Neutralising the SWP

88 posts / 0 new
Last post
Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Jan 18 2005 19:41
Lazlo_Woodbine wrote:
I said that some anarchists have more sympathy for the SWP than for other anarchists. Alan disagreed with this -- then said, 'yes, but there are really good reasons for the SWP being better.'

No you said anarchists had sympathy with the SWP, which is very different. I merely tried to clarify the position of my comrade, while you flagellated on the side.

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Jan 19 2005 14:54
Alan_is_Fucking_Dead wrote:
while you flagellated on the side.

confused

kalabine
Offline
Joined: 27-03-04
Jan 19 2005 14:58

when it comes to working with them - trots as a whole are no better than AR/primmo scum - just annoying in a different way - they will always try and take stuff over and their rants will scare normal people off

they may pay lip service to the class struggle - but it's bollocks in 99% of cases they have a similar middle class background to AR nuts

Big Brother
Offline
Joined: 17-01-05
Jan 19 2005 18:56

Well we can all see that we don't get on and that's the reason everybody turns to the SWP. We are too busy with infighting, so I don't think nothing will ever change there.

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Jan 19 2005 19:01

It's not infighting, it's "Comradely self-criticism"

You utter, utter shit

wink

nastyned
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Jan 19 2005 21:11
Lazlo_Woodbine wrote:
So, Pilgrim and nastyned, does that answer your questions?

Not really. You still haven't convinced my that anyone is actually sympathetic to the SWP.

And anyway primitivist muppets aren't anarchists.

Pilgrim
Offline
Joined: 18-05-04
Jan 19 2005 21:59

It strikes me as a shame that we all know the SWP are soulless, amoral careerist sacks of shit, but lack the solidarity to do anything about it.

Makes all the complaining about their malign influence pretty pointless really.

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Jan 19 2005 22:01

well the tagline on the forum has been changed to libertarian instead of anti-authoritarian, which is a step forward. Add socialist and it'll be sorted.

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Jan 20 2005 14:27
Catch wrote:
well the tagline on the forum has been changed to libertarian instead of anti-authoritarian, which is a step forward. Add socialist and it'll be sorted.

I like you. You can come round my house and fuck my sister.

cantdocartwheels's picture
cantdocartwheels
Offline
Joined: 15-03-04
Jan 20 2005 17:35
Pilgrim wrote:
It strikes me as a shame that we all know the SWP are soulless, amoral careerist sacks of shit.

yes, thats right, all the hundreds of SWP rank and file members actually joined because they wanted good careers, oooh and i heard they were ''amoral'' and bathed in blood in their sick satanic rituals aswell roll eyes

Its this kind of stupid hysterical shit that you're posting that annoys me, i mean what you're saying here is not much better than the kind of bollocks peddled by that cunt alex callinicos.

Pilgrim
Offline
Joined: 18-05-04
Jan 20 2005 18:01

My fault for not being clearer on this.

I was referring to the leadership of the SWP, rather than its rank and file membership.

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Jan 20 2005 21:53

Alan, I keep checking to see if it's there yet now, only noticed it yesterday. If you're from colchester I may already have fucked your sister.

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Jan 20 2005 22:18

Well that's OK then. I doubt it, she's too wishy washy liberal, she'd be scared by someone who's politics are as sexual as yourself.

redyred
Offline
Joined: 20-02-04
Jan 20 2005 23:02

Why would Catch need Alan's permition?

Unless Alan's sister is 12 or something.

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Jan 20 2005 23:14

anyway back on topic. (although I read "can" as meaning "please".

Alan_is_fucking_dead wrote

Quote:

and have deliberately toned down their propaganda so that they more closely resemble a typical parliamentary party being bankrolled by a liberal NGO than a revolutionary vanguard.

(I think) in Listen Marxist!, Bookchin described the main funding of one of the US trotskyist parties as being mainly from the subscription dues of government agents - state funding doesn't have to be direct. Which liberal NGO are you talking about (I try not to notice too much about the SWP), but there's well documented use of private foundations by the CIA to fund cultural programmes and magazines up to the late 1970s.

Which just happens to have been written about here:

http://www.enrager.net/history/articles/cultural-cold-war/

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Jan 21 2005 14:38
redyred wrote:
Why would Catch need Alan's permition?

Unless Alan's sister is 12 or something.

Patriarchy.

Actually, unless you're a dumbass, you should know I was quoting Full Metal Jacket.

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Jan 21 2005 14:41
Catch wrote:
anyway back on topic. (although I read "can" as meaning "please".

Alan_is_fucking_dead wrote

Quote:

and have deliberately toned down their propaganda so that they more closely resemble a typical parliamentary party being bankrolled by a liberal NGO than a revolutionary vanguard.

(I think) in Listen Marxist!, Bookchin described the main funding of one of the US trotskyist parties as being mainly from the subscription dues of government agents - state funding doesn't have to be direct. Which liberal NGO are you talking about (I try not to notice too much about the SWP), but there's well documented use of private foundations by the CIA to fund cultural programmes and magazines up to the late 1970s.

Which just happens to have been written about here:

http://www.enrager.net/history/articles/cultural-cold-war/

Oh man, have I inadvertently let the cat outta the beg??

I wasn't actually making direct accusations or indulging in conspiracy theories, I was merely commenting on the organisation and practises of the SWP. The liberal NGO was purely figurative.

Although that is interesting.

kalabine
Offline
Joined: 27-03-04
Jan 21 2005 14:53
redyred wrote:
Why would Catch need Alan's permition?

