# What was your first political organisation?



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 8, 2005)

What political organisation did you first actually sign up to?

No single-issue stuff here, we are talking about political parties, anarchist groups, that sort of thing.


----------



## Dubversion (Aug 8, 2005)

Militant

(shuffles away looking ashamed)


----------



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

ha ha! 

acf


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 8, 2005)

None. Don't plan to either.


----------



## HST (Aug 8, 2005)

um, white panthers peoples party. um 1972. um...it's embarassing now but back then...


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 8, 2005)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> Militant



You must have been wise beyond your years.

I on the other hand do have something to be embarrassed about...


----------



## audiotech (Aug 8, 2005)

HST said:
			
		

> um, white panthers peoples party. um 1972. um...it's embarassing now but back then...



Did you ever meet MC5?


----------



## Lock&Light (Aug 8, 2005)

CND


----------



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

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> You must have been wise beyond your years.
> 
> I on the other hand do have something to be embarrassed about...


that's true...


----------



## lizzieloo (Aug 8, 2005)

You haven't thought of any animal rights groups.

maybe that's not relevent


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 8, 2005)

Yep - No single issue groups - no AR - no CND


----------



## sihhi (Aug 8, 2005)

Fuck I've clicked the wrong button should have been Labour Party.  

Is there any way to change it?


----------



## WasGeri (Aug 8, 2005)

lizzieloo said:
			
		

> You haven't thought of any animal rights groups.
> 
> maybe that's not relevent



That's a single-issue thing though - Nigel said those were excluded. 

Mine was the Labour Party Young Socialists, then I was recruited to Militant through it.


----------



## HST (Aug 8, 2005)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Did you ever meet MC5?


No, saw them play the Greyhound in Croydon in 73 or 74. Good gig. Met Jamie Reid there. He obviously thought I was a twat ( I was - I was all of 17).


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 8, 2005)

sihhi said:
			
		

> Fuck I've clicked the wrong button should have been Labour Party.



I was just about to take the piss and all...


----------



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

sihhi said:
			
		

> Fuck I've clicked the wrong button should have been Labour Party.
> 
> Is there any way to change it?


a likely story!


----------



## q_w_e_r_t_y (Aug 8, 2005)

Young Communist League


----------



## lizzieloo (Aug 8, 2005)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> What political organisation did you first actually sign up to?
> 
> No single-issue stuff here, we are talking about political parties, anarchist groups, that sort of thing.



Anarchist groups????

You have rules to define anarchist groups on your thread???


----------



## Lock&Light (Aug 8, 2005)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> Yep - No single issue groups - no AR - no CND



Are you suggesting that RESPECT is more than a single issue organisation?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 8, 2005)

hmmm... tricky. i was already a bulk subscriber to class war when the rcp caught me unawares one day, bedazzling me with their expensive yet unbecoming leather jackets and polonecked sweaters. adjudication please!


----------



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

bristle-krs said:
			
		

> hmmm... tricky. i was already a bulk subscriber to class war, when the rcp caught me unawares one day, bedazzling me with their expensive yet unbecoming leather jackets and polonecked sweaters.


& their horizontal recruiting?


----------



## sihhi (Aug 8, 2005)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> I was just about to take the piss and all...



I joined the Labour Party because my dad was a member. 
I didn't survive very long though.

Perhaps there should be a list of how long you stayed in the political group you entered.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 8, 2005)

Labour Party back in the 80s, but i had tried to join the SPGB before then when i was 1 or 15 but decided against when they insisted that i take an exam.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 8, 2005)

bristle-krs said:
			
		

> hmmm... tricky. i was already a bulk subscriber to class war, when the rcp caught me unawares one day, bedazzling me with their expensive yet unbecoming leather jackets and polonecked sweaters.



"Other Trotskyist" for you then. Or maybe "far right".

As for qwerty, why haven't you ticked CP or other Stalinist yet?


----------



## WasGeri (Aug 8, 2005)

Shit, I forgot about the Bristol Anarchist Group - I was involved with them before I joined the LPYS, although there was no 'membership' so I didn't actually 'sign up' to them.


----------



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

sihhi said:
			
		

> I joined the Labour Party because my dad was a member.
> I didn't survive very long though.
> 
> Perhaps there should be a list of how long you stayed in the political group you entered.


& where you've ended up.


----------



## sihhi (Aug 8, 2005)

bristle-krs said:
			
		

> hmmm... tricky. i was already a bulk subscriber to class war when the rcp caught me unawares one day, bedazzling me with their expensive yet unbecoming leather jackets and polonecked sweaters. adjudication please!



did you pay any subscriptions outside of magazines?


----------



## DownwardDog (Aug 8, 2005)

FCS (the provisional wing of the Conservative party) while at University.


----------



## sihhi (Aug 8, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> & where you've ended up.



With the poll we could calculate 
average no of weeks turnover of U75 /leftie sect


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 8, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> & their horizontal recruiting?



never encountered it personally (though the cadre 'minding' me was swapped from a rather unlikable fellow with a fondness for leather-patched corduroy and an expensive 'apartment' in up-and-coming bermondsey to a far easier-on-the-eye young masters student of the female persuasion after i started showing signs of indifference  she won me over to a month's 'supporter subs' shortly before i jacked it in for a pile of shit).




			
				Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> "Other Trotskyist" for you then. Or maybe "far right".



that's the nub really


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 8, 2005)

sihhi said:
			
		

> did you pay any subscriptions outside of magazines?



nope (in terms of 'cw'). 

rcp it is then


----------



## sihhi (Aug 8, 2005)

bristle-krs said:
			
		

> a rather unlikable fellow with a fondness for leather-patched corduroy



Was that "respected film critic" Mark Kermode by any chance?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 8, 2005)

sihhi said:
			
		

> Was that "respected film critic" Mark Kermode by any chance?



nope, and the gentleman in question has evaded my many subsequent google searches (though i have 'fond' memories of a rather clueless and mardy claire fox ).


----------



## sihhi (Aug 8, 2005)

bristle-krs said:
			
		

> nope, and the gentleman in question has evaded my many subsequent google searches (though i have 'fond' memories of a rather clueless and mardy claire fox ).



Really? Did she have _that_ voice when she was upset?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 8, 2005)

she had _that_ voice all the bloody time  

her finest moment was 'organising' a protest of the rcp's school student front organisation outside the ministry of defence, with a view to launching an invasion of the place. on a saturday. when the entire front of the building was covered in a bomb-proof screen.

my mum had said "won't it be shut on a saturday?"

i said, "i'm sure she knows what she's doing, mum!"

 and yet


----------



## gawkrodger (Aug 8, 2005)

No pansying about with liberals and trots for me! Straight into the AF for me when i was 15. Still here

edit: i can't spell!


----------



## HST (Aug 8, 2005)

Just remembered! I joined the Schools Action Union in 1970 or 1971. Right after I joined there was a Maoist coup which took over the SAU. Being my school's only member, and being distrustful of Maoists, I remained a paper tiger - ie I was never active.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 8, 2005)

I've been in a few organisations, but only ever made one political shift, the rest were down to geography. Started out by joining SWSS in my first week in University (there must be a fair few people who did that). Was a sort of semi-detached member for a while before joining the Socialist Party. Lived in Glasgow briefly where I was in the SSP (and the CWI platform). Then was in the English Socialist Party when I lived in London. Now back in the Irish Socialist Party. International political organisations can be very convenient - I recommend them highly to the travelling activist.


----------



## sipriano (Aug 8, 2005)

The london workers group, introduced into it by Joe Thomas.


----------



## sevenstars (Aug 8, 2005)

I signed up to the LPYSYTURC (Labour Party Young Socialists Youth Trade Union Rights Campaign) around 1984/85, but i suppose thats classed as a single issue campaign? What a name though


----------



## bluestreak (Aug 8, 2005)

none, i've never been a member of any organisations and i wouldn't want to be.     i don't mind doing stuff with groups though, fif it's stuff i agree with.


----------



## HarrisonSlade (Aug 8, 2005)

The SWP I'm afraid.


----------



## haggy (Aug 8, 2005)

labour party, but re sihhi's Q, only for about a year - i let my sub lapse

i was a member in the midlands and active for a only a few months - but they called me up at my home address in essex in 1989 (no idea how they traced me), and i had to let them know i'd joined the swp


----------



## belboid (Aug 8, 2005)

Labour in 83, in time to vote for Eric Heffer & Denzil Davies for leader/deputy after Michael Foots resignation.

I had tried to join the CPGB, but they didn`t reply for six months! Turned out they had received two applications frm young people at the same time, and thought we must be taking the piss!

I was a member for about two years (until shortly after the miners strike), achieving the dizzying height of Chair of the constituency LPYS.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Aug 8, 2005)

sihhi said:
			
		

> Was that "respected film critic" Mark Kermode by any chance?


