This is problematic [Archive]

Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist

11th February 2014, 19:30

Is the American International Socialist Organization (http://www.internationalsocialist.org/) (which was closely linked to the SWP) about to face its Comrade Delta moment?
Speculation is growing this morning.
Setting the cat amongst the pigeons the Charnel House (http://thecharnelhouse.org/2014/02/08/more-leaked-iso-documents/) yesterday revealed this:
“Posted on social media by a member obviously embittered by the proceedings thus far, and by the ISO Steering Committee more generally.”

So this is how the ISO steering committee works, I guess:
If someone sends angry e-mails to an important Lenin scholar — start getting involved later that day.
If someone’s critical of the leadership and is late paying dues (or hasn’t paid “enough”) — send an e-mail saying he or she isn’t a member anymore.
If a member rapes someone — don’t do anything for over a year, hide this from most members of the branch in question, and take it to the disciplinary committee only after the rest of the branch finds out accidentally.
If someone leaks documents showing that the steering committee covered up the above-mentioned rape to “bad” socialists like Ross Wolfe — make snarky Facebook comments attacking the offending member for being disloyal.
Maybe they were just having another 3 margarita meeting!
The said Wolfie adds,

Should be interesting seeing how they handled the SWP rape allegations coverup, also, especially in light of the way the ISO’s handled the reported rape offense within its own ranks as revealed by the 2014 documents.
You can download them below (http://thecharnelhouse.org/2014/02/08/more-leaked-iso-documents/)(NOTE: For members only)
Howie’s Corner (http://howiescorner.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/sexual-conduct-allegations-emerge-in.html) helpfully posted,
Sexual conduct allegations emerge in International Socialist Organisation (USA)
The “Comrade Daniel” affair
It is in Pre-convention bulletin no 19 (http://rosswolfe.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/preconvention-bulletin-19.pdf) that we find the latest far-left scandal. This revolves around a certain “comrade daniel”.
Full story – as it stands at present - here (http://howiescorner.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/sexual-conduct-allegations-emerge-in.html).
An allegation of violation was dealt with by the scandalous approach the SWP took in a similar case,

During the investigation, it was revealed that two members of the current (2013) SDBC had known a year
prior that an accusation had been made, one of whom was also on the SDBC with “Daniel” at the time of
the incident (July 2012). As of July 2013, no one had spoken to the victim, no disciplinary action had been
taken against “Daniel,” no fewer than five San Diego comrades knew that there was an accusation,
including two members of the (2012) SDBC, and the ISOSC was also aware.* The accusation was not
investigated further in 2012, in part due to the way it was brought (also on Facebook), and the person
bringing it (also hostile to the ISO). People didn’t want to bother the alleged victim about it.

The document concludes that:
The primary failure in this situation was that no ISO member suggested or took the initiative to contact the victim directly to get her account of what had happened. This mistake was made by every member who was in some way aware that an accusation had been made, regardless of their position in leadership or their dedication to fighting sexism. We are not claiming that any ISO members acted in bad faith, but that is precisely the point: Even with the best of intentions, our established procedure produces huge failures.
As Howie comments: it is wrong that these groups still try to judge on these serious issues through internal investigations.
Shiraz Socialist (http://shirazsocialist.wordpress.com/2014/02/08/posh-pseudo-trotties/) comments, “Anyone with a lot of spare time there are tons of bulletins from the last four conferences of the American ISO (former comrades of the SWP)”.

For those who wish to further explore the ISO this (http://theredplebeian.wordpress.com/2013/02/03/the-expulsion-of-the-international-socialist-organization-from-the-international-socialist-tendency-in-2001/) gives an outline the spat that led to the British SWP “expelling” them from the International Socialist Tendency.

Obviously these issues are going to come up during the next convention where a number of internal reforms are supposed to occur and various factions are supposed to air their grievances. So considering the timing of this affair I imagine there will be direct repercussions in the convention. Hopefully the victims here can get the justice they deserve

Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist

11th February 2014, 19:31

Here is the link to the original article. I would have put it in the OP but unfortunately the edit feature isn't working

http://tendancecoatesy.wordpress.com/2014/02/09/the-american-international-socialist-organization-iso-facing-swp-crisis/

redguarddude

16th February 2014, 16:39

Trap Queen Voxxy

16th February 2014, 16:48

This is absolutely disgusting.

Os Cangaceiros

17th February 2014, 01:03

For a different point of view on leaking documents:
http://kasamaproject.org/threads/entry/leaking-internal-iso-docs-a-question-of-revolutionary-ethics

As a result of the debate in the comments, the author did a follow up article: http://kasamaproject.org/threads/entry/killing-lenin-again-the-conscious-crusade-against-left-security-culture

That bottom link is pretty dumb. Esp. the insinuation that these sorts of leaks somehow jeopardize the ISO before the state. The ISO is a legal organization which holds public meetings, if the state wanted to screw with them it would be incredibly easy (the same holds true for "right-wing crazies"). The other argument, that the leaks are tasteless/salacious expositions of people's personal lives for all to see, is a separate one, and one that I'm not particularly interested in, but the argument that such leaks represent a potential existential threat to groups like the ISO is laaaaaame. Or rather, if such leaks do represent an existential threat (seeing as how the ISO is not an illegal organization and the leaks are not "dark secrets", as Ely himself admits), what does that say about the ISO or other groups?

Alexios

17th February 2014, 01:41

A Revolutionary Tool

17th February 2014, 03:36

Lol. The ISO is the last thing on the US's agenda, believe me. Between support for the US's Islamist allies abroad and generally avoiding radicalism altogether, it's highly doubtful that the state has any interest in compromising the ISO (not even giving attention to the massive elephant in the room: the fact that the ISO is tiny and insignificant).

The ISO is the largest socialist group calling itself Marxist last time I checked and the government had infiltrated and slapped members of FRSO with supporting terrorism charges...So it's not naive to say that there would be infiltration here(in fact I'd say it would be naive to think there was no infiltration in most left groups).

