing my account of them burning through at least 4 or 5 young socialists from west belfast over their inability to condemn orange and british provocation?

as for domhnall, fair play to him. i think he's an exception to a rule. the SP in northern ireland comes from hadden going to sussex uni and picking up the militant economism (which i have no major issue with in a british context) then applying that to the 6 counties. the SP represent the best remaining elements of the old labour unionist tradition of walkerism. you can respond to this but then i'm done i don't want to hijack the thread.

Palingenisis

27th December 2010, 22:58

as for domhnall, fair play to him. i think he's an exception to a rule. the SP in northern ireland comes from hadden going to sussex uni and picking up the militant economism (which i have no major issue with in a british context) then applying that to the 6 counties. the SP represent the best remaining elements of the old labour unionist tradition of walkerism. you can respond to this but then i'm done i don't want to hijack the thread.

No they do not.

The Communist Party of Ireland with an actual progressive amount of ordinary, decent Protestants do...Trotskyite scum mouthing slogans from some English university have no place in Ireland. Give me a left Unionist like Betty Sinclair anyday over the sleaze of the Socialist Party.

Sasha

28th December 2010, 01:01

And re: SWP newspaper selling; at Millbank there was a dude simultaneously selling the Socialist Worker and defying the march stewards by directing protesters over to Millbank (very, very loudly). Fair play to him.

well, maybe the SWP is a bit better than the IS then, my mate left them in the midle of the battle of genova because they kept flogging their papers in the midle of the teargas clouds while around the corner demonstrators where getting shot at.

Stranger Than Paradise

28th December 2010, 01:09

well, maybe the SWP is a bit better than the IS then, my mate left them in the midle of the battle of genova because they kept flogging their papers in the midle of the teargas clouds while around the corner demonstrators where getting shot at.

SWP are better than the IS from what you've said. Hannah Kay reported comrades having some pretty shitty things happen to them by UAF where they collaborated with the cops though not everyone in UAF is SWP.

Jolly Red Giant

28th December 2010, 01:49

i would define a marxist with republican views or vice versa as a left republican or a socialist republican, connolly, o'donnell, costello, ta power, and the qub congress all stand in this tradition.
And here we have the crux of the problem. The equating of four individuals and this group in QUB as being all from the same tradition. Each of the four were different and only one could be remotely connected with this new group.

Connolly never, not once, engaged in an act of individual terror. Not one bombing, shooting, assassination and not one written word supporting it.

O'Donnell tried to marry guerillaism with worker activism, attempting to push the IRA in a Marxist direction. When he failed, he left to help found the RC - an organisation based on the slogan 'unite Protestant, Catholic and dissenter to break the connection with capitalism'. It collapsed when O'Donnell backed the CP in pushing for a united front with republicans.

Costello rejected the Stalinism of OSF and unfortunately did not get a chance to fully develop the political direction he was heading in before being assassinated.

Unfortunately Ta Power was not a patch on the other three politically and it demonstrates the political weakness of the IRSM that his document is pushed to the fore.

The new group is no different in any real way from Eirigi.

the SP in northern ireland is incredibly rigid and dogmatic
maybe you can demonstrate this - and by the way, opposition to republicanism does not equate to being dogmatic. Indeed condemning the SP/CWI for not bowing the knee to republicanism is dogmatic.

i've seen one of your full-timers there tell a young guy to "fuck off" when he complained about a pointless leafletting session.
wonderful little anecdote - I have refused to drop leaflets on countless occasions and never been told to fuck-off. Though I do recall seeing an incident where a young republican was beaten senseless for not carrying out the instructions of a local SF boss.

the SP are parachuting into west belfast,
do you know who Pat Lawlor is? Do you know where he works? Are you remotely aware of the work he has done in west Belfast as a union activist and as part of the anti-water charges campaign? The SP/CWI do not and never have parachuted election candidates into any area.

do you think i'm inventing my account
I would suggest the your previous experience with the CWI was not a positive one from your perspective. I am sorry about that - but it doesn't get you a free ride if you make less than positive comments about the CWI in general on an Internet forum.

the SP in northern ireland comes from hadden going to sussex uni and picking up the militant economism (which i have no major issue with in a british context) then applying that to the 6 counties.
This again demonstrates you ignorance of the history of the CWI in Ireland. Peter Hadden was not the first member of the CWI in Ireland. The CWI initially had a small base among the Derry Young Socialists with Gerry Lynch and in Strabane with John Throne.

Furthermore the initial rejection of left republicanism was driven by Dermot Connolly and Joe Higgins as much as, if not moreso than Hadden. As I said previously the British section of the CWI initially adopted a left republican position and actually held this position for several years until the Irish members demanded a debate be opened up on the national question within the international affiliates of the CWI. It took several months before the debate concluded and the Irish, with the support of the Swedish section, convinced the British of the need to drop left republicanism. It wasn't until the time of the UWC strike in 1974 that Hadden began demonstrating his grasp of the national question.

the SP represent the best remaining elements of the old labour unionist tradition of walkerism.
If you believe this then I suggest you read some of Hadden's writings on the subject - he did a far better polemic against walkerism than any left republican has managed. It also might help to read Connolly's writings on the subject.

i don't want to hijack the thread.
Then I suggest you stop feeding the troll.

Rosa Lichtenstein

28th December 2010, 04:39

Why has this degenerated into the usual Trotskyist (and now off-topic) slug fest?:mad:

Aurora

28th December 2010, 06:08

Why has this degenerated into the usual Trotskyist (and now off-topic) slug fest?:mad:

To be honest i think this is the best way the thread could have gone, the SWPers have said their piece others have stated the criticisms of the SWP, theres been lots of good advice from all sides and the obligatory slander from the usual sources.
I think the best advice would be like TGB said to go to some anti-student fees gatherings and talk to the members of various groups there like the SP, SWP, Eireigi and IRSP. Collect some of their literature and perhaps go along to a branch meeting of each group to get a feel for the internal structure. Maybe make a list of questions to ask before you go and remember there's no rush to join a party, when i was around your age i jumped into the SP and while my experience was overall very positive i don't think i was really ready at the time to participate in political life.

