look what this tosser from the swp had to say about those who download

[ed miliband]

actually, before you read it i'll point out his name is fucking sebastian (budgen), he's a public schoolboy who went to cambridge, and - if you couldn't tell by his shit about "conterhegemony" and what not - he's a big shot in the lucrative industry that is left-wing academia. anyway, without further ado...


"before the internet people had to actually go to the photocopying shop. Now they don't even have to do that and they are outraged when they can't download the stuff for free. Fuckers - I hate them so much...

I make a distinction between the honest downloaders who do it discreetly and will spend money when they have it and the loud-mouthed freeloading scum who have no interest in or understanding of how to build a counterhegemonic apparatus.

I'm not just interested in people being customers but in recognising, to the extent that they are leftists, that they should be involved in building a counterhegemonic apparatus. The anarchoids and lazy leftists of today don't get that so they act like the lowest petty bourgeois individualist swine."

oh, and being high-up in verso and hysterical materialism, the latter of whom charge at least £20 a book, explains mr budgen's anger at downloaders. he wants his money.

[Raúl Duke]

So "honest downloading," paying for music, his book, etc has something to do with a "counter-hegemonic apparatus?"

What the fuck does that even mean?

If this is what passes for left-wing academic discourse in general or wherever this person is from, do not want.

It just seems like complete non-sense. Also, I bet his book sucks if he thinks the way one downloads (or not) has something to do with a so-called "counter-hegemonic apparatus." I don't see the logic in that.


he wants his money.I guess if he wanted to find his hated dreadful "lowest petty bourgeois individualist swine" all he had to do was look in the mirror...

[ed miliband]

to be fair, i've had much worse experiences with "left-wing" academics; if i have to hear any more about post-colonial queer theory readings of reformation literature i'll shoot myself. they really think there's something radical about it, bless 'em.

[Ravachol]

actually, before you read it i'll point out his name is fucking sebastian (budgen), he's a public schoolboy who went to cambridge, and - if you couldn't tell by his shit about "conterhegemony" and what not - he's a big shot in the lucrative industry that is left-wing academia. anyway, without further ado...



oh, and being high-up in verso and hysterical materialism, the latter of whom charge at least £20 a book, explains mr budgen's anger at downloaders. he wants his money.

Haha this dude uses swine as an insult in a non-ironic fashion? Oh man I wanna live in the UK...



hysterical materialism


Gonna steal that one

[piet11111]

I download anything i find interesting and eventually buy whats worth the money.

Speaking of that give me the ability to buy Soviet storm world war 2 in the east on blu-ray already !!!

[Jimmie Higgins]

So you don't think that radicals should publish things? Just internet pamphlets alone?

If he means "downloading" in the abstract, then yes, download away - steal books whatever. But if he's speaking specifically about "counter-hegemonic":lol: efforts, i.e. left-wing press, then I agree with him since most are not making a lot of money; small circulation or speciality books are more expensive to produce; the money will likely go into publicizing left-wing works or producing more texts and I think we need more current left-wing books.

If the books are po-mo academic naval-gazing with the revenue going to some publishing house that just does academic or general readership books (or even good historical radical texts sold and publushed through a mainstream house), then who cares. If it's just that you don't like the politics of the book, then what does it matter to you one way or another? But - given the personal funds at the time - I would always make a point to actually purchase things from radical publishers because as far as I'm aware, Virso and AK press and so on aren't being backed by the Koch brothers or Murdoch or whatnot but - at least with AK - do need donnations and book sale revenue to operate.

[hatzel]

Matey should just get himself a blog and call it a day...

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

I can't afford too many left-wing books because they are fucking expensive.
I think by saying that only left-wings books shouldn't be downloaded, you're basically saying that only people with more money can study left-wing books. Which excludes the groups that should read those texts. I prefer to have the books, but downloading left-wing books has helped me a lot to be able to educate myself more than I would've without downloading. I think any left-winger who is against downloading is an idiot.