Mark kermode IS a respected film critic, no need for the quotes. He also did some acting.

Is he or was he a trotskyist though?


----------



## james_walsh (Aug 9, 2005)

I formed my own group with may mates , when i was 8. the AAA( anti adult association), i think our 'program' consisted of , adults should stop making stupid rules, stop being hypocrites, and generally stop being a real pain in the arse, and let us have some fun! Not a bad program ,now that i think about it! It was a secret society , so extra parliamentry- hardcore or what!!!

If that counts as single issue, its the YCL.


----------



## D (Aug 9, 2005)

www.naral.org

I think...at around the same time as I joined the "Women's Issues" club at my school.

We were so second wave, even though we were really third wave.

At one point we changed the name of the club to "Gender Issues", which wasn't much better...sort of like, "Wow, check out that person of indeterminate gender...I wonder if they have gender issues...Like, don't we all?"


----------



## D (Aug 9, 2005)

oh, I inadvertently ignored the "no single issue" caveat

I suppose the next one was the National Organization for Women (or is that "single issue" too   )


----------



## WasGeri (Aug 9, 2005)

belboid said:
			
		

> I was a member for about two years (until shortly after the miners strike), achieving the dizzying height of Chair of the constituency LPYS.



I was the secretary of mine until they reduced the age limit and I was suddenly 'too old' at 22!


----------



## Sorry. (Aug 9, 2005)

have only been in local anarchist groups really.


----------



## catch (Aug 9, 2005)

green for me, for about a year when I was 15. Because there weren't any local anarchist groups


----------



## Herbert Read (Aug 9, 2005)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> What political organisation did you first actually sign up to?
> 
> No single-issue stuff here, we are talking about political parties, anarchist groups, that sort of thing.



My first political group was trade union the GMB, i was once a member of the SWP...... (very short time around 4 months) shudders hangs head in shame.   

I left bitter and twisted and got involved with anarchist politic and eventually the Anarchist Federation


----------



## Stevil (Aug 9, 2005)

I joined the DAM (Direct Action Movement) that was the forerunner of SolFed. 

I nearly joined the WRP when I was young, they offered to send me to some place in Derbyshire after I attended a couple of meetings but I fucked them off, patronising gits.


----------



## fanta (Aug 9, 2005)

The Boy Scouts.

But I got dishonourably discharged for pinching the cash I made for their fucking silly Bob-Job-Week.

The shame will always be with me.


----------



## kropotkin (Aug 9, 2005)

Anarchist Federation for me, although I did make the mistake of going to a SWSS meeting when I was at uni once (was hassled afterwards with things through the door and phone calls for about 6 months).


----------



## sovietpop (Aug 9, 2005)

FridgeMagnet said:
			
		

> None. Don't plan to either.



would you if you found an organization that matched your political persuasion?


----------



## chegrimandi (Aug 9, 2005)

none.


----------



## treelover (Aug 9, 2005)

DD, Tory, eh, rebelling against your dad?


----------



## parallelepipete (Aug 9, 2005)

shh - young conservatives

Double-plus 

I have absolutely no excuse... well, except that my parents were/are life-long Tories

(Lasted about a week until I realised what I'd got myself into)


----------



## DownwardDog (Aug 9, 2005)

treelover said:
			
		

> DD, Tory, eh, rebelling against your dad?



Yes, I am honest enough to admit that this was probably partially due to a Freudian attempt to define myself in opposition to my parents. However, I was worried (this is ludicrous looking back at, but one thinks ludicrous things at age 18) that the fact that my whole family (father, mother and two uncles) were red-in-tooth-and-claw communists would hinder my military career. So I joined the FCS to demonstrate my non-communist sympathies. 

Over the years I have found membership very useful both professionally and socially. The Conservative party is a wonderful institution whose members are totally dedicated to the acquisition of wealth and satiation of libertine sexual desires.

However, because of my parents I've always been very interested in far left politics and some forms of anarchist thought which is why I hang out in U75. 

My father won't be posting here any time soon. Until the North Korean laptop industry gears up he'll stick to his East German typewriter.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 9, 2005)

For   me  The   Labour   Party (though not in it for the last 16 years.  However, still very   ing)


----------



## darren redparty (Aug 9, 2005)

why didn't anyone tell me about the rcps horizontal recruitment policy when I was 16?


----------



## belboid (Aug 9, 2005)

_because_ you were 16.

Your spots might have burst on their lovely leather jackets!


----------



## D (Aug 9, 2005)

james_walsh said:
			
		

> I formed my own group with may mates , when i was 8. the AAA( anti adult association), i think our 'program' consisted of , adults should stop making stupid rules, stop being hypocrites, and generally stop being a real pain in the arse, and let us have some fun! Not a bad program ,now that i think about it!



That is superb!


----------



## Thora_v1 (Aug 9, 2005)

I've never signed up to any particular group - been to meetings of a couple of groups though.  I just can't settle...


----------



## mk12 (Aug 9, 2005)

Joined Socialist Alliance first, then SWP later on.


----------



## articul8 (Aug 9, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> their horizontal recruiting?



My mate's partner (female) was a member of the SWP/IS in the 80's and insists they pursued this policy too.  Don't know why she would make it up, as she has left but isn't especially rabidly anti-Cliffite


----------



## james_walsh (Aug 9, 2005)

articul8 said:
			
		

> My mate's partner (female) was a member of the SWP/IS in the 80's and insists they pursued this policy too.  Don't know why she would make it up, as she has left but isn't especially rabidly anti-Cliffite



The swp round here, have to get it , where they can. Members or horizontal action. I don't think its a 'policy', I think there desperate.


----------



## rednblack (Aug 9, 2005)

DownwardDog said:
			
		

> My father won't be posting here any time soon. Until the North Korean laptop industry gears up he'll stick to his East German typewriter.



do your parents live in southampton by any chance?


----------



## rednblack (Aug 9, 2005)

i joined the labour party and the T&G when i was 18, and me and some mates set up a little group of our own after being ignored by AFA (   )
then stopped paying subs after making sure derek off big brother's boyfriend of the time lost his seat

then joined the swp for about 6 months (after a gap of several years) then moved to haringey and joined HSG


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Aug 9, 2005)

DownwardDog said:
			
		

> Yes, I am honest enough to admit that this was probably partially due to a Freudian attempt to define myself in opposition to my parents. However, I was worried (this is ludicrous looking back at, but one thinks ludicrous things at age 18) that the fact that my whole family (father, mother and two uncles) were red-in-tooth-and-claw communists would hinder my military career. So I joined the FCS to demonstrate my non-communist sympathies.
> 
> Over the years I have found membership very useful both professionally and socially. The Conservative party is a wonderful institution whose members are totally dedicated to the acquisition of wealth and satiation of libertine sexual desires.
> 
> ...




That's nuts - so you are in the military and the Conservative Party - do your parents still talk to??!


----------



## DownwardDog (Aug 9, 2005)

Divisive Cotton said:
			
		

> That's nuts - so you are in the military and the Conservative Party - do your parents still talk to??!



Not in the military now, but still a Tory robber baron! I think, at first, my parents couldn't quite believe I had taken the Queen's shilling and we had a rocky couple of months but our relationship is fine now. 

My parents, in common with many members of these far left groups, reserve their real venom, not for those of us on the right, but for members of other rival communist groups. Generally, those with whom they have had passionate, hair-splitting disputes over matters of doctrine. _cf U75 passim_.


----------



## DownwardDog (Aug 9, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> do your parents live in southampton by any chance?



No, North-East.

Other examples of my parents' ideological purity/insanity:

We never had a TV. Hence, I got 4 A grades in my A-levels.

My father worked as a hospital porter (or striking hospital porter) for 40 years and turned down supervisory and management positions several times.

In the 80s they refused to buy their council house, which they still rent to this day. I estimate that they would now own it outright and it would be worth 160,000 pounds.

And many, many more...


----------



## james_walsh (Aug 9, 2005)

DownwardDog said:
			
		

> Not in the military now, but still a Tory robber baron! I think, at first, my parents couldn't quite believe I had taken the Queen's shilling and we had a rocky couple of months but our relationship is fine now.
> 
> My parents, in common with many members of these far left groups, reserve their real venom, not for those of us on the right, but for members of other rival communist groups. Generally, those with whom they have had passionate, hair-splitting disputes over matters of doctrine. _cf U75 passim_.



Its reassuring to know your from a good home.


----------



## Gumbert (Aug 10, 2005)

class war through peer pressure and stupidity..

oh and cos i liked the hospitalised copper and winding the parents up


----------



## treelover (Aug 10, 2005)

So you have done the opposite then,and become a right wing war pilot who probably is so loaded the fifties keep falling out of your pockets..

I'd say he was a man of principle and he seems to have made sure you did alright  .