Is anarchism popular in Ireland? That'd be cool.
Ive never encountered anyone here outside of activist circles who knew of Class War and ive never heard of Red Action(just looked them up) :p
Although the Workers Solidarity Movement is around http://www.wsm.ie/ they're Platformists iirc, they've been involved with a lot of struggles and i think generally they do alot of good work although i remember when they came out against the Lisbon Treaty they got some criticism from the anarchists on here.

Devrim

28th December 2010, 09:20

Ive never encountered anyone here outside of activist circles who knew of Class War and ive never heard of Red Action(just looked them up) :p

To be fair though their heyday was over two decades ago. I think at the time a lot more people would have heard of Class War. They were often demonized in the tabloid press, occasionally on TV and one of the leaders even made an appearance on the Jonathan Ross Show. Although not as high profile as the Militant were or perhaps even the SWP, I think that most people who read newspapers would have heard of them.

Red Action was a much smaller, less notorious group. I would imagine that people who followed Republican politics would have heard of them as they were involved in some Republican bombings in the UK.

Whether Class War even had the politics that Palingenisis was attributing too them is highly debatable, and the phrase "The heroic positions taken by Red Action and Class War are well remembered in Ireland" seems a bit bizarre to me.

Devrim

Hit The North

28th December 2010, 17:17

of course it is. i mean it sounds like a good quality at first - after all we are all the children of liberal democratic ideology. however, in practice it means that there is a hard kernel of leadership that works out the political positions while you have a larger base that follows orders

Some questions for you, buddy:

1. Is this some metaphysical observation or just specific to the SWP?

2. What have you got against leadership?

3. What have you got against taking orders?

4. Why do you make a fetish of elitism and your own minority position?

5. What inner little angel makes you think you're so much better than the SWP rank and file?

6. Have you ever met a worker?

7. If yes, how undeserving on a scale of 1-10 (10 being really stoopid and unfit for membership of a socialist organisation) did you find her or him?

8. Given your obvious pessimism about ordinary people getting involved in political organisation, what makes you think you're a communist of any kind whether left or right?

Widerstand

29th December 2010, 07:23

Some questions for you, buddy:

1. Is this some metaphysical observation or just specific to the SWP?

2. What have you got against leadership?

3. What have you got against taking orders?

4. Why do you make a fetish of elitism and your own minority position?

5. What inner little angel makes you think you're so much better than the SWP rank and file?

6. Have you ever met a worker?

7. If yes, how undeserving on a scale of 1-10 (10 being really stoopid and unfit for membership of a socialist organisation) did you find her or him?

8. Given your obvious pessimism about ordinary people getting involved in political organisation, what makes you think you're a communist of any kind whether left or right?

This has to be the most confusing post I've read in a while.

Your first few questions seem to infer that the majority of people are too stupid to do actions that aren't spoon fed to them or to think for themselves, while the latter few infer the exact opposite?

Rosa Lichtenstein

29th December 2010, 14:22

Widerstand:

Your first few questions seem to infer that the majority of people are too stupid to do actions that aren't spoon fed to them or to think for themselves, while the latter few infer the exact opposite?

In fact, BTB does not mean this. He is merely trying to ascertain what Maldoror's position is on these questions.

Cencus

29th December 2010, 15:20

Over the years I've had a fair bit of contact with the SWP some positive some negative. They get a lot of flak from other leftists some deserved some purely on a sectarian basis.

In terms of numbers they are/were (dunno if my info is outta date) the largest leftist group in the UK which allows them certain advantages and draws a great big target on their back for everyone, capitalist parties other communists & anarchists so getting a non biased viewpoint on them is pretty hard.

Your best bet as stated by others in this thread is to go n see if they are the party for you whilst not closing your options on other groups.

BurnTheOliveTree

29th December 2010, 15:24

To all those who criticised SWP for selling papers in the middle of demos when the police charge or whatever - I really, really doubt that this happens. I'm a member and I've never seen it happen. And there's good reasons why it doesn't happen:

A. No-one is going to buy a paper amid a charge or in a cloud of tear gas. Whatever you think of us we aren't insane. What would be the fucking point.

B. The whole situation entails that a paper seller is near the police lines when it kicks off. You can't sell papers near the police lines if it's kicking off. I mean you physically can't. It's a crush. There's no room to move.

C. The only exception to the crush rule is when one side or other (usually the police) makes a successful push or they charge horses at you etc, in which case once again you'd have to be out of your mind to think someone will buy a paper in that situation, and also EVERYONE bloody well runs out of the way, including us. there is no point getting trampled by horses.

D. Even if all of those practical limitations were overcome I don't see why anyone would have the inclination to try and sell a paper in that particular situation. The point of selling the paper is to try and have a political conversation with people about what the problems are in society and what to do about them. A charge is an absurdly poor place to do that.

I can't help but feel this is just a made-up scenario to fit the caricature of us as paper-selling robots.

Rosa Lichtenstein

29th December 2010, 16:03

May I add to what Burn above has said: when I have been on demos selling papers, even when the cops attack, one tends to hold them even tighter to one's chest but without once thinking "What a great opportunity to sell a few copies to those guys over there getting attacked by the pigs...!"

Widerstand

29th December 2010, 16:37

Widerstand:

In fact, BTB does not mean this. He is merely trying to ascertain what Maldoror's position is on these questions.

But you realize that BTB's post implied that all involved in political organizations have to rely on a leader telling them what to do, and saying that it isn't so is the same as saying that workers are too stupid to organize?

Either way he was making lots of accusations.

Hit The North

29th December 2010, 16:42

This has to be the most confusing post I've read in a while.

