# Bolivia - Is Revolution on the Agenda?



## Udo Erasmus (Aug 10, 2005)

Socialist Worker Public Meeting -

*Bolivia - is revolution on the agenda?*
Speaker - Chris Bambery (Editor of Socialist Worker)

Wednesday 7th September 7.30 pm
O'Neill's Bar, Trinity Street, Cardiff 
(nr the Hayes and by back entrance to Indoor Market)

*Marxist Discussion Forums*

_War and Poverty: The Two Faces of Imperialism_
Speaker - Jonathan Jones
Wednesday 17 August @ 7.30
Cathays Community Centre
Cathays Terrace
Cardiff 
(Just past Woodville Pub)

_Can "Fair Trade" Change the World?_
Speaker - Rion Hall
Wednesday 24 August @ 7.30 pm
Cathays Community Centre


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 10, 2005)

is socialism on the agenda at these untoward meetings?


----------



## roger rosewall (Aug 12, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> is socialism on the agenda at these untoward meetings?



The meetings are being held by the Socialist Workers Party so I expect that there will be some passing mention of socialism. Perhaps if the speaker has a good memory there might even be a mention of workers. It is certain that there will be a Respectful mention of George Galloway.

But in what sense are these meetings untoward?


----------



## Col_Buendia (Aug 12, 2005)

roger rosewall said:
			
		

> The meetings are being held by the Socialist Workers Party so I expect that there will be some passing mention of socialism. Perhaps if the speaker has a good memory there might even be a mention of workers. It is certain that there will be a Respectful mention of George Galloway.
> 
> But in what sense are these meetings untoward?



Here's a clue for you from the OED:



> *untoward, a.*
> 
> 1. Not having or showing inclination, disposition, or readiness to or for something; disinclined.
> 
> ...



The SWP 'disinclined' towards socialism? The SWP showing a 'lack of proficiency' or being 'inept'? The SWP 'perverse'??

Shurely shome mishtake, Pickman's?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2005)




----------



## Udo Erasmus (Aug 30, 2005)




----------



## roger rosewall (Aug 31, 2005)

Udo Erasmus said:
			
		

>



Why the smileys?


----------



## Udo Erasmus (Sep 4, 2005)




----------



## Col_Buendia (Sep 5, 2005)

Udo Erasmus said:
			
		

>


Although that's just a naked bump, it is the first post of yours that has made me laugh! 

Y'must have had them roundglasses cleaned, eh? You've seen the light...


----------



## roger rosewall (Sep 6, 2005)

Udo Erasmus said:
			
		

>



Again. Why the smiley's?


----------



## osterberg (Sep 8, 2005)

I'm smiling because it was a lovely meeting


----------



## Col_Buendia (Sep 8, 2005)

Pray do tell more.


----------



## roger rosewall (Sep 8, 2005)

osterberg said:
			
		

> I'm smiling because it was a lovely meeting



Did Bam Bam advocate a united front with the Muslim Association of Bolivia?


----------



## osterberg (Sep 8, 2005)

He wasn't there.That's why it was a lovely meeting


----------



## Col_Buendia (Sep 8, 2005)

osterberg said:
			
		

> He wasn't there.That's why it was a lovely meeting



You don't mean to say that he failed to show "inclination, disposition, or readiness" for the meeting?

Goodness, Pickman's is more prescient than I suspected.


----------



## osterberg (Sep 8, 2005)

He was double booked and replaced by a human being.  
About a dozen or so people at the meeting.
The standard SWP line on Bolivia which I don't really disagree with(have a look at their paper or website).
So not very controversial but I found it interesting.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 8, 2005)

osterberg said:
			
		

> He was double booked and replaced by a human being.


please don't in future pretend to know anything about my movements.

i wasn't there cos i knew it would be full of fuckwit wankers.


----------



## osterberg (Sep 8, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> please don't in future pretend to know anything about my movements.
> 
> i wasn't there cos i knew it would be full of fuckwit wankers.


 I was referring to Chris Bambury,not your good self,Pickman.


----------



## Col_Buendia (Sep 8, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> please don't in future pretend to know anything about my movements.
> 
> i wasn't there cos i knew it would be full of fuckwit wankers.



PM = Chris Bambery??