But I don't know how to take this info, it obviously wasn't handled the best way but in the end it was dealt with and in the pre-convention notes they do try to change policy based on their experience(like not having to have the victim write a firsthand account of what happened). They should have investigated when there was an accusation. I'm curious as to what extent the other few people in the branch and steering committee knew, if they had knowledge of it beyond the accusation made on Facebook. It also seems problematic that the victim didn't want to report it because she didn't want to hurt the ISO. If she tells her acquaintances that she was raped but that she doesn't want to see Daniel expelled(which an investigation would lead to) where does that leave you? On one hand you want to report that someone on your BC may have raped someone but then again she also told you not to tell and you might not want to break that trust and do it without her permission. So if that's the situation some members found themselves in I don't blame them for not telling, they're in a hard situation. On the other hand if it's the opposite, she went to some friends from the ISO and they told her it would devestate the local branch or the cause of socialism if she came forward and they got it stuck in her head that Daniel shouldn't be expelled then they're guilty 1000%. But we don't know so it's hard to comment on that. But the ISO clearly states in that document that if you're ever in that situation you need to do something about it, so hopefully in the future even if the victim doesn't want to come forward others will because we can't have rapists leading the fight against sexism.

Jimmie Higgins

17th February 2014, 04:02

It is disgusting that a radical possibly raped or tried to rape someone. But I also think the document written was a serious attempt to show how it was handled sloppily and too informally and concete resolution about how to formalize that process and for other disputes as well. I don't think that the people trying to draw parallels to the swp where possibly the leadership intimidated and shamed the possible victim (who was also a member) while protecting the accused, are serious at all. The giddy talk of "the end of cliffites" I think shows the motivation of some has nothing to do with the fucked up but not unheard of possibility of a leftist trying to rape someone itself.

I've never had to deal with anything as serious as this, but I have delt with disputes and generally, unless it went to the point of possibly needing to explell someone, it was all handled on a local level. I've been able to arrange mediation and it seems to have worked for parties involved, but it's too loose in retrospect and so developing better formal protocol for disputes is something we have been attempting since the swp crisis.

what does that say about the ISO or other groups?since the FBI can easily find out our identities on revleft if they wanted, then it should be allowed to call out the revlefter a I know personally and use their real names. I should also be allowed to read personal emails of people who I am in coalitions with since their discussions and debates about the coalition are going to impact me?

these "secrets" are not documents of dictates or marching orders or maxims by the leadership, this is internal discussion amongst members that have only now been voted on, and it is counter to having an open internal discussion if people are afraid that if they write something stupid that it will reflect on the organization or if there is internal friction or debates we don't have the some other group going to that branch and trying to use internal debates to try slit and poach or whatnot.

The main argument we have made in regards to having a private internal discussion period before voting on resolutions is that we don't want sectarians trying to misrepresent our positions based on discussions before the decision is made or using internal debates or friction as a wedge. So the documents are leaked by people who openly say that they want to end these forms of organization to end. So they've actually just confirmed pretty much what members concerns were.

What does it say about those attacking the iso that their version of handling political differences is taking action against what they disagree with on their own. Rather than polemically arguing against having private debates on our own voluntary organization, they just disregard our wishes. What if people disagree with the secrecy of the black block? Should we encourage leftists to pull off their masks, or do we just debate and say we don't think that's the best way to organize.

These are no "secrect" documents it's a private discussion about how to better organize an organization we mutually want to build. Why would people who do not want to build such an organization or disagree with basic political views of the group feel entitled to read our private discussions? Fuck with a left like this, who needs cointelpro?

Os Cangaceiros

17th February 2014, 04:16

I guess I don't really understand how documents with a description like this:

These are no "secrect" documents it's a private discussion about how to better organize an organization we mutually want to build.

...would even be worth keeping secret in the first place.

I don't get the comparison with the black bloc either. People who want to participate in a black bloc want to keep their identities hidden so that either they or their allies can participate in the direct action they feel is beneficial without being prosecuted by the authorities. That's a different situation.

Jimmie Higgins

17th February 2014, 06:10

...would even be worth keeping secret in the first place.they are only being called "secret" by the people making the attack. Private or internal would be more accurate. I talk in emails with other iso members and other activists about what I think about coalitions we are mutually in, I try and convince them that we should do this or that, they try and convince me. I also brainstorm and suggest things that I wouldn't say at a coalition meeting because it's a half formed idea or I'm not sure if it's a good idea or not. Should people hack my emails? Would it be considered "secret" or just private?

Why are you (not "you" personally) entitled to internal discussions of a voluntary collective who you do not want to be a part of, probably don't agree with, and don't want to succeed? Are right wingers entitled to this? If some tea party group or breibart activist released these internal discussions, would this still be defended?

i don't get the comparison with the black bloc either. People who want to participate in a black bloc want to keep their identities hidden so that either they or their allies can participate in the direct action they feel is beneficial without being prosecuted by the authorities. That's a different situation.yeah because the u.s. State never represses revolutionary groups..? At any rate, the point of comparison was not the rationale for secrecy, but the unprincipled defense of unilateral action against forms of organizing that you disagree with. I don't agree that party names are the best way to organize... So instead of debating that with groups who do, I should just out them against their wishes?

EDIT: Fear of the FBI has never been a prime motivation for having the internal discussion - being able to have an internal discussion about a mutual specific project so that we can come up with a general agreement has always been the main reason. Considering that the documents were posted by a blogger who has made it clear that their interest was in preventing any private discussion on principle (not because there was some specific thing in the documents they thought was unethical and needed to be exposed - which would be different potentially), and the gleeful reaction by some on the left hoping to see a collapse of "the Cliffiteis"... gee I guess we were right in not wanting to have our internal debates made public before any collective decision had been made or votes taken so that people don't try and use the discussions to make sectarian hay! I mean who are these internal debates really important to? A) members who already receive the documents and participate in discussions B) people who want to find reasons to try and discredit us from either the right or unfortunately the left.

Trap Queen Voxxy

17th February 2014, 12:48

redguarddude

17th February 2014, 14:00

If you read the comments in the Kasama articles, those who disagree with the article are saying that an organization shouldn't have the right to have a members only discussion. Whether someone disagrees or not, that's up to the membership of the group to decide.

It's somewhat arrogant to demand that members of the ISO or any other group, submit to having their actions and program decided by non members. Those who accuse the ISO or other left groups of being "undemocratic" are themselves undemocratic. I would compare leaking these documents, to hacking someone's computer, and publicly distributing all their private email.

