# Is the ICC a sect?



## wld_rvn (May 17, 2005)

*Is the ICC right to defend itself against theft and slander?*

This was raised in the 'Is communism inevitable?' thread...




			
				Top Dog said:
			
		

> The problem as I see it, if i can slightly derail for a sec, is that while the ICC have published some very good texts of the history of the tradition they purport to have emerged from (dutch/german left, italian left, Bilan etc.) as a political organisation they are incapable of moving beyond the status of a minor sect... not due to any conditions of the rest of the left (bourgeois or otherwise), not because the proletariat is not yet concsious of its 'historical mission', but because their behaviour and interventions (if they can be described as such) are so bizarre and erratic, they would appear to be pathologically incapable of conducting a sane human relationship beyond their own number. But then the rest of do live in the "swamp" after all



And Kropotkin added...




			
				kropotkin said:
			
		

> It was sort of bait to see if they are as crazy as i've been lead to beleive. The all-other-parties-were-false-but-we-are-the-true-party-of-the-proletariat line was the point I saw the light!



To begin with, Kropotkin, there is no need to 'bait' us to find out if we are 'crazy'. Why not simply put to us what you have heard and ask for our response? Here's your chance.

Second, Topdog, could you expand on what you think our 'partyist' conception is, because it is not at all clear what you mean by this? Also you say the ICC “purport to have emerged from (dutch/german left, italian left, Bilan etc.)” what do you precisely mean by this? And how do you see us as not belonging to that tradition?

Finally, Topdog you say: “as a political organisation they are incapable of moving beyond the status of a minor sect...because their behaviour and interventions...are so bizarre and erratic, they would appear to be pathologically incapable of conducting a sane human relationship beyond their own number”. This is a very sweeping statement, would it be possible to put some more meat on these very bare bones?

World Revolution,
Section in Britain of the International Communist Current.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 17, 2005)

this should be a poll.


----------



## mk12 (May 17, 2005)

I quite like their website - I read an article yesterday on there about anarchism.


----------



## butchersapron (May 17, 2005)

Was there even an answer to this?
Open Letter to the International Communist Current


----------



## wld_rvn (May 17, 2005)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Was there even an answer to this?
> Open Letter to the International Communist Current



There is a reply to this, but it is from the pre-website days, so we will need to  find the issue of WR it is in.  When we find it we can send you a copy and if it is in electronic form we will place it on the website. However, there is a reply to a more recent campaign of slanders  against the ICC. This takes up many of the accusations that are made against us in the above document.

World Revolution.


----------



## gurrier (May 17, 2005)

> Is the ICC right to defend itself against theft and slander?


Definitely comrade.  The ICC's tracts declaiming the heinous wrongs of the [insert acronym of a 2 person organisation that nobody has ever heard of] always give me a giggle.  I particularly admire the wars that they wage against deviationist thugs in 'internal fractions'.  

I'm interested to know whether any members of the international live within 200 miles of each other?  From what I know of them, their many national sections never seem to make it out of single figure membership and look an awful like a pen pal circle for cranks.


----------



## wld_rvn (May 17, 2005)

gurrier said:
			
		

> Definitely comrade.  The ICC's tracts declaiming the heinous wrongs of the [insert acronym of a 2 person organisation that nobody has ever heard of] always give me a giggle.  I particularly admire the wars that they wage against deviationist thugs in 'internal fractions'.
> 
> I'm interested to know whether any members of the international live within 200 miles of each other?
> 
> From what I know of them, their many national sections never seem to make it out of single figure membership and look an awful like a pen pal circle for cranks.



Gurrier: you don't really answer the question: do you think the ICC (or any other proletarian organisation, be it political, etc) is right to defend itslef against theft and lies or not? Or do you agree with stealing from proletarian organisations, no matter what their size is? You  mock our struggles to defend proletarian principles of organisation and behaviour, does that mean you do not think there are any such principles worth fighting to defend?

As for our geographical spread: a good map and a glance at the list of our presence in France, Britain and Belgium will answer this question.

The ICC is not a large organisation nor does it claim to be.  Nevertheless, its ability to develop and maintain the political presence of an international proletarian organisation (over the last 30 years), to have sections or nuclei in 12 countries (on four continents), to produce a quaterly International Review in 3 languages, to have a territorial press, produce books, pamphlets, maintian a website,  hold regular public meetings as far afield as New York and Calcutta and to be able to respond to international events such as the Iraq war with the distribution of tens of thousands of international leaflets (in all of the languages where the ICC has sections), would imply that the ICC is more than "pen pal circle for cranks".

Our struggle to defend our organisation and the traditions of the workers' movement it stands for, is not taking place in the isolation that gurrier would like others to believe. There are many who support the ICC's struggle against parasitism and opportunism. We ask those reading this thread to seriously examine and reflect on the struggle that we have been waging to defend proletarian principles and to decide for themselves whether the fundamental questions involved are worth defending or simply trivia to be mocked.

World Revolution

Section in Britain of the International Communist Current


----------



## Top Dog (May 18, 2005)

wld_rvn said:
			
		

> Second, Topdog, could you expand on what you think our 'partyist' conception is, because it is not at all clear what you mean by this? Also you say the ICC “purport to have emerged from (dutch/german left, italian left, Bilan etc.)” what do you precisely mean by this? And how do you see us as not belonging to that tradition?