Your first few questions seem to infer that the majority of people are too stupid to do actions that aren't spoon fed to them or to think for themselves, while the latter few infer the exact opposite?

Rosa is correct in that I'm attempting to ascertain Maldoror's position.

Nevertheless, my first few questions only "infer that the majority of people are too stupid to do actions that aren't spoonfed to them," if you first believe that 'leadership' is only necessary because people are stupid or that only stupid people carry out orders. It is this implication which I am attempting to tease out of Maldoror's original statement. He's essentially implying that rank and file SWP members are stupid, unwitting pawns of an unelected, undemocratic and demotic elite.

Of course, if I'm wrong about this, he can correct me.

I actually think that you could have a workers party consisting of tens of thousands of worker-intellectuals, well versed in Marxist theory, critical thinkers all; but if they all refused to take orders, to channel their efforts and agitation in a single collective direction, they wouldn't be much use to either the party or the working class. So the question, "What's wrong with taking orders?" is a sincere one because I don't assume that only the ignorant "follow orders".

Widerstand

29th December 2010, 16:56

Nevertheless, my first few questions only "infer that the majority of people are too stupid to do actions that aren't spoonfed to them," if you first believe that 'leadership' is only necessary because people are stupid or that only stupid people carry out orders. It is this implication which I am attempting to tease out of Maldoror's original statement. He's essentially implying that rank and file SWP members are stupid, unwitting pawns of an unelected, undemocratic and demotic elite.

Well let's see. You called him an elitist, yet you believe the party leadership should have more say than it's pawns. In fact the whole "taking orders" rhetoric you used already suggests that they have no say at all, that they in fact are just human mass to be ordered around by their leaders (which is surprisingly fitting with what you accuse maldoror of thinking.) So either you think the same, or your putting words in his mouth, which is it?

Of course, if I'm wrong about this, he can correct me.

I actually think that you could have a workers party consisting of tens of thousands of worker-intellectuals, well versed in Marxist theory, critical thinkers all; but if they all refused to take orders, to channel their efforts and agitation in a single collective direction, they wouldn't be much use to either the party or the working class. So the question, "What's wrong with taking orders?" is a sincere one because I don't assume that only the ignorant "follow orders".

Well maybe this is a non-Stalinoid thing, but I believe that people should have a say in their organization, and not the majority just exists to receive orders, in fact no one should be ordered to do anything. Surely if the members were thinking for themselves and communicating with others on an equal basis they would be able to commit themselves just as well (though I guess paper selling wouldn't by high in course).

Your posts in fact infer that all workers are stupid or at least lazy or unorganized, and that without taking orders there can be no political work. Now if you believe this, I suggest you take a look at the internal structure of interventionistische Linke and Avanti, two main organizers of anti-G8 protests at Heiligendamm in Germany, or the FAU (you know, crazy Anarchist bombthrowers who don't do anything cos no one tells them what to do :rolleyes: ), or tons of initiatives in Hamburg's RaS network (ok you can't really look at those, sorry).

PS: Of course none of these is a "Worker's Party". They are rather groups full of Working Class people, which I guess isn't what you actually want cos there's no party elite or bureaucracy, right?

Sam_b

29th December 2010, 16:58

but I believe that people should have a say in their organization, and not the majority just exists to receive orders

So the membership elects and holds to account those in organisational positions, but then should ignore everything they say?

'bring the pasting table to the sale at noon' 'no you can't order me about!'

Widerstand

29th December 2010, 17:02

So the membership elects and holds to account those in organisational positions, but then should ignore everything they say?

'bring the pasting table to the sale at noon' 'no you can't order me about!'

Pray tell, what positions?

Hit The North

29th December 2010, 17:31

But you realize that BTB's post implied that all involved in political organizations have to rely on a leader telling them what to do, and saying that it isn't so is the same as saying that workers are too stupid to organize?

The implications are there because the post was satirical in intent - in order to draw out maldoror's opinions, not to present my own.

Well let's see. You called him an elitist, yet you believe the party leadership should have more say than it's pawns.I haven't said that and I would never refer to the many admirable socialists in the SWP as "pawns". That's your word, you said that.

In fact the whole "taking orders" rhetoric you used already suggests that they have no say at all, that they in fact are just human mass to be ordered around by their leaders (which is surprisingly fitting with what you accuse maldoror of thinking.) So either you think the same, or your putting words in his mouth, which is it?With all due respect, I think you are thinking about these categories in too rigid a manner. To say that members of an organisation should take order does not imply anything in regard to how those orders are arrived at or the capacity for leadership amongst those taking orders.

Believe it or not, the SWP sets out to create an organisation of leaders; working class people who are able to positively intervene in their workplaces, colleges, communities, and put forward a clear set of socialist principles and tactics. In order to do this, they must also commit to the principles of democratic centralism. If they don't like it they leave. Last time I looked, the SWP was a voluntary organisation.

Surely if the members were thinking for themselves and communicating with others on an equal basis they would be able to commit themselves just as well (though I guess paper selling wouldn't by high in course).
There is a healthy structural democracy in the SWP. Not perfect by any means, but discussion is held widely through the organisation, so here you are just parading your ignorance of how the SWP works. Meanwhile, your final very funny quip about selling papers, merely betrays your prejudice towards the SWP and the rest of your post simply confirms it.

Sam_b

29th December 2010, 17:55

Pray tell, what positions?

Judging by your analysis of my defence of the SWP in the CU forum, or your analysis of the SWP with regards to the FBU interventions, I would have thought you would have known all this, no?

Widerstand

29th December 2010, 18:33

I haven't said that and I would never refer to the many admirable socialists in the SWP as "pawns". That's your word, you said that.

Well but your posts infer that the leadership is there to order people around, don't they? Why can't people decide for themselves what to do? Why can't they commit themselves to doing this or that? An absence of orders doesn't mean an absence of coordination, does it? Surely You can go out with your friends all at the same time at the same place without any of you ordering the others?

