Child abuse and capitalist political parties
- This topic has 14 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
As the forum has been discussing rape and the SWP then I think it is fair game to attack openly capitalist parties for their alleged abuse of children
Is this subject really of interest to socialists? If it is not then why attack the SWP and not the conservative party?
As a movement we have nothing to gain by attacking child abusers and sleaze per se. The line we should take is that a sick society breeds sick people, and so on.Even if everybody in and associated with the government and all political parties were squeaky clean, were that possible, it wouldn't change our position one jot.
Vin Maratty wrote:As the forum has been discussing rape and the SWP then I think it is fair game to attack openly capitalist parties for their alleged abuse of childrenhttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/westminster-child-abuse-inquiry-theresa-may-under-fire-over-appointment-of-lady-butlersloss-9605847.html Is this subject really of interest to socialists? If it is not then why attack the SWP and not the conservative party?Our attack on the SWP focused on how they decided to deal with the allegations not on the act of rape itself.
Brian wrote:Our attack on the SWP focused on how they decided to deal with the allegations not on the act of rape itself.I am talking about the same thing. There has been a massive coverup in this case. I think there is a lot more energy used attacking the SWP than attacking the Tories.The party would have a lot more appeal if it spent more time attacking the actions of Tories and LibDems.
Vin Maratty wrote:Brian wrote:Our attack on the SWP focused on how they decided to deal with the allegations not on the act of rape itself.I am talking about the same thing. There has been a massive coverup in this case. I think there is a lot more energy used attacking the SWP than attacking the Tories.The party would have a lot more appeal if it spent more time attacking the actions of Tories and LibDems.
Agreed, but until there is some substance to the allegations of a cover up by the political establishment best if we stay well clear of the sleaze brigade. For no section of the community is going to be squeaky clean on the issue of child abuse. The stats on the subject estimate a figure of below 5% in the general population as perpetrators, and I have no idea how that figure was arrived at. Nonetheless, even if its 2.5 it means we are living in a very sick society.
Tory child abuse whistleblower: 'I supplied underage rent boys for Margaret Thatcher's cabinet ministers' In a series of explosive claims about conferences at Blackpool and Brighton in the 1980s, he alleges boys as young as 15 indulged in alcohol and cocaine before they had sex with the powerful politicians.He says one person who attended a party is a current serving minister.Others said to be present at the parties included Keith Joseph, Rhodes Boyson, Dr Alistair Smith and Michael Havershttp://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-i-3848987#ixzz37wUk38Mq
Capitalism is awful but one thing I wouldn't blame capitalism solely for is child abuse. Unfortunately there will always be child abusers, as well as capitalist paedophiles I am pretty sure there are one or two communist paedophiles out there. Though I do think child abuse will be reduced in communism, however unfortunately it will never completely go away.
Vin Maratty wrote:The party would have a lot more appeal if it spent more time attacking the actions of Tories and LibDems.And how exactly does attacking any party for its alleged paedophile activities further the cause of socialism?
rodshaw wrote:And how exactly does attacking any party for its alleged paedophile activities further the cause of socialism?rodshaw I am in full agreement with you on that, which was my original point re SWP. (See thread about SWP and rape) I mean spend more time attacking Tories and LibDems for their non-paedophile activities.
Alex Woodrow wrote:Capitalism is awful but one thing I wouldn't blame capitalism solely for is child abuse. Unfortunately there will always be child abusers, as well as capitalist paedophiles I am pretty sure there are one or two communist paedophiles out there. Though I do think child abuse will be reduced in communism, however unfortunately it will never completely go away.Not sure how things like that will be dealt with in socialism but we will be in a better position to deal with such things when capitalism (with its property laws) is abolished.
Vin Maratty wrote:Alex Woodrow wrote:Capitalism is awful but one thing I wouldn't blame capitalism solely for is child abuse. Unfortunately there will always be child abusers, as well as capitalist paedophiles I am pretty sure there are one or two communist paedophiles out there. Though I do think child abuse will be reduced in communism, however unfortunately it will never completely go away.Not sure how things like that will be dealt with in socialism but we will be in a better position to deal with such things when capitalism (with its property laws) is abolished.
There are studies that show "specific developmental experiences" have a tendancy to distort a persons sexual awareness. In a nutshell it would seem that most child abusers where themselves abused. The issue then becomes, how to break that cycle of abuse.I wouldn't go so far as to say a socialist society could eliminate all such abuse, but a socialist society has to be based on voluntary, community involvement. Or to put it very simply, watching out for one another. So if a family was struggling for whatever reason, the community could and would make themselves available for support etc. Unlike today where we are essentialy encouraged to isolate ourselves and look to authorities to solve every problem and we all know such problem solving is limited due to the constraints of available financial resources.I would also say that at times it may be necessary to remove individuals from the community for the protection of the community.However that is my way of seeing a socialist society trying to tackle difficult and very unpleasant issues. We may find that the different socialist communities take a harsher approach and simply hang such offenders. Who knows what the future might hold.
I agree that we should be wary of seeing these things as an upper class or Establishment 'vice' as certain populists are (a couple of members came across a demonstration outside parliament on Friday which they described as a 'lynch mob' chanting "Kick the pedos out of parliament"). After all, this was what some on the left traditionally saw homosexuality as.
There are shades of Marc Dutroux here.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Dutroux#Allegations_of_cover-upCertainly, we now have more than prima facia evidence that Cyril Smith was a serial child rapist. Avoiding charged words like 'network' and 'ring' it seems clear that he knew and was enabled by other politicians engaged in similar activities. As per the allegations around Elm Guest House, it seems otehrs were invovled.Now, this does not mean there was a cover up. Taking the occam's razor approach, we need to distinguish several different problems.[*]1) An inclination by police not to get caught up in political scandals, and perhaps a deferential approach to politicians.2) Politicians and officials not taking the offences seriopusly, and not triiggering or flagging them when they crossed their desks (this also relates to the so-callde missing files, I'm told by ex-civil servants that civil service records management isn't up to snuff, and orutinely destroys entire sections unless someone marks them as important or still active).3) Active collaboration or interference, either:i) through invovlement in the abuse themselves, or,ii) Through callous desire to protect their mates (or be owed a favour).If this story is true: Editor explains why he didn't publish Barbara Castle's paedophile dossier
Quote:Hale said special branch officers arrived at the Messenger's office, showed him a D-notice and warned him of imprisonment if he failed to hand over the dossier.Then we are beginning to have to start seriously thinking about the upper end on the scale of conspiracy.That said, i think our general approach remains unchanged. We need to be wary of power, deference and control. Child abuse is not a class issue, but cover ups and abuse of power are.[*] The Lib-Dems have been hard hit by all this, as David Steel has had to explain why he didn't take action. They have also had their own version of the Comrade Delta scandal in the form of Mike Hancock and also Lord Rennard. They are big enough not to implode over the issue.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rjy8oLVOvi4 ……about 50 seconds in."John Lydon talks about Jimmy Savile and his 'seediness' during an interview recorded for BBC radio in late 1978, this excerpt was not broadcast but has just been made available as part of the reissue of the first PIL album. Interviewer: Vivienne Goldman."To think the establishment branded the punk rock explosion and its figureheads as corruptters of British youth."Ah, ha, ha! Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?" Johnny Rotten, Sex Pistols last gig, Jan' 1978.
Sorry about my last post perhaps being only slightly relevant to the main theme of this thread, as it concerns Saville and not politicians.My point is that if a media figure like John Lydon, who at that time in 1978 would have been on the fringe of the entertainment industry, was aware of certain rumours, then it is a certainty that those at the heart of the establishment in this country would also have been aware.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.