Hey ho Downward Do'g how many kids did you kill today!(or in 1999)
'

'My father worked as a hospital porter (or striking hospital porter) for 40 years and turned down supervisory and management positions several times.

In the 80s they refused to buy their council house, which they still rent to this day. I estimate that they would now own it outright and it would be worth 160,000 pounds.'

A'


----------



## WasGeri (Aug 10, 2005)

DownwardDog said:
			
		

> No, North-East.
> 
> Other examples of my parents' ideological purity/insanity:
> 
> We never had a TV. Hence, I got 4 A grades in my A-levels....



And you're moaning about this? 





			
				DownwardDog said:
			
		

> My father worked as a hospital porter (or striking hospital porter) for 40 years and turned down supervisory and management positions several times.....



Good for him. Perhaps he doesn't want to be the boss.




			
				DownwardDog said:
			
		

> In the 80s they refused to buy their council house, which they still rent to this day. I estimate that they would now own it outright and it would be worth 160,000 pounds.



Good man, refusing to be bribed by the evil witch.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Aug 10, 2005)

I had an odd experience a few months ago when I suddenly realised that if I had held the same opinions at the age of eighteen that I hold now, I would have joined the Labour Party.


----------



## treelover (Aug 10, 2005)

obviously, thats why you always defend the SWP....


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Aug 10, 2005)




----------



## Antrophe (Aug 10, 2005)

Bleeding Swapper was I.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Aug 10, 2005)

And now you're what, Yoda?


----------



## hibee (Aug 10, 2005)

Very brief spell in the Labour party before moving Trotwards


----------



## Herbert Read (Aug 11, 2005)

hibee said:
			
		

> Very brief spell in the Labour party before moving Trotwards



*shudder* 

two wrongs dont make a right


----------



## EatMoreChips (Aug 11, 2005)

Does my O-level politics and government class count? 

Probably not, I suppose.


----------



## sovietpop (Aug 11, 2005)

besides CND? an anarchist group I set up with some friends.


----------



## hibee (Aug 11, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> *shudder*
> 
> two wrongs dont make a right



frying pan/fire


----------



## Echo Beach (Aug 13, 2005)

SWaP too.

I wonder how many ppl who ticked SWP are still members?


----------



## rebel warrior (Aug 13, 2005)

Echo Beach said:
			
		

> SWaP too.
> 
> I wonder how many ppl who ticked SWP are still members?



Currently it is about 20-25%...


----------



## Ryazan (Aug 13, 2005)

Is your tagline a Communist mobile phone advertisement plug?


----------



## Oxpecker (Aug 14, 2005)

Plaid Cymru when I was 16.


----------



## nino_savatte (Aug 14, 2005)

Hmmmm, depends on what one means by a "political organisation". My first was either Hunt Sabs or Friends of the Earth, in that case.


----------



## Bajie (Aug 14, 2005)

Militant Labour for a brief period some years ago.


----------



## Ryazan (Aug 14, 2005)

I have never been and probably never will.  My mother though, is a Stalinist.


----------



## anfield (Aug 14, 2005)

SWP. I was young, naive and idealistic. Luckily I soon learned that the interests of the working-class weren't best served by this organisation. Also I was sick of selling their fuckin paper.


----------



## JonnyT (Aug 15, 2005)

The SWP. Tho "organisation" would be going a bit far...

Edit: mm, I quit. should have mentioned that. yeah.


----------



## Oxpecker (Aug 15, 2005)

Ryazan said:
			
		

> I have never been and probably never will.  My mother though, is a Stalinist.



Can you ask your Mum if Ern's getting on all right? And send him my best wishes.

Ta.


----------



## Ryazan (Aug 15, 2005)

Will do.


----------



## Roadkill (Aug 15, 2005)

I was a swappie.    

Actually, IIRC I was technically a Labour party member at that point as well, but I only joined because they were having a free piss-up for members one year at uni.  £3 for as much beer as I could drnk seemed like a good idea at the time.


----------



## sovietpop (Aug 15, 2005)

Can any of you ex-swappies remember why it was you joined the SWP (and not some other group)? There seems to be quite a lot of you.


----------



## Masseuse (Aug 15, 2005)

Rcp  :d


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 15, 2005)

sovietpop said:
			
		

> Can any of you ex-swappies remember why it was you joined the SWP (and not some other group)? There seems to be quite a lot of you.


 There's more ex-labour though - and look at the quality!

I would guess that for a large-ish number of the SWP voters the party offered a pseudo-family and welcoming social scne at a stressfull time of thier lifes - away from home for the first time etc that them outgrew as they matured (some never do of course).


----------



## Roadkill (Aug 15, 2005)

That's a rather patronising interpretation, butchers!  




			
				sovietpop said:
			
		

> Can any of you ex-swappies remember why it was you joined the SWP (and not some other group)?



I joined the SWP because I was interested in left/extra-parliamentary politics, and they were the only party around.  Simple as that.  Stress or need for a 'pseudo family' had nothing to do with it.  

It was an eye-opener in some respects.  It certainly started me off exploring ideas that I'd never really come into contact with.  I left the SWP five years ago.  These days I'm definitely not a trot and don't agree with much of what they say, but I don't regret having been in the party.  Nor do i think they're the devil incarnate, unlike some.  Tbh there's a lot of people on the left (and on here, for that matter) who'd be far more interesting if they actually spent sometime thinking constructively for themselves, rather than dreaming up new insults to hurl at swappies all the time...


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 15, 2005)

Roadkill said:
			
		

> That's a rather patronising interpretation, butchers!


 It was meant to be!  

(Though it was aimed at current rather than past members really)


----------



## Roadkill (Aug 15, 2005)

What, all current members?

Tbh, I doubt it's changed much in the last few years and I'd be prepared to bet that, for a lot of members, younger ones especially, the 'only party about' thing still applies.


----------



## rebel warrior (Aug 15, 2005)

It was aimed, I suspect, at me - and so like most of the things you say to me - it was patronising.  Quelle surprise.  Anyway, overall, I think the quality of the posters in the 'SWP box' is very respectable...as Roadkill testifies above.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 15, 2005)

Roadkill said:
			
		

> What, all current members?
> 
> Tbh, I doubt it's changed much in the last few years and I'd be prepared to bet that, for a lot of members, younger ones especially, the 'only party about' thing still applies.


 Nope, just the particular ones that voted above - as i said. I'm not so sure, their membership has dropped dramatically over the last 5 years...i think more people are now 'active'  (horrible term, sorry) without first going through the grinder with them or another similiar group - and so possibly avoiding the disillusionment and demoralisation that often comes with it.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 15, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> It was aimed, I suspect, at me - and so like most of the things you say to me - it was patronising.  Quelle surprise.  Anyway, overall, I think the quality of the posters in the 'SWP box' is very respectable...as Roadkill testifies above.


 Yes, i agree - as the fact that only two (?) remain members testifies.


----------



## JonnyT (Aug 15, 2005)

sovietpop said:
			
		

> Can any of you ex-swappies remember why it was you joined the SWP (and not some other group)? There seems to be quite a lot of you.


I got involved in politics in general in late 2002 when it looks like Iraq was gonna go down. That was my first experience of anything like this - and was completely new to the whole idea of politics to be honest, had only started paying attention in any meaningful way when 9/11 happened.

So, yeah. Got involved with the anti-war group and pretty soon noticed there were lots of other issues that needed addressing. The SWP was the most visible grouping on the national demos, and (pretty much) the only visible grouping locally, at least the only one that was open about itself and its politics (relatively speaking, anyway - only other lefty group was the Greens and they were so quiet it was easy to miss them). Given how new I was on the one hand, and how enthusiastic* to get involved with wider activism on the other, joining something like the SWP made sense.

I left when I got sick of not actually doing anything beyond SW Forums and the occasional paper sale, that and being at uni (meaning spending half the year with a barely active branch and the other half with no branch at all). But overall I think it was a worthwhile experience, as it helped to have someone "holding my hand" at first - but I wouldn't rejoin.

- Jonathan.
* said enthusiasm has now faded and have retreated into the cynical, unreasonable bastard I am today


----------



## rednblack (Aug 15, 2005)

the reason i joined the swp after leaving labour was partly because they told me anarchists (or anarcho-reformists as i described myself for about 5 minutes  )could join, and partly because they seemed less boring than the other two revolutionary factions in southampton socialist alliance, i soon learned my mistake...


----------



## treelover (Aug 15, 2005)

Ooh thanks!   


'There's more ex-labour though - and look at the quality!'


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Aug 15, 2005)

I joined SWSS in my first year at uni as a naive youth, trying to explore politics. The direct action part was fun (going on protests, graffiti, flypostering etc.) but I grew fed up with all the demands to sell papers/membership and books that were (imho) poorly written and politically dogmatic. It was this dogmatism in literature as well as the attitudes of my "comrades" - following the party line, sectarianism etc. that finally forced me to say - "fuck this, lets go running". 