With all due respect, I think you are thinking about these categories in too rigid a manner. To say that members of an organisation should take order does not imply anything in regard to how those orders are arrived at or the capacity for leadership amongst those taking orders.

How does it not? Unless you are not using "order" in it's common meaning as synonymous to "command"?

From a random dictionary:

–noun
1.
an authoritative direction or instruction; command; mandate.
2.
a command of a court or judge.
3.
a command or notice issued by a military organization or a military commander to troops, sailors, etc.

Is that the way in which you use "order?"

Believe it or not, the SWP sets out to create an organisation of leaders; working class people who are able to positively intervene in their workplaces, colleges, communities, and put forward a clear set of socialist principles and tactics. In order to do this, they must also commit to the principles of democratic centralism. If they don't like it they leave. Last time I looked, the SWP was a voluntary organisation.

I'm afraid I don't see how "democratic centralism" is in any way a necessity for interventions of any kind?

There is a healthy structural democracy in the SWP. Not perfect by any means, but discussion is held widely through the organisation, so here you are just parading your ignorance of how the SWP works. Meanwhile, your final very funny quip about selling papers, merely betrays your prejudice towards the SWP and the rest of your post simply confirms it.

But discussion is widely held throughout any representative democracy, too. I fail to see how the SWP is not a representative democracy in it's structure, in fact I fail to see how this so called "democratic centralism" can be anything else.

Judging by your analysis of my defence of the SWP in the CU forum, or your analysis of the SWP with regards to the FBU interventions, I would have thought you would have known all this, no?

Well I can hardly mind read to know what you're talking about, can I?

Sam_b

29th December 2010, 18:41

Well I can hardly mind read to know what you're talking about, can I?

I don't understand. Do you need help understanding that the SWP has elected positions such as the CC?

PS how is democratic centralism a 'so-called'? It's not a new term, nor is it exclusively used by our organisation.

electro_fan

29th December 2010, 18:48

Im not in the SWP, but i do sell the Socialist Partys paper, and i like it a lot as it gives you a good chance to talk to people coming up to the stall or on the demo about their views, and some of the time people come up to us wanting to buy them, i dont go around harassing people and telling them to buy the papers, if they want them then they can buy them, if not not. :D i highly doubt the incident that people are talking about with paper sellers trying to sell papers when they everyone else are being physically crushed is real, as someone in a far left party can feel fear just like everyone else!

as for the SWP I am not a great fan of them and the way behave for reasons im sure will be known and i dont need to go into, but i think that like any socialist organisation there are a lot of decent people in the SWP and saying that people in trots groups are just robots selling everyone papers is bollocks :)

electro_fan

29th December 2010, 18:50

Also i have never been "ordered" to do anything, if i can do a stall at a certain time then great, if not then not :D

electro_fan

29th December 2010, 18:56

Erm Im not really sure about that? they are quite opportunistic at times, and one of the main criticisms of them is that in order to try and recruit more people they tone down their message quite frequently (as in the fact that they are advocating that saying "no cuts" straight away will put people off?) And also that they get involved in international causes rather than domestic ones and concentrate more on students than the rest of the population, many of them will leave the swp at the end of it. Given that many of the members leave the swp after a year or so i don't see how they have been more successful?

i have a lot more criticisms but im sure most of them have been covered by other people on other threads. however its true that they are the biggest organisation on the left and are good at getting people along to their events and getting their message across, in a way that other groups could definitely learn a lot from

electro_fan

29th December 2010, 19:03

Well they dont have a base in the trade unions, its largely among university students many of whom leave at the end of the time at university, either to go to another group or away from politics anyway. And most of the things they do (at least for the last few years) have revolved around international events - Im not saying these aren't important however.

I say that they have toned down their messsage a lot depending who they are talking to, to take one example, i mean look at the whole thing with respect, where they started to sort of "suck up" to religious extremists with quite reactionary views - altho tbf they realised their mistake later on? And they have seriously annoyed a lot of people, they have recruited a lot but i think have put a lot more off??

electro_fan

29th December 2010, 19:05

I am not saying we are always right or have all the answers, but i think the cwi have quite a good record in terms of actually campaigning and achieving something from what we have done, both here and internationally?

Aesop

29th December 2010, 19:06

Whether they are opportunistic or whether you agree with their politics, it's undeniable. They are the biggest left party in the UK and have done more to build a revolutionary alternative than other party.

If I'm wrong, then can you please tell which party has?

To be honest this is a very bad line of arguement.

Using your logic, i guess that all the 'marxist-leninists'(like the CPSU, PUWP etc) organisations are immune to criticism because in modern history they have been the only ones in government.

electro_fan

29th December 2010, 19:55

yes it is, you said that they have done more to develop a revolutionary party than anyone else, but if their politics is so watered down and pandering to different interests such as islamist extremists, labour councillors they want to get on the right side of even if they have voted for / carried out cuts (they usually call for a vote for labour in big elections) and the like, rather than having a clear marxist programme of what they want (Im not saying the SPs programme is neccessariy perfect or that we havent been guilty of the same things btw), then how is that developing a revolutionary party, they have done loads to get people involved in different things, they are great at organising, great at PR, really good in the universities and the like, but i don't really think they have done much "revolutionary" work to be honest, they aren't really often on picket lines for instance, and in the process of their activities they have, rightly or wrongly, irritated a lot of people to the extent that many groups have to disassociate themselves from them.