[Jimmie Higgins]

I think by saying that only left-wings books shouldn't be downloaded, you're basically saying that only people with more money can study left-wing books.By saying that radicals should ONLY publish things for free you're basically arguing that only the privitely wealthy should write and produce radical books?

I think for the most part the left does make an effort to make things available and affordable - old texts are all available for free online and so on. Many take donnations or have shorter PDFs and so on. But not being a college student, myself, but also needing to know how radicals delt with different situations, trying to find out about hidden labor battles in history and so on, means that I also want and need acess to a lot of old out of print books and would like more up to date and in-depth things.

I make $12 an hour and don't spend loosely, but I'd rather pay $30 for a radical book, than not have access to that information or have to pay $200 for an out of print copy of some radical text. I also just can't read anything longer than a pamphelt online anyway.

[Vanguard1917]

While i have not an ounce of sympathy for 'post-colonial queer theory readings of reformation literature', JH is right: if books were consumed for free, they would not be produced. This is capitalist society, not cloud cuckoo land.

Not to defend his choice of tone, but Budgen's point about 'petit-bourgeois individualism' has some validity. Fashionable middle-class campaigns for free downloading are in effect a slightly more radical extention of consumer activism. They offer no criticism of the system of production, only a utopian demand that consumers should be cut more slack by industry.

[Rugged Collectivist]

While i have not an ounce of sympathy for 'post-colonial queer theory readings of reformation literature', JH is right: if books were consumed for free, they would not be produced. This is capitalist society, not cloud cuckoo land.

Physical books wouldn't. People could still publish books on the internet easily for free. Unless you're saying that people wouldn't produce books because there would be no profit motive. which is also false.


Not to defend his choice of tone, but Budgen's point about 'petit-bourgeois individualism' has some validity. Fashionable middle-class campaigns for free downloading are in effect a slightly more radical extention of consumer activism. They offer no criticism of the system of production, only a utopian demand that consumers should be cut more slack by industry.

I think they do in a way. The fact that people refuse to pay is an implicit rejection of the system of production, since profit is an integral part of that system.

Maybe that's not really a criticism, and maybe the people participating in these "middle class" campaigns don't even realize it, but it's not something I think we should be condemning.

[The Idler]

So company owners should be able to make a profit on the products made by their workers? Even when it costs virtually nothing to distribute and share.
Hell, even anarcho-caps exist who refuse to defend intellectual property. To hear it from a leftist is surprising to say the least.

[hatzel]

Fashionable middle-class campaigns for free downloading are in effect a slightly more radical extention of consumer activism.

Perhaps. The fact that he seems to consider the leftish literature section in Waterstones a 'counterhegemonic apparatus,' however, means that he's far from the person to make such a point...

[TheRedAnarchist23]

I'm an anarchoid, and a lowly petty bourgeois individualist pig!:D

[ed miliband]

Perhaps. The fact that he seems to consider the leftish literature section in Waterstones a 'counterhegemonic apparatus,' however, means that he's far from the person to make such a point...

precisely. if i see something from ak press that i'm interested in i'll probably buy it, not out of any moral duty i feel i have to support "radical publishers", but because i like to have books as objects (and recently ak press have been publishing some nicely printed and designed stuff). if i wish to purchase something from ak press i either have to go to a radical bookshop or get it online. in contrast verso titles are available in most high street bookshops across britain -- they're a big company churning out "radicalism" for a middle-class / academic audience.

if they aren't making enough profit to keep 'em afloat, fuck 'em; the world doesn't need any more althusser republications or books by guardian columnists.

[Vanguard1917]

Physical books wouldn't. People could still publish books on the internet easily for free. Unless you're saying that people wouldn't produce books because there would be no profit motive. which is also false.


So company owners should be able to make a profit on the products made by their workers? Even when it costs virtually nothing to distribute and share.


The cost of publishing is not just paper and shelf space in the bookshop. A great deal of labour and resources goes into publishing anything of a high standard, from the time and material required to research and write the book, to editing and publicising it afterwards.

