after the anti-war movement, its time to hijack the Climate Change Campaign!
- Thread starter treelover
- Start date
Hawkeye Pearce
We're your friends man...
If this is true this is not exactly a surprise. I've never worked out whether the SWP are actually an MI5 front or are just adept at running movements into the ground?
There certainly are state agents on the SWP central committee, however I think they're just destructive power hungry cunts on the whole. The climate movement is too important to leave to the trots or the liberals!
poster342002
PROPER leftwing socialist
If this demo is going to be something along the lines of "Higher Gas Bills NOW!!" or anything else that will really sit well (not) with the poor, then I'm not interested.
Basically, is this demo going to place the blame and necessity for action squarely where it should: the capitalist ruling classes, or is it going to be another bourgeoise liberal, pseudo-primitivist "we must ALL make sacrifices" nonsense?
Basically, is this demo going to place the blame and necessity for action squarely where it should: the capitalist ruling classes, or is it going to be another bourgeoise liberal, pseudo-primitivist "we must ALL make sacrifices" nonsense?
taffboy gwyrdd
Embrace the confusion!
I agree that just being a demonstrating organisation somewhat limits the CACC.
However, in mitigation they are internationally co-ordinated simultaneuous demos and that is to their credit.
As usual, if people moan about SWP hijacking this or that, as they will always try to, it stands to reason that the more non-SWPers who are on board the less this will happen.
However, in mitigation they are internationally co-ordinated simultaneuous demos and that is to their credit.
As usual, if people moan about SWP hijacking this or that, as they will always try to, it stands to reason that the more non-SWPers who are on board the less this will happen.
The AWL and ISG are harmless, there're so few of them they can't possibly do any harm, even here where there's a fair few of them.
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Who was it now? A few of us talked about this threat about a year ago (I think)...don't remember the thread title but it was focused on what to do about stopping the SWP hijacking the Climate Change movement...
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
It's funny, but while there is obviously a place for large groups connected with climate change when it comes to thngs like direct lobbying of government and industry, real change is only ever going to be effected from the level of the individual and up, which fortunately doesn't require large protest groups to organise people on pointless (and environmentally costly) marches etc.
What bastards the SWP are.
How dare they try to help build an active broad based movement to campaign on climate change?
No,what really would be effective would be to get a bunch of hippy anarchists to run round Drax power station being chased by Her Majesty's Constabulary.
How dare they try to help build an active broad based movement to campaign on climate change?
No,what really would be effective would be to get a bunch of hippy anarchists to run round Drax power station being chased by Her Majesty's Constabulary.
This 'Hijack' stuff is such a lot of bollocks.
I might just as well say the campaign's been 'hijacked' by hippies.That would be equally ridiculous.
If your concerned there's too many SWP in the Climate change campaign get involved and fight your corner.
As an SWP member genuinely concerned about climate change who has been involved in the campaign , and would be involved with the campaign even if I wasn't in the SWP , no amount of silly nonsense about hijacking is going to keep me out.
I might just as well say the campaign's been 'hijacked' by hippies.That would be equally ridiculous.
If your concerned there's too many SWP in the Climate change campaign get involved and fight your corner.
As an SWP member genuinely concerned about climate change who has been involved in the campaign , and would be involved with the campaign even if I wasn't in the SWP , no amount of silly nonsense about hijacking is going to keep me out.
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
No, it's the worry that the SWP will change the focus of the protest from only being about climate change into some all-encompassing 'Ban Climate Change and Support Palestine and Islam' type bollocks.
kyser_soze said:
They won't do that, indeed they'll try and remove political debate within the climate change movement alltogether, while simultaneously forcing through a 'steering committee' dominated by themselves and their closest 'allies' and driving the movement into an unimaginative and disempowering deadend.
The best thing to do is either explicitly bar them from involvment or simply set up and independent campaigning group for everyone else. Unless you can outnumber them...
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
osterberg said:
I’ll take that as a big fat yes that a SWP entrist operation is underway…
Osterberg,
Some of us on here have 20-30 years experience of seeing the SWP in action in popular campaigns.