Jimmie Higgins

17th February 2014, 14:14

I find it strange that what is being discussed is not the actual assault nor is it the well being of the victim nor the far deeper implications of all this but instead all attention is being focused party PR damage control/defense or whether or not it was ok for this information to have been leaked out.I assume this is directed at me. There are a couple of different things being discussed A) the alleged attempted rape by a former iso member (member at the time though) against someone in a different group. B) The leaking of documents wholesale (the discussion of the rape allegation and poor handling of it and how to try and correct that informal "improvised" protocol was one of a couple score documents released).

I tried to separate out the two points in my first post because I thought that the rape allegation was serious enough to be taken as one point by itself and then I also wanted to respond to the issue of releasing documents for the sake of thinking that other groups shouldn't organize in this manner because other posters were talking about that. If someone felt that the discussion of the rape allegation was done in an unethical manner or if there was some document where the leadership was arguing to trick people in movements or some other thing, then I don't think my opinion of the leak would be the same in terms of being unethical. But it wasn't leaking for the sake of any particularly relevant reason other than because the blogger who released the documents felt that parties shouldn't "hide" their discussions. I feel that is an unprincipled nark-y and vigilante type thing to do since these are not "secret directives" but an internal discussion of proposals and analysis from various members of the organization as part of a discussion to help us shape our collective project.

The ISO is not a coalition, it's a specific organization with points of unity and so we should have the ability to discuss things amongst ourselves when we are trying to figure out our strategy for the upcoming year.

No, we should never under any circumstances give anything, anything at all, to government men however if a party representative is involved in the sexual assault of vulnerable party acolytes then yes, they should be fucking outed and it should be made known to the public; they should be tagged, bagged and booted. This is a couple of women were involved in an organization they valued politically only to be coerced and assaulted by party pubas.I think you may be thinking of some other incident because nothing above describes the situation in the document. It was one person in a different organization. It was handled poorly and sloppily because several members of the branch heard second-hand rumors of it and basically dismissed it. It was sloppy and not taken seriously initially and that's where I see the fuck-up. Unless you have other information, there is nothing about the victim being assaulted or coerced by iso leadership, in fact the criticism in the document of the leadership was that there was indecision and mixed singles over if this was a local or national matter - in fact, the leadership told them to suspend the suspected member before any final decision had been reached. We didn't have any real set or good protocol to deal with this type of thing because usually disputes were rather minor and could be settled locally unless the issue of possible expulsion or suspension.

blac bloc, for the record is a clandestine touch and go groups of which don't harbor rapists nor has any relevance here whatsoever, really. The relevance is that some people with different political views believe the ISO should not organize as group who come up with a collective "line" amongst themselves. That's fine alone, they should make polemical arguments about the best way to organize and should argue with us that we are wrong to organize by "freedom of discussion, unity in action" in the way we do or at all; and they should try and build an organization they think will avoid what they see as problems with our methods or politics. But they shouldn't voluntarily leak discussions and debates made by people in a different organization who believed they were discussing amongst comrades trying to build on the same basis. That would be like if some dude pulled masks off of black blockers because he disagreed with that tactic!

And, for the record, the ISO doesn't "harbor" rapists and if you think politics are a barrier to protect black bloc activists or any revolutionary from similar situations as the one in San Diego, I think that is very neieve in a sexist society. I know of anarchists who have had similar charges against them, I know there were rapes and even cover-ups in Occupy. "Good politics" isn't protection from the rest of society, it takes extra effort to be able to not let this be handled through cliques or informally. This is why we are trying to create more formal protocols because it's not enough to think, well this or that person is a committed anti-sexist, I know them, so no way anything could have happened. That was the initial problem in this case - comrades hearing rumors and not taking them seriously because it's hard to believe someone that you are organizing with might be capable of doing something remotely like that.

Criminalize Heterosexuality

17th February 2014, 14:34

We can't "discuss the actual assault" because at the time, we don't even know the charges against "Daniel". What we know is that some people vaguely associated with the victim talked about "attempted rape", but we don't know how the (possible) victim described the events. In fact we don't know what the events are.

What we can discuss is how one blogger, apparently a Shachtmanite who doesn't have anything against the FBI arresting members of the FRSO, affiliated at one point with Platypus, that cesspit of pseudo-leftism, and generously supported by Proyect, whose violent hatred of the entire left is common knowledge at this point, leaked internal documents of the ISO without even reading them.

Really, this is what some people defend? This aggressive sort of hyper-individualist liberalism that is in principle identical to that of Karen Spaink?

Brotto RÃ¼hle

17th February 2014, 16:01

Criminalize Heterosexuality

17th February 2014, 16:36

There was an attempted rape... and you fucks think the big issue is that it was a "private conversation" and "private internal documents"? Get fucked...

http://thecharnelhouse.org/2014/02/17/unredacted-rape-controversy-and-internal-strife-within-the-international-socialist-organization-usa/

"Just wanted to remind everyone that the guy ["Comrade Daniel," the one accused of attempted rape] was only finally expelled on Feburary 6, 2014 (i.e., the same day the “Daniel” case was published in Preconvention Bulletin #19). Either way, it’s clear that the majority of the San Diego branch — and maybe some national leadership — doesn’t think that forcing yourself onto someone and only getting off when they knee you in the groin, is attempted rape."

That is how one person, who was not the victim and who might not even have been present at the event, described what was going on. We can't take that as face value - in particular, it would be useful if we had a statement by the woman in question.

"We fucks" are concerned about the actions of Wolfe and Proyect because they violate one of the basic "rules" of socialist politics: socialist groups do not compromise each others' security. They do not attempt to destroy each other. Even if their actions have uncovered real abuses, Wolfe and Proyect are still political bandits for making public the internal documents of a socialist organization without even fucking reading them, to the general public, just as Healy was a political bandit in his time for sending photos of Iraqi communists to Saddam Hussein. I mean, maybe some of those Iraqi communists were right bastards. That doesn't change the character of Healy's actions.

Also, I am sure that snarky comments on Facebook and involving the cops - cops in particular being noted for their extremely helpful and professional conduct when it comes to rape - are precisely what every woman who might have been assaulted needs. If the ISO members were uneasy about the way ISO handled the accusations, they had other options besides this.

Alexios

17th February 2014, 23:31

The ISO is the largest socialist group calling itself Marxist last time I checked and the government had infiltrated and slapped members of FRSO with supporting terrorism charges...So it's not naive to say that there would be infiltration here(in fact I'd say it would be naive to think there was no infiltration in most left groups).

