Please stop this
- This topic has 25 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I have tried to do my best for the Socialist case and the cause for Socialism. Would those on internal Party sites stop their attacks upon myself, on a site, I may remind you, that non-members have no redress.
Do not stir up, what appeared to have dissipated. Why would you do this? Please stop.
Steve.
So I think I read there's two forms A from returning members. One is obviously yourself Steve, the other better not be this guy http://www.revleft.com/vb/spgb-forum-purge-t180388/index2.html
Why "better not", Ed? You have a personal grudge against Vin? so be it. Get over it! He has been a good Socialist since 1979, I have the evidence to prove it. That he is frustrated at what has happened on SPGB sites, who can blame him? Are you free of blame, are others? Lets all, in comradely spirit, put this shit behind us. Doing none of us any good, least of all me! My health is such, that if this continues much longer, the "recriminatory crap", I will have to, for the good of my health, walk away.Some may say, good riddance, but it will be one less "class warrior" on the field. One less voice against the avalanche of shit, we workers have to contend with every day.Sort it out boys and girls, sort it fucking out, for our kids and their kids sake.Steve.
If he hadn't resigned I think our branch would have seriously reconsidered putting forward a motion of action detrimental to the party. As his current stunt on Revleft is not the first time he's bad mouthed the party to anyone who will listen. There was I believe, a blog where he was saying we were all a bunch of homophobes and sexists. Taking out of all context an incident which occurred at summer school, through second hand information.I think if you want back in, you should begin, and this is my advice to both of you, by acknowledging the faults in your own behaviour. Expressing regret and explaining how you will keep it from happening again. At the moment I haven't seen either of you take responsiblity for your actions and at least one of you persists. I think this is the only way to win round, to borrow a phrase the silent majority.
If as you say, I should begin by acknowledging the faults in my behaviour, I have done this. I have explicitly stated that no one in this sorry incident is free of blame, or for being complicit in it's continuance, myself and yourself, included. What more do you require? I am not Japanese so will not cut off my little finger, as a mark of apology! I, myself, have'nt seen any evidence of others involved doing any of what you suggest above.I have said I want an end to this, to that end, I will end this. No more posts from me that could be seen as problematic. No more rising to take any bait offered, to be re-embroiled in a slagging match. No more pointlessly asking for others do take this action as well but for me to do it unilaterally. An ignoring of comments made elsewhere, with regard to myself, regardless of a wish to respond and defend myself. As I say, an end to this! Yours fraternally,Steve.
I don't really see that as acknowledgement. What have you done wrong and why do you regret those actions? The way you've put it suggests more of a sweeping it under the carpet arrangement. If you can't specifically say what you regret how can members begin to assess whether you are sincerely remorseful and know that the behaviour will not be repeated. How about the abusive e-mails I've heard so much about. Perhaps you could start by sending a private apology to those members you feel you may have wronged, I think that would go a long way. Perhaps an open letter of apology to the membership at large.
Ah damn sorry meant to put this in the last message. You are also positing a tu quoque argument. Otherwise known as whataboutism. This would be used by the soviet union. When asked about human rights violations they would point to America and say well look at them they're not so perfect. The point being that you can only accept responsibility for your own actions and only address the issues that you are able to control, not the faults of your neighbours. You can say that there were mitigating circumstances that others behaviour drove you to act in the manner that you did, but I'd be careful not to blame everything on others. Also I thought you wanted more free speech, do you want those on spintcom to be censored?
Hi EdWhat is it you want here? Are you goading Steve into an argument, even though he has stated he wants an end to the squabbles?At the end of the day we are socialists. We want the same things. But it does not mean we must all be best of friends. This form of communication is fraught with pitfalls, that can so easily lead to arguments and acrimony. I am no angel, I have taken the wrong path with a few on this forum. Can I promise it will not happen again, of course I can't. No one can, we can't predict the future.Steve has had a decent result in his local elections. We should not let personal squabbles get in the way of positive socialist activity.Time to put this mess behind us, once and for all.
SocialistPunk wrote:Hi EdWhat is it you want here? Are you goading Steve into an argument, even though he has stated he wants an end to the squabbles?No, not at all. I'm actually trying to help him. I haven't closed my mind to him rejoining the party. But then again I wasn't on the receiving end of one of his e-mails. What is needed more than anything to convince people that he is sincere is to take responsibility and to exercise a little humility. In my humble opinion that will help his case for membership.It's all very well to say put it behind us but obviously judging by spintcom that is unsatisfactory to many members.
Hi EdIn my opinion, those pursuing this unhelpful discourse on SPintcom are just as guilty of continuing the squabbles they claim are so harmful.Reminds me of the old saying, "There's none so blind as those who will not see."
Ed wrote:Also I thought you wanted more free speech, do you want those on spintcom to be censored?My understanding of what Steve said is that, though he might not like some of what was being said about him, he was prepared to let the discussion on spintcom take its course without trying to interfere. In that case, let's continue the discussion amongst ourselves there, as the members of any organisation have the right to discuss who joins and who doesn't, hopefully in an objective a way as possible.
ALB wrote:Ed wrote:Also I thought you wanted more free speech, do you want those on spintcom to be censored?My understanding of what Steve said is that, though he might not like some of what was being said about him, he was prepared to let the discussion on spintcom take its course without trying to interfere. In that case, let's continue the discussion amongst ourselves there, as the members of any organisation have the right to discuss who joins and who doesn't, hopefully in an objective a way as possible.
I am merely asking for clarification.
EdThere is constructive criticism and discussion, then there are unhelpful slurs. I think Steve is ok with party members discussing his request to rejoin, but it is unpleasant and distracting to see little inflammatory remarks that have little to add to the debate.I thought such remarks are part of the reason we are here in the first place?
I have seen the discussion taking place elsewhere and am fine with it, in the main. What I did feel was particularly hurtful however was during the discussion on spintcom re giving help to the election I have just contested. In particular comments that seemed to suggest that I could, or would, use this platform, especially if I had been elected, for some form of self-aggradisement. Showing a complete lack of comprehension of myself as an individual and my complete commitment in the struggle to bring about our common aim, Socialism.A commitment, undiminished for all these years and which will never change. Yours fraternally,Steve.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.