I've been on the odd protest since, but I'd never join a political group again unless I'd read up more about it beforehand. I have no regrets however - it opened my eyes to a lot of things....


----------



## reallyoldhippy (Aug 15, 2005)

sovietpop said:
			
		

> Can any of you ex-swappies remember why it was you joined the SWP (and not some other group)?


I thought most people who are politically inclined go for the first group they come across. For me the first anarchist organisation I came across was ORA (IIRC) and I joined that. But soon I drifted away to more involvement in local and regional anarchist groups.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 15, 2005)

sovietpop said:
			
		

> Can any of you ex-swappies remember why it was you joined the SWP (and not some other group)? There seems to be quite a lot of you.



I was a student at the time. I suspect that's at least part of the answer for many of us who ticked the box. The SWSS (I wasn't in the SWP itself) was the only left group on the campus. The Irish SP at that time just didn't have student groups anywhere, neither did the anarchists or the Workers Party or anyone else. I don't want to slag them off too much - at the time most of the things I objected to about them were things which on balance they were right about.

The other thing you have to remember for any of the British posters who are over about 30 is the profile of the four major left groups there. The WRP fell apart in the mid-1980s and was mad anyway. The CPGB was in terminal decline. Up until the early 1990s Militant was recruiting in large part from people who were already in the Labour Party or LPYS (including a few of the people who ticked Labour in this poll). Who does that leave with a national spread in Britain at the time? The SWP.

Interesting that the SWP have 18 votes so far though and I can only spot 2 current members in there. Then again Labour have 19 votes and probably even fewer current members.


----------



## anfield (Aug 15, 2005)

sovietpop said:
			
		

> Can any of you ex-swappies remember why it was you joined the SWP (and not some other group)? There seems to be quite a lot of you.



They had the best placards innit.

In the end I was accused of 'sounding like the IWCA' for daring to mention "working-class" and "community activism" in the same sentence. Authoritarian arseholes. Fuck them (the SWP).


----------



## hibee (Aug 15, 2005)

sovietpop said:
			
		

> Can any of you ex-swappies remember why it was you joined the SWP (and not some other group)? There seems to be quite a lot of you.



After realising the Labour party was full of shit after about two minutes, I found myself poached into the SWP via a single issue campaign. I wasn't at all well politically educated, having left school at 16, and wasn't really aware of any other groups to be honest. 

It took longer to dawn on me that I'd gone from frying pan to fire because, although I did have some reservations about the party from the start, I grew very interested in Marxism and found the SWP a great resource for learning more. Of course, this phase of my membership sowed the seeds of its own destruction (ho ho) because as I read more I found some gaping discrepancies between Charlie's ideas of working class emancipation, the end of exploitation, the liberating side of his ideas about alienation, versus the authoritiarian, middle class nature of the SWP.

Ultimately I went back to what got me interested in politics in the first place - a vague idea that the working class were getting fucked over and something needed to be done. I realised, like Anfield, that the SWP weren't interested in engaging with the working class at grass roots level because that would mean giving up their place at the "vanguard". And so I rejected Leninism.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 15, 2005)

> I would guess that for a large-ish number of the SWP voters the party offered a pseudo-family and welcoming social scne



I joined the SWP about five or six years ago and believe me the social scene wasn't a reason to join! Anyone joining the SWP on that basis must be extremely bored or lonely indeed. I was working though, so dunno if SWSS was any different.

I think the reason most people join the SWP, as oppossed to another left group, in the last ten years or so is for the reasons Nigel gave.

All the other groups were tiny and firstly you never came across them, and secondly, when you're new to politics their tiny size is off putting. The WRP and RCP had collapsed by the mid 1990s. Militant/SP had pretty much collapsed by the mid-1990s (a few hundred members) and the CPB had dwindled into nothing much. And all the rest of the left groups were tiny.

The SWP was the only group you came across. Mind you, their numbers have been in decline in the last few years as well.


----------



## Solidarnosc (Aug 15, 2005)

There is a bit of a social scene in SWSS, and in the SWP - you just had to be keyed into it to an extent.


----------



## cockneyrebel (Aug 15, 2005)

It probably depended on where you were in the country as well. In London there didn't seem to be any social scene at all (although again London SWSS could have been different, don't know).


----------



## past caring (Aug 15, 2005)

sovietpop said:
			
		

> Can any of you ex-swappies remember why it was you joined the SWP (and not some other group)? There seems to be quite a lot of you.



I sort of considered myself an anarchist (if anything) when I was 18-19. My mates were anarchists - but they were more serious about it. But they were also all blokes. There were a couple of SWPers I knew via them - and from the bands we used to go to see.

One of them was a girl I wanted to fuck. 

Case closed.


----------



## sevenstars (Aug 15, 2005)

Around 1990 I had decided to leave the Labour Party (due to the poll tax and build up to 1st gulf war) and join the CPGB, which promptly dissolved itself the next week.

At the same time I went to Ibrox to see the mighty Dynamo Kiev play Rangers in a friendly, I bought a copy of SW at a paper sale in Glasgow to show that I was supporting the 'Russians'...who then turned out not in their classic white kit, but in yellow and blue as a Ukranian nationalist protest.

To add to the confusion when i read SW at half time it had a big article explaining why the USSR wasnt socialist, which was news to me and got me interested.

And I probably also did need a pseudo-family at a stressful time, no shame in that surely?





			
				sovietpop said:
			
		

> Can any of you ex-swappies remember why it was you joined the SWP (and not some other group)? There seems to be quite a lot of you.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 16, 2005)

Masseuse said:
			
		

> Rcp  :d



i should have known from your dapper style


----------



## rednblack (Aug 16, 2005)

past caring said:
			
		

> One of them was a girl I wanted to fuck.
> 
> Case closed.



lindsey was fit when she was younger


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> lindsey was fit when she was younger


   



			
				ambrose bierce said:
			
		

> can such things be?


----------



## revol68 (Aug 16, 2005)

first political group I joined was Organise! a libertarian communist group in Ireland (though based primarily in the north). It draws heavily on Anarcho syndicalism, council communism and other historical currents that have a rich history in proletarian self organisation. Currents that recognise (libertarian) communism as a tendency to be developed within the class and not an ideological postion to be recruited to.

Organise! also rejects nationalism of all forms and has argued strongly that left republicanism or any other form of "anti imperialist" struggle is not only based on a false reading of history but serves only to divide the working class as much as loyalism or unionism.


----------



## Thora_v1 (Aug 16, 2005)

Is it just me that really hates the anarchist tendency to stick exclamation marks all over the place?  Group names, pamphlets, the title of every other article in Do or Die etc.  Organise!  Dissent!  EF!


----------



## rednblack (Aug 16, 2005)

oranginise?


----------



## revol68 (Aug 16, 2005)

i hare it to but it looks quite good on the end of Organise, especially when people ask why anarchists would believe in organising.


----------



## Herbert Read (Aug 16, 2005)

Thora said:
			
		

> Is it just me that really hates the anarchist tendency to stick exclamation marks all over the place?  Group names, pamphlets, the title of every other article in Do or Die etc.  Organise!  Dissent!  EF!



WANK!


----------



## rednblack (Aug 16, 2005)

Thora said:
			
		

> Is it just me that really hates the anarchist tendency to stick exclamation marks all over the place?  Group names, pamphlets, the title of every other article in Do or Die etc.  Organise!  Dissent!  EF!



i want to form a group called 'the committee to reform the dialectical debate among the working class!'


----------



## Sorry. (Aug 16, 2005)

Thora said:
			
		

> Is it just me that really hates the anarchist tendency to stick exclamation marks all over the place?  Group names, pamphlets, the title of every other article in Do or Die etc.  Organise!  Dissent!  EF!



CSG-(FLS!)


----------



## revol68 (Aug 16, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> oranginise?



is tha jibe at Organise! for refusing to support a bunch of nationalist fuckwits who think a mythical united ireland is a worth the cost of working class lives?


----------



## belboid (Aug 16, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> i want to form a group called 'the committee to reform the dialectical debate among the working class!'



to _refound_ the dialectical.... shorely?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2005)

Thora said:
			
		

> Is it just me that really hates the anarchist tendency to stick exclamation marks all over the place?  Group names, pamphlets, the title of every other article in Do or Die etc.  Organise!  Dissent!  EF!


have you previously encountered the best-named latin american guerrillas, ecuador's  'alfaro lives, damn it!'?


----------



## rednblack (Aug 16, 2005)

revol68 said:
			
		

> is tha jibe at Organise! for refusing to support a bunch of nationalist fuckwits who think a mythical united ireland is a worth the cost of working class lives?



just a potential nickname for youse lot


----------



## rednblack (Aug 16, 2005)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> have you previously encountered the best-named latin american guerrillas, ecuador's  'alfaro lives, damn it!'?



or the 'east side up against the wall motherfuckers!'