I dont doubt you have emerged (as one tendency of many) from that tradition... But while the tradition above is a rich one, the ICC have constructed themselves out of the narrowest possible interpretation of a rigid and fixed Bordigism. I use the ‘_ism_’ deliberately here. You would also seem to cast yourselves as the historical torchbearers of the legacy of Bilan. And it is you _and you only_, in your correct positions, that can rightly have claim to that legacy. This strikes me as slightly sus, and just a little detached from the real world and the situation the 21st century working class finds itself in. It is also contradictory (see below). 






			
				wld_rvn said:
			
		

> Finally, Topdog you say: “as a political organisation they are incapable of moving beyond the status of a minor sect...because their behaviour and interventions...are so bizarre and erratic, they would appear to be pathologically incapable of conducting a sane human relationship beyond their own number”. This is a very sweeping statement, would it be possible to put some more meat on these very bare bones?


Butchers’ link to Ingram’s piece is one such article I was going to mention, however there are two other examples i’ll produce for the moment : one from your website, the other from an intervention at a _No War but the Class War_ meeting in London, in Jan 2003, just prior to the iraq invasion…

First example
CANT SEE THE WOOD FOR THE TREES - THE ICC ON SECTARIANISM
From your website… You have an entire page called ‘*Theses on parasitism’*. 





> Sectarianism is the typical expression of a petty bourgeois conception of organisation. It reflects the petty-bourgeois mindset of wanting to be king of your own little castle, and it manifests itself in the tendency to place the particular interests and concepts of one organisation above those of the movement as a whole. In the sectarian vision, the organisation is “all alone in the world” and it displays a regal disdain towards all the other organisations that belong to the proletarian camp, seen as “rivals” or even “enemies”. As it feels threatened by the latter, the sectarian organisation in general refuses to engage in debate and polemic with them. It prefers to take refuge in its “splendid isolation”, acting as though the others did not exist, or else obstinately putting forward what distinguishes itself from the others without taking into account what it has in common with them. _Full article _ http://en.internationalism.org/ir/94_parasitism]_here_[/URL]


Now compare and contrast with another page from your site in which you display the very same ‘_disdain towards all the other organisations that belong to the proletarian camp’ _: 


> *The campaign of slanders against the ICC*
> Following the public meeting of the International Bureau for the Revolutionary Party in Paris, organised with the "political and material support" of the 'Internal Fraction of the ICC' (a development which we have written about in the article 'The IBRP taken hostage by thugs'), the ICC has become the victim of a new campaign of slanders […]
> 
> Also, the IBRP has just published on its website a reply to our article 'The IBRP taken hostage by thugs'. This article, 'Reply to the stupid accusations of an organisation on the way to disintegration' is a real declaration of war *[sic]* on the ICC.
> Rest of article


For an tendency with a worldwide membership that I would generously estimate as barely reaching 3 figures, can you really issue such incredible hyperbole in all seriousness? Can you not see how detached from reality this actually sounds? Does it matter to the proletariat's destiny that the ICC have fallen out with the IBRP, dont get on with the CWO, or whatever...


Second example
ON THE DEMONSTRATION AGAINST THE WAR IN IRAQ - THE ICC ON INTERVENTION
Prior to the Feb 15th 2003 march in London, I can remember two ICC members arguing at a _No War But the Class War _ meeting, that while they had no intention of walking on the march itself (it was a bourgeois march after all), they would attend at the beginning. But only in the capacity of leafleting the demonstration (a demo of 2 million people remember). Both members would be leafleting those marching from the side of the road on the correct proletarian response to the war. 

Again, i need to ask: can you not see how detached from reality this sounds? What difference would it have made to the British proletariat if you had actually walked on the march or indeed what difference if you had instead stayed at home in bed that day? Can you not see there might be a problem with a distorted perspective going on here?


----------



## gurrier (May 18, 2005)

wld_rvn said:
			
		

> Gurrier: you don't really answer the question: do you think the ICC (or any other proletarian organisation, be it political, etc) is right to defend itslef against thieft and lies or not? Or do you agree with stealing from proletarian organisations, no matter what their size is? You  mock our struggles to defend proletarian principles of organisation and behaviour, does that mean you do not think there are any such principles worth fighting to defend?


I think that spending so much of your "organisation's" energy engaging in polemics with similarly irrelevant sects in far-flung corners of the world is hilarious. When you engage in 'international' polemics full of the most antiquated and flamboyant rhetoric against one of your 'internal fractions' - more accurately described as 'that odd guy in argentina' - I don't know how you expect anybody to react with anything other than mirth.   So, I will continue to chuckle at you, thanks very much.  

The opening two paragraphs of the tract that you directed me towards is a case in point: 




			
				Mad ICC Website said:
			
		

> Visitors to our internet site will be aware that in the recent period the ICC has had to confront a *slanderous* and *shameful* campaign mounted by the *so-called* Internal Fraction of the ICC (IFICC) and the Argentine Círculo de Comunistas Internacionalistas. In fighting these attacks the ICC has drawn on the *unique* source of *clarity and strength* for any revolutionary organisation; it has placed itself squarely on the ground of the principles, history and traditions of the workers’ movement.
> 
> We can only *deplore* the fact that the IBRP, which is also a part of the Communist Left, has not done so but has chosen to throw in its lot with the ICC’s detractors and has embraced their *sordid and cynical* methods. This is a *serious betrayal* of *all that it means* to be a part of the proletarian political milieu. Moreover this is in a situation in which the other historic groups of the Communist Left stand by, *indifferent to the threat* from elements whose *sole aim* is the *destruction of proletarian organisations* and, *with them*, the hope of a classless society.


Which exhibits so many psychological ailments in action that I think the term 'crank' is somewhat kind.  I have helpfully underlined the references to similarly hilarious organisations and placed the text that shows the more significant signs of crankery in bold face, in order to illustrate my point.


