the reason the party is so small
- This topic has 16 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
the reason the party is so small is obvious. The following is the face of the party. What people see and have to put up with when they come into contact with the party. You can continue to bury heads in the sand but this problem needs to addressed by the membership.
Some members/sympathisers in the north east may now feel too intimidated to come down to conference. (Tho' i am not one of them. ) But I can understand a disabled and defenceless person feeling that way.
Ed wrote:Your post is utter shit you haven't even read what I've wrote more strawmen and ad hom.
Ed wrote:Time to start backing up your bull shit
Ed wrote:Hope that question is not too intellectual for you, I know there was a few words over 3 syllables there
Ed wrote:that's a matter of opinion mainly I've just seen incessant whinging
Ed wrote:I've behaved like a fucking saint and let a lot of your attacks slide but I've had enough of the constant attacks from you and Socialist Punk. I disagree with his unfounded assertion and he responds with an attack on me and I'm the fucking bad guy? Fuck that
Ed wrote:My heart bleeds
Ed wrote:Cry me a fucking river pal you lot love to dish it out but you run away crying anytime anyone gives it back.
Ed wrote:I'm referring to you socialist punk and northern light, the three horsemen of the apocalypse
Ed wrote:I suggest you and your cronies come down to ADM no one can stop you spouting your hysterical bollocks there
TOGWWe can all read.To an "outsider" your re-posting of remarks you find offensive only contributes to the poor image you complain of.
I have just read the 7 page thread entitled "Is there, "Something wrong with the party's case and/or it's methods?" and it has profoundly depressed me. What a laughing stock the SPGB would be should left wingers (or anyone else for that matter) ever read this discourse. My eyes were opened at Summer School in July and when I was there my position was confirmed that I would never rejoin the party…I think the main thing that swung it for me was the way the speaker from Occupy Norwich was handled at Summer School. Frankly I was disgusted by the way this guy was treated. The party really doesn't do itself any favours does it?. The dude was being patronised from the start by members asking questions in the Saturday afternoon session incl an inebriated member who (even though he was pissed with a can of beer in his hand) was later allowed to chair an impossibly obtuse and highly intellectualised evening talk about Shakespeare which would have sent your average worker in the street fleeing in utter boredom. When it came time for a Q&A in the earlier afternnon session, another dissolute party member (a scruffy sort of dishevelled guy…don't know his name) posed a question then just as the Occupy dude was about to answer, the same member just got up and shuffled out of the room them came back in few minutes later then went out of the glass doors into the garden! The Occupy guy didn't know what was going on. To top all of this, at the very end of the night after having sat through that Shakespeare dreck the same poor cunt from Norwich was standing in the garden being ganged up on and lambasted with the case for Socialism by three evangelical members! I mean what kind of impression does this sort of arrogance give off? I say arrogance because most members wouldn't even see any of this as a problem. It would not even occur to them and it didn't that weekend…because in their heads the SPGB is always right no matter what. On top of all this was the homophobic shit that I had to sit through at dinner when another member was spouting out her distaste of the social mores of gay men in South London. Being gay myself I was obviously offended and flabbergated that a party member should be coming out with this shit. Yet despite my protestations the member in question seemed to be totally unconcerned. This really disgusted me."Clinical, critical, often aggressive cynicism." is what "SocialistPunk" stated is the main problem and I could not agree more. I think it is aggression in particular. I saw this at Summer School and also when I watched the video of the recent discussion with TZM in London. This is the problem with humans…it's the old ego that get's in the way every time when things aren't going as planned or hoped for. And things haven't been going anywhere for 108 years and herein lies the rub. I see the Party disappearing in years to come or at least surviving as a relic to be kept alive by a few curators. But it's not really the party's fault either. 108 years of frustration and disappointment coupled with the collosal and increasingly sophisticated Capitalist media/news/entertainment machine turns something like the SPGB into what it is today. This is the main reason behind the fact that the SPGB is wee because it is wee because it is wee etcThis problem also has an element that is much closer to home for me.The ultimate price has been paid by me (again because of this "Clinical, critical and often aggressive cynicism) because 18 months ago I had a massive blowout with my own father who is a 75 year old member. The reason? I dared to make similar criticisms of the party whilst making comparisions to TZM. I was basically disowned by him and that is when the big fall out came. Bearing in mind of course that my old man (like many members I imagine) has never actually read or watched a single piece of TZM material. I digress. I just fear the owning class will win in the end…and I'm talking about the end of history and humanity here because not only is our class hopelessly disorganised and utterly clueless, but the few hundred workers who are organised in WSM are in some ways totally at odds with each other. No wonder TZM decided to totally ditch all of their forums.I think this method of communication is counter-productive in a way because the level of invective I have read today might never happen if members were all together socialising in real life…although from some of the stories I heard over the years from Glasgow branch I wouldn't know so much. All you have to do is read some of the comments pages in newspaper websites or anywhere and eventually you will get folk slagging each other off. Sorry to be so pessimistic but I think we are all fucked. If even the SPGB can't get it together after all this time then humanity is doomed.
Hi Hollyhead,When I joined the forum there were a few who I thought were unconstructive and unnecessarily critical. It has lead to this exchange. This kinda thing is the reason I started the debate about party image and approach. Someone didn't get it, and the rest is history.I think OGW has a point here. As far as I am aware he wants some explanations as to how this thing got so out of hand, given it was supposed to be a debate about this very thing. I think he should be taken seriously, as it is a valid point that needs addressing in a democratic organization.I again make an appeal to the silent majority on this forum and in the party. Are you allowing this site, a window into the socialist party to be dominated by people who sneer, swear and act aggressively? Is this to be the image of the party?To an outsider it will be off putting. But if it leads to positive change, it will benefit the party in the long run.