That still doesn't make them significant, and this ignores my point that the ISO isn't even radical to begin with, unlike the FRSO which was promoting armed insurrection, Stalin, etc. The ISO on the other hand is basically indistinguishable from your typical European socdem party.

That is how one person, who was not the victim and who might not even have been present at the event, described what was going on. We can't take that as face value - in particular, it would be useful if we had a statement by the woman in question.

It would be useful, but can you really discount the accusations because we don't have a statement from the victim? Did it occur to you that a rape victim wouldn't want to talk about it with the public?

"We fucks" are concerned about the actions of Wolfe and Proyect because they violate one of the basic "rules" of socialist politics: socialist groups do not compromise each others' security. They do not attempt to destroy each other. Even if their actions have uncovered real abuses, Wolfe and Proyect are still political bandits for making public the internal documents of a socialist organization without even fucking reading them, to the general public, just as Healy was a political bandit in his time for sending photos of Iraqi communists to Saddam Hussein. I mean, maybe some of those Iraqi communists were right bastards. That doesn't change the character of Healy's actions.

Oh, what a tragedy! Like it or not, the document is out now. And if you're getting upset that someone broke imaginary rules instead of getting upset at the possibility that this organization covered up rape, then your heart is not in the right place.

Alexios

17th February 2014, 23:43

I think this guy on facebook pretty much hit the nail on the head:

the problem is, all these Lefty Groups are run by entrenched bureaucracies whose primary interest is their own bit of power:- "sectarian" in the true sense of the world ie they are counterposed to the interests of the working class

There's no revolutionary value in the countless tiny sects scattered across the globe; they only exist to keep their theories and traditions alive in opposition to other sects. Camatte went as far as to call them 'rackets' which I think is actually a pretty good albeit aggressive description.

Trap Queen Voxxy

18th February 2014, 02:03

@Higgie Baby: get to you later.

There's no revolutionary value in the countless tiny sects scattered across the globe; they only exist to keep their theories and traditions alive in opposition to other sects. Camatte went as far as to call them 'rackets' which I think is actually a pretty good albeit aggressive description.

I don't think it's an aggressive critique at all and I think the word is very apropos here. Considering, it's not just the ISO. Another org just had the exact same thing occur. Now while its true that sure, there will always be a bad apple or two in every bunch. It's more the way in which the organizations (and other similar organizations like it) operate that I feel facilitate these kind of things; of which I think this needs to be explored more in-depth.

A Revolutionary Tool

18th February 2014, 02:04

That still doesn't make them significant, and this ignores my point that the ISO isn't even radical to begin with, unlike the FRSO which was promoting armed insurrection, Stalin, etc. The ISO on the other hand is basically indistinguishable from your typical European socdem party.I never said they were significant, but I wouldn't engage in that discussion when you're doing what again? Where are the thousands you've organized? Before we start flinging shit around talking about how irrelevant any Marxist group is lets take a second to acknowledge how utterly insignificant you are in comparison to how insignificant they are.

And if this is your view you've horribly misread the situation thinking they wouldn't infiltrate the ISO because they're "socdems" according to you. It's recently been revealed that the government has infiltrated basically any group that wants to resist anything from liberals, to conservatives, to Marxists, etc. GREENPEACE has agents in it, you really think ISO who are the largest Marxist group saying they support a revolution wouldn't have government spying in on it? Don't be so naive.

Oh, what a tragedy! Like it or not, the document is out now.
And that's why some people are justifiably pissed and why it's being discussed, because we shouldn't be doing this to each other.

And if you're getting upset that someone broke imaginary rules instead of getting upset at the possibility that this organization covered up rape, then your heart is not in the right place.Why can't it be both? I'm not ecstatic either one happened. What did we learn from the documents though, why did 20+ documents need to be released that had nothing to even do with what happened? He says he didn't even read all of them, he's just leaking them because he can. This guy just seems spiteful. And then when you look at the leaked documents it's not like there was some grand scheme to cover abuse up like it's the Catholic Church.

DaringMehring

18th February 2014, 07:04

Proyect revealed himself in the comments section of the second linked article, where he dug himself deeper and deeper into ignominy.

He said with a straight face that people don't get fired because of their political associations, so what's the big deal with posting identifying information where bosses could Google it or someone could get on a list (like that "keywiki")? He even added a dumb anecdote about his boss protecting his right to be a socialist. What a disaster.

The excuse offered for the document dump is the allegation of rape or sexual misconduct. So what? Does anyone know whether this rape occurred or who knew what when? You can only speculate. So based on some speculation from some lines in a document, you're going to violate all security protocol and solidarity. BS!! You're just taking a chance to attack another group that you already wanted to based on their politics.

I don't love ISO's politics either but I would never do that shit. Even if we assume Proyect and the others are honest in caring about the left, which I do not believe is true, you still open an easy route for the bourgeoisie's agent provocateurs to rip up and expose any group. Suppose this woman, or the alleged rapist, was an agent provocateur, well, viola, done. You let them manipulate you and get the left fighting itself.

The only possible argument to justify this disgusting violation is to say that democratic-centralist groups are counter-revolutionary and need to be destroyed by any means possible -- and that argument is wrong and reactionary. Don't be one of those idiots who thinks the one thing barring the way to socialism is that the left doesn't follow your particular principles or theory and therefore the main task is to destroy others on the left, a completely idealist blunder proven wrong again and again by history.

#FF0000

18th February 2014, 07:56

Damn dude there is not a single good person involved in this thing. the folks in the ISO who mishandled this, and the people in this thread defending them are actual human garbage and my opinion of a lot of folks has greatly diminished.

I also hate Ross Wolfe so i am really feeling some type of way.

o well this is ok I guess

18th February 2014, 08:04

you still open an easy route for the bourgeoisie's agent provocateurs to rip up and expose any group. Suppose this woman, or the alleged rapist, was an agent provocateur, well, viola, done. You let them manipulate you and get the left fighting itself. gg guys the left lost apparently taking rape seriously and properly handling rape accusations isn't even an option

#FF0000

18th February 2014, 08:16

if the ISO was actually serious or competent at all in how they handled it then maybe being a little upset about the leaking of some documents would make sense. They were leaked specifically because they failed so miserably at this, though, and covered for the alleged rapist without taking it seriously.

The excuse offered for the document dump is the allegation of rape or sexual misconduct. So what?