Bugger me, now I've heard everything, and in the Wales forum'n'all


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 8, 2005)

Col_Buendia said:
			
		

> PM = Chris Bambery??
> 
> Bugger me, now I've heard everything, and in the Wales forum'n'all


----------



## Col_Buendia (Sep 8, 2005)

osterberg said:
			
		

> The standard SWP line on Bolivia which I don't really disagree with



Wossat then? That the filthy ignorant peasant masses will have to buckle down to a bit of serious school discipline in order to learn how to read in order to get a proper job instead of all this coca-planting, in order to earn the money in order to buy the paper (you know which one I mean!) in order to understand how to have a proper revolution like the one the SWP have staged many's a time in Hyde Park?

Or was there a change in policy, seeing as Pickman's wasn't at the meeting?


----------



## anfield (Sep 8, 2005)

Any working-class people at the meeting?


----------



## Col_Buendia (Sep 8, 2005)

anfield said:
			
		

> Any working-class people at the meeting?


Any Bolivians? More to the point


----------



## roger rosewall (Sep 9, 2005)

osterberg said:
			
		

> He was double booked and replaced by a human being.
> About a dozen or so people at the meeting.
> The standard SWP line on Bolivia which I don't really disagree with(have a look at their paper or website).
> So not very controversial but I found it interesting.



The SWP line on Bolivia? Oh yeah, that would be to applaud the struggles in that country as inspirational. Quite true and quite lacking in any real point in relation to the class struggle in this country. A topic the SWP has but scant interest in.

As a matter of curiousity who replaced dear Bam Bam? I had thought of attending actually as a friend would like to know what happened to the Glasgow IMG's treasury when Bam Bam changed allegiances (if not politics).


----------



## osterberg (Sep 9, 2005)

anfield said:
			
		

> Any working-class people at the meeting?


 I've got a job  .
As for the Bolivian 'line' read the paper.
There was not just applause for the 'inspiring' Bolivian working class but their central role,discusions about 'dual power',what the role of a revolutionary party would be etc. 
I'm not the SWP's biggest fan but they're not all bad.
The anti-war movement would be weaker without them.


----------



## osterberg (Sep 9, 2005)

The speaker was Candy Udwin by the way.Someone with actual T.U experience unlike most SWP fulltimers.Better speaker than Bambury anyway.


----------



## Udo Erasmus (Sep 9, 2005)

Chris Harman on Bolivia, from Socialist Review (July edition): http://www.socialistreview.org.uk/article.php?articlenumber=9463


----------



## roger rosewall (Sep 9, 2005)

Udo Erasmus said:
			
		

> Chris Harman on Bolivia, from Socialist Review (July edition): http://www.socialistreview.org.uk/article.php?articlenumber=9463



Always a good read Harman senior. But this is a particularly weak article. A few examples of what I mean.

1 There is no discussion of the weakness of the call for a Constituent Assembly and what that means in a country in which the central tasks of the bourgeois revolution have been achieved.

2 The reference to Lora's POR as the historical party of the Bolivian working class is naive given that this sect has managed to act like a mensheviks in not one but two revolutionary crisies. (For details of the former see issue of Revolutionary History journal devoted to the topic.) 

3 Crucially there is no discussion of the populism of Evo Morales and MAS. Hardly surprising this given that the SWP is sinking into the swamp of populism in Britain where such a politics has far less basis than in Bolivia.


----------



## roger rosewall (Sep 9, 2005)

osterberg said:
			
		

> There was not just applause for the 'inspiring' Bolivian working class but their central role,discusions about 'dual power',what the role of a revolutionary party would be etc.
> I'm not the SWP's biggest fan but they're not all bad.
> The anti-war movement would be weaker without them.



The anti-war movement would have been stronger if the SWP had not diverted the energies of its own militants, and those of dying sects like the ISG, into building Respect the populist coailition.

The anti-war movement would have been stronger if the SWP had adopted the approach it habitually adopted, until recently, of directing its militants to fight against the war within the working class as its first priority rather than calling for pointless impotent peace crawls through London.

I would take the SWP more seriously on Bolivia if its members fought to build a revolutionary party within the working class in Britain instead of diverting their energies into building Respect as a vehicle for the careers of Galloway, Yacoob and, they hope, the Rees-German clique.

A course that is slowly but surely destroying the SWP as certainly as cancer destroys the host organism.