Sam_b

29th December 2010, 20:01

interests such as islamist extremists

Bullshit. Say all you want about RESPECT but 'Islamic Extremists' amounts to petty slander here.

labour councillors

Should we not be trying to get leftist labour councillors to break away from the Labour party, or at least work with them in the spirit of a united front? What about leftist MPs such as Jeremy Corbyn?

but i don't really think they have done much "revolutionary" work to be honest

I hate to take things down to this level, but is your organisation having Brian Caton, the leader of the Prison Officers Association and reactionary screw, particularly 'revolutionary'?

electro_fan

29th December 2010, 20:03

Anyway I dont really want to have a go at another group, I started off this thread defending them because I get sick of sneering bollocks about "paper sellers" etc, so it isnt really my intentions to slag them off, i will stop now, but i just don't think that it is accurate that they have done more than everyone else

electro_fan

29th December 2010, 20:13

Sam_b

29th December 2010, 20:14

EDIT - seen a reply.

electro_fan

29th December 2010, 20:20

anyway i don't want to be rude to you or anything, i think you made good points and perhaps someone can answer them better than me, but i think that all these are common crticisms that have been made at the SWP, not just something ivve made up

Sam_b

29th December 2010, 20:22

the labour councillors thing, the sp said it would work with them, but ONLY IF they said that they wouldn't carry out cuts or vote for them, the swp in some areas have allegedly been saying that you can't have a platform of no cuts whatsoever, because it will put people off, either this is inaccurate in which case i would like to see the actual policy, or this is just more opportunism again

You should know as a CWI member there is no such thing as a 'policy' here - we are not a party standing for office with a manifesto. Organisations such as ours and yours are tactical theoretical engines. 'Allegedly' does not cut it here - put up your source and your claims. What areas are these?

but i think that being a prison officer (not necc a leading one) shouldnt necessarily bar you from being the member of a socialist organisation

This will be where our organisations disagree then. I think having screws in your organisation is the same as having police officers - unacceptable.

i also don't think that they are all "the enemy" and that attacks on prison officers' conditions and pay will also mean attacks on prisoners and a decreased ability to deal with abusive prison officers, when you look at the state of prisons in america which are privately run and in some areas people are literally paid money for how many prisoners they get which has led to innocent peiople being put in jail so people can get more money.

Brian Caton has come out and said that prisoners have too many 'rights'. This guy has a shameful track record going about for years, which you can read about in some threads on this forum. I'm not asking about cuts here - I'm asking about having them in your ranks as comrades with identical class interests.

i also think that its a very tricky dividing line - there are teachers, staff at job centres, etc, all of whom can also play a reactionary role but at the same time attacks on their pay and conditions are still very detrimental to society.

Teachers and job centre staff are not comparable to screws.
http://www.revleft.com/vb/stooges-state-t133815/index.html?t=133815

....The reason the SWP and other organizations on the left object to the SP's description of prison officers as "workers in uniform" and the decisions that flow from that description (such as letting Caton speak at Socialism alongside people like Mark Serwotka) is because prison officers are part of the capitalist state and are responsible for carrying out the decisions of the capitalist judicial system, and as such there is a qualitative difference between these individuals, and, for example, teachers, or nurses, even when they may share the same living standards. During the POA dispute in 2007 the SWP argued that prison officers should be allowed to go on strike and have a union, and we also pointed out that if prison officers were feeling confident enough to defy the government by taking illegal action then there is no reason why other public-sector workers should not do the same, but we also contended that because their role is to uphold the law and order of the bosses, prison workers are frequently pushed towards the most right-wing ideas, and many of them have a proven record of racism and violence. It is evident that whilst working people are punished when they threaten the interests of the bosses by occupying their factories or taking some other form of direct action, prison officers and other groups such as the police who share the same relation to the bourgeois state are able to impose themselves on others and commit acts of violence in defence of the capitalist system without being held accountable for their actions, especially when oppressed groups such as ethnic minorities and political activists are the targets, and this dynamic explains why it is that discrimination and the idea of a structured and regulated society have such an important role in the culture of these armed bodies of men, to take a phrase from Lenin, and why it is that prison officers cannot be considered allies in the class struggle, as I noted above.

Emphasis mine.

electro_fan

29th December 2010, 20:35

well for example in southampton - i dont know about that meeting because i wasn't there, but here for example:

http://www.permanentrevolution.net/entry/3104

i will try and find some more (non-SP related) links, and post them up, unfortunately most of what i have heard is anecdotal (from people who were there at the meetings) but i will find some more articles about it and post them here

electro_fan

29th December 2010, 20:43

I dont think its about what the organisation does or doesn't say, i don't follow a party line on absolutely everything, but at the end of the day the POA is one of the most militant unions and i think that even though their role is often a reactionary one, i don't think that their class interest, fundamentally, is that different to anyone else, do you see many people who went to say Eton and the like becoming prison officers? It is a shit, brutalising and dangerous job, and you are correct in saying that they are pushed to reactionary ideas, so if one isn't then i think fair play to them to be honest

and ive seen anarchists making the argument that you should not support dole staff because of their reactionary role, because they can cut people off benefits and leave them homeless etc, and because some of the way people in the dole office sometimes behave.

i'd rather have well paid prison officers with secure terms and conditions than ones who were completely demoralised and stressed, with no job security and to add to that not in a union and had little notion of solidarity or sympathy with socialist ideas, as i said i agree there should have been more debate about it, but i think just condemning every prison officer , just like condemning every soldier or whatever, is a bit of a fucking mistake tbh

anyway i can tell this is annoying you so i will stop, as i said ive got no wish to criticise the swp and have actually talked about some of the good things that they have done

The Idler

29th December 2010, 20:51

There is a healthy structural democracy in the SWP. Not perfect by any means, but discussion is held widely through the organisation, so here you are just parading your ignorance of how the SWP works.
Bureaucratic centralism lives - Communist Party of Great Britain (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBYQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cpgb.org.uk%2Fworker%2F774%2F bureaucratic.php&rct=j&q=democracy%20swp%20site%3Acpgb.org.uk&ei=YZ0bTY-uFcuChQeJ7qi3Dg&usg=AFQjCNHu48zisQpq1CV46CGsvBUgbQHSUg&sig2=FTdKjsZzhakUIe7gu8c2Gg&cad=rja)

