Groucho said:
Utter distortion Groucho! I'm surprised at you (though not very surprised at Das Uberdog's similar distortions)
Is UKPol becoming the unofficial SWP bulletin board!
- Thread starter treelover
- Start date
Utter distortion Groucho! I'm surprised at you (though not very surprised at Das Uberdog's similar distortions)
Das Uberdog said:
An admirable representation of how little capable some SWPers are of dealing with anyone who thinks for themselves and not along preordained sectarian party tramlines.
I wonder whether you've ever been any good at winning over sceptics or neutrals, Das Uberdog?
If you're default reaction on being contradicted/doubted is to sneer as unpleasantly as in the above post, and to distort the other person's position, then long may you continue to be a political failure because you deserve it ...
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Das Uberdog said:
Whereas yours shine forth from the dark place that is ignorance, rather in the way that a stream of bat's piss shines forth in a dark cave (with apols to Graham Chapman), no doubt.
William of Walworth said:
Well there have been repeated assertions of Respect compromising on homophobia and womens rights without a shred of evidence. All the actual evidence is to the contrary. These assertions are repeated however, always with reference to the involvement of Muslims, and frequently in alarmingly negative terms - 'fundies', etc. Mostly this is straight forward bullshit without any evidence. On other occassions it is gross distortion of the facts. In all cases the insinuation is that Muslim involvement = bigotry.
I am not saying that the only criticisms of Respect from the left are along these lines. I was dealing specifically with the lie that Respect compromises on these issues.
fractionMan
Custom Title
The borg are taking over!
articul8 said:
That is an example of all of this crap. The statement was made in relation to the Stop the War Coalition and demands from some members of the now defunct Workers Power Group that the StWC could not involve anyone who was not signed up to a raft of policies including gay rights. It was not said in relation to membership of the SWP, to SWP policy, to membership of Respect or Respect policy. Yet it is constantly misquoted as if LG was saying that gay rights should not be part of a Respect/SWP agenda.
Of course some 'leftists' do think that broad based single issue campaigns against war should also campaign on gay rights, womens rights, TU rights, Socialism, the environment etc etc. In other words accept the entire socialist agenda or fuck off out of the Stop the War movement/anti-fascist movement or whatever. A really crap position precluding the organising of any broad based single issue campaign.
Did the All Britain Anti-Poll Tax Federation have LGBT rights, Womens rights, environmental issues etc etc in the constitution? Why not? homophobes!! Does CND have abortion rights in its constitution? Why not?? Sexists!! Why is this stupid criteria only ever applied to StWC/UAF? (And then quoted as being about respect/SWP?
Defend Council Housing doesn't have abortion rights or LGBT rights in the constitution either, nor does No2ID
Outrage!It was the SWP (among others) who opposed an overtly homophobic speaker being invited to a UAF conference. Livingstone et al were pushing for him to come. Had he turned up and spoken despite SWP opposition to his being there (he didn't), sectarians would have denounced the SWP for organising with homophobes. Never let the facts get in the way of sectarian point scoring though eh.
revol68
what, fucking what?
I think it's applied because the SWP do not make any real distinction between themselves and the "broad based movement", they never argue for a socialist agenda but rather just seek to gain leadership vis a vis the lowest denominator.
nevermind that, most people in the SWP know fuck all about their own positions or history.
Many a wee trot bot has been shocked to learn that in the 80's the SWP called for victory to the IRA and told people to vote Sinn Fein (but build a socialist alternative, hoho).
The SWP does not have a principle in it's body, it's nothing more than a jumped up PR street team pimping the next big issue, grabbing some members out of that and then moving onto the next. Of course it never actually grows much cos it any member that join is just a flake who'll drop the wadical liberalism and join the Labour party, or is actually intelligent and hence develops their politics way beyond the level of the SWP, and the rest are just burnt out by the weirdo cultness of it all.
nevermind that, most people in the SWP know fuck all about their own positions or history.
Many a wee trot bot has been shocked to learn that in the 80's the SWP called for victory to the IRA and told people to vote Sinn Fein (but build a socialist alternative, hoho).
The SWP does not have a principle in it's body, it's nothing more than a jumped up PR street team pimping the next big issue, grabbing some members out of that and then moving onto the next. Of course it never actually grows much cos it any member that join is just a flake who'll drop the wadical liberalism and join the Labour party, or is actually intelligent and hence develops their politics way beyond the level of the SWP, and the rest are just burnt out by the weirdo cultness of it all.
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
Groucho said:
same approach seems to apply with regard to Respect though - what about Dr. Muhammed Naseem? - not only a member of Respect, but a parliamentary candidate and member of its National Council, whilst at the same time serving on the executive of the Islamic Party of Britain as its Home Affairs spokeman.
The IPB's policy on gay rights? A mandatory death penalty for anyone caught having gay sex in public. Very liberal.
But, hey, he tipped up £15k so let's forget about it...
Sorry for being so howwibly sectawian about these things
What's the official CC excuse for this bit of cretinous opportunism - I'm sure you'll be happy to deliver it for us...Anotherfolky
New Member
Groucho said:
Im sorry Groucho but that just isnt true, for all their faults the Workers Power Group, CPGB, ISG etc etc etc hold the position that it is necessary for a single issue campaign such as StWC to hold a position on Gay rights as a policy issue, it would be ludricious to do so. However the issue with Lindsay German and her comments did relate to Respect see the links below:
http://www.petertatchell.net/politics/respectconference.htm
Now whether it is a misunderstanding or not or a misinterpretation (wilful or otherwise) of Germans remark it was specifically related to Respect and not the StWC.