----------



## Udo Erasmus (Sep 10, 2005)

roger rosewall said:
			
		

> Always a good read Harman senior. But this is a particularly weak article. A few examples of what I mean.
> 
> 1 There is no discussion of the weakness of the call for a Constituent Assembly and what that means in a country in which the central tasks of the bourgeois revolution have been achieved.
> 
> ...



If you had been at the meeting, a key point in Candy Udwin's talk was discussing the conservative influence of Evo Morales - who at one stage was a militant, but now was acting to put a break on the revolution. 

For example Candy outlined how when the movement called for nationalisation of the oil and gas, Morales only called for a tax on oil and exposed how Morales only made the demand for a constituent assembly _as an alternative _ to a popular revolutionary assembly that was being called for by the mass movement, and discussed how Morales orientation towards elections and not wanting to jepordise support from the Bolivian middle classes had led him astray. 

Or as Chris Harman puts it:
_"An important factor in the months of impasse was the way, as also in past revolutionary upheavals, *that certain political figures and formations which had helped to lead the movement forward at previous stages no longer did. * Indigenous leaders like Felipe Quispe of the Union of Peasant Workers had played an important role in articulating the indigenous grievances against the Spanish speaking white elite who dominated official politics. But they allowed justified resentment at past treatment by the mestizo (mixed race Spanish speaking) section of the masses to divert them from pushing forward the struggle against the common enemy. 


Evo Morales and his MAS party were the other channel for indigenous bitterness, calling for a constituent assembly to remould the country's political institutions so as to reflect its ethnic make-up. But dazzled by Morales's vote in 2002, they followed a strategy of keeping Mesa in power so that Morales would have an eventual chance of succeeding him by 'constitutional means' in 2007 and urged a 'yes' vote in Mesa's gas referendum." _

Or as Chris Bambery summed up the situation: "Common sense vs. Good sense in the Bolivan Uprising
_
"Bolivia was in the grip of a classic revolutionary situation last week. Popular assemblies spread across working class areas. Mass strikes combined with peasant rebellions. Insurrection was in the air and sections of the police fraternised with the insurgents. 

Yet, for the moment, the movement seems to have receded following the promise of elections.

Going home to prepare for elections looks like common sense. Yet good sense would be to demand that the popular assemblies take power, securing the nationalisation of Bolivia’s gas and breaking the hold of neo-liberalism. 

In the clash between the two, all the forces of common sense — from the media through to trade union officials — have an established hold. To overcome this, networks of activists, rooted in their workplaces and communities, need to win the argument for good sense.

Imprisoned after the fascist victory in Italy, the Marxist Antonio Gramsci looked back at the revolutionary situation which gripped the country in 1920 and wrote, “The decisive element in every situation is the permanently organised and long prepared force which can be put into the field when it is judged that a situation is favourable. 

“Therefore the essential task is that of systematically and patiently ensuring that this force is formed, developed, and rendered ever more homogeneous.”

He was urging the creation of a revolutionary party before the moment of revolution arrives. Such a party must be an intrinsic part of the working class and the oppressed, involved in a constant dialogue with them. And it must be a party made up of those capable of leading on the streets, the picket lines and the barricades."_


----------



## roger rosewall (Sep 10, 2005)

Udo Erasmus said:
			
		

> For example Candy outlined how when the movement called for nationalisation of the oil and gas, Morales only called for a tax on oil and exposed how Morales only made the demand for a constituent assembly _as an alternative _ to a popular revolutionary assembly that was being called for by the mass movement, and discussed how Morales orientation towards elections and not wanting to jepordise support from the Bolivian middle classes had led him astray.
> 
> Or as Chris Harman puts it:
> _ <snip> Evo Morales and his MAS party were the other channel for indigenous bitterness, calling for a constituent assembly to remould the country's political institutions so as to reflect its ethnic make-up. But dazzled by Morales's vote in 2002, they followed a strategy of keeping Mesa in power so that Morales would have an eventual chance of succeeding him by 'constitutional means' in 2007 and urged a 'yes' vote in Mesa's gas referendum." _
> ...



OK Udo that's two points out of three taken up. I guess there's no chance of your being able to answer my points without doing a cut'n'paste job?