These involve costs which need to be met somehow, either by individual consumers, by an organisational subsidy, or by 'society' (e.g. state grants). Research, writing and publishing aren't cost-free endeavours. If they were, we would not be opposing cuts in university funding, for example.

After all, art and scholarship owe their existence to the production of an economic surplus in society. They can only come about in a society that's able to meet their material costs. Mass theft may entail a crude rejection of the market, but it's not a solution or alternative to it.

[Vanguard1917]

Perhaps. The fact that he seems to consider the leftish literature section in Waterstones a 'counterhegemonic apparatus,' however, means that he's far from the person to make such a point...

No doubt. Isn't the Pirate Party seen as 'counter-hegemonic' by 'new left'/Verso/Occupy/'new social movements' types? Not when it affects their own wallets, it seems...

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

After all, art and scholarship owe their existence to the production of an economic surplus in society. They can only come about in a society that's able to meet their material costs. Mass theft may entail a crude rejection of the market, but it's not a solution or alternative to it.

Seems a pretty damn good solution to me. Note that despite mass piracy (NOT theft - if I were to make an exact copy of your car, what exactly have I stolen from you?), society still manages to produce the surpluses necessary to support artists and scholars.

Now why am I not surprised that you've fallen for the kind of rhetoric that entirely parasitic industries employ to justify their profits?

[Vanguard1917]

Seems a pretty damn good solution to me. Note that despite mass piracy (NOT theft - if I were to make an exact copy of your car, what exactly have I stolen from you?), society still manages to produce the surpluses necessary to support artists and scholars.

Would books, CDs and DVDs (or their electronic equivalents) continue to be produced if they were not sold but only 'copied' for free? No, they wouldn't - because capitalist society produces commodities to be sold on the market, not for anything else.

You could, of course, argue, as I would, that books, CDs and DVDs should not be commodities. But then you would need to propose a viable alternative to sustain their production (assuming you see their sustained production as desirable). Mass theft/piracy - or 'copying' - does not, of course, constitute such an alternative.

[The Idler]

Sorry but you're not a Marxist if you can see no alternative to commodity form and extraction of surplus value.

[l'Enfermé]

I hope no one gets the brilliant idea to create a "petty bourgeois individualist swine" user group and set it as their main tendency...because I want to do it first.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Would books, CDs and DVDs (or their electronic equivalents) continue to be produced if they were not sold but only 'copied' for free? No, they wouldn't - because capitalist society produces commodities to be sold on the market, not for anything else.

This ignores the fact that anyone with an internet connection can already get loads of stuff for free.


You could, of course, argue, as I would, that books, CDs and DVDs should not be commodities. But then you would need to propose a viable alternative to sustain their production (assuming you see their sustained production as desirable). Mass theft/piracy - or 'copying' - does not, of course, constitute such an alternative.

Not in itself, no. But piracy or no piracy, people will still produce intellectual stuff. Piracy just makes it easier for people of limited financial means to get hold of certain things.

[Rugged Collectivist]

Would books, CDs and DVDs (or their electronic equivalents) continue to be produced if they were not sold but only 'copied' for free? No, they wouldn't - because capitalist society produces commodities to be sold on the market, not for anything else.

How do you explain the multitudes of music, movies, and literature that are produced under capitalism and released for free on the internet?



You could, of course, argue, as I would, that books, CDs and DVDs should not be commodities. But then you would need to propose a viable alternative to sustain their production

Communism.

[Vanguard1917]

This ignores the fact that anyone with an internet connection can already get loads of stuff for free.

They can only get them for free because other consumers sustain their production by paying for them. If everyone (or enough people) decided not to pay for them, they would not be produced. Unless, that is, as i said above, there is an alternative means to fund their production.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

They can only get them for free because other consumers sustain their production by paying for them. If everyone decided not to pay for them, they would not be produced. Unless, that is, as i said above, there is an alternative means to fund their production.