Hi Ozymandias,You are spot on.I am particularly appalled at your report about the homophobia. When I came across socialism as a young punk, it spoke to me, I saw it as a way of bringing to the fore the best in humanity, tolerance, understanding, freedom of expression etc. I expected fellow socialists to have freed themselves of the bullshit of everything that is wrong in society today.From what I have seen and heard recently, I think I must be thinking of some other socialism. It looks as though some in this party are still weighed down with todays bullshit. The pathetic attitude of the party to the Occupy speaker at summer school is a classic example of what I have been trying to get across about the party image and approach. TZM and Occupy are made up of people who are looking for something better.To sneer, attack and ignore them because they are not members of a genuine socialist party, not like "us", is petty and self defeating.I am pleased to see that there are others out there who can see what I can see. If more speak up, maybe something can be salvaged from the wreck.
HollyHead wrote:TOGWWe can all read.To an "outsider" your re-posting of remarks you find offensive only contributes to the poor image you complain of.You need to speak to the auth0r of the comments NOT the messenger. You cannot brush it under the carpet. Intimidation and abuse needs to be confronted head on.
Ozymandias wrote:On top of all this was the homophobic shit that I had to sit through at dinner when another member was spouting out her distaste of the social mores of gay men in South London. Being gay myself I was obviously offended and flabbergated that a party member should be coming out with this shit. Yet despite my protestations the member in question seemed to be totally unconcerned. This really disgusted me.this must have been very uncomfortable. Such an intimidating and abusive atmospher is not a safe environment. There is a very nasty picture emerging
I can assure you, Ozy, that most members did not approve of the way some members behaved at both the Occupy talk and the meeting with Zeitgeist and they told them. After all, the organisers of these meet-ups had set them up with a view to establishing a friendly first contact with the two recent movements which offered some sign, the one of a new anti-capitalist feeling, the other pointing to the alternative to the money-wages-profits system that is capitalism. The behaviour of those members frustrated this.So, yes, we do have a problem here. I'm not sure what we can do about it, though, except that invoking the disciplinary clauses of the rulebook is not the way. We are not a top-down centralist party that can tell members what to do. It's up to the members concerned to realise that they are being counter-productive and to exercise self-restraint.Fortunately, these negative kneejerk reactions are not reflected in the Socialist Standard which is our flagship rather than our forums.Incidentally, I don't think this is why we are small. It's more likely to be the other way round.
TheOldGreyWhistle wrote:Ozymandias wrote:On top of all this was the homophobic shit that I had to sit through at dinner when another member was spouting out her distaste of the social mores of gay men in South London. Being gay myself I was obviously offended and flabbergated that a party member should be coming out with this shit. Yet despite my protestations the member in question seemed to be totally unconcerned. This really disgusted me.this must have been very uncomfortable. Such an intimidating and abusive atmospher is not a safe environment. There is a very nasty picture emerging
Did the homophobic member know you were gay before she spoke about it?
Hi ALB,So it would seem that the party has a few members who, think it ok to act in a manner that is likely to give other organizations (TZM, Occupy) a bad impression of the SPGB. It looks like damage has been done to the party reputation. And you say you're not sure what can be done?Come on! If the party has people who damage its rep, are those people needed, especially in these difficult times?Could the behaviour that is being described be deliberate? It is well known that disruption tactics are used by the state to tar organizations with bad reps etc.
SocialistPunk wrote:Could the behaviour that is being described be deliberate? It is well known that disruption tactics are used by the state to tar organizations with bad reps etc.No it wasn't. Of course not. I suggest that it comes rather from frustration at being (and having been for a long time) a tiny minority in a world dominated by capitalist ideas being given a chance to have a go at someone they perceive not to be completely free of these ideas. Counter-productive in the circumstances, yes, but capable of being avoided in the future by friendly criticism and rational discussion.This whole matter is coming up at the Party's Autumn Delegate Meeting on Sunday 21 October. Look at the supporting statements to items 27 and 28 here:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/spintcom/message/13549As to your second point, it was (I imagine) partly the suggestion that some members were actually State agent-provacateurs planted in the Party that upset one participant here and led to the warnings to both. That's a completely unacceptable claim to level at a member, besides being quite ridiculous. In fact, the fact that we are even discussing this possibility will make it seem to outsiders that we (all of us) are a bunch of nutters. I don't think that we should go anywhere near that road.
I disagree with the idea it will make us look like nutters, if we even consider the idea of infiltration. I am sure left wing as well as right wing organizations are aware of the tactic. And it has been used by the state against groups on both side of the political spectrum.I understand the unacceptable nature of leveling or inferring that kind of accusation at people on this forum. I expect some will think that of me, given that I am asking awkward questions. I do not however understand the idea that the notion of that tactic being used at some point in the party, past, present or future is "quite ridiculous". Seems a bit naive to me.I accept your explanation of the incidents at the meetings described, I was not there and I am sure you know these people on a personal level.I offer my sincerest apologies to anyone who may have taken any offence at my previous post to which ALB refers.
SocialistPunk wrote:I disagree with the idea it will make us look like nutters, if we even consider the idea of infiltration. I am sure left wing as well as right wing organizations are aware of the tactic. And it has been used by the state against groups on both side of the political spectrum.I understand the unacceptable nature of leveling or inferring that kind of accusation at people on this forum. I expect some will think that of me, given that I am asking awkward questions. I do not however understand the idea that the notion of that tactic being used at some point in the party, past, present or future is "quite ridiculous". Seems a bit naive to me.I accept your explanation of the incidents at the meetings described, I was not there and I am sure you know these people on a personal level.I offer my sincerest apologies to anyone who may have taken any offence at my previous post to which ALB refers.The miners picket lines in the 80s were infiltrated to make us look bad..
There is obviously something very wrong going on.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.