[imposs1904]

ALB wrote:

Surely it was "Jezwedid". Though that sounds more like SPD.

You're probably right.

[imposs1904]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

A 60% vote certainly gives him a mandate and the thank you speech was littered with sound-bites. But the one that stood out for me was."We are one world." But my hearing was confused at the beginning as he mounted the rostum…i kept hear "SPGB…SPGB.." being chanted…what was it really?

 "Jezwecan"?

[imposs1904]

I'm not a big fan of some of the twitter stuff or this month's Socialist Standard front cover, but I still think that the coverage of Corbyn and his campaign within the pages of the Standard has been measured and well presented.

[imposs1904]

DJP wrote:

jondwhite wrote:

So now we have Corbynwho is popular among Labour memberswho is popular among Labour supporters who are not memberswho has purportedly engaged non-political people with high turnout meeting rallieswho is averse to personality politics, more keen on movements than leadership and not seemingly a product of focus groupswhose policies are popular among the general publicSo do we continue to attack the man or play the ball?

You've missed something from your list.."who is pushing the same old illusions that continually lock the working class into the reformist dead end"And this is "playing the ball" it's a comment on ideas, not the personality.

Hurry up with the like button function, 'cos I like this post. What DJP said.

[imposs1904]

Tonight, Panorama are dedicating their show to Corbyn's revolution – for want of a better term.8.30pmhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06bg6ty

[imposs1904]

He blocked me on twitter after I called him out for being such an abusive prat.  eta: The above is in reference to Derek Wall on twitter.

[imposs1904]

If it's doable I think it would be a  worthwhile addition to the forum.

[imposs1904]

Or as Ian Bone once termed it, 'Anarcho-Brigadoon'.

[imposs1904]

From 1938:http://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.com/2015/09/should-aliens-be-allowed-in-1938.html

[imposs1904]

This invective directed against us is solely as a consequence of the twitter account.Derek Wall is a bloke who has spoken at a past SPGB Summer School, who has debated with us and, whilst disagreeing with our politics, understands our core politics and why it is we oppose the left-wing of capitalism and all its manifestations.And yet, despite all that, we've coloured ourselves in such a fashion on twitter that he now thinks of us as the caricature spgb that we've always hated being portrayed as. People should chew that one over.Just because we're making 'noise' on twitter it doesn't by default make it a good thing.

[imposs1904]

Vin wrote:

I have to jump to the defence of @officialSPGB. Those involved are doing a good job and their technique has led to a 100% increase in followers over four months. Tho' we will have to wait to see the reaction to the said tweetPublicity is publicity and the twitter account is being noticed. Onward and upwards

Sorry, I think 'their' technique (one bloke) is counterproductive.Screen grab doesn't work, so here's th wording of the tweet from Derek Wall:"they are such hateful tossers, to my undying regret I once sent them a donation"I think when you piss off someone like Derek Wall, you know you're doing it the wrong way. I don't care if there is an increase in followers if we go about it in this way. At times it reads like an SPGB Parody twitter account.

[imposs1904]

gnome wrote:

Young Master Smeet wrote:

https://twitter.com/reddeathy/status/639346991873531904I'm glad to see my Harold Wilson crack caught their eye.  Personally I think we don't need to disavow it, it's a good article, we can safelyy ignore the scurrilous suggestion about our finances, since they've already included our rebuttal.

Bill's right.  And whoever was responsible for the meme should be congratulated, not called an idiot.   Thank goodness we still have members prepared to nail the party's colours to the mast. 

 not a fan of the @officialSPGB in the bottom left hand corner. With regard to the actual Private Eye dig, from ALB original post I was expecting some far worse.

[imposs1904]

ALB wrote:

I have to confess that Vin, SP and JDW have been proved right. Some idiot sent this from our twitter account on 16 August:https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CMh5m2wWgAAxURh.jpgIt's been picked up by Private Eye who have replied in kind on p. 9 of this fortnight's issue.The EC needs to disavow it on Saturday but the damage has been done.

 Any chance of doing a screen grab of the Private Eye response? I'm not a fan of the marmite image – but, then, I love marmite – but I don't think it's as damaging as you think. Silly, yes . . . but then I haven't seen what's in Private Eye.The thing that does strike me about the official spgb twitter account is that I think it can to be too 'full-on' at times, and I think that can be counter-productive. Comrades with long memories will remember the comrade who decided to spam numerous messageboards about 15 years ago. That really pissed a lot of people off at the time, and though I don't think the twitter account is as bad, it can sometimes go down that road.If we don't want to permanently alienate a lot of people that we should be engaging with, then I think a more nuanced approach is needed.

[imposs1904]

imposs1904 wrote:

A Gilmac article from 1954. One for the SPGB anoraks, 'Some notes on party history':http://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.com/2015/08/some-notes-on-party-history-1954.html

Gilmac's follow up to this article. This one's primarily about the early days of the Socialist Standard:http://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.com/2015/08/some-notes-on-party-history-1954.html

[imposs1904]

Interesting Private Eye article currently doing the rounds on social media about how the media's deliberately distorting Corbyn's political positions;

[Author]

Posts