----------



## Top Dog (May 18, 2005)

Quite


----------



## rednblack (May 18, 2005)

the icc are brilliant


----------



## Random (May 18, 2005)

The ICC turned up to the Colombia demo today.  Well done!


----------



## Pickman's model (May 18, 2005)

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=115572


----------



## montevideo (May 19, 2005)

Random said:
			
		

> The ICC turned up to the Colombia demo today.  Well done!



In london? For the death of the 15 year anarchist? I'm impressed. There were a few middle aged men in dark glasses. I thought they were the af. Fair play to the icc.


----------



## chegrimandi (May 19, 2005)

is this a thread about the International Cricket Council? Certainly *THEY* are corrupt as hell


----------



## Top Dog (May 19, 2005)

chegrimandi said:
			
		

> is this a thread about the International Cricket Council? Certainly *THEY* are corrupt as hell


they're nothing like as bad as the Internal Fraction of the International Cricket Council, believe me!


----------



## Random (May 19, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> In london? For the death of the 15 year anarchist? I'm impressed. There were a few middle aged men in dark glasses. I thought they were the af. Fair play to the icc.



Didn't you see it?  A van parked nearby with the logo 'ICC' on the side?  Part of the new Bordigist Turn topwards replacing human demonstrators with automated communist agitators.  When a passerby walked near the van it assertained their class background from their clothes, walk, etc and printed out the appropriate leaflet for them.  Fantastic.


----------



## rednblack (May 19, 2005)

Random said:
			
		

> When a passerby walked near the van it assertained their class background from their clothes, walk, etc and printed out the appropriate leaflet for them.  Fantastic.



was it manned by our ernie?


----------



## gurrier (May 19, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> was it manned by our ernie?


ernie *is* an automated communist agitator.  He *was* that van.  You didn't really think that a human could be that efficient at producing stereotyped tanky responses, did you?


----------



## ernestolynch (May 19, 2005)

Random said:
			
		

> Didn't you see it?  A van parked nearby with the logo 'ICC' on the side?  Part of the new Bordigist Turn topwards replacing human demonstrators with automated communist agitators.  When a passerby walked near the van it assertained their class background from their clothes, walk, etc and printed out the appropriate leaflet for them.  Fantastic.



I can do that by looking at someone's eyes.


----------



## montevideo (May 19, 2005)

ernestolynch said:
			
		

> I can do that by looking at someone's eyes.



you old romantic you. The ever fragrant is one lucky lady. Duck tonight? With oven chips?


----------



## ernestolynch (May 19, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> you old romantic you. The ever fragrant is one lucky lady. Duck tonight? With oven chips?



Nah boss - pot noodle in the den - a tribute to you and Jose.


----------



## sovietpop (May 20, 2005)

pictures and report from Dublins colombian demo, no sigh of robo-stalinists afaik

report


----------



## Chuck Wilson (May 20, 2005)

Plenty of hoodies though, just as well it wasn''t a shopping centre.BTW which one was the ICC?


----------



## wld_rvn (May 20, 2005)

The thread seems to be wondering off subject. Thus, to return to the question. Topdog says:

"I dont doubt you have emerged (as one tendency of many) from that tradition... But while the tradition above is a rich one, the ICC have constructed themselves out of the narrowest possible interpretation of a rigid and fixed Bordigism. I use the ‘ism’ deliberately here. You would also seem to cast yourselves as the historical torchbearers of the legacy of Bilan. And it is you and you only, in your correct positions, that can rightly have claim to that legacy. This strikes me as slightly sus, and just a little detached from the real world and the situation the 21st century working class finds itself in. It is also contradictory"

To answer this it is necessary to define what is meant by the Communist Left and how the ICC understands its continuation of the historical traditions of the Communist Left.

The ICC is defending the historical tradition of the Communist Left: that traditon of the workers' movement that waged an intransigent struggle against the degeneration of the 3rd International and the communist parties. The main expressions of this struggle were the Left fractions in; Germany, Italy, Holland and Russia, but there were also weaker expressions of this struggle in all of the main parties. In their heroic struggle to defend proletarian politics and principles first against the growing weight of opportunism within the 3rd Interantiona, then against Stalinism and in the 1930s and 40s against the degeneration of Trotskyism, these fractions of the Communist Left made a fundamental contribution to the the future liberation of humanity by the proletariat. Not only did the clearest fractions of the Communist Left stand out against nationalism, democracy, defence of the capitalist state in the name of anti-fascism etc, they also intransigently defended the need for proletarian political organisation. Against Trotskyism's increasing accomodation with Social Democracy the Communist Left, above all the Italian Left fraction, struggled to defend the absolute necessity for the proletariat to defend its political autonomy.

The ICC, based upon the work of Bilan, has sort to produce a synthesis of the work carried out by the Comunist Left. The work of Bilan is of particular importance because of its political clarity and rigour, particularly in relation to the questions of; the role of a fraction, the role of anti-fascism, the nature of the war in Spain, the degeneration of Troksyism. However, Marxism is based on the need draw the lessons of the past in order to arm the proletariat for the future. This means making a critique of work of the Communist Left and drawing from this the main lessons which is precisely what the ICC has tried to do.

