Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

"SW appropriates causes solely to propagate SW", in order to... [fill in the blank]

ResistanceMP3 said:
there is another thread on the topic of SW, (how boring is that), but the way it is couched I think it will only attract the usual cliche posturing answers. thought it might be interesting, well at least for a saddo like me, if people for once could put some meat upon the bones of these 'theories'.

so;

"SW appropriates causes solely to propagate SW", in order to... [fill in the blank]

it's like if you had a murder trial, the prosecutors would try to give a motive for the crime. that's what I'm really interested in, what people think are the motives for this clearly Machiavellian behaviour.

here is one beginnings of an attempt at a rational explanation.


(have a look here for the context of the quote)

I do hope that some of our more prolific posters will for once offer some rational explanation beyond the usual one-liners. If you agree with violent panda and want to expand upon it, feel free. If you have alternative theories, please please, SHARE!
Click to expand...

This is one of the weirdest threads I've ever read on Urban 75.

Has Viz's Mr Logic joined the SWP? :hmm:
 
butchersapron said:
Most clumsy dodge this year. Plus you have a go at dwarfs.
Click to expand...


And, speaking as a dwarf, y'know, I just want to point out that the 'comrade' is being, y'know, totally oppressive.



Which is why we're inviting the Autonomous Dwarf Collective to join in our new United Dwarves Front.



That, and because someone on our Central Committee has discovered they get the horn just thinking about short people.
 
ResistanceMP3 said:
Look I did PM, very formally, to try and explain to you where I was coming from. As I said, I have no desire whatsoever to intentionally misrepresent you, but if I don't understand where the fucking hell you're coming from, is it NOTt understandable there is room for error in reading what you have said? Go back and read what you have said in the other thread, and tell me it is impossible for someone who hasn't got a clue what you are talking about, to have read things the way I did.
Click to expand...
You really can't abide even mild criticism, can you? :D
If you can't appreciate where I'm coming from, I ABSOLUTELY pity any member of the working class who comes into contact with you anarchists...
Click to expand...
Why pity?, Do you think that members of the working class would be as poor at grasping a non-doctrinal argument as you are? You should set aside a bit of that condescension. :)
...no wonder your movement is so tiny.
Click to expand...
he shoots! He misses the point entirely!
Okay, you are entitled to your opinion. I think that argument is much weaker than the one placed by butchers and chilango. I mean it is better than the one I caricatured inadvertently, but it still implies there is a will to deceive.
Click to expand...
No it doesn't.
that's very interesting. Lots of people wouldn't go that far.
Click to expand...
That's because lots of people haven't bothered to slog through the writings of Cliff, Rees, et al in order to see where they're coming from.
Lots of people think that the workers state, is the end, but you at least think for Cliff "power was a means to an end, a vanguard propelled socialism. Similar to the way the French philosophers of the French Revolution, differed from the English philosophers of the English Revolution, perhaps?
Click to expand...
I don't think it's even that complicated, to be frank.
perhaps anarchists are more Newtonian in their philosophy than I had realised
Click to expand...
You keep mentioning "anarchists" as if they're some homogeneous formation, which is about as far from reality as you can get.
sorry, this kind of argument doesn't really carry much weight with me. The simple response would be, how come the anarchists haven't been able to retain the people it has attracted? Because it hasn't attracted anybody? Why is that? :D
Click to expand...
Well, given that you're basing your premise on anarchism being a "movement" that attempts to retain adherents, I'm not surprised it doesn't carry much weight with you, as your premise isn't accurate. :)
 
ViolentPanda said:
You really can't abide even mild criticism, can you?
Click to expand...
was it just criticism? I thought you were suggesting highway is being dishonest, intentionally distorting what you have said. if you are just criticising what I said, fair comment.. sorry.

Why pity?, Do you think that members of the working class would be as poor at grasping a non-doctrinal argument as you are? You should set aside a bit of that condescension.
Click to expand...
it took four years and eight months to even get an answer out of an anarchist of any sort. and generally it's the Napoleon complex that so alienates. (hope he's not reading this :D ) lastly, I only show condescension in reciprocation.


