Weekly Worker 990

[jondwhite]

Weekly Worker 990

references the SPGB in the following article

http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/990/science-fiction-aiming-for-the-mixed-economy

there is also a letter from a member

http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/990/letters

[admice]

Sort of a digression. Regarding the table toppling, why did they attack another socialist group? Only or primarily because of the rape allegations?

[ALB]

So now it's "No Platform for the SWP". The biter bit.

[jondwhite]

There are reasons given herehttp://sussexasn.tumblr.com/post/69499029324/swp-off-campus

Quote:

A few days ago the SWP turned up to one of the Sussex 5 solidarity demos. They brought a mass of placards and papers, which they proceeded to distribute from the obligatory stall. We binned their placards, turned over their stall and burnt their papers. We will not tolerate the SWP on our campus. Their consistent attempts to shame, intimidate and gaslight survivors whilst protecting rapists is disgusting. It is also important to emphasise abuse and the protection of abusers is not limited to the SWP, but is endemic across the left. We will fight it wherever we find it.  Our solidarity will always be with the oppressed in their fight against the oppressors.  Burn the SWP.

And a supporter of the attack herehttp://stavvers.wordpress.com/2013/12/16/an-anticipatory-obituary-for-the-swp/and more explanation herehttp://crowdfury.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/why-we-trashed-swp-stall-and-why-well.html

[ALB]

They better hope that somebody doesn't start a "No Platform for Radical Feminists" campaign. That's where this sort of hooligan politics leads, as the SWP is now finding to its cost. Direct action to prevent free speech is as bad state legislation to do this.Here's how our members have behaved in such circumstances:

Quote:

“Students at the London School of Economics last night voted strongly to apologize to Professor H. J. Eysenck for the incident on Tuesday during which he was punched and kicked as he started to address the school’s Social Science Society. But although voting was about five to one at a mass meeting attended by about 600 of the school’s students, a later motion attacked Professor Eysenck’s views on race, heredity and intelligence and said that those responsible for the attack should be actively defended against any disciplinary action . . . Moving the successful motion to apologize to Professor Eysenck, Mr D. Zucconi, who said he was a member of the Socialist Party of Great Britain and the World Socialist Society, said: ‘An issue like this in general cuts across political differences. The events on Tuesday were a disgrace and discredit to socialism and a blow for fascism’. Responsibility for the attack on Professor Eysenck has been attributed to the Communist Party of England (Marxist-Leninist).” (Times, 11 and 17 May 1973).

The Communist Party of England (Marxist-Leninist) again!

[admice]

"Direct action to prevent free speech is as bad as state legislation to do this.""The events on Tuesday were a disgrace and discredit to socialism and a blow for fascism" Well said. This goes much deeper though. It's one thing to counter or prevent violence with violence, what was done there was a whole different issue. Supports so many criticisms of socialism: democracy, human nature, anarchy, violence. Too many to go into now.Why do I keep coming to the conclusion people are idiots.

[Author]

Posts