Of course there is, otherwise nothing would ever be released for free.

[Vanguard1917]

Of course there is, otherwise nothing would ever be released for free.

Yes. So mass piracy is no solution to market distribution. In fact, its existence depends on that of the market.

[Lynx]

What I get for free allows me to spend money elsewhere. This is true for any consumer who has limited funds at their disposal.

[The Idler]

Free: The Future of a Radical Price - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free:_The_Future_of_a_Radical_Price)

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Yes. So mass piracy is no solution to market distribution. In fact, its existence depends on that of the market.

So fucking what? It is a solution for getting stuff when one is broke.

[Hit The North]

oh, and being high-up in verso and hysterical materialism, the latter of whom charge at least £20 a book, explains mr budgen's anger at downloaders. he wants his money.

If he's so high up in Verso, he should know that they make a lot of their content free to download HERE (http://fckvrso.wordpress.com/)

[Vanguard1917]

So fucking what? It is a solution for getting stuff when one is broke.

That's fine. I'm not criticising it from the perspective of morality.

[ed miliband]

If he's so high up in Verso, he should know that they make a lot of their content free to download HERE (http://fckvrso.wordpress.com/)

no need for the sarcastic response, a quick google search will inform you that sebastian is commissioning editor for verso -- so yes, very high up indeed! oh, and is verso behind that? perhaps that's what sebastian meant about a "counterhegemonic apparatus" -- at any rate, it didn't stop his lot threatening to sue a website run by activists giving away free verso books earlier this year.

e: because the last bit of my message was too troll-y.

[Vanguard1917]

but you're a sectarian in the classical sense, so i guess defending a privately educated oxbridge graduate who happens to be a member of your party is more important than supporting your classes' right to free access of information.

Could i ask how you believe a publisher would go about funding the release of their books for free? Are you calling for state subsidies?

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

I mean, I think it's true, it's not possible to mass-produce/distribute books/music whatever in a centralized way without people coughing up cash for them. It's precisely for this reason that we need to turn toward networks of autonomous small producers/distributors. For an example, I think it's worth looking to the mass distribution of The Coming Insurrection. While there is a swanky published version, I'm going to risk saying on personal observation that it is typically encountered in photocopied form. I can say that I have personally distributed hundreds of copies, all of which I "avoided paying for". Similarly, a band I played bass for made it to #15 on the national college charts on the basis of super-cheap cassette only production and sharing through networks of friends, workplaces, etc. By being able to sell hand-copied cassettes at $2-$5 a piece (ie production/transportation costs), it achieved wide distribution among people who have very little cash to spare.
Honestly, I think these forms are more likely to emerge as an effective party than fucking Verso. I mean, unless everyone is shoplifting their Verso books, I think the relationships formed in sharing through anticapitalist networks are more transformative than buying any mass-produced-by-wage-labour book through a capitalist retailer, even if it has t3h m0$t r3v0luti0n4ry l1n3 3v4r!!!

[ed miliband]

Could i ask how you believe a publisher would go about funding the release of their books for free? Are you calling for state subsidies?

dunno how you could read that into what you've quoted, i was just trolling htn (and edited my post before you quoted it, because it was an obvious troll).

anyway, i already answered this -- if verso aren't making enough profit to support themselves then, as i put it earlier, "fuck 'em; the world doesn't need any more althusser republications or books by guardian columnists". i absolutely do not believe that they should be subsidised by the state, and you're a bit thick if you drew that conclusion.

[Vanguard1917]

dunno how you could read that into what you've quoted, i was just trolling htn (and edited my post before you quoted it, because it was an obvious troll).

anyway, i already answered this -- if verso aren't making enough profit to support themselves then, as i put it earlier, "fuck 'em; the world doesn't need any more althusser republications or books by guardian columnists". i absolutely do not believe that they should be subsidised by the state, and you're a bit thick if you drew that conclusion.

