Membership Requirements
November 2024 › Forums › General discussion › Membership Requirements
- This topic has 8 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 2 months ago by alanjjohnstone.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 15, 2015 at 5:53 pm #84193GavinParticipant
Apart from a satisfactory knowledge of the Socialst case, are there any instances whereby a person could be denied membership of the SPGB? Such as, showing sympathy to another political party, criminal conviction or perhaps suggesting the SPGB should merge with another Party?
September 15, 2015 at 6:37 pm #114251DJPParticipantAt this ponit in time if someone was showing sympathy to another political party or suggesting the SPGB should merge this would suggest that they do not share our conception of socialism, so it would be highly likely that membership would be refused. We do not check for criminal records.
September 15, 2015 at 10:14 pm #114252alanjjohnstoneKeymasterYes, i think i would ask for more clarification of those questions you present, if i was on the membership committee. What political parties and to what degree of sympathy?Our rules forbid membership of another political party. Theoretically, if another socialist party sharing our principles arose we would seek to unify. If there existed disagreement on what both considered basic positions, then any unity would soon break down with internecene disputes. DJP does omit that we do not permit membership to those holding any religious beliefs.
September 16, 2015 at 3:11 pm #114253AnonymousInactiveThe EC can deny membership without giving reason.
September 16, 2015 at 3:48 pm #114254jondwhiteParticipantIn the US its called 'dual-carding' and the SPGB don't permit 'dual-carding'
September 16, 2015 at 5:23 pm #114255DJPParticipantI think the "dual-carding" thing is more to do with trade unions.. I doubt there are many if any political parties that allow dual membership..
September 24, 2015 at 5:25 pm #114256GavinParticipantThanks for enlightening me on those points I raised though the reply by ‘Vin’ does seem to indicate a possible lapse in the democratic procedures.
It was a pleasant surprise to see an article in September’s Standard from John Bisset.
September 24, 2015 at 7:22 pm #114257AnonymousInactiveGavin wrote:Thanks for enlightening me on those points I raised though the reply by 'Vin' does seem to indicate a possible lapse in the democratic procedures.You can be reassured that there are no lapses in the democratic procedures of the party although mistakes are sometimes made. I don't know where you live Gavin, but you might find it instructive to attend either a public meeting organised by the party or a Branch or the monthly Executive Committee, or, in about a month's time, the Autumn Delegate Meeting. Party procedures are transparent and all meetings are open to everyone, member or non-member alike.
September 25, 2015 at 12:56 am #114258alanjjohnstoneKeymasterI agree with Gnome, Gavin.The importance we place on our party democracy frequently results in impassioned defence of it when individuals perceive a potential threat. We tend to over-act or use hyperbole but who says that is always a fault. Always best to be vigilant. But it may have the back-fire effect of giving non-members or the casual visitor to the forum an entirely wrong impression. Despite his grievances i am sure Vin would say the bar of our democratic practices is very high for other organisations even to try to emulate and expectations upon those responsible within the party for it ,such as moderators on this forum, is very demanding.You will also be pleased that I believe JohnB has another article in this upcoming October issue.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.