The fight gets ugly - Communist Party of Great Britain (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CB0QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cpgb.org.uk%2Fworker%2F794%2F thefight.php&rct=j&q=democracy%20swp%20site%3Acpgb.org.uk&ei=YZ0bTY-uFcuChQeJ7qi3Dg&usg=AFQjCNFDrXf1romxqJeFqwQYptfoEbaElw&sig2=a9j00H9-pPOnYYkskMpisA&cad=rja)

Victim of 'democracy' :: Weekly Worker 609 - January 26 2006 ... (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CC4QFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cpgb.org.uk%2Fworker2%2Findex .php%3Faction%3Dviewarticle%26article_id%3D832&ei=YZ0bTY-uFcuChQeJ7qi3Dg&usg=AFQjCNFOHaDH5QMCYhO3d_dxztyMtdaH8A&sig2=CPkaAR3Q8e-uAFBRS3-0dQ)

Why I left the SWP | Workers' Liberty (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=10&ved=0CFkQFjAJ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.workersliberty.org%2Fstory%2F 2007%2F12%2F11%2Fwhy-i-left-swp&rct=j&q=democracy%20swp%20site%3Aworkersliberty.org&ei=Z50bTbudM-qShAeurPG2Dg&usg=AFQjCNEZDfbFXvrP2aywKtSpD0aXmxKyUQ&sig2=AMHIremwLoFUJmqMZfnCuQ&cad=rja)

Bullshit. Say all you want about RESPECT but 'Islamic Extremists' amounts to petty slander here.
Socialists tail islamic reaction :: Weekly Worker 407 - November ... (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBYQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cpgb.org.uk%2Fworker2%2Findex .php%3Faction%3Dviewarticle%26article_id%3D1000090&rct=j&q=swp%20islamic%20site%3Acpgb.org.uk&ei=cJYbTdzQMsqwhQer2Li4Dg&usg=AFQjCNFm4XXup56k9qKjjOkpJ1aoKC1R1g&sig2=KAlnhdDqJSP39p2hIxblNg&cad=rja)

Giving excuses leads to active collaboration - Communist Party of ... (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cpgb.org.uk%2Farticle.php%3Fa rticle_id%3D105&rct=j&q=swp%20islamic%20site%3Acpgb.org.uk&ei=cJYbTdzQMsqwhQer2Li4Dg&usg=AFQjCNFEOZA5m2D0WW2A3db4rxCP2F_DeQ&sig2=P6E0zl4IFUXODRGDYdrYHg&cad=rja)

SWP backs the mullahs - official - Communist Party of Great Britain (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=20&ved=0CF8QFjAJOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cpgb.org.uk%2Farticle.php%3Fa rticle_id%3D280&ei=-JsbTe7kKMSZhQfai8G3Dg&usg=AFQjCNGgEO50pqbejjfR1RfIEF_OdNU1xw&sig2=eR3N62qTQCs-n2tG-WYnaA)

Unity with al Sadr - Communist Party of Great Britain (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=12&ved=0CB8QFjABOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cpgb.org.uk%2Farticle.php%3Fa rticle_id%3D225&rct=j&q=democracy%20swp%20site%3Acpgb.org.uk&ei=-p0bTfPkFoOqhAe3rpG3Dg&usg=AFQjCNFVF1W308hFAjx7gGE2X1fN4_X9BQ&sig2=FSp3_t9JCf7Yt2R405aqJA&cad=rja)

SWP and Islamic clerical fascism: poisoning the new anti ... (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBYQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.workersliberty.org%2Fstory%2F 2007%2F06%2F20%2Fswp-and-islamic-clerical-fascism-poisoning-new-anti-capitalists&ei=H5sbTbTrI8WwhAfm3IS3Dg&usg=AFQjCNGpeYt3w93QIAkgeR11o880_OEKhg&sig2=TEejmgg7_MMke8O6MA2Ejw)

The SWP and political Islam: lending support to anti-worker ... (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CCsQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.workersliberty.org%2Fnode%2F6 23&ei=H5sbTbTrI8WwhAfm3IS3Dg&usg=AFQjCNFOE56hSb94E96z4U5k3oqS-SXmxw&sig2=kJi_CuIdj3RiQKfCpnBXpA)

Islamofascism and the SWP | Workers' Liberty (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=17&ved=0CEAQFjAGOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.workersliberty.org%2Fnode%2F6 879&ei=Z5sbTca4AcGGhQe0pt23Dg&usg=AFQjCNEcFqZGrcGOWJDq1S8nEY0LV3gnzA&sig2=3QOT9SBJsnPYVjzxLCvXGQ)

No alliance with fundamentalism! | Workers' Liberty (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=67&ved=0CEEQFjAGODw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.workersliberty.org%2Fnode%2F3 43&ei=pJwbTeWbDIqJhQftt5C4Dg&usg=AFQjCNGkV7_juV0a_-6LQq3tLIGl1DF_eg&sig2=eyTsoX_OI4aoSjbwd_hNvw)

electro_fan

29th December 2010, 20:53

Not sure the AWL which is where some of those links are from, are any better tbh, they have a bit of an obsession with Islam and not in a good way, and support israel ...

Arlekino

29th December 2010, 20:54

I am not in favour of Socialist Workers Party but why some forum readers putting dirt on them, is nothing wrong to sell papers, is spreading good leftist info and is anti capitalist paper. Another why we divided among Communist parties, Revolutionary parties, same division as right wing parties. Should we all united is better for all workers. Please correct me if I am wrong?!

Sam_b

29th December 2010, 20:56

well for example in southampton

eeeh whit? Labeth Council, to my knowledge, has not been set up by the SWP. Furthermore there's nothing there that says the SWP have stated anything, yes anything, that you've said. I don't see the SWP here arguing that some cuts are acceptable, maybe you can show me where the article says so? All I see here is that "there was a meeting, Labour councillors were there, the SWP line is confused". Fine. This doesn't change anything i've said about working with Labour leftists. The labour party is not completely homogenous.