----------



## anfield (Aug 16, 2005)

Anyone else go to SWP conference? I thought it was hilarious that there were so many non-working class nutjobs, taking the whole thing so seriously and at the same time being so detatched from reality.

Also the sight of Chris Bambery swanning around in leather trousers is enough to put anyone off Leninism for life.


----------



## sevenstars (Aug 16, 2005)

Yes, generally an awful political experience designed to stamp on any critical thinking and hype up the latest line i remember, which would fall a bit flat as soon as you returned to tiny branch meetings. This was in the 1990's, though, comrades who had been around a bit told me they used to have real debates. 




			
				anfield said:
			
		

> Anyone else go to SWP conference?


----------



## audiotech (Aug 16, 2005)

sevenstars said:
			
		

> ...comrades who had been around a bit told me they used to have real debates.



Too true mate. As working class members of the SWP, we would sit at the back of meetings and ponder what the word periphery meant.


----------



## Herbert Read (Aug 17, 2005)

Thora said:
			
		

> Is it just me that really hates the anarchist tendency to stick exclamation marks all over the place?  Group names, pamphlets, the title of every other article in Do or Die etc.  Organise!  Dissent!  EF!




COCK AND BULL STORY!


----------



## R.I.C.O. (Aug 17, 2005)

anfield said:
			
		

> Anyone else go to SWP conference? I thought it was hilarious that there were so many non-working class nutjobs, taking the whole thing so seriously and at the same time being so detatched from reality.
> 
> Also the sight of Chris Bambery swanning around in leather trousers is enough to put anyone off Leninism for life.



I went to the SWSS conference whilst at Uni - that was a fucking farce and a half. It comprised of 5 days of empty rhetoric, shouting slogans at student union officers ("SHAME!", "OCCUPY!" etc.), a "local community" meeting in which no Salfordians actually turned up to, a load of twatty student types banging on about how good cock-rock band The Darkness were (  ), some scary type scowling at me for eating a kebab outside the student's union (as a vegetarian, I feel repressed by your...rant rant, woof woof) and Helen Salmon ranting off on one against "_members who don't practise what they preached_" (i.e. not selling enough papers/literature) and who try to co-operate with their student unions (even though the SU had broken their backs to allow the event to even take place), as they were "facilitators of student apathy" (  ).

What was most poignant about her rants was the presence of a McDonald's cup bought from the store across the road. Practise what they preach my arse. Needless to say, I did'nt turn up to it after that.


----------



## tbaldwin (Aug 18, 2005)

The first organisation i joined was Red Action. Mostly due to their anti fascism. But also due to their paper at that time under MOF being quite readable and funny.
I stayed in it for about 4 yrs and have no regrets about either joining or leaving.
I learnt a lot and am glad i had the experience.


----------



## charlie mowbray (Aug 19, 2005)

reallyoldhippy said:
			
		

> I thought most people who are politically inclined go for the first group they come across. For me the first anarchist organisation I came across was ORA (IIRC) and I joined that. But soon I drifted away to more involvement in local and regional anarchist groups.


I might well know you then, as I was in ORA. What town did you join it in?


----------



## drewish (Sep 25, 2005)

*Political party affiliation.*

I joined the Socialist Party at their Skeggy conference last year - till then I wasn't involved in anything. Tused to vote Labour a long time ago - ditching Clause 4 and pallying up to Bush soon put paid to that.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Sep 25, 2005)

drewish said:
			
		

> I joined the Socialist Party at their Skeggy conference last year.



Jesus, I was at that. There's something uniquely grim about a British seaside resort in winter. It gives the piss-ups a strange a kind of post-nuclear-holocaust feel.


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 25, 2005)

sevenstars said:
			
		

> I signed up to the LPYSYTURC (Labour Party Young Socialists Youth Trade Union Rights Campaign) around 1984/85, but i suppose thats classed as a single issue campaign? What a name though




Jeezussss, YTURC now there's a blast from the past   

As for me, well joined the Labour Party June 1986, Militant Tendency September 1987. Left the CWI June 2000.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Sep 25, 2005)

Well at least we got 13 years out of you  . I take it you left with the ISM - how long did you last with them?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2005)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> Jesus, I was at that. There's something uniquely grim about a British seaside resort in winter. It gives the piss-ups a strange a kind of post-nuclear-holocaust feel.


like a six month hangover.


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 25, 2005)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> Well at least we got 13 years out of you  . I take it you left with the ISM - how long did you last with them?



Nah I left before the ISM did. Never joined the ISM. Can't ever see me doing so neither.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Sep 25, 2005)

Fedayn said:
			
		

> Nah I left before the ISM did.



Looking back at your post I should have realised that the date was wrong. Still 13 years isn't bad - I'm only in my 6th. So I can't really slag you too much for casting off into the centrist swamp quite yet...  




			
				Fedayn said:
			
		

> Never joined the ISM. Can't ever see me doing so neither.



Well it would be a good trick to join them now that they have all but wound themselves up. Are the bits of them that still care about having an organisation still talking about launching a new Marxist platform/repackaging the ISM? They were making a bit of noise about it a few months back but not a peep since and the most recent Frontlines doesn't even mention it.


----------



## articul8 (Sep 25, 2005)

Fedayn said:
			
		

> Left the CWI June 2000.



if not with the ISM, then why?


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 25, 2005)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> Well it would be a good trick to join them now that they have all but wound themselves up. Are the bits of them that still care about having an organisation still talking about launching a new Marxist platform/repackaging the ISM? They were making a bit of noise about it a few months back but not a peep since and the most recent Frontlines doesn't even mention it.



I don't know what they're planning/doing. I must admit to being less and less interested in their plans.


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 25, 2005)

articul8 said:
			
		

> if not with the ISM, then why?



For 'similar' reason to the ISM ie the CWI's position/behaviour of the setting up of the SSP followed by their compounding their 'line' with the debate over the role/nature of a marxist organisation within the SSP in 2000-2001. I left both the SSP (mistakenly and later re-joined) and the CWI-correctly imho-in June 2000. I don't belive either the CWI orthe ISM came out of that debate un damaged.

You a member of the SSP or CWI??


----------



## grogwilton (Sep 25, 2005)

joined swp cos of the reasons nigel mentioned.

am still a memebr though lots of stuff pisses me off. main reasons ive stayed in are because the local activists in my branches have always been honest good people, and there hasnt been much hackery. though i have to admit ive only ever been in small branches.

also i want to work with an organisation, and havent found anything much that i agree with enough to leave the swp for it.


----------



## articul8 (Sep 25, 2005)

Fedayn said:
			
		

> For 'similar' reason to the ISM ie the CWI's position/behaviour of the setting up of the SSP followed by their compounding their 'line' with the debate over the role/nature of a marxist organisation within the SSP in 2000-2001. I left both the SSP (mistakenly and later re-joined) and the CWI-correctly imho-in June 2000. I don't belive either the CWI orthe ISM came out of that debate un damaged.



so what is your problem with the ISM then?  What do you think the CWI ought to have done re the formation of the SSP?


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Sep 25, 2005)

grogwilton said:
			
		

> joined swp cos of the reasons nigel mentioned.
> 
> am still a memebr though lots of stuff pisses me off. main reasons ive stayed in are because the local activists in my branches have always been honest good people, and there hasnt been much hackery. though i have to admit ive only ever been in small branches.
> 
> also i want to work with an organisation, and havent found anything much that i agree with enough to leave the swp for it.



That wouldn't be enough for me for a couple of reasons. On a practical level I just couldn't take the constant hype, the relentlessly upbeat gibberish that gets handed down from above would just leave me grinding my teeth with frustration.

More importantly, well, it comes down to why you are a political activist in the first place. It's about changing the world, and whether your branch has some good people in it or is full of utter dipshits doesn't really the change the fact that the SWP isn't going to be a useful vehicle for that. I have to admit though that the first reason would probably drive me out these days long before the more considered second element kicked in.


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 25, 2005)

articul8 said:
			
		

> so what is your problem with the ISM then?



 I don't think they represent the kind of marxist organisation needed within the SSP. They have, imho, become a rather 'amorphous' grouping that 'congregates' around Frontline. 



> What do you think the CWI ought to have done re the formation of the SSP?



Well not re-writing history would be a good start.


----------



## articul8 (Sep 25, 2005)

Fedayn said:
			
		

> Well not re-writing history would be a good start.



In what respect?


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 25, 2005)

articul8 said:
			
		

> In what respect?



Hmmm well claiming they supported the setting up of the SSP. 
One of the EC members denying that the SP and CWI opposed the setting up of the SSP. 

Two fairly major revisions.

ps are you a member of the CWI or SSP?