Candy Udwins coments are interesting in displaying her confusion between the roles of a Constituent Assembly and Workers Councils (Soviets). You have her talking of the need in Bolivia for a popular revolutionary assembly but what would be the tasks of such an assembly? If its central task is to seize state power then it will be faced with the task of writing a new constitution in other words it will function as a Constituent Assembly! In other words this phrase is nothing but a more radical sounding synonym for the Constituent Assembly and as a popular assembly the tasks appropriate to it would be bourgeois tasks. This is the same trap the Bolivian Trotskyists fell into in 1971.

The quote from Harman senior is good I agree but it is a general warning against relying on parliamentary struggle and does not touch upon the real danger in Bolivia today which is populism. At most Harman wishes for different goals for the exisiting movement he does not see the need to split the movement on class lines. That is to counterpose a revolutionary socialist orgram to the populist program of Morales and to break the working class from the former. As for bambery's remarks they are nothing so much as radical sounding padding having no concrete meaning and are not t be taken seriously from a man who has directed his own organisation away from the task of building networks in the workplaces for over thirty years.

Finally dear Udo your quote from Gramsci is excellent but you should be wary indeed of such quotes. Wary as it is all too easy to substitute the development of your own arguments by the scriptural quotation of such sacred texts. For example are you aware that at the time Gramsci wrote the article from which your quote is extracted he believed that the task of the day was to construct a Communist party that would reject any collaboration with the Socialists and Anarchists then mass forces in Italy? Do you endorse this stance? Of course not but in rejecting it what is left of your brave quote from gramsci? very little but the abstract call for a revolutionary party and that is true of the SWP today is it not? On the ground it tails Galloway and builds his populist party while reserving its abstract calls to build a revolutionary party to the faithful. How sad.


----------



## osterberg (Sep 10, 2005)

roger rosewall said:
			
		

> Always a good read Harman senior. But this is a particularly weak article. A few examples of what I mean.
> 
> 1 There is no discussion of the weakness of the call for a Constituent Assembly and what that means in a country in which the central tasks of the bourgeois revolution have been achieved.
> 
> ...


 Disgraceful isn't it.A _whole_ two pages and not one of these terribly important issues was mentioned.It's just not good enough  .


----------



## roger rosewall (Sep 10, 2005)

osterberg said:
			
		

> Disgraceful isn't it.A _whole_ two pages and not one of these terribly important issues was mentioned.It's just not good enough.



Yes it is disgracefull that a man as talented as Harman can write an article that evades the central question of which class is to hold state power in Bolivia. It is a function of his role in the SWP as a lawyer for the Rees-German clique using his mastery of Marxism in order to justify the deepening descent of the SWP into class collaborationist populism.


----------



## osterberg (Sep 12, 2005)

roger rosewall said:
			
		

> Yes it is disgracefull that a man as talented as Harman can write an article that evades the central question of which class is to hold state power in Bolivia.


 We must have read different articles.
If I may quote the article-
'We have had a glimpse of how workers' power can suddenly become a real possibility amid the recurrent instability of globalised capitalism. And it will not be the last time. Let us learn the lesson and work so that next time there is mass insurgency, people do not merely knock on history's door, but kick it open.' 
Seems clear to me but maybe I'm thick  .


----------



## llantwit (Sep 12, 2005)

Classic! Trot-scrap!!!
Red flags an' handbags at dawn!



> Yes it is disgracefull that a man as talented as Harman can write an article that evades the central question of which class is to hold state power in Bolivia. It is a function of his role in the SWP as a lawyer for the Rees-German clique using his mastery of Marxism in order to justify the deepening descent of the SWP into class collaborationist populism.





> 1 There is no discussion of the weakness of the call for a Constituent Assembly and what that means in a country in which the central tasks of the bourgeois revolution have been achieved.





> Finally dear Udo your quote from Gramsci is excellent but you should be wary indeed of such quotes. Wary as it is all too easy to substitute the development of your own arguments by the scriptural quotation of such sacred texts. For example are you aware that at the time Gramsci wrote the article from which your quote is extracted he believed that the task of the day was to construct a Communist party that would reject any collaboration with the Socialists and Anarchists then mass forces in Italy? Do you endorse this stance? Of course not but in rejecting it what is left of your brave quote from gramsci? very little but the abstract call for a revolutionary party and that is true of the SWP today is it not? On the ground it tails Galloway and builds his populist party while reserving its abstract calls to build a revolutionary party to the faithful. How sad.