I dont think its about what the organisation does or doesn't say, i don't follow a party line on absolutely everything, but at the end of the day the POA is one of the most militant unions and i think that even though their role is often a reactionary one, i don't think that their class interest, fundamentally, is that different to anyone else, do you see many people who went to say Eton and the like becoming prison officers? It is a shit, brutalising and dangerous job, and you are correct in saying that they are pushed to reactionary ideas, so if one isn't then i think fair play to them to be honest

So i'll take that as a "no Sam, I didn't read the quote you cited debunking what I was about to write very well" then? It would be interesting to see if you regard the police as such 'workers in uniform' with similar class interests to ours as well. You completely ignore the role that prison officers have in our society and how this impacts very much on their class outlook. These people are not allies in the class struggle.

I think it's a mistake having any prison officer in your organisation, in the same way that having any cop would.

Sam_b

29th December 2010, 20:59

Here comes the Idler right on cue with no analysis of his own, but a handy google image search to articles by the AWL and CPGB! Do you pander to the AWL's anti-Arab chauvenism as well?

Great to see your definition and analysis of what is 'Islamic Extremism' and how you thoughtfully included it as well.

electro_fan

29th December 2010, 21:09

no my view on the police is quite complicated :D i don't think they are "workers in uniform", i do however think that they are not all bad people, i think however that the culture and role of the police leads them to behave above the law and have a role in enforcing what crimes are punished and what are not.

i also think though that while the state does use the police in the way that that quote describes, individual police officers are not necessarily the enemy and a few of them could possibly be "won round" and the way to do this is not by screaming at them that they are scum. possibly, because i don't actually know that it is true or not.

and i never said the same of prison officers, i already said it may have been a mistake to allow caton to join and ive no idea if he's still a member.

also, as i've said ive had arguments with anarchists saying that some dole staff are in a similar position because of their role in being able to stop people's benefits, investigate "benefit fraud" and decide whats investigated and whats not, potentially making people homeless etc, i think there can be a definite (seeming) conflict among different sets of workers as to what their interests are but that this can be resolved, and im not convinced that just blanketly condemning every single prison officer is the right way to go

Palingenisis

29th December 2010, 21:11

Whether Class War even had the politics that Palingenisis was attributing too them is highly debatable, and the phrase "The heroic positions taken by Red Action and Class War are well remembered in Ireland" seems a bit bizarre to me.

Devrim

Read what they said in Unfinished Business and their recent reaction to the Ardoyne riots for instance.

electro_fan

29th December 2010, 21:13

yeh the AWL are just as "bad", if not worse, actually a lot worse than the swp, but in a completely diferent way, they have a strange idea of being left wing which involves supporting war in iraq and supporting israel ... and they think that because nobody else supports this bizarre view they are the only real lefties ... lol

The Idler

29th December 2010, 21:15

Here comes the Idler right on cue with no analysis of his own, but a handy google image search to articles by the AWL and CPGB! Do you pander to the AWL's anti-Arab chauvenism as well?
Is that considered "petty slander" of the AWL, or is it just "petty slander" when it criticises the SWP with sourced citations? Address the point rather than the person making the point.
Anyway there is also the commune and I could go on;
beyond mousavi: the movement of the iranian masses « the commune (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=25&ved=0CDAQFjAEOBQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fthecommune.wordpress.com%2F2009%2 F07%2F07%2Fbeyond-mousavi-the-movement-of-the-iranian-masses%2F&rct=j&q=swp%20site%3Athecommune.wordpress.com&ei=UaMbTcqjD8WwhQfhs5S3Dg&usg=AFQjCNGixaJvIby5ne2ZGCqiOBwTfQLUYQ&sig2=UQy4nUCcsGbhW-2Il66pzQ&cad=rja)

Sam_b

29th December 2010, 21:23

Is that considered "petty slander" of the AWL, or is it just "petty slander" when it criticises the SWP with sourced citations?

I think the position of the AWL as being Israel apologists is particularly well documented.

How are these exactly 'sourced citations'? They are not proving any argument as you have not made any. All you have appeared to do is type 'SWP' and 'Islam' into Google and copy and pasted the results. Anything, anything, featuring 'Islam' and the 'SWP' is here, ranging from Iran to RESPECT to Israel et al. However, you've not defined what has been meant by 'Islamic Extremism' nor have you constructed any argument of the sort.

It's pretty ironic that by doing this you fail to address any point.

29th December 2010, 21:29

Sam_b's logic:

Come up with an argument -> "you have no source of that!"
Come up with a plethora of sources -> "you have no argument!"

Yeah...

electro_fan

29th December 2010, 21:29

i have to agree with you there sam, the awl are fucking nuts, iirc their leader called for israel to attack iran :rolleyes:

29th December 2010, 21:31

i have to agree with you there sam, the awl are fucking nuts, iirc their leader called for israel to attack iran :rolleyes:

Notice how he diverts the attention away from the SWP argument towards the AWL being a nut club. Even nutters though may make valid arguments. Don't let Sam_B make you go off topic.

Sam_b

29th December 2010, 21:33

Come up with an argument -> "you have no source of that!"
Come up with a plethora of sources -> "you have no argument!"

So, that's no definition of 'Islamic Extremism' then?

It's funny in light of you making excuses for Communist Students, the youth section of the sect squad you cheerlead from afar, and their joining with the Labour Representation Committee, and then come out with some tripe about wriggling out of things.

To recap, there's no argument and no sources here.

Sam_b

29th December 2010, 21:34

Notice how he diverts the attention away from the SWP argument towards the AWL being a nut club. Even nutters though may make valid arguments. Don't let Sam_B make you go off topic.

Resigning from modship so you have more time to troll?

29th December 2010, 21:37

Resigning from modship so you have more time to troll?