----------



## WasGeri (Sep 25, 2005)

Fedayn said:
			
		

> As for me, well joined the Labour Party June 1986, Militant Tendency September 1987.



About the same time as me then! I might know you if you ever came to Bristol.


----------



## articul8 (Sep 25, 2005)

Fedayn said:
			
		

> Hmmm well claiming they supported the setting up of the SSP.
> One of the EC members denying that the SP and CWI opposed the setting up of the SSP.
> 
> Two fairly major revisions.
> ...



evidence?  And I currently live in England (so not a member of SSP).  And don't feel I have an axe to grind for or against the CWI.


----------



## tollbar (Sep 25, 2005)

I came into politics via the old Liberal Party  in the very late 60s when Hain was doing direct action against Aparthied.  The Liberal Party had a base in my area which the Labour Party didnt. Got pulled to the left by a family member who was in the IMG eventually joining the WRP in 75.  2 minutes to get in, 2 years to get out, supported the IMG from without until 1980 and was a member for a couple of years.  Moved to Scotland in 85, was in the Labour party from 86 to 90, then was in the SWP for a very short time.  Rejoined the LP in 94, but left in 98. joined the SSP in 2000.


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 25, 2005)

Geri said:
			
		

> About the same time as me then! I might know you if you ever came to Bristol.



Nah I never went to Brizzle. Knew a good few members of the then Militant in Bristol however.
I lived in Coventry South-East for 6 years so if you came up for Dave Nellists election campaign in 1992 you've probably met me. If so I can only apologize


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Sep 25, 2005)

Fedayn said:
			
		

> Hmmm well claiming they supported the setting up of the SSP.
> One of the EC members denying that the SP and CWI opposed the setting up of the SSP.
> 
> Two fairly major revisions.



If the above was accurate, surely that would be one "fairly major revision", given that they amount to much the same thing?

But anyway, I never cease to be amazed by the fact that certain ISM supporters (and your good self) continue to peddle this line when _all the documents from the time are freely available_ on the CWI's Marxist archive website. I mean it isn't as if it is difficult to show what the CWI's position was at the time. The CWI's position was to insist on the continuation of Scottish Militant Labour as a coherent, revolutionary socialist organisation. Exactly what form that would take was an open question - with the CWI itself putting forward two options.

The first option was for SML to launch itself as a revolutionary SSP, while inviting others in the Scottish Socialist Alliance to join it. The second option was for the SSP to be launched as a politically broad organisation, but with SML continuing to build a revolutionary organisation within it. Different people in the CWI favoured each option but nobody in principle objected to either - which option to take was a tactical decision. 

What the CWI did oppose and still opposes is the idea of launching a broad SSP without continuing to build a revolutionary organisation within it.

For example a summary of the CWI's position from November 1999:



			
				CWI resolution said:
			
		

> "In the run-up up to the formation of the Scottish Socialist Party, the leadership of the Committee for a Workers’ International proposed that our Scottish comrades should accept one of two options. Option One was for a re-launch of the Scottish Militant Labour, and the formation of a new party affiliated to the Committee for a Workers’ International.
> 
> This proposal was not made in order to cut across or end the electoral alliances in which Scottish Militant Labour had successfully participated in the previous period... However, the Scottish comrades clearly rejected Option One, and therefore, the possibility of implementing Option Two was posed. This would have entitled the launching of a broad party within which we would have maintained a distinct revolutionary organisation, programme and membership".



If anyone is interested, all of the documents are available at http://www.marxist.net/scotland/index.html they are unfortunately a bit jargon heavy as they were written as internal discussion pieces rather than for publication.






			
				Fedayn said:
			
		

> ps are you a member of the CWI or SSP?



If he/she is then it comes as news to me.


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 25, 2005)

articul8 said:
			
		

> evidence?  And I currently live in England (so not a member of SSP).  And don't feel I have an axe to grind for or against the CWI.



Meetings i've been at and leaflets i've read. One of the leaflets-rightly criticising the contents of the Declaration of Calton Hill last year-talked about how the CWI had supported the setting of the SSP and no mention of their fullsome opposition to its being set-up.


----------



## WasGeri (Sep 25, 2005)

Fedayn said:
			
		

> Nah I never went to Brizzle. Knew a good few members of the then Militant in Bristol however.
> I lived in Coventry South-East for 6 years so if you came up for Dave Nellists election campaign in 1992 you've probably met me. If so I can only apologize



I expect we know a few of the same people then - I am still friendly with some of that lot.

I never came up to Coventry.


----------



## articul8 (Sep 25, 2005)

My understanding of things Scottish (open to correction as appropriate!!):

Scottish Militant Labour had already been granted the status of an independent section of the CWI.  Essentially, some saw no probs with keeping this organisation going along the same lines, but saw no objection in it intervening (in an entryist fashion) into a broader left formation.

Some thought that SML could bring on board sympathetic forces into a newly renamed grouping, but retain its own organisation and apparatus (much as with the early SA in England).

The ISM's option was to dump not only the name SML, but also its structural link to the international, its structures, publications and apparatus, in favour of liquaditing into an amorphous broad coalition - the SSP.  

Therefore, whether the CWI has re-written history depends very much on whether you think "setting up the SSP" automatically had to be along the lines pursued by the ISM.  

PS Nigel - I'm a he!


----------



## dennisr (Sep 26, 2005)

Fedayn said:
			
		

> I lived in Coventry South-East for 6 years so if you came up for Dave Nellists election campaign in 1992 you've probably met me. If so I can only apologize



Geri - once you've met Fedayn you wouldn't have forgetten him   

If you are ever down in london, Fedayn - don't hesitate to get in contact mate

Personally, articul8's summary seems pretty accurate to me - the leadership of what became the ISM hoped that by putting all its resources - the paper and full-timers into the broader formation without holding back anything to continue its own platform within this broader organisation they could get a short-cut to a new mass workers party but it hasn't really worked out like that - for all of the positive aspects of the SSP. 

The internal debate within the CWI was not helped by a lack of clarity behind what was being said and implied by some of the scottish CWI leadership of the time iMO. The 'real' position (and the real dangers in the arguments being raised at the time..) did not become clearer until later. i thought highly of some of the individuals (on a personal level) argueing for the then scottish CWI leadership but still think they were mistaken.


----------



## chilango (Sep 28, 2005)

Plaid Cymru / Cymdeithas Yr Iaith Gymraeg


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 28, 2005)

dennisr said:
			
		

> Geri - once you've met Fedayn you wouldn't have forgetten him
> 
> If you are ever down in london, Fedayn - don't hesitate to get in contact mate



Cheeky so-and-so, yeah no probs old bean, next time i'm down i'll have a fruit juice or two with ya ))



> Personally, articul8's summary seems pretty accurate to me - the leadership of what became the ISM hoped that by putting all its resources - the paper and full-timers into the broader formation without holding back anything to continue its own platform within this broader organisation they could get a short-cut to a new mass workers party but it hasn't really worked out like that - for all of the positive aspects of the SSP.



That's as maybe, however the success of the SSP also replies more than adequately to the CWI asking the question as to where is the 'constituency' we'd be aiming at. 
I'd make you right about the SSP not yet being a 'mass workers party (frankly who wouldn't), however the advances made by the SSP far outweigh the CWI's claims of 'no constituency' to aim at/work in/get votes from. 
And I can't remember anyone claiming the SSP would be a short-cut. Unlike the CWI who talk of the SSP as an 'experiment'.    




> The internal debate within the CWI was not helped by a lack of clarity behind what was being said and implied by some of the scottish CWI leadership of the time iMO. The 'real' position (and the real dangers in the arguments being raised at the time..) did not become clearer until later. i thought highly of some of the individuals (on a personal level) argueing for the then scottish CWI leadership but still think they were mistaken.



There's an argument in that. However if you are referring to the 'oroginal' paper then it was effectively dropped and started afresh.
The attempts by the CWI to 're-write' their past re their claims of supporting the founding of and wanting some of the credit for the SSP-yes i've seen the leaflets-doesn't help either.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Sep 28, 2005)

Fedayn said:
			
		

> The attempts by the CWI to 're-write' their past re their claims of supporting the founding of and wanting some of the credit for the SSP-yes i've seen the leaflets-doesn't help either.



The CWI supported the idea of launching the SSP - as either a revolutionary party or as a broad party with a coherent revolutionary wing within it. What it opposed was the destruction of Scottish Militant Labour as a revolutionary organisation. That's not a question of my recollection of the arguments of the time versus your recollection, the documents from the time are available at the click of a mouse button and are absolutely explicit about this.

What's more, the CWI Platform of the SSP almost down to the last member supported "Option 2", the broad party version and the platform has contributed to the building of the SSP since the beginning. When they are faced with a concerted attempt by ISM supporters to portray them as having been opponents of the SSP rather than opponents of the political degeneration of the ISM then of course they are going to stress their support for the SSP project.