You said that publishers like Verso should allow free access to their publications. Do you still advocate that? If so, how do you believe they should go about this? If individual consumers aren't going to be giving them the money to go on publishing books, and if the state is not going to either, who/what is?

PS: Unlike yourself, i have not used a derogatory tone or language with you, in the hope that you would be a mature adult and respond to criticism like a man.

[ed miliband]

You said that publishers like Verso should allow free access to their publications. Do you still advocate that? If so, how do you believe they should go about this? If individual consumers aren't going to be giving them the money to go on publishing books, and if the state is not going to either, who/what is?

PS: Unlike yourself, i have not used a derogatory tone or language with you, in the hope that you would be a mature adult and respond to criticism like a man.

no, i didn't say verso should allow free access to their publications; it's quite obvious that verso, whatever pretensions they have to radicalism or whatever, have to operate within capitalism, etc., etc., etc. but from a communist perspective, so what?

i support people taking stuff from verso -- free access to their publications -- i don't expect verso to support that in turn. i was suggesting that hit the north should support that too, rather than seemingly defending sebastian by sarcastically suggesting he wasn't an important figure within verso.

and if no consumers give verso money (which realistically isn't going to happen, they have a massive market if one takes into account purchases by academic institutions): oh well, buh-bye verso :(

[black magick hustla]

there's a ton of quality journals out there that have both an online prescence and also a print prescence, which in my opinion, is how you should do things. booofuckinghoohoo that i don't feel compelled to give my $$$$$ to the average left wing racket/professional left wing intellectual/community organizer.

[Lynx]

Who will pay? How about this (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanity_press) ?

[ed miliband]

Who will pay? How about this (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanity_press) ?

the left are already doing that...

http://www.zero-books.net/welcome-new.html

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

Fuck vanity presses! Just learn to fucking steal photocopies!

(see my last post)

[o well this is ok I guess]

I paid full price for a verso book the other day. I felt like shit the whole day after (cuz I couldn't afford food).
tl;dr it's wrong to steal from verso, cuz they're left-wing.
Man I remember a story where a bunch of hooligans crashed a Verso party and stole a bunch of books.

[Jimmie Higgins]

the left are already doing that...

http://www.zero-books.net/welcome-new.htmlThe left? THis company you linked to sells books on capitalist management!



Business Books encapsulates the freshest thinkers and the most successful practitioners in the areas of marketing, management, economics, finance and accounting, sustainable and ethical business, heart business, people management, leadership, motivation, biographies, business recovery and development and personal/executive development.


So while deriding small publishers who focus on radical titles and politics like Verso and AK, your alternative model is to have capitalist publishers set up free online radical "imprint" titles?:lol:

Again, this backs up Vangard1917's argument that "free online" books still require some sort of source of funding and when capitalist music and book publishers offer "free downloads" this model is only possible because of the profits coming form somewhwere else. Often it's because of their general titles that major publishing companies will put out some left-wing books (which is great that some of these titles are out there no matter who publishes them, but again, I don't see much of an ethical problem with stealing from Penguin or whatever because they are not going to specifically invest in publishing left-wing books anyway) - in this specific example, it's because the author paid to have the book published. This ignores that these companies are adding to exploitation of the induvidual producer who then must do all the marketing, editing, and publicizing of the book themselves (which also takes a great deal of funds). And it ignores the other function of radical presses - not just to be print-shops but to actually aid in getting these voices out there. AK is greater than the induvidual books it sells because it can develop a relationship, people know and can generally trust the viewpoint and the sucess of one book on the Wobbilies or something can then aid in other titles by the same company. Maybe there are differnet models for this, the induvidual authors paying to have their books printed can form a mutual promotion and aid group - but then isn't that a de-facto publishing house anyway?

[o well this is ok I guess]

left? THis company you linked to sells books on capitalist management! I'm not finding it.
And in case you didn't notice, he was accusing zer0 of being a vanity press.

[Devrim]

Obviously publishing books costs money, and equally obviously political organisations have to fund their activities.