No words

#FF0000

18th February 2014, 08:25

Jimmie Higgins

18th February 2014, 08:46

jesus christ there are organizations that handle this kind of thing very well so the people going on about "oh man they didn't handle it the best but it's a tricky situation" need to fuck right off. The IWW had a similar thing last year and they managed to handle it fine. There is no defending the ISO, here. ...
They were leaked specifically because they failed so miserably at this, though, and covered for the alleged rapist without taking it seriously.

Did you read the document? It's all about how we mishandled it and what we want to try and learn and improve for it because A) the initial rumors were not taken seriously when heard second-hand by some members of the branch B) the lack of protocol lead to a lot of internal strife, the suspension of the accused member led to him and several people who heard the rumor to "feel ganged up on" and leave. How is a self-critical document with proposals for how we need to create better formal protocol saying that "oh we did the best we could?"

Honestly, the document is showing much more seriousness about the matter than some on the left who are quick to try and turn this into political capital to promote whatever criticism or dislike of the ISO they already had. Already we've had people in this thread make claims that this accusation is about multiple iso members being sexually assaulted and then brow-beaten by the national leadership, or "pubahs". People are right to be outraged, they are wrong to try and make blanket condemnations without even considering the self-critical nature of the document or even the get the story correct: ("This is a situation where couple of women were involved in an organization they valued politically only to be coerced and assaulted by party pubas.") And if you look at the blog, the initial reason for the leak, and the main arguments he made for more than a week were focused on not wanting groups to have "secrecy", not the rape accusation. The blog author has only now this week claimed that that was the main reason, but in the first post it was mentioned in the middle of the last paragraph almost as an afterthought. If the motivation for the leak was specifically because of that one document... why were probably 50-60 unrelated ones released?

Rather than morally condemning me, what would you have people do at this point? How can I argue on the one hand the ethics of sabotaging the chosen internal decision-making process (in this case a wide-ranging discussion of the experience of the last year and suggestions and proposals for what to do next open to all members participation) while also arguing that the rape accusations were not handled well without being called "Fucks" and "scum" and implied rape apologist? Since the past can not be changed, what more should have been done beyond suspending the member and attempting to discuss what went wrong in terms of organizational response on all levels and how to fix it?

Do people think the proposals made in the document would create better standardized way to deal with an accusation of this seriousness? If not, what would be the best ways for revolutionary groups deal with a situation like this?

Criminalize Heterosexuality

18th February 2014, 09:38

It would be useful, but can you really discount the accusations because we don't have a statement from the victim? Did it occur to you that a rape victim wouldn't want to talk about it with the public?

Yeah, it did. That's part of the reason I wouldn't leak documents about her possible rape (again, we have no idea how she described the incident and what the incident was) to the public for everyone to gawk at.

You know, unlike some people.

In any case, I never said that we should discount the accusations. I did say we can't take them at face value. I mean, more than half the people who have posted in this thread have already decided that this "Daniel" fellow is a rapist, even though our knowledge of the incident is somewhere between "fuck" and "all". And you can't dodge this by claiming to simply support the victim, since you don't know what the victim claims in the first place.

Oh, what a tragedy! Like it or not, the document is out now. And if you're getting upset that someone broke imaginary rules instead of getting upset at the possibility that this organization covered up rape, then your heart is not in the right place.

If the ISO really did cover up (attempted - we've gone from alleged attempted rape to attempted rape to rape to multiple rape just in the span of this thread) rape, that would be disgusting and it would raise some hard questions about the future of ISO and their relation to the rest of the movement. However, at this point, I don't have enough information to say anything about that, and neither do you.

Wolfe's leaks are another matter, though. He broke those "imaginary rules" that most socialist organizations assume other organizations and individuals affiliated with them will follow, consciously and maliciously. If he uncovered a coverup of attempted rape, he did so by accident. He admitted to not reading most of the documents leaked.

Anyway, would you kindly give me all of the internal documentation of the ultraleft grouplet you identify with, without redacting anything, so I can release them to the public without reading them? It would only be fair, no?

Would you cyber-activists also defend Karin Spaink, who I've mentioned earlier?

A Revolutionary Tool

18th February 2014, 09:42

Brotto RÃ¼hle

18th February 2014, 13:27

The only people I said were in a tricky situation were friends who the victim told but told not to tell which I'm saying is a probable possibility because she seems reluctant to come forward and get this guy disciplined in the organization. So I recognize that that situation is a tricky one to be in and then end with agreeing with what the document states, that if they knew about it they should have reported it.

*EDIT* After looking over the document again it looks like I was mistaken. I thought it said some of the people who knew about it were close to the victim and that's how they heard about it, when in reality it said some people close to her made the accusations to other members. Those people definitely should have taken the accusations seriously and reported it no doubt, nothing really tricky about that.Do you people actually think that, regardless of the failures of capitalist criminal punishment in the USA, "discipline" such as expulsion from the ISO is an appropriate solution to an attempted rape? If you do, how are you fucks not banned?

Jimmie Higgins

18th February 2014, 14:24

Do you people actually think that, regardless of the failures of capitalist criminal punishment in the USA, "discipline" such as expulsion from the ISO is an appropriate solution to an attempted rape? If you do, how are you fucks not banned?

It would be a different matter if the victim wanted to go to the police. Then it would be complete wrong imo to try and dissuade them. Apparently she didn't even request the expulsion, but understandably thought it was fucked up that he would presume to continue to speak about feminism and anti-sexism.

I don't think any organization is in a position to determine guilt or innocence for sure, but they can decide that if an accusation is even remotely valid enough to warrant expulsion.

So you think that the ISO should have called the police, breached the anonymity of the accuser without their consent?

redguarddude

18th February 2014, 14:53

So what do you counterpose to revolutionary socialist organzations? Petit bourgesoie dilettantism?

redguarddude

18th February 2014, 15:08

Most of the arguments against the ISO are not honest political differences. The attacks against the ISO are because of the ISO's very existence. The ISO is the center of these attacks by petit bourgosie dilettantes, and talk shop socialists, simply because of it's status as the largest revolutionary socialist organization in the US.

In the highly unlikely event that the ISO were to magically disappear, the next largest group would then come under attack by the same people who were previously attacking the ISO.

#FF0000

18th February 2014, 15:19

redguarddude

18th February 2014, 16:29

What the fuck am I talking about? What the fuck are you talking about!