----------



## Udo Erasmus (Sep 12, 2005)

roger rosewall said:
			
		

> Candy Udwins coments are interesting in displaying her confusion between the roles of a Constituent Assembly and Workers Councils (Soviets). You have her talking of the need in Bolivia for a popular revolutionary assembly but what would be the tasks of such an assembly? If its central task is to seize state power then it will be faced with the task of writing a new constitution in other words it will function as a Constituent Assembly! In other words this phrase is nothing but a more radical sounding synonym for the Constituent Assembly and as a popular assembly the tasks appropriate to it would be bourgeois tasks. This is the same trap the Bolivian Trotskyists fell into in 1971.



Firstly, Candy Udwin didn't state that Bolivia needed a Popular Revolutionary Assembly - it is a demand being made by the movements in Bolivia.

She did note that Evo Morales sudden conversion to the idea of a Constituent Assembly was only to pose it as _an alternative _ to the more radical demands being made by the mass movement - for a Popular Revolutionary assembly.

Secondly,

On the subject of the working class, it's a shame you didn't make it to the meeting: with your "grasp" of marxist theory, I'm sure you could have taught Candy Udwin how to relate to the workers.

Afterall, she has only been a militant trade union activist since the 70s, who was recently disgracefully expelled from UNISON for the crime of leading a wildcat strike that won: http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=3349

All things being equal, possibly you have learnt something about workers struggles from your armchair that eludes Candy Udwin in the many struggles that she has been a leading figure in: from the fight to save the Elizabeth Garrett Anderson Women's hospital in the 70s through to the strike action against PFI that led to the rightwing UNISON bureaucracy witch-hunting her out of the union.

Fraternally, Udo Erasmus


----------



## roger rosewall (Sep 13, 2005)

osterberg said:
			
		

> We must have read different articles.
> If I may quote the article-
> 'We have had a glimpse of how workers' power can suddenly become a real possibility amid the recurrent instability of globalised capitalism. And it will not be the last time. Let us learn the lesson and work so that next time there is mass insurgency, people do not merely knock on history's door, but kick it open.'
> Seems clear to me but maybe I'm thick  .



Note how the article slips from talking about workers to talking about people. Rather typical of the SWP these days sad to say. And ritual mention of the workers means nothing.


----------



## roger rosewall (Sep 13, 2005)

Udo Erasmus said:
			
		

> Firstly, Candy Udwin didn't state that Bolivia needed a Popular Revolutionary Assembly - it is a demand being made by the movements in Bolivia.
> 
> She did note that Evo Morales sudden conversion to the idea of a Constituent Assembly was only to pose it as _an alternative _ to the more radical demands being made by the mass movement - for a Popular Revolutionary assembly.
> 
> ...



Candy Udwins credible and praiseworthy record of trade union activity does not make her an expert with regard to either Marxism or Bolivia. In any case dear Udo my criticisms of your groups line would be the same if such luminaries as  Chris Harman or even a resurrected Tony Cliff had addressed your meeting. In which case your argument that Cde udwins politics with regard to Bolivia are to be defended because of her personal record in the unins here would not fly given that neither Cliff or Harman led any trade union struggles or held office in any mass organisation of the class at all come to that.

As for your remark that the idea of a Popular Revolutionary Assembly is more radical than the call for a Constituent Assembly this is silly. inreality there is no differenfe between the two bodies. Eiother the Popular Revolutionary Assembly is a Constituent Assembly or it is something else. In which case what? Obviously it cannot be a Workers Council or else it would, be definition be based upon local workers councils and those calling for such an assembly would be demanding workers power, which they are not, which is the programmatic content of Workers Councils for those of us who remain Marxists.

That you confuse these distincy categories merely illustartes yor lack of knowledge of the marxist tradion on these questions. I can only recommend a study of Trotskys history of the Russian Revolution and a paralell study of how the 1971 revolution in Bolivia was derailed by confusing these concepts.


----------



## osterberg (Sep 13, 2005)

roger rosewall said:
			
		

> Note how the article slips from talking about workers to talking about people.


 No-one could accuse you of being pedantic,Roj!


----------



## roger rosewall (Sep 13, 2005)

osterberg said:
			
		

> No-one could accuse you of being pedantic,Roj!



I'm sure they could. But they would be wrong.

Is it not written that in the detail lies the Devil?


----------



## anfield (Sep 13, 2005)

osterberg said:
			
		

> I'm not the SWP's biggest fan but they're not all bad.
> The anti-war movement would be weaker without them.