No it doesn't.
Click to expand...
doesn't it? i think so, and you haven't tried convince me otherwise. that's why I like butchers post, it doesn't need anything like "those attracted to power", doesn't need any dishonesty, it just explains people within their context, position in society. if you are now saying your opinion, analysis, is exactly the same as butchers and chill explained, I'll take your word for it, still doesn't look like that to me, but no biggy.

That's because lots of people haven't bothered to slog through the writings of Cliff, Rees, et al in order to see where they're coming from.
Click to expand...
credit to you! honest criticism! good!


You keep mentioning "anarchists" as if they're some homogeneous formation, which is about as far from reality as you can get.
Click to expand...
like all Leninists are homogenous? Marxists are homogenous? it's being a stickler like this that makes it really hard to learn from you anarchists. In that respect anarchists are homogenous, in my experience.:D you find it really hard to accept different experiences, lead to a different use of the English language. So what I don't speak anarchistese, as someone trying to impart information it's really up to you to expect the paucity of my language and finds ways round the obstacles, in my own opinion. I'm paralysed in the neck down, and a member of the SW , you should surely see these attributes as disabilities, and try to make anarchism accessible, no? "our meeting room has steps, and if you don't like it fuck off?:D
Well, given that you're basing your premise on anarchism being a "movement" that attempts to retain adherents, I'm not surprised it doesn't carry much weight with you, as your premise isn't accurate. :)
Click to expand...
so let me understand this, this is interesting, you believe in trying to create a social revolution but you are not interested in explaining to people what anarchism is about or retaining their interest in the topic?:confused:
Click to expand...
 
ResistanceMP3 said:
was it just criticism? I thought you were suggesting highway is being dishonest, intentionally distorting what you have said. if you are just criticising what I said, fair comment.. sorry.

it took four years and eight months to even get an answer out of an anarchist of any sort. and generally it's the Napoleon complex that so alienates. (hope he's not reading this) lastly, I only show condescension in reciprocation.
Click to expand...
The reason you find it so hard to "get an answer out of an anarchist" is because many anarchists, even those who are members of the various groupings, don't tend to speak for anyone but themselves. It isn't some form of superiority complex, it's an acknowledgment that what they represent as an answer may differ markedly from the answer any other anarchist might give.
doesn't it? i think so, and you haven't tried convince me otherwise...
Click to expand...
I shouldn't need to have to convince you otherwise, given that I haven't accused anyone of deliberately and maliciously acting to deceive. As much as I dislike the SWP nomenklatura, I don't believe they're deliberately dishonest, what I think is that they've let their core ideology blind them to the possibility that they might not be on the right path.
...that's why I like butchers post, it doesn't need anything like "those attracted to power", doesn't need any dishonesty, it just explains people within their context, position in society.
Click to expand...
And it does so admirably. It doesn't, however, cater for "the human factor" very well, which is why I mention "those attracted to power". :)
if you are now saying your opinion, analysis, is exactly the same as butchers and chill explained, I'll take your word for it, still doesn't look like that to me, but no biggy.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying anything of the sort, I'm expressing my own opinion, based, as I said, on experience.
credit to you! honest criticism! good!
Click to expand...
What was that you were saying about condescension? :p
like all Leninists are homogenous? Marxists are homogenous?
Click to expand...
Spurious, they've (along with "Trotskyism", "Stalinism", "Maoism" etc) evolved from the same set of basic texts written by Engels and Marx, anarchism hasn't.
it's being a stickler like this that makes it really hard to learn from you anarchists. In that respect anarchists are homogenous, in my experience.:D you find it really hard to accept different experiences, lead to a different use of the English language. So what I don't speak anarchistese, as someone trying to impart information it's really up to you to expect the paucity of my language and finds ways round the obstacles, in my own opinion. I'm paralysed in the neck down, and a member of the SW , you should surely see these attributes as disabilities, and try to make anarchism accessible, no? "our meeting room has steps, and if you don't like it fuck off?
Click to expand...
The essential point that you miss is that I'm not here to preach the Gospel according to an anarchist theoretician, I'm making statements and expressing my opinions based on my own perceptions and understandings of anarchist thought, I'm not preaching or holding to a party line.
so let me understand this, this is interesting, you believe in trying to create a social revolution but you are not interested in explaining to people what anarchism is about or retaining their interest in the topic?:confused:
Click to expand...
I'm not interested in preaching, and I don't believe that people can be "converted" to anarchism through me explaining the minutiae of anarchist thought to them, I personally believe that anarchism is a philosophy that people arrive at under their own steam, and that it's up to you to inform yourself. That way you're less likely to be ensnared by doctrine. :)
 