Alexios

18th February 2014, 16:47

Red Commissar

18th February 2014, 17:09

I don't really understand what's going on here. Is the ISO dealing with a rape coverup like the SWP or is this over documents being leaked? Both?

This is a serious question, I've read the thread and I'm just more confused.

Devrim

18th February 2014, 17:11

"We fucks" are concerned about the actions of Wolfe and Proyect because they violate one of the basic "rules" of socialist politics: socialist groups do not compromise each others' security. They do not attempt to destroy each other. Even if their actions have uncovered real abuses, Wolfe and Proyect are still political bandits for making public the internal documents of a socialist organization without even fucking reading them, to the general public, just as Healy was a political bandit in his time for sending photos of Iraqi communists to Saddam Hussein. I mean, maybe some of those Iraqi communists were right bastards. That doesn't change the character of Healy's actions.

I think that this is a pretty outrageous comparison. Healy informed on people who were later shot on behalf of the state. This is not what has been done here. I agree that publishing these sort of things is pretty shoddy behaviour, and I wouldn't want to be politically involved with somebody who did it, but it is not on the same level at all.

The ISO though should also have been aware that it is is quite likely these days that these sort of documents can get leaked, especially if it is an organisation that has recruiting tactics in any way similar to the UK SWP, and if they include any information that infringes on people's security, then they were very foolish indeed.

Devrim

Devrim

18th February 2014, 17:13

Do you people actually think that, regardless of the failures of capitalist criminal punishment in the USA, "discipline" such as expulsion from the ISO is an appropriate solution to an attempted rape? If you do, how are you fucks not banned?

I don't think the function of these sort of internal discipline procedures are to find a solution to the problem nor should they be. There function is to protect the organisation. I think expelling somebody does do that. The problem with what the SWP in the UK did with their disputes committee is that they utterly failed to protect the integrity of the organisation.

Devrim

Criminalize Heterosexuality

18th February 2014, 17:45

I think that this is a pretty outrageous comparison. Healy informed on people who were later shot on behalf of the state. This is not what has been done here. I agree that publishing these sort of things is pretty shoddy behaviour, and I wouldn't want to be politically involved with somebody who did it, but it is not on the same level at all.

Yes, in retrospect it wasn't the most fortunate comparison - Proyect and Wolfe are political bandits, but they pale in comparison to Helay, who was the undisputed king of political bandits.

The ISO though should also have been aware that it is is quite likely these days that these sort of documents can get leaked, especially if it is an organisation that has recruiting tactics in any way similar to the UK SWP, and if they include any information that infringes on people's security, then they were very foolish indeed.

Possibly, but what are you suggesting they should do? Their recruitment model is, I think, a fairly natural consequence of their politics, and they can't really stop having internal discussions, no matter how much hashtag revolutionaries would like that.

Do you people actually think that, regardless of the failures of capitalist criminal punishment in the USA, "discipline" such as expulsion from the ISO is an appropriate solution to an attempted rape? If you do, how are you fucks not banned?

Expulsion from the ISO, or from any organization, is not punishment but an administrative measure designed to protect an organization. That is all ISO can do. They can't, and shouldn't, initiate criminal proceedings on behalf of the woman. They could offer her support and help (although some would probably interpret that as "hush money"), at best.

Of course we don't know if an attempted rape took place. But that is apparently irrelevant.

Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages

18th February 2014, 17:51

Lol people think the ISO has status?

Jimmie Higgins

18th February 2014, 18:15

Ok folks calm down, the issues here are sensational enough.

I think what the fuck was being talked about was how some people like Wolfe and proyect are defending leaking any internal discussions on the left because they don't feel that groups should organize that way. Wolfe claims it's his right as a journalist and other have been arguing that since Lenin leaked documents (in a different context, involving groups working together in which the documents were leaked because the official record of the meeting didn't match the actual discussion of the meeting). Wolfe even says he leaked the documents because he doesn't like the organization because some iso leadership reported an already leaked platypus document. However, that document was about a strategy of taking down other organizations on the left! He claims that was unprincipled and so he too has a right to be unprincipled. But he's comparing his act of callous revenge to reporting already leaked info that was directly relevant to other left organizations.

Leaking a range of documents for the sake of it vs leaking relevant information such as:
The strategy underlying Platypus' activities is detailed in the attached statements by Cutrone. Here, Cutrone outlines Platypus' identity as a “combat organization” fighting to “hasten the disintegration and dissolution of the ‘Left’." Platypus, Cutrone writes, seeks to “degrade our interlocutors into ever more untenable positions, until, finally, we hope, they abandon any self-conscious commitment to the Left....This will leave the field to us alone.”if the iso adopts such a position, then please leak away.

As for this issue of leaking on "principle" of no private discussion, again I think it's totally unethical. In occupy people wanted to keep reporters out from meetings, they barred unknown people and there was tons of "secret" organizing and discussion. Reporters always claimed they were entitled to film whoever whenever coz "freedom of the press". Breibart's people have done the same thing at iso meetings. Voluntary organizations on the left should be allowed to organize in a manner of their choosing, outing people or internal debates just on the principle or because you don't like how they organize is counterproductive to say the least. If the iso documents were talking about plans to undermine other left groups, then it would be ethical to release those subjects... Or at least contact the groups being talked about.

These documents had rank and file people's first names, last initials and city... How does no one see this as a problem or at least see why members would feel defensive about it?

Lol people think the ISO has status?

For the u.s., the biggest revolutionary tadpole in an ocean full of capitalist sharks I guess.

Devrim

18th February 2014, 18:23

Possibly, but what are you suggesting they should do? Their recruitment model is, I think, a fairly natural consequence of their politics, and they can't really stop having internal discussions, no matter how much hashtag revolutionaries would like that.

I would suggest that for example they don't use people's real or full names in their discussion bulletins, or any information which could endager people's security. They should not treat them as a secure documents. I would imagine they do this anyway.

Devrim

Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages

18th February 2014, 18:30

the biggest revolutionary tadpole in an ocean full of capitalist sharks I guess.

This just isn't the case, and it never has been. The idea that you or any other organization represents some kind of opposition is just absolutely crazy. You seem like a nice rational person so I'm not trying to attack you, but some of the self importance contained in this thread, and probably within your circles in general is so hard to take seriously.

