Invitation to participate in the creation of a new Revolutionary Socialist Orgnsation

[JHE]

Loads of times

 

[mauvais]

Loads of times

What if we exclude marriage?

 

[audiotech]

Well, do you have members of the SWP who hold management positons with the capacity to get people sacked via the corporate performance-management systems in the workplace or not?

I've given you my thoughts on this already (post# 88), so fuck off you tedious twat.

 

[nightbreed]

I can't understand why anyone opposed to the system and it's hierchies would want to take on a position of authority within it over other workers. To me, it runs counter to every principle and ethic I hold.

I was given the position because I locked up the warehouse at night and set the alarm. I was paid 25p an hour extra and I was not contracted to do disciplinaries.I had no staff under my control apart from self employed contractors who worked on site.

Does it still count? Am I still a boss?

 

[butchersapron]

Yes. I'm a millionaire too. Can't help thinking maybe I should be in the SWP?

Did you mean the Turners

 

[Fisher_Gate]

Did you mean the Turners

That link did not work.

 

[butchersapron]

Did it it not? Seems to work for me. Odd. Suffice to say it was about Jackie and Graham Turner who i'm sure you're familiar with.

 

[belboid]

works for me. the key bits of it are:

scooping £20k from a couple of lesser known Turners (down near the bottom of the page) last week.

http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/regulatory-issues/week1regpartdon.cfm

A mention of Jackie Turner here (http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php4?article_id=6136) briefly, and graham turner appears to be the "economic policy advisor" to respect.

Presume they are a couple, why would they want to give RESPECT 20 grand though and where did they get it from, it's a nice round some so it's not as if it's been raised.

Who are these people?

"Graham Turner is an economic policy adviser to Respect"

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/election/comment/0,,1462344,00.html

I strongly suspect that he's the Graham Turner whos a consultant at these nice sounding people,:

GFC Economics (http://www.gfceconomics.com/)

"GFC Economics is an independent organisation providing economic research to the investment management community on a subscription basis. Run by former City economists, GFC Economics provides timely analysis of the economic issues affecting global financial markets."

So RESPECT's economic policy it appears is being directly made by capitalists.

I don't really know what to say.

 

[exosculate]

Did it it not? Seems to work for me. Odd. Suffice to say it was about Jackie and Graham Turner who i'm sure you're familiar with.

Works for me too!

 

[Fisher_Gate]

Did it it not? Seems to work for me. Odd. Suffice to say it was about Jackie and Graham Turner who i'm sure you're familiar with.

SWP, now with "The Left Altermative" (this week's title for their adventures in la-la land).

 

[Nigel]

Did anything come of this 'new' initiative?
Radical Socialist thing in Wales looks quite interesting!

 

[GuruYoghourt]

Have this bunch said what they mean by the term 'socialism'?

 

[trevhagl]

I think Attila the Stockbroker hit the nail on the head when he said he is resigned to the Tories getting in as that can only be a good thing - ie we can build the Labour party up again and all the yuppies will clear off to their jobs in the city.
There is no point whatsoever in the current lot getting in again, as they are EXACTLY like the Tories...to vote for them is to accept the nazi proposals from the likes of Purnell who even Cameron admits he stole the Tories ideas.

 

[butchersapron]

That's the wort analysis of the next few years i think i've ever read. (The first para anyway). Those who now own and run the labour party are a) not yuppies and b) not going to just walk away and leave the thing after spending decades fighting to gain control of it and putting in place structures that means that their power cannot be challenged in any substantial manner. This 'takeover' (not an accurate term but i'll use it for now) took place with the consent and support of the vast majority of the mainstream membership who are now suddenly supposed to reclaim the party - for what? They've already got the policies they support in place.

 

[exosculate]

That's the wort analysis of the next few years i think i've ever read. (The first para anyway). Those who now own and run the labour party are a) not yuppies and b) not going to just walk away and leave the thing after spending decades fighting to gain control of it and putting in place structures that means that their power cannot be challenged in any substantial manner. This 'takeover' (not an accurate term but i'll use it for now) took place with the consent and support of the vast majority of the mainstream membership who are now suddenly supposed to reclaim the party - for what? They've already got the policies they support in place.

So the Labour party won't move a bit more to the left following their inevitable defeat. I disagree.

 

[belboid]

a little bit maybe - but that isn't what AtS said - he seems to be on about a wholesale 'reclamation' of the party - which just aint on the cards

 

[butchersapron]

...what's more, the argument follows that this reclaimation project is what people should expend their energies on.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

So the Labour party won't move a bit more to the left following their inevitable defeat. I disagree.

Who would do this moving and what mechanisms would they use?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[GuruYoghourt]

So what if the Labour Party does move to the left? They'll still, like every other party that looks for a mandate to run the system, be a pro-capitalist party.

 

[Nigel]

I think you may have to look at the failure of Keynesian/Post Keynesian social and economic policies: inevitably leading to high inflation.

The misconception that conventional social democracy is a path towards socialism!

 

[exosculate]

Who would do this moving and what mechanisms would they use?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

The same mechanism they used to move to the right I would suggest!

 

[Louis MacNeice]

The same mechanism they used to move to the right I would suggest!

A problem with that; to use those mechanisms you need to be in the leadership in the first place. The old 'democratic' structures which the left used to gain leverage in the 1970s and 80s has gone. So I ask again what mechanisms.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[goldenecitrone]

I think Attila the Stockbroker hit the nail on the head when he said he is resigned to the Tories getting in as that can only be a good thing - ie we can build the Labour party up again and all the yuppies will clear off to their jobs in the city.
There is no point whatsoever in the current lot getting in again, as they are EXACTLY like the Tories...to vote for them is to accept the nazi proposals from the likes of Purnell who even Cameron admits he stole the Tories ideas.

Four years of the Tories a good thing? Never thought I'd see the day.

 

[audiotech]

I think Attila the Stockbroker hit the nail on the head when he said he is resigned to the Tories getting in as that can only be a good thing - ie we can build the Labour party up again ...

Build the Labour party up again to do what exactly?

 

[october_lost]

The revolutionary organisation must be part of the working class and take part in the life and struggles of the working class and the oppressed.

I always find the far-left saying things like this a bit ingenious. If you set yourself up as supporting workers struggles - what about their autonomy? What about the amount of time you waste building political structures? Which is time that could really spent supporting workers.

As you were

 

[sihhi]

Do the ISG agree with the gender divisions in this election rally for Respect?

Does Respect still have supporters around here?

 

[sihhi]

Was the Revolutionary Socialist Orgnsation ever formed?

 

[Nigel Irritable]

Was the Revolutionary Socialist Orgnsation ever formed?

That depends on your definition of "revolutionary socialist".

The ISG formally merged with the handful of people they worked with in Socialist Resistance, which was then nominally a "broad" project. They also incorporated a few ex-SWPers. The unified and slightly larger ISG+ is now called Socialist Resistance.

Basically, the abolished the pretence that SR and the ISG were different things and added a few new members. In fairness to them, given their distinctly middle aged demographic and their inability to recruit new people this was a major success by their standards. They are now sort of cuddling up to Permanent Revolution and Counterfire, two other small groups, the former of which has a similar age profile to SR.