The ICC is not the only group of the Communist Left. The other main parts are the Bordigists and the IBRP. The aim of the Communist Left is the defence of proletarian politics and principles of organisation, their propagation within the working class and the political preparation of the future revoluton, an essetential component of which  will be the  party. Within the Communist left there is a political process of clarification, based on drawing the lessons of history and how to apply these to the future. This expresses the struggel of the proletariat to arm itself with the cleatest possible political organisations. Thus, within this process any concessions to bourgeois ideology, compromising of proletarian principles of organisation and behaviour, etc can only act as fetters on the vital process of clarification. 

This is why the ICC has always engaged in rigours discussion with the other groups of the Communist Left and also openly discussed its organisation struggles and crises. We do not seen ourselves as immune from the penetration of bourgeois ideology, opportunism etc, but we do think we have the political framework for understanding and overcoming these pressures.

Thus, when Topdog says we defend "narrowest possible interpretation of a rigid and fixed Bordigism", he is wrong. The ICC places itself squarly in the tradition of the Communist left. This is why we have produced many articles and books on the history of the Communist Left. And it is to defend the traditions of the Communist left that we struggle against all expressions of opportunims etc within the Communist Left, which of course includes within the ICC.

World Revolution


----------



## sipriano (May 20, 2005)

Comrades of the ICC.....

Fraternal proletarian greetings. The unmistakable smell of the swamp permeates this place, awash with petit bourgeois elements, they cast their eyes towards the more rigourous, more considered politics of the ICC. Beware,
nothing less than the denigration and ultimate destruction of the milleu of the left Communists is their goal, therefore it is imperative that you remain steadfast and resolute in the face of the calumny and slur that you are likely
to find here. The  lifeblood of the Communist project could well be at stake, although im sure that you are well aware of the gravity of the situation.
It is always with great anticipation that I enter housemans bookshop to obtain the latest issue of world revolution, within my workplace it is always eagerly passed from hand to hand. Of particular concern to my colleagues is the imperialist drive towards war, and frequently do they say to me " Look the rate of profit has fallen yet again " also, they always express solidarity with the belgian public service workers whenever they enter upon another phase of their heroic struggle with the forces of capital, your regular reportage of these events within the pages of your illustrious journal is a valuable service to the proletariat,and much appreciated by all.
However, wedded as you are to eight pages of black type with no pictures, im hoping that you will consider an alternative form of propaganda, one that you have hitherto neglected, the propaganda form that I refer to is stickers.
Yes ! I know that your initial reaction will be to regard stickers as a frivolous
bourgeois deviation, but comrades, I hope that you will reconsider. Stickers are now a vital weapon in the armoury of every go-ahead, dynamic revolutionary organisation. And placed strategically throughout proletarian areas, will work wonders in raising the profile of left Communist ideas amongst the class.
I hope that you dont consider this to be presumptious, but ive taken the liberty of originating a few ideas, im hoping that you will consider the efficacy of them on the occasion of your next praesidium.

Thus.....                     

PROLETARIAN MILLEU RULES OK.

SMASH THE HOMOGENOUS COMPOSITION OF CAPITAL NOW !

ICC  /  ITA

GENERALISED COMMODITY PRODUCTION SUCKS

WORLD REVOLUTION ?  YER  HAVIN A LAUGH !


----------



## Fozzie Bear (May 20, 2005)

sipriano said:
			
		

> Stickers are now a vital weapon in the armoury of every go-ahead, dynamic revolutionary organisation.



 What was that short story with all the left-communists playing the quiz machine on the ferry and stuff?   I'm sure they had stickers in that as well, but they just said "READ THE ITALIAN COMMUNIST LEFT", iirc.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (May 20, 2005)

wld_rvn said:
			
		

> This expresses the struggel of the proletariat to arm itself with the cleatest possible political organisations.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (May 20, 2005)

wld_rvn said:
			
		

> The thread seems to be wondering off subject. Thus, to return to the question. Topdog says:
> 
> "I dont doubt you have emerged (as one tendency of many) from that tradition... But while the tradition above is a rich one, the ICC have constructed themselves out of the narrowest possible interpretation of a rigid and fixed Bordigism. I use the ‘ism’ deliberately here. You would also seem to cast yourselves as the historical torchbearers of the legacy of Bilan. And it is you and you only, in your correct positions, that can rightly have claim to that legacy. This strikes me as slightly sus, and just a little detached from the real world and the situation the 21st century working class finds itself in. It is also contradictory"
> 
> ...



Organisations like yourself have always to be on guard against the penetration of bourgeois ideology and opportunism.Look what happened to workers Power and the descent of their membership into chronic drug abuse and left abstentionism. But what organisational struggles and crisis has the ICC had to overcome? I assumed everything was going to plan since your predecessors formed the Left factions in the 1920s.


----------



## Top Dog (May 20, 2005)

wld_rvn said:
			
		

> The thread seems to be wondering off subject. Thus, to return to the question. Topdog says:
> 
> "I dont doubt you have emerged (as one tendency of many) from that tradition... But while the tradition above is a rich one, the ICC have constructed themselves out of the narrowest possible interpretation of a rigid and fixed Bordigism. I use the ‘ism’ deliberately here. You would also seem to cast yourselves as the historical torchbearers of the legacy of Bilan. And it is you and you only, in your correct positions, that can rightly have claim to that legacy. This strikes me as slightly sus, and just a little detached from the real world and the situation the 21st century working class finds itself in. It is also contradictory"
> 
> To answer this it is necessary to define what is meant by the Communist Left and how the ICC understands its continuation of the historical traditions of the Communist Left... *And it continues*


That has got to be the longest way to say absolutely nothing that I have read in a long while.


----------



## Top Dog (May 20, 2005)

sipriano said:
			
		

> Comrades of the ICC.....


  And that the funniest!