ViolentPanda said:
The reason you find it so hard to "get an answer out of an anarchist" is because many anarchists, even those who are members of the various groupings, don't tend to speak for anyone but themselves. It isn't some form of superiority complex, it's an acknowledgment that what they represent as an answer may differ markedly from the answer any other anarchist might give.
Click to expand...
that doesn't really wash. All three of you have managed to answer a question this time. But more to the point, someone was on here ages ago, criticising the whole left on here, for being more about defining themselves by what they are against, than defining themselves by what they are for. that seems to be the main problem to me.
I shouldn't need to have to convince you otherwise, given that I haven't accused anyone of deliberately and maliciously acting to deceive. As much as I dislike the SWP nomenklatura, I don't believe they're deliberately dishonest, what I think is that they've let their core ideology blind them to the possibility that they might not be on the right path.
Click to expand...
yes, that is more in chime with what Napoleon and Chill have said, and is in a language I understand.

And it does so admirably. It doesn't, however, cater for "the human factor" very well, which is why I mention "those attracted to power". :)
Click to expand...
well that's I think you are mistaken. There aren't many humans in SW leadership, read the other thread, there they tell us SW is controlled by the state, which is controlled by a lizards don't you know?:D

Spurious, they've (along with "Trotskyism", "Stalinism", "Maoism" etc) evolved from the same set of basic texts written by Engels and Marx, anarchism hasn't.
Click to expand...
doesn't it? How do we know if no two anarchists are prepared prepared to agree what anarchism is?:D
The essential point that you miss is that I'm not here to preach the Gospel according to an anarchist theoretician, I'm making statements and expressing my opinions based on my own perceptions and understandings of anarchist thought, I'm not preaching or holding to a party line.

I'm not interested in preaching, and I don't believe that people can be "converted" to anarchism through me explaining the minutiae of anarchist thought to them, I personally believe that anarchism is a philosophy that people arrive at under their own steam, and that it's up to you to inform yourself. That way you're less likely to be ensnared by doctrine. :)
Click to expand...
I thought you would finish those comments with, "it is only when you take the stone from my hand grasshopper, will it be time for you to leave the monastery"!:D (Kung fu, the David Carradine series from the 1970s)

But yes, I think there is an element of truth in that. The philosophy of anarchism as I perceive from what you all say, is just so alien to my everyday experience, it's like you all speak another language. I can understand you don't want to preach. I can understand your philosophy dictates, "people must arrive at anarchism under their own steam". But when somebody is sincerely curious, and enquires about it, does this still mean you have to tell them to fuckoff?

People think ResistanceMP3 Mr logic is funny. Even funnier was ResistanceMP3 Mr Ultra polite "fraternal greetings comerade, ResistanceMP3". I've tried every way I can think of to try and get some explanations of any individual's, individual interpretation of anarchism, with no success. In my endeavour, this thread has been the most successful I have ever taken part in since 2003. Isn't that taking the anarchist philosophy to the extreme? if anarchists are not even prepared to answer somebody who is curious, how are you expected to find anything about anarchism?
 
The Caravanserai moves on....

ResistanceMP3 said:
"SW appropriates causes solely to propagate SW", in order to... [fill in the blank]

it's like if you had a murder trial, the prosecutors would try to give a motive for the crime. that's what I'm really interested in, what people think are the motives for this clearly Machiavellian behaviour.

...

I do hope that some of our more prolific posters will for once offer some rational explanation beyond the usual one-liners. If you agree with violent panda and want to expand upon it, feel free. If you have alternative theories, please please, SHARE!
Click to expand...
In my opinion the Socialist Workers' Party appropriates causes because, although it has various theories, these are formless, shapeless and need something specific to give them context. The doctrines and ideology of the SWP are epiphenomena. It's the activity and the structure of this group which are important.