I think that the advent of the internet and digital media has completly changed the way that we have to approach propaganda and publications, and I think that whilst nobody has really grasped the nature of the change yet, some people seem to be virtually unaware that a change is even happening.

Personally while not a member of an organisation at the moment, I do regularly donate money to support communist political activity. To me this is important. I don't buy into the idea that we should support so-called 'left wing businesses', which is essentially what is meant by 'counterhegemonic apparatus' here.

If a member of some organisation I was sympathetic to was telling me that I should buy a copy of their paper instead of reading it on the internet in order to fund the organisation, I would think that he was wrong about the model, but at least have some sympathy.

When somebody from the management of a company with "global sales approaching $3,000,000 per year" tells me I should give them more money, to be quite honest, I am not in anyway sympathetic.

Devrim

[ed miliband]

The left? THis company you linked to sells books on capitalist management!



So while deriding small publishers who focus on radical titles and politics like Verso and AK, your alternative model is to have capitalist publishers set up free online radical "imprint" titles?:lol:

Again, this backs up Vangard1917's argument that "free online" books still require some sort of source of funding and when capitalist music and book publishers offer "free downloads" this model is only possible because of the profits coming form somewhwere else. Often it's because of their general titles that major publishing companies will put out some left-wing books (which is great that some of these titles are out there no matter who publishes them, but again, I don't see much of an ethical problem with stealing from Penguin or whatever because they are not going to specifically invest in publishing left-wing books anyway) - in this specific example, it's because the author paid to have the book published. This ignores that these companies are adding to exploitation of the induvidual producer who then must do all the marketing, editing, and publicizing of the book themselves (which also takes a great deal of funds). And it ignores the other function of radical presses - not just to be print-shops but to actually aid in getting these voices out there. AK is greater than the induvidual books it sells because it can develop a relationship, people know and can generally trust the viewpoint and the sucess of one book on the Wobbilies or something can then aid in other titles by the same company. Maybe there are differnet models for this, the induvidual authors paying to have their books printed can form a mutual promotion and aid group - but then isn't that a de-facto publishing house anyway?

what 'o well this is okay' said, i wasn't linking to them in a positive manner, but yeah... "the left"; like verso, zer0 like to act at being a radical left-wing collective or something, and i was just pointing out that they are essentially a vanity press.

oh, also, previously in this thread hit the north suggested verso were behind 'fuck verso', in some weird bid to imply his fellow party member -- commissioning editor of verso -- wasn't an important figure in the company. little bit of research suggests verso have absolutely nothing to do with 'fuck verso', so i don't know where he got that from.

[Hit The North]

oh, also, previously in this thread hit the north suggested verso were behind 'fuck verso', in some weird bid to imply his fellow party member -- commissioning editor of verso -- wasn't an important figure in the company. little bit of research suggests verso have absolutely nothing to do with 'fuck verso', so i don't know where he got that from.

Actually I was labouring under the misunderstanding that the site was legit Verso - didn't notice the obvious 'fuck verso' id :blushing:. But, anyway, I have no interest in defending Verso as a publishing house or the integrity or otherwise of the individual from the SWP, someone I have never met or know anything about. So really you can take your assumptions about my intentions and insert them in a manner that will enhance your self-pleasure, comrade ;).

[Rugged Collectivist]

Hey, I just had an idea. Why don't leftists just publish their books online and use ad revenue to fund later projects?

[black magick hustla]

i think the most honest thing to do is to have an online version but also a buyable, slick, print form. when some leftwingers goes on a rant about how writing costs $$$$ etc. it reminds me of older writers who whine about how they are making less $$$ cuz' of the internet. i don't think political ideology excuses you of the fact that you need to produce a quality product that people are willing to pay for as opposed to just throw money at it cuz of charity. especially in marginal, political millieus, there is a tendency to release a lot of robotic, stale output as opposed to a smart, but shorter and slick product. although consciousness isn't raised in massive amounts by nice "marketing", it does help to have respect for your audience and give them something interesting to chew on and nice to look at. it's hard to take the ICT seriously when their logo reminds me of some dude waving a bat against something. i've seen people on a shoestring budget release more exciting stuff than centralized political organizations that ask for a non trivial amount of $$$ for dues

[Flying Purple People Eater]

that you would be a mature adult and respond to criticism like a man.
Obviously! We wouldn't dare want to respond to criticism like those primordial women, would we? The penis validates all.