----------



## sipriano (May 20, 2005)

Elvis bordiga is brilliant, dont step on my red suede shoes is a classic !!


----------



## younghegelian (Jul 20, 2005)

I don't know if Sipriano is having a laugh with hs post about the ICC,but I thought it was brilliant.  In fact, and this is how sad I am, I am going to send it to all my friends now...

"Of particular concern to my colleagues is the imperialist drive towards war, and frequently do they say to me " Look the rate of profit has fallen yet again " ha ha, I don't know why, but I am finding this hilarious.  

However, it would be useful if those the ICC were responding to in their last post were to respond to them, as I would be interested in seeing how the discussion works out.

I have been discussing, in a very odd fashion, with the ICC for the past couple of years (I don't really know how long, it is all such a blur, lol).  I am rather surprised that I have not been called a parasite, although I have been told I am in the swamp, something I also found to be hilarious.  I don't think they found it too funny when I asked if they had a towel to wipe the mud off...


----------



## rednblack (Jul 21, 2005)

sipriano said:
			
		

> SMASH THE HOMOGENOUS COMPOSITION OF CAPITAL NOW !
> 
> GENERALISED COMMODITY PRODUCTION SUCKS



i want 1000 of each now!


----------



## Top Dog (Jul 21, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> i want 1000 of each now!


have they got picktures of masked up yoof?


----------



## rednblack (Jul 21, 2005)

Top Dog said:
			
		

> have they got picktures of masked up yoof?



one will have a pic of an old dead foreign bloke with a massive beard, and one will have a picure of comrade radek addressing the proletariat of the dusseldorf rail yards, during the infamous sealed train when he got carried away with backward revolutionary overenthusiasm


----------



## Paul Marsh (Jul 22, 2005)

Is the ICC a cult?

Yes.


----------



## wld_rvn (Jul 24, 2005)

*Is it better to be big or right?*




			
				Paul Marsh said:
			
		

> Is the ICC a cult? Yes.


That wasn't the original question though. We originally asked 'Is the ICC a sect?' because on other threads we have seen the idea commonly put about that the ICC "_has sound politics_" but "_because their behaviour and interventions... are so bizarre and erratic, they would appear to be pathologically incapable of conducting a sane human relationship beyond their own number._" This argumentation is incorrect, and the main aim of this thread was to combat this false vision. However, the fact that the question 'Is the ICC a cult?' has been raised is interesting. As an organisation that defends marxism, and thus for the development of class consciousness against religious illusions, the ICC clearly is not a 'religious cult'. So, is the ICC a 'sociological cult'? This is just one of the many lies, slanders and accusations that have been thrown at us often before by parasitic groups and individuals, and again we have openly fought these in our press , during the mid 1990s (we are working to publish certain of these articles on our website) and more recently in the combat against the so-called 'Internal Fraction of the ICC'. 

However, given the overwhelming weight of bourgeois ideology in all its forms, any organisation that holds views that are radically opposed to the prevailing ideology is labelled a ‘sect’ or a ‘cult’. Even more so when this organisation defends certain proletarian principles and ways of behaving that are radically opposed to bourgeois and petty-bourgeois conceptions and methods. Just as the working class is an 'outlaw class', a communist organisation is an alien body within bourgeois society. The things the ICC says, and the way it intervenes, may sound and look bizarre to many but we understand that this is to be expected in these times when there is a growing distaste for theoretical clarity, political depth and organisational rigour.

There are a number of assumptions in the responses to this thread that we want to take up.

*1. "If you are a small organisation then what you do is unimportant".* In other words it's better to be in something big no matter who is running it. Well if you believe that then you may as well go and join one of the mainstream parties and campaign for reforms. Size does matter, but the world communist party of the future will not be a ‘mass party’ in the sense of the social-democratic parties of the Second International. The experience of the Bolsheviks has shown that the revolutionary organisation will of necessity always be a minority. What is more important - to be big, or to be right?

*2. “All the little groups should work together instead of being sectarian”. *Within what we call the ‘proletarian political milieu’ (ICC, IBRP, Bordigists plus sympathisers and fellow travellers) the ICC has always been in favour of principled regroupment against sectarianism, we participated in the The International Conferences of the Communist Left (1976-80) . We have repeatedly appealled for the other groups of the PPM to adopt common positions in the face of imperialist wars. Such appeals have always been rejected, and what is more the sectarianism within the PPM is increasing. The ICC is now the target of a veritable campaign of attacks and manoeuvres against which we have the right and the duty to defend proletarian principles and the very honour of the international communist left. The very conception of a proletarian political milieu is being abandoned, along with the marxist theory of the decadence of modes of production.

*3. “All the little groups are insignificant, and their quarrels are hilarious”.* A brief acquaintance with the history of revolutionary minorities (Communist League, Bolsheviks, Spartakists, KAPD etc) reveals that yes, for 90% of their existence they were ‘insignificant’ but at certain moments in history they had a decisive weight on the course of history. When they met for the first time at the international conference of 1915 at Zimmerwald, Trotsky could joke that the proletariat's revolutionary representatives – the kernel of the Third International - could fit into a few taxis. But their intransigent internationalist positions were to be born out by events. The communist left is such a ‘historic’ tradition with a pivotal role to play in the future world revolution precisely because it never betrayed the principles of proletarian internationalism during the period of the counter-revolution (late ‘20s to late ‘60s) unlike the Trotskyists who crossed the class frontier to defend participation in the Second World War. The future world communist party can only be formed on the basis of the political and organisational acquisitions of the communist left. This is why we think it is so important to have these struggles to defend proletarian principles and methods: they are 'historic struggles', because without the communist left the chances of the communist revolution being successful - and the future of humanity being liberated from capitalist barbarism - are zero. *The stakes are that high.*