This comes back to a point made by articul8. Supporters of the ISM effectively see the launch of a broad SSP and the destruction of the ISM/SML as a revolutionary organisation as one and the same thing. With varying degrees of sincerity, they really do think that opposing the liquidation of Scottish Militant meant opposing the birth of the SSP. 

The CWI does not now and never has accepted that the two things are synonymous. Instead they argued right from the start that the launch of the broad SSP could be combined with the continued building of a Marxist organisation within it - the approach they have themselves tried to implement.


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 28, 2005)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> The CWI supported the idea of launching the SSP
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Sep 28, 2005)

Fedayn said:
			
		

> That as you are well aware is incorrect. The CWI supported the idea of launching an organisation called the SSP, which as you are wellaware was on THEIR terms. They resolutely opposed the launching of the organisation that exists and is called the SSP. You are engaged in sophistry, just try a little better next time.



Given that I've explained this to you twice on this thread, as well as quoting from the documents of the time and providing you with a link to them, I have to admit that I'm becoming increasingly irritated by your refusal to engage with my points at all.

Once more, the CWI supported *either* of the following two options:

1) The launch of a revolutionary SSP (which did not occur).
2) The launch of a broad SSP (ie the SSP which was in fact launched).

*However*, in the context of that second option, the CWI argued then and continues to argue now that a revolutionary organisation has to be built inside that broad SSP. It opposed utterly - and correctly - the destruction of Scottish Militant Labour as a revolutionary organisation.

Only by trying to falsely claim that the launch of the SSP was dependant on the destruction of SML as a revolutionary group can your argument make any sense. Opinion on the relative merits of Option 1 and Option 2 was divided within the CWI internationally, but either of the two options were acceptable. More to the point, the people who went on to found the CWI Platform almost to the last member supported Option 2 - the broad party option. In other words they supported the launch of the actual existing SSP while opposing the liquidation of their revolutionary group.

The CWI supported the launch of the SSP, while opposing the manner in which it was carried out.


----------



## gurrier (Sep 28, 2005)

dennisr said:
			
		

> The internal debate within the CWI was not helped by a lack of clarity behind what was being said and implied by some of the scottish CWI leadership of the time iMO. The 'real' position (and the real dangers in the arguments being raised at the time..) did not become clearer until later. i thought highly of some of the individuals (on a personal level) argueing for the then scottish CWI leadership but still think they were mistaken.


    
The real position was not the one that the leadership were 'implying' at the time, it was the one that we wrote down later!

Priceless!


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Sep 28, 2005)

What?

dennisr was saying that the arguments and ideas raised by the leadership of the ISM during the debate were less than clear and that their thinking only became clearer with time. I'm not sure why this is     or "Priceless!", rather than a fairly straightforward comment based on his own experience. 

Perhaps you should read more closely next time before dishing out a sneer.


----------



## gurrier (Sep 28, 2005)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> Perhaps you should read more closely next time before dishing out a sneer.


I know and care nothing about the CWI's history with the ISM/SSP.  I am able to read closely enough to know an incredibly bad defence of the leadership 'rewriting history' when I see one though.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Sep 29, 2005)

gurrier said:
			
		

> I am able to read closely enough to know an incredibly bad defence of the leadership 'rewriting history' when I see one though.



Apparently not, given that the piece you quote from dennisr's post deals with his view of the changing (slowly clarifying) views of the ISM leadership rather than with any change in stance or apparent stance by the CWI. The "leadership" referred to in the post is the leadership of the ISM ("the scottish CWI leadership of the time"). Dennisr wasn't defending anybody in that passage, rather he was offering a criticism in passing - basically that the ISM leadership hadn't fully worked out its own stance at the time of the debate.

I can at least agree with you that it's all too obvious from your posts that you "know and care nothing" about the events you are commenting on though. The next time you try to score a cheap point you might find that actually following the discussion you are sniping at pays dividends.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 29, 2005)

That's a good one nige "slowly clarifying" - may use that


----------



## rednblack (Sep 29, 2005)

gradually solidifying is another good trot standby

conjures up images of congealed egg


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Sep 29, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> That's a good one nige "slowly clarifying" - may use that



Fine but I want credit. Rednblack can keep his congealing one though.


----------



## rednblack (Sep 29, 2005)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> Rednblack can keep his congealing one though.



hey - it's not mine, chris harman or john molyneux, or colin birchall i think-a cliffite anyway


----------



## gurrier (Sep 29, 2005)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> Apparently not, given that the piece you quote from dennisr's post deals with his view of the changing (slowly clarifying) views of the ISM leadership rather than with any change in stance or apparent stance by the CWI. The "leadership" referred to in the post is the leadership of the ISM ("the scottish CWI leadership of the time"). Dennisr wasn't defending anybody in that passage, rather he was offering a criticism in passing - basically that the ISM leadership hadn't fully worked out its own stance at the time of the debate.


Really?  Did the CWI expel it's scottish leadership 'of the time'?  

This is a genuine question by the way I really don't know much about it.  I apologise if my sniping was misplaced too.  However, it would appear that the situation as you describe it violates one of the axioms of trotskyism*.

* axiom 1: the position of the organisation is equal to the position expressed by the leadership of the time.


----------



## RubberBuccaneer (Sep 29, 2005)

Anti-Nazi League

Followed by the Young Communist League

Then The Legion of the Cramped


----------



## james_walsh (Sep 29, 2005)

RubberBuccaneer said:
			
		

> Anti-Nazi League
> 
> Followed by the Young Communist League
> 
> Then The Legion of the Cramped



then Demented Are Go.


----------



## RubberBuccaneer (Sep 29, 2005)

james_walsh said:
			
		

> then Demented Are Go.



err. yep


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Sep 29, 2005)

gurrier said:
			
		

> Really?  Did the CWI expel it's scottish leadership 'of the time'?



Yes to the first question. No to the second.

After a discussion that went on for years, the majority of the Scottish group left the CWI - basically they felt that there wasn't much point staying in an organisation they had such political divergences from and that it was better to make a clean break. They formed the ISM. A minority of the Scottish group stayed with the CWI.

The "Scottish leadership of the time" refers to the leadership of the pre-split group, mostly composed of people who went with the ISM.


----------



## dennisr (Sep 29, 2005)

gurrier said:
			
		

> I know and care nothing about the CWI's history with the ISM/SSP.  I am able to read closely enough to know an incredibly bad defence of the leadership 'rewriting history' when I see one though.



Gurrier - i was not 'defending' anyone - the CWIs leadership or the old scottish CWI leadership (what became the leadership of the ISM). Your crude preconceptions are colouring your view of my practice (to put it very politely).

I've never followed any leadership comfortably - much to your astonishment i am sure   - Because of a thorough-going debate throughout the CWi membership at the time i was able to draw my own conclusions which ran contrary to my personal feelings about the then scottish leadership (to repeat in different words what i said before). Trying to draw my own conclusions was not helped though by the confusion/lack of clarity of the arguements coming from the old scottish CWI leadership. In retrospect, I don't think they were clear in thier own minds about the ultimate course of thier then arguements. 

I suppose it is a lot easier to delude oneself that one is being 'critical' when one dosen't have to genuinely attempt to understand the arguements being put forward before opposing or supporting them. (this bit is aimed at your recent comments - this being polite stuff is not easy for me you know...)

As has already been said the full debate from the time is freely available - so much for "rewriting history" then...


----------



## gurrier (Sep 29, 2005)

dennisr said:
			
		

> I suppose it is a lot easier to delude oneself that one is being 'critical' when one dosen't have to genuinely attempt to understand the arguements being put forward before opposing or supporting them. (this bit is aimed at your recent comments - this being polite stuff is not easy for me you know...)


Apologies again for misunderstanding you.  Being an anarchist I naturally oppose both sides of this argument and would compare it to an argument between a group who advocated chopping off their feet and a group who advocated chopping off their hands.  Hence, I have no interest in investigating the detailed arguments put forward by both sides.  Furthermore, I find that reading anything by the CWI has the guaranteed effect of making me want to eat my own head.  

Anyway, apologies again for the derail.  As you were.


----------



## mk12 (Sep 29, 2005)

I joined the Socialist Alliance, first after reading about it. It seemed logical to join this organisation, as it brought together all the revolutionary leftist strands. Lavalette had recently won a seat in Preston too. There was no local activity for the SA round my way, because it was in it's dieing days.


----------



## dennisr (Sep 29, 2005)

gurrier said:
			
		

> .. compare it to an argument between a group who advocated chopping off their feet and a group who advocated chopping off their hands...
> 
> Anyway, apologies again for the derail.  As you were.



no worries  - i can't remember that bit quoted being part of the discussion - would have made it all a wee bit more interesting...