Unless Alan's sister is 12 or something.

well she hadnt started puberty when i banged her good

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Jan 21 2005 15:09
kalabine wrote:
redyred wrote:
Why would Catch need Alan's permition?

Unless Alan's sister is 12 or something.

well she hadnt started puberty when i banged her good

Oh Jesus.

Ever hear about a "line" and "crossing it"?

the button's picture
the button
Offline
Joined: 7-07-04
Jan 21 2005 15:46
John. wrote:
kalabine wrote:
redyred wrote:
Why would Catch need Alan's permition?

Unless Alan's sister is 12 or something.

well she hadnt started puberty when i banged her good

Oh Jesus.

Ever hear about a "line" and "crossing it"?

Exactly. I work for a charity involved in child protection, and that's exactly the kind of thing that's going to get my access to enrager blocked. cry

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Jan 21 2005 18:38

Dude if you hadn't have been blocked already then I'm surprised. 99% of Martin Red's posts are about paedophilia.

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Jan 21 2005 20:54

I don't want to get into conspiracy theories either, but "Who Paid the Piper, the CIA and the Cultural Cold War" from which a lot of information in that essay is taken (and hardback available from Freedom for £4.95 last time I was there) isn't about conspiracy theories, it's about original sources and interviews with people involved at the time. That those tactics have been used in the past (especially the CIA's enthusiasm for and promotion of the NCL), is worth looking into.

nastyned
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Jan 22 2005 18:43

You couldn't see if the CIA are interested in funding resistance could you?

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Jan 22 2005 19:19

I think their funding of the NCL was dependent on them ultimately supporting Western liberal capitalist democracy against the Soviets - hence the term Non Communist Left. As soon as (I think) Truman found out they were funding one-legged lesbian commie pinkoes the whole Congress for Cultural Freedom got shut down.

I'll take my tin foil hat off and try to send messages to them through the chip if you like.

Nick Durie
Offline
Joined: 12-09-04
Jan 23 2005 18:53

As a communist I can understand why comrades might join the SWP.

My thoughts on the SWP are however that they are a very dangerous brake that the state supports to control the working class movement. They will be trotted out by the state when the authorities lose control, as the 'radical alternative' because capitalism can work with Stalinism, and other extreme authoritarian types of regimes. Moreover I resent working with Stalinists because their great historical achievement was to fuck the workers movement internationally and channel the hope it expressed into a form of dictatorial rule, which was never the expression that the working class had been aiming for. They have killed countless millions, and given the chance they will kill countless more. It is our duty to try and point this out to comrades in the SWP and other Stalinist and Trotskyite organisations before they are too far gone to be of any real use to the working class.

As for the anarchists without a class analysis - they're hardly worth speaking to as they're not part of the socialist movement, which has always been really just the political wing of a developed humanism. We'd be as well talking to American 'Libertarians' and trying to work with them on their free state project as we would with individualists, non-humanists and authoritarians like the neo-malthusians (calling them primitivists isn't descriptive enough of their politics - the central thing they agree on is that people are bad, evil breeders, locusts and need to be killed off. Really self-hating Calvinist stuff.), who if they ever got hold of the reins of power would be infinitely more cruel and destructive than Stalin or Hitler. I'm sure many of them are well-intentioned, but the same could be said of members of the Kmeer-Rouge, the Polis, or the SS; that sounds harsh but i really do think _they are_ that bad. I don't think however most anarchists lack a class-analysis; I think what is more a problem is the life-stylism of people who DO have a class-analysis and all the people who would rather pontificate about proletarian revolution than get out and work like fuck for the movement.

I think some see class as only one of a number of oppressions, which while I think is the wrong tack, is something that most of us could work with, and which is a perfectly rational position to take.

What I don't understand however is how neo-malthusians, and other people who have no love for their fellows could ever have convinced themselves that they are anarchists - which is about as humanist a movement as you can get. They'd be a lot more at home in some kind of latter day Calvinist movement.

I think tho the SWP, lifestylists and neo-malthusians are not our biggest enemy yet - altho I think they all the the potential to fuck with the progress of the revolutionary project in their separate ways. I think the biggest issue for the movement right now is our failure to take ourselves seriously, there's too much counter-cultural bollocks and too little strategy, and adjust our workrate and the quality of our endeavours accordingly.

For Communism

red n black star Nick Durie red n black star

Joe Hill
Offline
Joined: 2-12-04
Jan 24 2005 00:23

May I ask the male comrades who run this forum why my wee post about Osama and he CIA was blocked when this (paedo) shit was not?

Joe Hill
Offline
Joined: 2-12-04
Jan 24 2005 00:43

Any comments anyone, before I draw my own conclusions?

Nick Durie
Offline
Joined: 12-09-04
Jan 27 2005 11:47

I think it is disgraceful that this thread was censored and this disgusting display has not been. I would far rather have the most outlandish displays of paranoia than this horrible environment of laddish in 'jokes', such as this totally unacceptable 'joke' in this thread which purports to condone paedophilia.

Jacques Roux's picture
Jacques Roux
Offline
Joined: 17-07-06
Jan 27 2005 14:29

As always, if you whine on a thread about something, most likely is an admin wont see it. If you want to complain about something send an Admin a PM with a link to what you are talking about.

Kalabine has been contacted smile

Joe Hill
Offline
Joined: 2-12-04
Jan 28 2005 21:00

thanks, must remember the whining thing, but you jump on me pretty *uickly.