*4. “There is something bizarre about the ICC because they have internal crises and denounce people”.* Well, we would ask anyone who has been in a leftist organisation (Stalinist/Trotskyist/Anarchist) whether these are not full of individuals seeking influence, back-biting, ‘informal channels’, ‘chum politics’, ‘gurus’ etc. etc. Anyone who has been in such groups knows - if they are the honest - that this is the case. (There are certainly enough people in the ICC who've been through such groups to know that this is the case!) Capitalism is a disgusting society that is rotting on its feet, so it is only to be expected that it fosters disgusting behaviour. And the fact of saying "I am a revolutionary" does not automatically wash you white as Persil.... So what to can be done? The ICC has learned the hard way that all this is not easy, but that the first thing to do about crises in the organisation is not to hide them, but to be honest about them and try to learn from them, and from the struggles within previous revolutionary organisations (marxists within the First International against Bakunin’s Alliance, Lenin and the Bolsheviks at the 2nd Conference of the RSDLP in 1903). In our experience, this is not what anarchists do.

Finally, we can't help noticing that all the people who go on about "the working class", "how irrelevant the ICC is", etc. etc., are in, errr... forgive us for saying this... "late" groups. Class War? The DAM? Where are they now? And all those hundreds of others who burst on the scene telling us what they were going to do?... And the ones that do survive are the out and out leftists: In France there are the "Alternatives Libertaires" who argue, as anarchists, that the Palestinians.... should have a state!!!!  

For the ICC,

World Revolution.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Jul 24, 2005)

wld_rvn said:
			
		

> That wasn't the original question though. We originally asked 'Is the ICC a sect?' because on other threads we have seen the idea commonly put about that the ICC "_has sound politics_" but "_because their behaviour and interventions... are so bizarre and erratic, they would appear to be pathologically incapable of conducting a sane human relationship beyond their own number._" This argumentation is incorrect, and the main aim of this thread was to combat this false vision. However, the fact that the question 'Is the ICC a cult?' has been raised is interesting. As an organisation that defends marxism, and thus for the development of class consciousness against religious illusions, the ICC clearly is not a 'religious cult'. So, is the ICC a 'sociological cult'? This is just one of the many lies, slanders and accusations that have been thrown at us often before by parasitic groups and individuals, and again we have openly fought these in our press , during the mid 1990s (we are working to publish certain of these articles on our website) and more recently in the combat against the so-called 'Internal Fraction of the ICC'.
> 
> However, given the overwhelming weight of bourgeois ideology in all its forms, any organisation that holds views that are radically opposed to the prevailing ideology is labelled a ‘sect’ or a ‘cult’. Even more so when this organisation defends certain proletarian principles and ways of behaving that are radically opposed to bourgeois and petty-bourgeois conceptions and methods. Just as the working class is an 'outlaw class', a communist organisation is an alien body within bourgeois society. The things the ICC says, and the way it intervenes, may sound and look bizarre to many but we understand that this is to be expected in these times when there is a growing distaste for theoretical clarity, political depth and organisational rigour.
> 
> ...




What is your opinion about Workers Power?


----------



## wld_rvn (Jul 24, 2005)

*The counter-revolutionary character of 'workers'' parties*

WP are a typically leftist, anti-working class organisation. Our position on such counter-revolutionary "workers parties" is explained here.

What do you think about them?

WR.


----------



## treelover (Jul 24, 2005)

this thread is so

BORING!


----------



## younghegelian (Jul 24, 2005)

Well I don't think it is boring, and even if I did, why would I need to post something saying I was bored?  Just leave the topic and go onto something else.

I think the ICC are making some interesting points, and I would like to point out that I wasn't really trying to criticise them when I mentioned that I was told I was in the swamp.  I have no problem with people being denounced if they deserve to be denounced.  And in fact, at this point, I agree with the ICC that the positions I held at the time they said I was in the swamp where those which in fact put me in the 'swamp'.

This may be off topic, but I am studying Hegel, and for the first time, I can actually understand it, or at least I think I can.  So, does anybody have any suggestions for what particular books to read, either by him or by others?  I have been studying Stace's systematic work on him, which is very useful, although I was rather annoyed at the lack of space spent on the philosophies of nature and religion, whilst he spent 40 pages explaining his philosophy of fine art (art is nonsense, religion is at least interesting).


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Jul 25, 2005)

wld_rvn said:
			
		

> WP are a typically leftist, anti-working class organisation. Our position on such counter-revolutionary "workers parties" is explained here.
> 
> What do you think about them?
> 
> WR.



Couldn't agree more with your first sentence and some would say that you were being too kind. I liked this bit from your link....



> All the so-called ‘revolutionary’ currents – such as Maoism which is simply a variant of parties which had definitively gone over to the bourgeoisie, or Trotskyism which, after constituting a proletarian reaction against the betrayal of the Communist Parties was caught up in a similar process of degeneration, or traditional anarchism, which today places itself in the framework of an identical approach by defending a certain number of positions of the SPs and CPs, such as ‘anti-fascist alliances’ – belong to the same camp: the camp of capital.



What do you think about their calls for a fifth international, workers defence squads against fascism, an international brigade for Iraq and their analysis that we are in a pre revolutionary period? It's about time these so called 'workers friends' were exposed.