[Vanguard1917]

Obviously! We wouldn't dare want to respond to criticism like those primordial women, would we? The penis validates all.

Quite right. I should have said 'like a man/woman'.

[Ocean Seal]

People don't buy my book...

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/32595219.jpg

[The Idler]

Its always the dinosaur left groups and never groups like CrimethInc who complain about the internet and piracy.

[Ravachol]

Its always the dinosaur left groups and never groups like CrimethInc who complain about the internet and piracy.

Yeah, and whatever folks think of Crimethinc., man have they got slickly designed releases.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

Despite the SWP being as shitty as they are, we must remember that all of their splits failed to produce anything of worth and that they are the must relevant socialist party in Britain, so despite our misgivings we ought to slog along and hope they become less awful if they get into parliament.

[Ostrinski]

I know someone who had a somewhat similar experience with the ISO. The ISO runs Haymarket Books (which I think is a great publisher, btw) and they would always have reading groups with only books released by Haymarket and you had to buy them because if you downloaded them they would complain about piracy and such.

[Igor]

Despite the SWP being as shitty as they are, we must remember that all of their splits failed to produce anything of worth and that they are the must relevant socialist party in Britain, so despite our misgivings we ought to slog along and hope they become less awful if they get into parliament.

I'll bet my right hand in that they'd only become exponentially more awful if they ever got into the parliament.

Also I can't stand the whole "most relevant" thing because for me personally "relevance" is of no interest if their politics are disagreeable for me. Of course it's nice to see people being interested in leftism even if it means they support the SWP, but just them being big doesn't really mean I should feel any different about their politics than if had ten persons on it.

Also SWP splits failed to produce anything of worth largely because they didn't produce anything that was particularly that different. People who already disagree with SWP will almost certainly disagree with those splinter groups as well, so nothing really will happen.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

I know someone who had a somewhat similar experience with the ISO. The ISO runs Haymarket Books (which I think is a great publisher, btw) and they would always have reading groups with only books released by Haymarket and you had to buy them because if you downloaded them they would complain about piracy and such.

I feel like every mainstream tendency has it's shittiness. Maoism has the preMLM idiots who defend every bourgeois revolution with red flags (I'm talking about you MaoistRebelNews), Marxist Leninism has the dogma worshiping folks at the Marxist Leninist (Not the newspaper, which is pretty decent, I mean the blog http://marxistleninist.wordpress.com/ ) and you've got these trots who behind all of their talk of fake socialism, seem to preach what looks like the Yugoslavian system of "market" socialism, at least in practice if not in words.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

I'll bet my right hand in that they'd only become exponentially more awful if they ever got into the parliament.

Also I can't stand the whole "most relevant" thing because for me personally "relevance" is of no interest if their politics are disagreeable for me. Of course it's nice to see people being interested in leftism even if it means they support the SWP, but just them being big doesn't really mean I should feel any different about their politics than if had ten persons on it.

Also SWP splits failed to produce anything of worth largely because they didn't produce anything that was particularly that different. People who already disagree with SWP will almost certainly disagree with those splinter groups as well, so nothing really will happen.

Well look at the two controversies that we've seen on this board. One was about piracy and the other was about flaws in their system of democratic centralism. It's important to note that neither of these flaws have anything to do with their politics or ideology, they aren't trying to rehabilitate any form of
Bernsteinism, they aren't telling you to vote Labour, sure there was that one controversy over how they screwed over the Egyptian trots, but other than that their politics have been pretty decent and principled for a socialist party
in the mainstream. So yea, once they start practicing revisionism than to hell with them, then there would be no difference between them and the Labour party, but for right now they've got good politics but shitty politicians. So I think we can hold our noses for now and hope for the best

[ed miliband]

lol, they do tell people to vote labour.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

lol, they do tell people to vote labour.