Bollocks. The anti-war movement might have maintained much more of its momentum if it hadn't been for middle-class trots exploiting every public meeting and demo to sell their identical newspapers and recruit members to various front groups.


----------



## Udo Erasmus (Sep 13, 2005)

anfield said:
			
		

> Bollocks. The anti-war movement might have maintained much more of its momentum if it hadn't been for middle-class trots exploiting every public meeting and demo to sell their identical newspapers and recruit members to various front groups.



Would these be the public meetings and demo's that they had actually done most of the work building, advertising and organising?


----------



## chilango (Sep 13, 2005)

Udo Erasmus said:
			
		

> Would these be the public meetings and demo's that they had actually done most of the work building, advertising and organising?



Would they happen without the left parties?

Yes. Perhaps in a different form.

We never used  to have any problems  organizing without the left.

So i think that this is a false argument.


----------



## roger rosewall (Sep 14, 2005)

Udo Erasmus said:
			
		

> Would these be the public meetings and demo's that they had actually done most of the work building, advertising and organising?



The SWP and the smaller sects deserve credit for the work their members put in building those demonstrations and meetings. But to pretend that the SWP, plus a few others, built the massive demonstration in Hyde Park is fantasy.

Tha demonstration did however prove that in and of themselves demonstrations demonstrate only the futility of demonstrations unless they are backed by something more powerful. Which can only be the millions strong workers movement.

As the SWP chose to orientate on building yet more peace crawls and the electoralist populist abomination that is Respect the Hyde Park demonstration in the end marked only the defeat of the SWP's current approach. The only real question to be asked is how long before the Rees-German clique abandon the Marxism they still formally profess.


----------



## osterberg (Sep 14, 2005)

anfield said:
			
		

> Bollocks. The anti-war movement might have maintained much more of its momentum if it hadn't been for middle-class trots exploiting every public meeting and demo to sell their identical newspapers and recruit members to various front groups.


 So who would have helped organised the anti-war movement?You?The working class hero?
Bollocks yourself.


----------



## osterberg (Sep 14, 2005)

chilango said:
			
		

> Would they happen without the left parties?
> 
> Yes. Perhaps in a different form.
> 
> ...


Yeah,sure.
I can see Bruce Kent fly-posting 
On demos.
They might not be that effective but until the day the working class go on all out general strike to stop the war(and that might _just_ be a long wait) I'll carry on marching thanks.


----------



## chilango (Sep 14, 2005)

osterberg said:
			
		

> Yeah,sure.
> I can see Bruce Kent fly-posting
> On demos.
> They might not be that effective but until the day the working class go on all out general strike to stop the war(and that might _just_ be a long wait) I'll carry on marching thanks.




Bruce Kent? Why are you reducing the antiwar movement to this?

My point is that protests (incl demos) can and do happen without th e organised left (or CND) eg the school kids walking out or the demos we used to pull in Cardiff without the left.

Thats all.


----------



## osterberg (Sep 14, 2005)

chilango said:
			
		

> Bruce Kent? Why are you reducing the antiwar movement to this?
> 
> My point is that protests (incl demos) can and do happen without th e organised left (or CND) eg the school kids walking out or the demos we used to pull in Cardiff without the left.
> 
> Thats all.



Who's 'we' if not the left?


----------



## lewislewis (Sep 14, 2005)

If i was Bolivian, i'd prefer a Bolivarian revolution to a Marxist one. Because then Bolivia could look to Venezuela for assistance (namely, cheap fuel). I hope Evo Morales wins the elections.


----------



## chilango (Sep 14, 2005)

osterberg said:
			
		

> Who's 'we' if not the left?



Well I´m not part of the left. 

"Ordinary" people maybe?

People who aren´t in, or suppporters of, any political parties?

The working class?


----------



## roger rosewall (Sep 14, 2005)

chilango said:
			
		

> Bruce Kent? Why are you reducing the antiwar movement to this?
> 
> My point is that protests (incl demos) can and do happen without th e organised left (or CND) eg the school kids walking out or the demos we used to pull in Cardiff without the left.
> 
> Thats all.



The school youth organised themselves through net link ups and to some degree the Socialist Party influenced some of them. In other words the walkouts were far from spontaneous but were organised and led. Sometimes by the left ou affect to despise.