----------



## mk12 (Jul 25, 2005)

> All the so-called ‘revolutionary’ currents – such as Maoism which is simply a variant of parties which had definitively gone over to the bourgeoisie, or Trotskyism which, after constituting a proletarian reaction against the betrayal of the Communist Parties was caught up in a similar process of degeneration, or traditional anarchism, which today places itself in the framework of an identical approach by defending a certain number of positions of the SPs and CPs, such as ‘anti-fascist alliances’ – belong to the same camp: the camp of capital.



So everyone is on the side of "capital" if they are not in the ICC?!? How, exactly, were the thousands of CP members in the "camp of capital"?


----------



## younghegelian (Jul 26, 2005)

Just a few points...

About Workers Power: There is no point in a 'Fifth International' as this International would be Trotzkyite if Worker's Power had their way.

As to Iraq, I think it would be absurd to support going in and defending Iraqi 'native' capital against the US military.  We would be easily smashed, and more importantly, I am not going to go and fight for representatives of a class opposed to me.  The fact that capitalism lost its progressive nature through the development of the productive forces to the extent necessary for the establishment of communism, and because the relations of productive became a fetter, in relative terms, upon their development, means that no capital is progressive in relation to another capital: they are all thoroughly reactionary and we must oppose all of them.  The bourgeois revolution has been completed: the epoch of imperialism is the epoch of proletarian revolution.

'Workers' defence squads' are squads set up, not to fight against the bourgeoisie as a whole but simply fascists.  And, if they are just defence squads, does that mean they are not going to use any violence unless the fascists use violence, and that all violence will be as an immediate reaction to the violence of the fascists?  No, WP etc are dangerous, and they will just turn the people in the workers defence squads into thugs who will break up fascist meetings, and beat them up, which will just increase the resolve of the fascists in the first place, which defeats the purpose.  

If we are going to set up defence squads against fascists, we should also set them up against Labour, Liberal and Tory types, as well as WP and the leftist types, as these people will resort to the same as the fascists if they need to.  The enemy is not fascism but capitalism, and we cannot enter into broad alliances against fascism, because these alliances always end up being for something they call 'democracy'.

I don't know about the pre-revolutionary period idea, what does the ICC think of it?  Just as importantly, what do you think of it?

I was surprised to find that WP decided that China was capitalist in the 1990s.  I found this out a few weeks ago, when I said 'So I assume you call China a deformed workers state'.  'No, it is capitalist' the chap said, and that is what made me interested, then he tells me about the reversal of the gains in the 1990s by privatisation.  It seems that any understanding of elementary economic theory eludes these idiots: well it has eluded better men than them.

And to Matt, the ICC doesn't think that all other groups are counter-revolutionary, although it may as well do so, considering that its paper is full of attacks upon everybody else in the 'milieu'.  I stopped following all the 'polemics' quite some time ago.  They actually have an Internal Fraction who write a journal of 20 pages every month, which has about 2 pages in it which do not criticise the ICC.  

And as to the CP, is this the same CP that told us that the capitalism which existed in Russia was 'socialism'?  Is this the same CP that told us that we should struggle for such a 'paradise' in which we would be exploited by a new set of masters, the 'Communist' Party?  If not, then PERHAPS they aren't in the camp of capital...


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Jul 27, 2005)

younghegelian said:
			
		

> Just a few points...
> 
> About Workers Power: There is no point in a 'Fifth International' as this International would be Trotzkyite if Worker's Power had their way.
> 
> ...



I like your point about workers defence squads against Workers Power ,I have been concerned about their attempts to influence individuals in  the teachers unions for some time.

Pre revolutionary period? I have lost count of how many years we have been at the same time  that close but so far away from being in a pre revolutionary period .


----------



## younghegelian (Jul 28, 2005)

Hiya

What do you mean about their attempts to influence teachers?  Are they going around trying to get them to take part in such 'defence squads against fascism'?  It seems that leftists have had, for a long time, a lot of support amongst teachers, who like to see themselves as enlightened intellectuals.

What do you mean by a pre-revolutionary period?  Are they talking about a period immediately preceding a revolution?  Yes, the working class are being attacked by the capitalist class, and more intensively than before, but there has as yet been not very much in the way of a fightback, not in Britain anyway.  I think such a fightback, on a mass scale, is a precondition of us being able to say we are in a pre-revolutionary period.  I don't really know, I have spent too much time in the abstract and have spent too little time looking at concrete developments.  This is something I had better sort out to be honest.

Another question, where is the ICC?


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Jul 28, 2005)

younghegelian said:
			
		

> Hiya
> 
> What do you mean about their attempts to influence teachers?  Are they going around trying to get them to take part in such 'defence squads against fascism'?  It seems that leftists have had, for a long time, a lot of support amongst teachers, who like to see themselves as enlightened intellectuals.



It seems to be the case, several schools have banned them from selling papers in the common room at break time but they are resorting to more sinister methods. They claim to have had teachers leading strikes against the war and refuse to take part in running sports teams on Saturday mornings or doing the school show.




			
				younghegelian said:
			
		

> What do you mean by a pre-revolutionary period?  Are they talking about a period immediately preceding a revolution?  Yes, the working class are being attacked by the capitalist class, and more intensively than before, but there has as yet been not very much in the way of a fightback, not in Britain anyway.  I think such a fightback, on a mass scale, is a precondition of us being able to say we are in a pre-revolutionary period.  I don't really know, I have spent too much time in the abstract and have spent too little time looking at concrete developments.  This is something I had better sort out to be honest.
> 
> Another question, where is the ICC?