This is a really embarrassing thread to read, it should be a sticky

Jimmie Higgins

18th February 2014, 19:14

This just isn't the case, and it never has been. The idea that you or any other organization represents some kind of opposition is just absolutely crazy. You seem like a nice rational person so I'm not trying to attack you, but some of the self importance contained in this thread, and probably within your circles in general is so hard to take seriously.

This is a really embarrassing thread to read, it should be a stickyyou do know that tadpoles are small and relatively insignificant compared to an ocean of sharks, don't you. I wouldn't say that such a comment implied overblown "self-importance".

And an attempted rape by someone on the left is serious. Leftists trying to undermine collective efforts of other leftists just because they don't like their politics is also troubling to me.

A Revolutionary Tool

18th February 2014, 19:21

Do you people actually think that, regardless of the failures of capitalist criminal punishment in the USA, "discipline" such as expulsion from the ISO is an appropriate solution to an attempted rape? If you do, how are you fucks not banned?

I'm sorry, I forgot the party is supposed to take him out into the streets and publicly stone him. I don't know what you expect from either me or the ISO.

Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages

18th February 2014, 20:55

you do know that tadpoles are small and relatively insignificant compared to an ocean of sharks, don't you. I wouldn't say that such a comment implied overblown "self-importance".

And an attempted rape by someone on the left is serious. Leftists trying to undermine collective efforts of other leftists just because they don't like their politics is also troubling to me.

No one brought the seriousness of the attempted rape into question, you know aside from some ISO members and their partisans who would prefer to talk about something other than the attempted tape, like they have for 3 pages. My comment was mostly referring to some of the posts on the first two pages about the ISO being some high profile target for the feds. I'm sure the unpaid interns assigned to monitor you guys are really salivating at the prospect of unmasking a few of you devils.

A Revolutionary Tool

18th February 2014, 21:15

No one brought the seriousness of the attempted rape into question, you know aside from some ISO members and their partisans who would prefer to talk about something other than the attempted tape, like they have for 3 pages. My comment was mostly referring to some of the posts on the first two pages about the ISO being some high profile target for the feds. I'm sure the unpaid interns assigned to monitor you guys are really salivating at the prospect of unmasking a few of you devils.

Have you been blind to what the security state is up to? Like I told someone else in this thread, it's not that the ISO is a "high value target", but every group is being infiltrated and spied on. Is the FRSO a high value target? Then why were some of their members targeted? At this point it's just naivety to think there wouldn't be government intrusion in any leftist group no matter how irrelevant you find them to be. And considering the ISO is the largest Marxist group openly advocating for socialist revolution it would just be dumb of anybody to think the Feds have no interest in it.

For gods sake random people not affiliated with any group get picked off the Internet by Feds to be led into trying to do terrorist attacks so that the Feds can catch them! You need to rethink your positions about the Feds if you're serious.

Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages

18th February 2014, 21:28

Have you been blind to what the security state is up to? Like I told someone else in this thread, it's not that the ISO is a "high value target", but every group is being infiltrated and spied on. Is the FRSO a high value target? Then why were some of their members targeted? At this point it's just naivety to think there wouldn't be government intrusion in any leftist group no matter how irrelevant you find them to be. And considering the ISO is the largest Marxist group openly advocating for socialist revolution it would just be dumb of anybody to think the Feds have no interest in it.

For gods sake random people not affiliated with any group get picked off the Internet by Feds to be led into trying to do terrorist attacks so that the Feds can catch them! You need to rethink your positions about the Feds if you're serious.

The fact that the security apparatus occasionally goes slumming amongst socialist orgs to dig up enemies of the state in order to justify the permenant state of exception we all live in does not give any significance to the organizations. Also as was pointed out frso was beginning to advocate armed struggle when they were infiltrated. If anything this leads one to question the intelligence of people who continue to take part in these kinds of groups, considering that playing the role of internal enemy for the feds every few years is pretty much the only thing they ever actually accomplish.

However, I feel the need to point out how irrelevant all this is end. The NSA has been recording internet traffic for at least 10 years but probably longer. Have you exchanged emails with members of a socialist organization? Signed into a members portal on a socialist group's website? Visited socialist new sites? Guess what! They already know, this leak is absolutely useless to them. If the feds want to know who is in the ISO, all they have to do is run some queries on their database, they don't need to wait for the ISO to fuck up a rape investigation.

The Jay

18th February 2014, 21:44

I'm sorry, I forgot the party is supposed to take him out into the streets and publicly stone him. I don't know what you expect from either me or the ISO.

I think that public shaming of rapists and social ostracization would be a jolly good way to demonstrate disappointment in a rapist as well as a rock massage.

Lily Briscoe

18th February 2014, 23:23

This is all incredibly boring.

Brotto RÃ¼hle

19th February 2014, 01:57

I'm sorry, I forgot the party is supposed to take him out into the streets and publicly stone him. I don't know what you expect from either me or the ISO.

Hand the pig over to the pigs. Let scum deal with scum. If this was a successful attempt at rape, what would you suggest? That he just be expelled?

DaringMehring

19th February 2014, 03:23

Whether the ISO did or did not mishandle a rape accusation is one thing, and one that can really mainly be known by those who are more connected to the case. The problem I have, is the sanctimony of those who leaked this information.

Mike Ely did a good job of explaining why what they did is reprehensible, in the linked articles.

Here again, the same weak arguments are made:

1) It doesn't matter that I acted as a stool pigeon and gave a gift to reactionaries, because the ISO is insignificant.(so insignificant that apparently I think they're a worth while subject for leaks? and since when does being small mean you forfeit solidarity? would you scab on a union if it was only 15 people and was having a rough time and was weak? apparently)

2) It doesn't matter that I acted as a stool pigeon and gave a gift to reactionaries, because the State has invincible intelligence. (never mind I put it on the internet where people not using NSA manpower or technology can see it, incl. bosses and fascists)

3) It doesn't matter that I acted as a stool pigeon and gave a gift to reactionaries, because rape. (because alleged rape which I only know some details about 3rd hand, therefore indiscriminate document dump? it is not possible to know enough detail to discuss a particular case, and there is no component of a serious theoretical discussion of discipline within a socialist group here)

All I see are a bunch of excuses, trying to divert from the fact of being a stool pigeon. Objectively on the other side of the barricades, as is Proyect and it is no surprise to me that Platypus quotation someone put up about destroying the left.