Wait, what? But I thought they ran their own candidates? Are you sure you aren't talking about the IMT? Do you have a source?

[ed miliband]

Wait, what? But I thought they ran their own candidates? Are you sure you aren't talking about the IMT? Do you have a source?

they don't run their own candidates in elections as the swp although occasionally do as part of coalitions or front.

they're well-known for the line "vote labour without illusions", for e.g.:

http://www.workersliberty.org/story/2008/12/13/swp-goes-back-vote-labour-without-illusions

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

they don't run their own candidates in elections as the swp although occasionally do as part of coalitions or front.

they're well-known for the line "vote labour without illusions", for e.g.:

http://www.workersliberty.org/story/2008/12/13/swp-goes-back-vote-labour-without-illusions

Oh come the fuck on, why is it that whenever a trot party gets an excess of five members they become so fucking shitty. I mean, come on trots, you're smarter than that, I'm not even patronizing you, you really are. You were the ones who saw through Stalin's bullshit before anyone else, you really should know better than to have such god awful politics. I mean, seriously you guys

That's it, I'm done with them. The UK will never have a revolution. Never, ever, ever, ever. It is simply impossible, it would defy the laws of physics. The only way to bring socialism to the UK is to exterminate every single British person on that god forsaken island and use it as a penal colony for reactionaries.


Edit: I realize this reaction was a bit much, but for a long time I had a certain degree of hope in the British Trotkyite left which was now just shattered, I'll keep this post here for your amusement

[Raúl Duke]

that's a bit harsh!

plus there are other currents besides British labour-voting Trotskyists.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

that's a bit harsh!

plus there are other currents besides British labour-voting Trotskyists.

Fair enough, it is a bit harsh. I was thinking about editing it but looking back the tone of the post is some what amusing, so I'll just post this disclaimer here so the rest of you can get a good chuckle from me busting a blood vessel

[Flying Purple People Eater]

the only way to bring socialism to the uk is to exterminate every single british person on that god forsaken island and use it as a penal colony for reactionaries.
Death to the brits!

[Geiseric]

Most of the stuff I read is on marxists, but i'm guilty of downloading Capital and State and Revolution. Not to mention all the Trotsky books I really don't see the point of buying, since he obviously doesn't see any of the money, and none of the money spent would honestly go towards anything I support, which would of been different if say the Black Panthers were selling books I wanted, for a good price, and the money would go to whatever they were doing.

[Geiseric]

Oh come the fuck on, why is it that whenever a trot party gets an excess of five members they become so fucking shitty. I mean, come on trots, you're smarter than that, I'm not even patronizing you, you really are. You were the ones who saw through Stalin's bullshit before anyone else, you really should know better than to have such god awful politics. I mean, seriously you guys

That's it, I'm done with them. The UK will never have a revolution. Never, ever, ever, ever. It is simply impossible, it would defy the laws of physics. The only way to bring socialism to the UK is to exterminate every single British person on that god forsaken island and use it as a penal colony for reactionaries.


Edit: I realize this reaction was a bit much, but for a long time I had a certain degree of hope in the British Trotkyite left which was now just shattered, I'll keep this post here for your amusement

All of them at one point split off the mainstream trotskyist movement. Just sayin. But I agree that if you don't really criticize, or objectively try to work inside of (for the better obviously, I mean trying to get rid of types like Gordon Brown and Tony Blair) or try to get people to split from Labor into the communist party, and still tell people to vote for Labor, there is a problem.

I have noticed a bureaucacy forming in already small, quasi significant leftist groups, with the best example of all of these bureaucrats being Chairman Bob Avakian. They seem to be the ones with the problem of formulating politics that move the working class, not the "party", forward.