Continue to divert from the topic, you're doing a remarkable job, as always when the SWP is being discussed :)

Sam_b

29th December 2010, 21:42

.
Continue to divert from the topic

So, that's no definition of 'Islamic Extremism' then?

29th December 2010, 21:54

So, that's no definition of 'Islamic Extremism' then?

The Idler already gave plenty of resources to the Weekly Worker's critique to the SWP's adventure in Respect. Of course, you continue to dismiss that "gossip rag" conveniently out of hand.

blake 3:17

29th December 2010, 21:54

I think at the time a lot more people would have heard of Class War. When they existed. They were so funny. I love them.

Sam_b

29th December 2010, 22:00

The Idler already gave plenty of resources to the Weekly Worker's critique to the SWP's adventure in Respect.

I don't see anywhere where I am dispputing this. But there's articles there about everything. The point was in relation to the SWP dabbling in so-called 'Islamic Extremism'. So far nobody has actually given any argument.

You could step up to the plate for once rather than gutter sniping, if you like. What is Islamic Extremism?

Devrim

29th December 2010, 22:25

Read what they said in Unfinished Business and their recent reaction to the Ardoyne riots for instance.

Class War today is not the same organisation as it used to be. It actually dissolved itself in the 1990s and a rump reconstituted it. I don't think that you can really judge by any recent comments. Even before the time of that book, the organisation seemed to be falling apart after all of the business with Andy Anderson.

You forget that I was there at the time and actually knew these people. Yes, many people in Class War held the positions that you suppose they do. Many others held positions more similar to ours. Class War as an organisation at its high point never took positions on things like this, and different issues of its paper expressed contradictory ideas.

Devrim

Hit The North

30th December 2010, 03:19

Well but your posts infer that the leadership is there to order people around, don't they? Why can't people decide for themselves what to do? Why can't they commit themselves to doing this or that? An absence of orders doesn't mean an absence of coordination, does it? Surely You can go out with your friends all at the same time at the same place without any of you ordering the others?

You might infer that from my post, but my post cannot.

How does it not? Unless you are not using "order" in it's common meaning as synonymous to "command"?

From a random dictionary:

–noun
1.
an authoritative direction or instruction; command; mandate.
2.
a command of a court or judge.
3.
a command or notice issued by a military organization or a military commander to troops, sailors, etc.
Is that the way in which you use "order?"

"1. an authoritative direction or instruction; command; mandate" is the way I'm employing the word. What's your point? This still has no implications for how the instructions are arrived at (democratically or managerially) or how they are carried out (dogmatically or flexibly). You seem to be saddled with a simplistic binary between leading and following and this leads you into empty phrase-mongering about authoritarianism and whatnot. What you fail to realise is that all this is undertaken voluntarily and no one is forced to assume any 'line' or 'policy' or do anything they are not prepared to do.

I'm afraid I don't see how "democratic centralism" is in any way a necessity for interventions of any kind?That is evidently your problem. It is also why any discussion between us regarding organisation is doomed to stalemate.

But discussion is widely held throughout any representative democracy, too. I fail to see how the SWP is not a representative democracy in it's structure, in fact I fail to see how this so called "democratic centralism" can be anything else.Duh, well first the members of the SWP do not elect a leadership to represent them, the members represent the party.

Ninel

30th December 2010, 04:50

Look what my somewhat simple question has done...

Widerstand

30th December 2010, 04:54

Yo Bob and Sam, whatever really. I don't have to deal with the SWP in real life, and I'm not willing to attempt reasoning with your insane assumptions that commitment requires being ordered around by a party elite.

Look what my somewhat simple question has done...

It's a SWP thread after all.

Iraultzaile Ezkerreko

30th December 2010, 05:12

Look what my somewhat simple question has done...

Anything that has to do with the IST or the ISO seems to turn into a dog-pile by everyone on members of any IST organizations or the ISO. It's not actually your fault.

Sam_b

30th December 2010, 09:40

Yo Bob and Sam, whatever really. I don't have to deal with the SWP in real life, and I'm not willing to attempt reasoning with your insane assumptions that commitment requires being ordered around by a party elite.

So you're running away from another SWP discussion after you've been challenged then?

Widerstand

30th December 2010, 09:43

So you're running away from another SWP discussion after you've been challenged then?

The discussion wasn't even about the SWP, but feel free to think what you wish.

Sam_b

30th December 2010, 09:52

The discussion wasn't even about the SWP, but feel free to think what you wish.

Why do you mention the SWP in so many of your posts, including your penultimate one here; and in a thread titled 'Socialist Workers Party'?

Like it or not BTB has responded to your post and you show no intentions of defending your position. So yes, i'll say that's pretty much running away.

The Man

31st December 2010, 03:03

I think that a Communist/Socialist party that also wants a state is destructive, and only true Communism in which there is freedom and equality can only be achieved with Anarchy.

Ninel

31st December 2010, 12:39

I think that a Communist/Socialist party that also wants a state is destructive, and only true Communism in which there is freedom and equality can only be achieved with Anarchy.
This isn't about the politics, this is about the parties of the SWP and SP themselves and how they run things.(Read the OP?)

SadieF

8th January 2011, 15:22

Ninel, if this whole left debate/sometimes mud-slinging thing hasn't completely put you off the left and you still want to talk to the SWP, to see if our way of operating suits you... I'm an active member of SWP in Belfast. Are you based here? We can arrange to meet up, and/or you can come to our branch meetings and see what you think. And if you do decide to join and then change your mind it's pretty easy to leave, you just tell the rest of the local branch you're out and then you are - it really is that simple - we don't want anyone who doesn't want to be a member, after all!
You should also get involved with NISA, as someone said before. It's a great, exciting new movement founded by school students and uni students (esp. FEE QUB) - the next protest is on Jan 29th, also at city centre.

Ninel

8th January 2011, 17:58