Attempting to appropriate a cause provides a ready market for the selling of papers. This becomes an end in itself, an example of a circular, self-referential activity - selling the papers for the sake of selling the papers.

The problem with this, from the SWP activists' point of view, is that most of the potential purchasers / recruits they are aiming at, have been in other causes, have seen them before, and have formed the view that the SWP are parasites. So they won't buy / won't bite. Thus as an activity / strategy, attempting to appropriate the cause is futile.

All this really comes round to the question about the sincerity of the SWP in their involvement in the sundry causes. For example, the Socialist Alliance. One reason why they receive such a hostile reception is the fact that once the issue / movement they latch on to goes off the boil, the Socialist Workers quickly move on to the next target. This leads people to conclude that they did not really care about the cause or issue. Only the recruiting or the selling of the papers....

It is a little like those Behaviourist experiments where a nerve has been cut preventing the appetite from being saeitiated. The pigeon goes on drinking and drinking; an example of a drive, technique or activity which does not address the motivation or instinct which initiates the hunger.
 
ResistanceMP3 said:
People think ResistanceMP3 Mr logic is funny. Even funnier was ResistanceMP3 Mr Ultra polite "fraternal greetings comerade, ResistanceMP3".
Click to expand...

mrmagoo-1.jpg


The real Mr RMP3 - simultaneously myopic and delusional but completely unaware of and unperturbed by either shortcoming.
 
Louis MacNeice said:
mrmagoo-1.jpg


The real Mr RMP3 - simultaneously myopic and delusional but completely unaware of and unperturbed by either shortcoming.
Click to expand...

LOL :D I challenge you. If you can manage to find one thread from the last four years where YOU have tried to explain anything to me about YOUR politics, I will make a donation to a cause of your choice.

All you ever do, like above, is attack me or what I believe in. You could never be accused of being insidious.
 
ResistanceMP3 said:
LOL :D I challenge you. If you can manage to find one thread from the last four years where YOU have tried to explain anything to me about YOUR politics, I will make a donation to a cause of your choice.

All you ever do, like above, is attack me or what I believe in. You could never be accused of being insidious.
Click to expand...

Sorry was away camping when you posted this so I've only just seen it; didn't take more than a couple of minutes to find what you're after.

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=213392

Donation to the IWCA please.
 
Nope.
Louis MacNeice said:
Where have I ever called for a single defintion of socialism? The point of this thread isn't to arrive at an answer (singular) but to explore the terrain (plural).

Cheers - Louis (when Adam delve and Eve span who was then the gentleman) MacNeice

p.s. I'm off to play in the snow with the kids now, then away for a few days in Herefordshire before they go back to school, but please feel free to continue putting me straight in my absence.
Click to expand...
you didn't set to explain your politics, you set out to have a general discussion, and even in your first few post it quickly transpired that you were expecting me to explain mine, rather than you explain yours. it's the same technique as Napoleon, you constantly ask questions so you can find minutiae you can pull apart. Though I have to give you credit, there was some honesty in this thread from you, even though at that point, 2007, you still believed I was "disingenuous".

you seem totally incapable of believing someone can HONESTLY hold a contradictory SW view to yourself.

so go on, really prove me wrong, by actually answering the topic of the thread. (WHICH NAPOLEON ACTUALLY DID FOR ONCE!:eek::eek::eek:
 
Just send the cheque made payable to the IWCA to:

Independent Working Class Association
BM Box IWCA
London
WC1N 3XX

Cheers - Louis MacNeice
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ElizabethofYork
Met Police to Stop Non-Crime Hate Investigations
2 3
Replies
84
Views
1K
A380
A380
HeAthen
HMRC web services hosted in the US?
Replies
24
Views
556
marty21
marty21
editor
Triple stabbing in Uxbridge, 28th Oct 2025
2
Replies
31
Views
1K
Yossarian
Yossarian
Orang Utan
US book banning fever spreads to the UK
2
Replies
34
Views
894
RichDelBoy
R
L
Oops - How did the Government not see that this was going to happen? (ID cards)
Replies
4
Views
262
Buddy Bradley
Buddy Bradley
Back
Top Bottom