----------



## Idris2002 (Sep 29, 2005)

Hung around with Democratic Left in uni. Not sure if I ever actually joined though.

Sent away for a copy of Socialist Standard once.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 29, 2005)

Didn't we all. Ad in the back of the NME?


----------



## flimsier (Sep 29, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Didn't we all. Ad in the back of the NME?



I certainly did. They never ever stopped writing. Some geezer at my mum's ex's old house is probably still receiving their 'bonus, free subscription' over and over again.

I remember wondering where all their money came from...!


----------



## Idris2002 (Sep 29, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Didn't we all. Ad in the back of the NME?



I remember the ad. But this was years later, from an ad in Red Pepper.

I remember once in Books Upstairs choosing _Irish Socialist_ (CPI paper)instead of _Socialist Worker_.

Perhaps if I'd chosen the latter, my life would have been very different. . .


----------



## sihhi (Sep 29, 2005)

Idris2002 said:
			
		

> Hung around with Democratic Left in uni. Not sure if I ever actually joined though.
> 
> Sent away for a copy of Socialist Standard once.



Democratic Left-- the successors to the CPGB after the fall of the Soviet Union?

Did they have any supporters in Northern Ireland?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 29, 2005)

Nah, it *was* an officials breakway group...


----------



## gurrier (Sep 29, 2005)

sihhi said:
			
		

> Democratic Left-- the successors to the CPGB after the fall of the Soviet Union?
> 
> Did they have any supporters in Northern Ireland?


No, they were the short-lived party which emerged out of the Workers Party (stalinists, ex official sinn fein) in Ireland in the early 1990's.  They had 6 members of parliament, 5 of whom wanted to 'modernise' (ie ditch all the socialist stuff).  The party refused to comply so they effectively expelled the membership and set up their own party called democratic left.  They never really managed to find a new membership and merged with the labour party within a few years.  Their ex-leadership now controls the Irish labour party and are currently purging any remaining vestigal socialists in the LP.


----------



## sihhi (Sep 29, 2005)

gurrier said:
			
		

> No, they were the short-lived party which emerged out of the Workers Party (stalinists, ex official sinn fein) in Ireland in the early 1990's.  They had 6 members of parliament, 5 of whom wanted to 'modernise' (ie ditch all the socialist stuff).  The party refused to comply so they effectively expelled the membership and set up their own party called democratic left.  They never really managed to find a new membership and merged with the labour party within a few years.  Their ex-leadership now controls the Irish labour party and are currently purging any remaining vestigal socialists in the LP.



Aha that makes more sense   -
the Democratic Left over here were instantly reformed Euro-Communists/Euro-Brezhnevites iirc.


----------



## j26 (Sep 30, 2005)

I'm banned from joining a poltical party


----------



## Batboy (Sep 30, 2005)

*Where's my frog spotting badge?*

The cubs?


----------



## Idris2002 (Sep 30, 2005)

gurrier said:
			
		

> No, they were the short-lived party which emerged out of the Workers Party (stalinists, ex official sinn fein) in Ireland in the early 1990's.  They had 6 members of parliament, 5 of whom wanted to 'modernise' (ie ditch all the socialist stuff).  The party refused to comply so they effectively expelled the membership and set up their own party called democratic left.  They never really managed to find a new membership and merged with the labour party within a few years.  Their ex-leadership now controls the Irish labour party and are currently purging any remaining vestigal socialists in the LP.



The last time DL stood in NI before merging with southern Labour, they got fewer votes than the natural law party - FACT.

What's this about Rabitte and Co. purging the remaining vestigial socialists in the LP?


----------



## gurrier (Sep 30, 2005)

Idris2002 said:
			
		

> What's this about Rabitte and Co. purging the remaining vestigial socialists in the LP?


I'm principally refering to the Declan Bree debacle in Sligo.  I think the very public way that Rabbite has conducted this witch hunt is intended to be a clear message to any of the old labour / cp types that they won't be tolerated.  

http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?search_text=declan+bree


----------



## Idris2002 (Sep 30, 2005)

That's worse than I expected. Bree showed poor judgement going into Labour in the first place, but still and all.

This is all to keep the O'Reilly papers happy and prove Labour is fully modernised and moderate, I suppose.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Sep 30, 2005)

gurrier said:
			
		

> No, they were the short-lived party which emerged out of the Workers Party (stalinists, ex official sinn fein) in Ireland in the early 1990's.  They had 6 members of parliament, 5 of whom wanted to 'modernise' (ie ditch all the socialist stuff).  The party refused to comply so they effectively expelled the membership and set up their own party called democratic left.



The split effectively killed Irish Stalinism, but of course the international context - the fall of the Eastern Bloc - may have been doing that anyway. At their peak, the WP had thousands of members, seven TDs, a higher vote than Labour in Dublin, the highest vote of any party in Waterford. Yet it has left few organisational traces. You still meet ex-Sticks in community campaigns though, and there are a few in the Socialist Party and of course that's essentially the background of the ISN. Nowadays on demonstrations even the remnants of the Communist Party look a bit more vibrant than the remnants of the Workers Party!

It's pretty surprising in a way that the parliamentary leadership couldn't take the membership with them, given how tightly controlled from the top the Workers Party was. The similar "modernisation" moves in Italy and Britain were much more succesful from the leaderships point of vew, holding on to the main party and the more conservative elements having to set up minority splits. I also gather that the split was a bit more politically messy than you might expect - some of the less left wing elements stayed with the WP out of loyalty while some of the more radical people actually went with DL, thinking that more democratic space would be available than in the WP monolith.

I sometimes wonder how much ongoing contact there was between the "modernising" elements in the Italian CP, Irish Workers Party and CPGB given that they all ended up using the same Democratic Left name.

The Bree thing is interesting, if only because it seems so unneccessary and vindictive. There is no organised left of any kind existing in the Irish Labour Party. Bree is an anachronism - the kind of vaguely Stalinist inflected Labour left that once upon a time the Irish and British Labour Parties were full of, but which is near-extinct as a species these days. The handful of remaining "lefts" in the Labour Party just aren't a threat to Rabbitte, so you have to wonder why he's even bothering to pick on them.


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 1, 2005)

Because he can. And to keep the mainstream media onside like I said. There me be no remnants of the old left left, but that's hardly going to stop the Sudnay Independent mounting a mccarthyite witch hunt if they feel like it (have they done one on your lot, Nige?)

Rabitte probably fancies his chances of getting some nice shiny new labour type into a seat in Sligo/Leitrim.

What he's forgetting is that any Labour vote that went to Declan Bree was much more a personal vote for Bree himself, from Sligo voters who wouldn't know socialism from a hole in the wall, but like the cut of Bree's jib.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Oct 2, 2005)

Idris2002 said:
			
		

> There me be no remnants of the old left left, but that's hardly going to stop the Sudnay Independent mounting a mccarthyite witch hunt if they feel like it (have they done one on your lot, Nige?)



Not yet.

There was elements of it during the coverage of the bin tax battles at the end of 2003, but they were surprisingly well behaved during the GAMA dispute. 

The right wing media generally gives Joe Higgins positive if patronising coverage. He provides good copy and the only real difference of opinion in the Dail and basically we just aren't perceived as a threat. If the moment ever comes where there are a couple more SP TDs that would change rapidly.




			
				Idris2002 said:
			
		

> Rabitte probably fancies his chances of getting some nice shiny new labour type into a seat in Sligo/Leitrim.What he's forgetting is that any Labour vote that went to Declan Bree was much more a personal vote for Bree himself



Yep, Labour were nowhere in that part of the country until they absorbed Bree's outfit. That said no Labour candidate has a hope in hell of winning a seat next time out. Bree has had his vote in the working class urban areas eaten into by the Provos, but he is still too scary for the wealthier vote Labour would like to fight with Fine Gael and the like over. 

Presumably the Labour thinking is that they get a New Labour clone in place this time and position themselves to build a new vote for the longer term. Being seen to shaft Bree could put the cat amongst the pigeons though if he stands as an independent.


----------



## cathal marcs (Oct 2, 2005)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> The split effectively killed Irish Stalinism, but of course the international context - the fall of the Eastern Bloc - may have been doing that anyway. At their peak, the WP had thousands of members, seven TDs, a higher vote than Labour in Dublin, the highest vote of any party in Waterford. Yet it has left few organisational traces. You still meet ex-Sticks in community campaigns though, and there are a few in the Socialist Party and of course that's essentially the background of the ISN. Nowadays on demonstrations even the remnants of the Communist Party look a bit more vibrant than the remnants of the Workers Party!
> 
> .



Didnt the stick in the 70s spend more that FF and FG in electioneering with the cash from numerous bank roberies?

Has anone got any figures how muck WP spent on elections during those days out of interest?


----------



## blamblam (Oct 2, 2005)

I've just remembered I joined Greepeace when I was 10.


----------

