Hit The North

somebody got up and said it was quasi-religious bullshit but not really anything else was said against it, we had a lil discussion outside where myself and bob argued against it to a scottish comrade tho

Rosa wasnt at the dialectics meeting tho

I didnt heckle him, I cornered him and waggled my finger all up in his face while ranting until he scuttled off...
He only allows simple SWP members to speak (not that I'm having a go at your entire party, I met alot of decent people at Marxism).

I might join the SWP to start letter signing to get Chris removed from his position, I'm that petty haha

did you get to Marxism?

Just a FYI. I'm not a 'post-structuralist' or an advocate of 'post-structuralism'. As an eternal student of history i value the contributions to and perspective of post-structuralists on history/historiography (I.E. its criticisms of conventional history/historians) - including the european 'enlightenment', humanism and other 'human progress' narratives. As a political militant, i value its insights on identity identity politics, feminism and queer theory and the relationship between these and the language of marxism/anarchism as liberatory ideals. I also find deconstruction to be an effective technique of argument, and frequently employ this in one guise or another when participating in debates on this site. I don't think that post-structuralism is an inherently 'revolutionary' perspective, rather i personally value some components (and techniques) of post-structuralist criticism and apply these to my own ideas and praxis where/when/if they are relevant.

Cheers Bob