Das Uberdog
remembers the alamo
Please, don't anybody think that I'm trying to win people over here. I know enough about internet forums to know that winning intellectual arguments, especially in a situation where people can wriggle and squirm out of the actual debates and draw the focus away to many various and assorted mini-arguments, is not the most effective way to do - well - anything, really. I come here to troll, yes - I also come to shout a bit.
Please;
-example of an organisation which was destroyed because of the SWP
-quantify the actual progress anyone has made by following tiny little campaigns focused around bringing in road toll charges
-does anyone here seriously believe that the left movement in this country would be stronger without Stop the War, Respect or any of the other great social movements of our times?
-does anyone here dispute that Jack Straw, after having seen the Stop the War demonstrations in Blackburn and Liverpool stepped down his original position on Iran, declaring that an attack on Iran would be 'inconcievable' leading to his removal from cabinet?
-does anyone dispute that the Stop the War demonstration called after three days notice in London was a principle reason for Tony Blair backing down on his original statements regarding the responsibility of Hezbollah in the conflict in Lebanon?
Please;
-example of an organisation which was destroyed because of the SWP
-quantify the actual progress anyone has made by following tiny little campaigns focused around bringing in road toll charges
-does anyone here seriously believe that the left movement in this country would be stronger without Stop the War, Respect or any of the other great social movements of our times?
-does anyone here dispute that Jack Straw, after having seen the Stop the War demonstrations in Blackburn and Liverpool stepped down his original position on Iran, declaring that an attack on Iran would be 'inconcievable' leading to his removal from cabinet?
-does anyone dispute that the Stop the War demonstration called after three days notice in London was a principle reason for Tony Blair backing down on his original statements regarding the responsibility of Hezbollah in the conflict in Lebanon?
Anotherfolky
New Member
Das Uberdog said:
You seem to be confusing the Stop the War movement with the SWP and confusing support for the former with support for the latter DA.
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
Socialist Alliance.Das Uberdog said:
Respect - "A great social movement of our time"
I dispute the left in this country benefited from the STWC leadership excluding socialist arguments from its platforms, inviting LibDems to speak instead, etc.etc.
yes - his statements re attacking Iran being "nuts" preceded the Condi visit.
Yes. The demonstration went unreported even in the Guardian. What's more, Blair's underlying position has hardly changed at all.
Das Uberdog
remembers the alamo
articul8 said:
As though I couldn't quote easily argue that Socialist Alliance was destroyed by any other factors - don't let's get into a big argument about this, I want an organisation which turned to shit primarily because of the SWP and not just infighting between various different groups. I don't want opinion pieces which include ideological or principled and practical differences, I want something which the SWP has actually sabotaged for it's own gain or otherwise.
Respect - "A great social movement of our time"
I dispute the left in this country benefited from the STWC leadership excluding socialist arguments from its platforms, inviting LibDems to speak instead, etc.etc.
The STWC leadership didn't allow Socialist Party enthusiasts to stand up on stage and claim that the only solution to the problem was to call a general strike, if that's what you're talking about. Yeah, we didn't let completely tactless idiots speak. Stop the War is a broad based united front. Can you pronounce, U-N-I-T-E-D? Yoo-Nai-Tid. As a result of Stop the War, leftist groups of all organisations have benefitted from increased membership and publicity. Just because the speakers have been told to be a-political in terms of their economical beliefs, doesn't mean that the left hasn't been benefitting more than the right from Stop the War.
javascript:launchAVConsoleStory('4807152')
Incorrect. Though he did claim that attacking Iran was 'Nuts' in 2004 he also came back with another statement out of the blue just over a week after facing the protests in his own constituency. What else made him change his mind?
His underlying position may not have changed, though his public announcements have. If you don't believe the mass movement influenced his decision, what do you think made him re-evaluate his comments?
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
Again, the SA fits the bill (they joined - completely dominated it - many of best left activists were forced out - SWP deliberately marginalised it during the Iraq war build up - it turned to shit). Whatever, they're telling you - the SA did not "fall apart" due to internal differences. It was systematically wrecked by the SWP.Das Uberdog said:
Unity suggests unity between those of different outlooks though - not reduce all arguments to LCD liberal/pacifist mush. Muslims could quote from the Qu'ran, CND could talk about 'peace', liberals could talk about international law and the UN, but SOCIALISTS had to refrain from advancing the case against capitalism from STWC platforms.
Let me ask you a question - what would have been necessary for "Stop the War" to have ACTUALLY STOPPED the war rather than protesting about it (and being ignored)?
SO you admit it had been Straw's recorded position for at least 2 years - so he didn't "change his mind". No doubt this made it necessary to move him on. Straw doesn't need any demonstrations to remind him he has a big muslim population in his constituency.
I don't think there has been much in the way of substantial re-evaluation. Any slight change in rhetoric probably has more to do with the internal politics of the Labour party than a STW demonstration which received negligible coverage.
Similar threads