Does anyone honestly defend Proyect when he says having personal info made public is not a problem because bosses won't use it against you? You know, there's a whole tradition of McCarthyism and witch-hunts, maybe he should ask some of the people who suffered from that. I guess he's a God who can decide what is safe for others.

The whole thing is just a smear attempt.

Os Cangaceiros

19th February 2014, 03:58

The fact that the security apparatus occasionally goes slumming amongst socialist orgs to dig up enemies of the state in order to justify the permenant state of exception we all live in does not give any significance to the organizations.

Esp. when you consider the fact that the feds were tailing a group of dreadlocked anarcho-hippies out in Oregon only a couple years ago LOL. There's no telling how far they're willing to dredge into the mud in order to justify their bloated budgets :lol:

Devrim

19th February 2014, 08:48

Hand the pig over to the pigs. Let scum deal with scum. If this was a successful attempt at rape, what would you suggest? That he just be expelled?

Yes, I would suggest that socialist organisations expel people who rape people. "Hand the pig over to the pigs" is just empty phraseology. It doesn't even have any meaning if the victim doesn't want a prosecution, which she may not do for many reasons.

Devrim

Five Year Plan

19th February 2014, 16:38

Hand the pig over to the pigs. Let scum deal with scum. If this was a successful attempt at rape, what would you suggest? That he just be expelled?

And if the woman making the complaint doesn't want to involve the bourgeois police forces?

Sinister Cultural Marxist

19th February 2014, 19:45

This is troubling for the ISO, though I would not put this in the same camp as the SWP scandal. The SWP actually protected a rapist, defended themselves, and kept the rapist on their committees. Here, the ISO (at least privately) acknowledged they did a crap job and claim to be looking for better internal mechanisms to deal with that. This "Daniel" fellow has been expelled and the ISO recognized that better mechanisms need to be thought up (unlike in the SWP's rape scandal)

Did the ISO mishandle the situation? It seems so, and it seems that they acknowledge as much. Did they do so in the same deeply troubling way that the SWP did? I don't think so.

Do you people actually think that, regardless of the failures of capitalist criminal punishment in the USA, "discipline" such as expulsion from the ISO is an appropriate solution to an attempted rape? If you do, how are you fucks not banned?

I agree that it makes for poor vengeance or "justice" to just expel a person. I doubt it would help to do something like take them out and kneecap the accused racists or something like that though.

jesus christ there are organizations that handle this kind of thing very well so the people going on about "oh man they didn't handle it the best but it's a tricky situation" need to fuck right off. The IWW had a similar thing last year and they managed to handle it fine. There is no defending the ISO, here.

From what I understand, what makes this case tricky is that it was hearsay and the victim was not the one which made the accusation. That doesn't defend their response of course (on the contrary, the ISO document leaked seemed quite critical of the response of their San Diego branch)

Hand the pig over to the pigs. Let scum deal with scum. If this was a successful attempt at rape, what would you suggest? That he just be expelled?

(1) The victim needs to be able to or want to legally testify to build any kind of serious legal case.

(2) Morally speaking, it's wrong to go against the wishes of a rape victim and accuse a person to the police without their consent.

I can't stress that 2nd point too much. Really, if someone else is raped, don't take it upon yourself to decide that they want to make it a legal issue.

redguarddude

19th February 2014, 23:50

Time for some input from the ISO:
http://socialistworker.org/2014/02/19/a-response-to-slander

A Revolutionary Tool

20th February 2014, 01:46

The fact that the security apparatus occasionally goes slumming amongst socialist orgs to dig up enemies of the state in order to justify the permenant state of exception we all live in does not give any significance to the organizations. Also as was pointed out frso was beginning to advocate armed struggle when they were infiltrated. If anything this leads one to question the intelligence of people who continue to take part in these kinds of groups, considering that playing the role of internal enemy for the feds every few years is pretty much the only thing they ever actually accomplish.

However, I feel the need to point out how irrelevant all this is end. The NSA has been recording internet traffic for at least 10 years but probably longer. Have you exchanged emails with members of a socialist organization? Signed into a members portal on a socialist group's website? Visited socialist new sites? Guess what! They already know, this leak is absolutely useless to them. If the feds want to know who is in the ISO, all they have to do is run some queries on their database, they don't need to wait for the ISO to fuck up a rape investigation.The only reason I even brought this up as a point of contention was because I was under the impression that some comrades held the view that the ISO wasn't strong or big enough to be targeted by the security state. I sought to correct that because, especially, in light of all the information we've had recently about the security state it would seem naive to suggest most groups don't have some government intrusion. But now I realize that wasn't it at all, you people just wanted to talk shit and take cheap shots at the ISO.

Are the ISO insignificant? It's irrelevant, if you got a hold of some communications made between a comrade and I that were meant to be private I'd expect you not to leak them even if it's just two "insignificant" people. That's just a cover for very bad politics.

blake 3:17

20th February 2014, 02:54

@DaringMehring -- I'm a fence sitter on some of this. I've appreciated many of Mike's comments & have strangely agreed with some of Proyect's. Anyways been probably to wrapped up in it as a distraction from life.

Here's the official ISO response: http://socialistworker.org/2014/02/19/a-response-to-slander

Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages

20th February 2014, 14:50

The only reason I even brought this up as a point of contention was because I was under the impression that some comrades held the view that the ISO wasn't strong or big enough to be targeted by the security state. I sought to correct that because, especially, in light of all the information we've had recently about the security state it would seem naive to suggest most groups don't have some government intrusion. But now I realize that wasn't it at all, you people just wanted to talk shit and take cheap shots at the ISO.

Are the ISO insignificant? It's irrelevant, if you got a hold of some communications made between a comrade and I that were meant to be private I'd expect you not to leak them even if it's just two "insignificant" people. That's just a cover for very bad politics.

What exactly am I gaining by taking 'cheap shots' at the ISO? No one outside this little ghetto of ours even knows what it is, and presumably if you're down with the ISO then you're already a member. It's not as if I'm recruiting for a different group by attacking this bloated sense of importance.

I'm responding specifically to your assertion that the security state is interested in this information, not that member information shouldn't be protected from employers, right wing nutjobs, etc. I wouldn't feel super comfortable with my employer knowing what I do outside of work either. Although again as someone else pointed out, there was a reason this happened and it wasn't so that employers or fascists could get people's private info.