They basically have 3 stock responses to any popular campaign -
A) Ignore it if is relatively democratic and strong but without too much recruitment potential. (i.e some local community campaigns)
B) Enter en-masse, take over leadership positions and drive in their preferred direction, recruiting as many as possible to their manipulative and anti-democratic politics along the way, throwing it away or "crashing it" when it has outlived its usefulness. Once in leadership, the original aims of the organisation/campaign are secondary to the partisan objectives of the SWP.
And it is worth remembering that the SWP, being a democratic centralist revolutionary org, actually has contempt for the original aims and viewpoints of many popular campaigns that they see as hopelessly reformist. They do not allow this contempt to show too openly though until they are in full control. Contrast the reformist aims and programme of Respect, loudly supported by the SWP for example, with what it says in the small print about bourgeois democracy in the "Where We Stand" bit in Socialist Worker.
C) Enter and form a faction if another rival organisation, i.e. CWI etc have already achieved dominance. Cause problems for the rivals, wreck or split the org if they cannot get their way. Blame the other organisation for everything that goes wrong.
The SWP can domninate things because they have sufficient cadre to do so, unlike many other groups who have to act in a less sectarian way if they are to get a hearing or some influence. Furthermore, for many of these cadre, the SWP is an "alternative religion" to which they devote much of their time and money, 52 week 24/7 activists. This means that ordinary folk with lives outside politics are brushed aside as "not as committed" by the robo-trots.
That is my experience, anyhow
Some of us on here have 20-30 years experience of seeing the SWP in action in popular campaigns.
They basically have 3 stock responses to any popular campaign -
A) Ignore it if is relatively democratic and strong but without too much recruitment potential. (i.e some local community campaigns)
B) Enter en-masse, take over leadership positions and drive in their preferred direction, recruiting as many as possible to their manipulative and anti-democratic politics along the way, throwing it away or "crashing it" when it has outlived its usefulness. Once in leadership, the original aims of the organisation/campaign are secondary to the partisan objectives of the SWP.
And it is worth remembering that the SWP, being a democratic centralist revolutionary org, actually has contempt for the original aims and viewpoints of many popular campaigns that they see as hopelessly reformist. They do not allow this contempt to show too openly though until they are in full control. Contrast the reformist aims and programme of Respect, loudly supported by the SWP for example, with what it says in the small print about bourgeois democracy in the "Where We Stand" bit in Socialist Worker.
C) Enter and form a faction if another rival organisation, i.e. CWI etc have already achieved dominance. Cause problems for the rivals, wreck or split the org if they cannot get their way. Blame the other organisation for everything that goes wrong.
The SWP can domninate things because they have sufficient cadre to do so, unlike many other groups who have to act in a less sectarian way if they are to get a hearing or some influence. Furthermore, for many of these cadre, the SWP is an "alternative religion" to which they devote much of their time and money, 52 week 24/7 activists. This means that ordinary folk with lives outside politics are brushed aside as "not as committed" by the robo-trots.
That is my experience, anyhow
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
Hippies could probably truthfully claim that 'their' poltical stomping ground has been hijacked by the mainstream...or is this SWP logic at work, ignoring the history of movements it attempts to impregnate?
bouncer_the_dog
Well-Known Member
I alays thought the SWP was a KGB sleeper cell gone wrong. And a really shit one at that.
Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
osterberg said:You overestimate my influence..
But I am flattered
Nope, you're more a reflection than a determinative SWP bot.
Of course they do, they rewrite history, they had no interest/involvement in reclaim the streets, the anti-globalisation movement, etc before Seattle then they were all over it. Most SWP have never ever shown any interest in the environemnt as indeed have few of the Left in general, now the leaders speak and the 'footsoldiers' (TM Chris Harman) jump.
Donna Ferentes
jubliado
"hijacking" = "groups we don't like being involved".
Donna Ferentes
jubliado
"control" = "have more influence than my lot"
Similar threads