Just as the small demonstrations you organised were led by an organised group whose consciousness was in advance of the majority. Put plain you acted in a fashion not dissimilar to that of the SWP or StWC. And your demos were just as impotent.


----------



## roger rosewall (Sep 14, 2005)

lewislewis said:
			
		

> If i was Bolivian, i'd prefer a Bolivarian revolution to a Marxist one. Because then Bolivia could look to Venezuela for assistance (namely, cheap fuel). I hope Evo Morales wins the elections.



Bolivia does not need cheap fuel from Venezuala. And Evo Morales will deal with the IMF so in effect you are calling for a vote for George Bush. Good thinking.......


----------



## chilango (Sep 14, 2005)

roger rosewall said:
			
		

> The school youth organised themselves through net link ups and to some degree the Socialist Party influenced some of them. In other words the walkouts were far from spontaneous but were organised and led. Sometimes by the left ou affect to despise.
> 
> Just as the small demonstrations you organised were led by an organised group whose consciousness was in advance of the majority. Put plain you acted in a fashion not dissimilar to that of the SWP or StWC. And your demos were just as impotent.



Hmmm.

I don´t "affect to despise the left". Merely pointing out that you can´t politically defend left organisations by arguing that without them demos etc wouldn´t happen.

Equally demos etc that I was involved in organising were not against the war (i´d left the UK before the war) and were not always impotent and not always your trad demos. But still...

I suspect the SP influence on kids in rural mid wales was limited to say the least.

People can, will and have acted spontaneously against things they disagree with. I know thats how I became politically involved. This is my point. Not a general left bashing (though I´m happy to do that if you want   .)


----------



## roger rosewall (Sep 15, 2005)

chilango said:
			
		

> Not a general left bashing (though I´m happy to do that if you want   .)



Go ahead it might amuse me for a few minutes.


----------



## roger rosewall (Sep 15, 2005)

lewislewis said:
			
		

> If i was Bolivian, i'd prefer a Bolivarian revolution to a Marxist one. Because then Bolivia could look to Venezuela for assistance (namely, cheap fuel). I hope Evo Morales wins the elections.



A vote for Morales is a vote for the IMF and Dubya.

Asd for the cheap fuel from venezuala have you not noticed that to a conisderable degree the struggle in Bolivia is over gas? In plain terms there is no need for oil from Venezuela.


----------



## osterberg (Sep 15, 2005)

chilango said:
			
		

> People who aren´t in, or suppporters of, any political parties?
> 
> The working class?


So all those people who voted Labour aren't really working class?
Don't make much sense do you?


----------



## chilango (Sep 15, 2005)

osterberg said:
			
		

> So all those people who voted Labour aren't really working class?
> Don't make much sense do you?



Note:

Two different sentences. There was no relationship implied.

(but go ahead and check the voting figures for wales if you like. I`d bet more people didn`t vote, than voted labour...and no you can`t determine the class of those people but you can make an educated guess)


----------



## chilango (Sep 15, 2005)

roger rosewall said:
			
		

> Go ahead it might amuse me for a few minutes.



oooh.

where shall we start?


----------



## roger rosewall (Sep 15, 2005)

chilango said:
			
		

> oooh.
> 
> where shall we start?



Wherever you want. Make my day liberal.


----------



## chilango (Sep 15, 2005)

roger rosewall said:
			
		

> Wherever you want. Make my day liberal.



Surely your day is already pretty liberal....


----------



## roger rosewall (Sep 15, 2005)

chilango said:
			
		

> Surely your day is already pretty liberal....


----------



## chilango (Sep 15, 2005)

roger rosewall said:
			
		

>



you said "make my day liberal" meaning "make my day, liberal" so I made a poor joke of it and...well, forget it.


----------



## roger rosewall (Sep 16, 2005)

chilango said:
			
		

> you said "make my day liberal" meaning "make my day, liberal" so I made a poor joke of it and...well, forget it.



Ahhhhh...........


----------



## lewislewis (Sep 17, 2005)

roger rosewall said:
			
		

> A vote for Morales is a vote for the IMF and Dubya.
> 
> Asd for the cheap fuel from venezuala have you not noticed that to a conisderable degree the struggle in Bolivia is over gas? In plain terms there is no need for oil from Venezuela.



Yes but cars in Bolivia generally can't run on LNG, that's why Bolivia imports oil for its internal market?


----------