There are a few WP members on here ( at one time about a fifth of their membership) who could try and explain what they are on about better, as I can't make head or tail of it. Redhippy, WP member and Cockneyrebel ( though I think cockers has been stood down by his comrades after some faux pas on here). All I can say is that apparantly there is a difference between a pre-revolutionary period and a pre-revolutionary situation and  that there is not a pre-revolutionary situation here but there is one in Venezuala apparantly.They have a sliding scale of pre-revolutionary demands that the massess chant  depending on the degree of pre-revolution in each country.That explains why Workers Power were calling for a bit of the fence to be pulled down and the Spar shop to be looted at the G8 demo but in Venezuala they are banging on about general strikes and arming the workers. I may not be able to give their arguement the full credit that it deserves but I think the principles are clear.

I am also not keen on their policy on their bohemian policy on  Class A drugs or their support for the Wombles either.

ICC ? I think there is only one bloke and he is very buisy.


----------



## mk12 (Jul 28, 2005)

Oh I do love your posts.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Jul 28, 2005)

mattkidd12 said:
			
		

> Oh I do love your posts.



It's a struggle at my age to keep up!


----------



## Random (Jul 28, 2005)

mattkidd12 said:
			
		

> Oh I do love your posts.



I am also a fan


----------



## LLETSA (Jul 29, 2005)

Chuck Wilson said:
			
		

> I think cockers has been stood down by his comrades after some faux pas on here).





This does indeed appear to be the case. It seems like he's been replaced by one of the big guns, the imaginitively-named WP member.

I wish I could have been a fly on the wall when WP member got wind of whatever ideological deviation cockney committed.  Lenin's berating of Kamanev in the car from the Finland Station springs to mind.

I miss cockneyrebel, but it had to be done, I guess: any more of it and the struggle for the Fifth International could be lost. And then the Workers' Defence Squads would have to be called off. The whole pre-revolutionary situation would then be in jeopardy.  And, ultimately, the whole fiuture of humankind.

It really doesn't bear thinking about.


----------



## younghegelian (Aug 9, 2005)

Hiya Chuck

Sorry I haven't replied, here is something towards it.

About the leftists, I did not know they even tried to sell their paper in the first place, not to teachers anyway.  Don't you think people with University degrees would just get pissed off at the patronising languages.  Christ, I first read it when I was 13, and I was pissed off at the language, and just went and read Marx myself (boring person here).

I don't know wy the SWP etc would tell their members to refuse to take part in organising school and community events such as these.  The question of reform and revolution is difficult, but I think communists ought to struggle to build upon their standing in the community, as this is working towards building a base of support, and a level of agreement within the working class.

I think the nature of demands whic hwe place before our fellow workers does have to be tailored, to an extent anyway, to the situation.  However, I think it would be STUPID to go so low as to call merely for the 'Spar shop to be looted' and a bit of the fence to be taken down.  The lowest demand should be for things like occupation of factories, abstention from useless bourgeois elections, abolition of the wages system, things which are actually useful.  Smash up the Spar shop and youll get smashed up as well by the police.

What is their policy on Class A drugs?  Aren't the Wombles just a group who dance around at demonstrations?  Could you send me a link about this pre-revolutionary stuff?  

The ICCs member on this forum is wld_rvn.  They sent me an email about libcom, and how good my contributions on the unions were on it, but now I am a parasite in theireyes, I don't think they will be writing to me again, except to remind me of how much of a parasite on the proletariat I am.  HA HA HA!


----------



## rebel warrior (Aug 9, 2005)

Having just found this thread, I have to admit as a SWP member I am afraid to pass any comment on the matter of whether the ICC is a sect or not.  

While I am tempted to think that, from the sound of things on here, that the ICC is too small to warrant even being called a sect, I fear if I actually came out and said this then it this would count as some sort of milestone in the history of their organisation.  'A member of the Socialist Workers Party and Galloway apologist suggested we might be a sect - this is the most serious attack our British section has ever faced from the most advanced and bloodthirsty sections of the counter-revolutionary capitalist bourgeoisie'.   

Mind you, I do like Chuck's and LLETSA's analysis on the latest twists and turns of WP.


----------



## mk12 (Aug 9, 2005)

Rebel Warrior, with this sentence: _"he ICC is too small to warrant even being called a sect"_, you have firmly established yourself as petit-bourgeois, who is on the side of capital. The vanguard of the proletariat will see through your counter-revolutionary lies. Smash capitalism! Smash the counter-revolutionary SWP!


----------



## rebel warrior (Aug 9, 2005)

Thank god someone on here can see through my counter- revolutionary lies, matt.  Far too many of my lies and tricks pass unchallenged in the petit-bourgeois infested 'objectively counter-revolutionary' swamp that is Urban 75.


----------



## Top Dog (Aug 9, 2005)

rebel warrior said:
			
		

> Thank god someone on here can see through my counter- revolutionary lies, matt.  Far too many of my lies and tricks pass unchallenged in the petit-bourgeois infested 'objectively counter-revolutionary' swamp that is Urban 75.


hey rw, why dont you get back to answering some of the questions thrown at you on this thread and, *Tip*: leave the 'humour' to that thread eh? believe me, its much funnier watching you make a complete tool of yourself there


----------



## younghegelian (Aug 11, 2005)

With regards to Rebel Warrior, I am sorry but I don't think his comments are all that useful.  Does he think that the ICC is a sect or not: he says, "they are too small to be a sect".  Why?

"A group of people forming a distinct unit within a larger group by virtue of certain refinements or distinctions of belief or practice. 
A religious body, especially one that has separated from a larger denomination. 
A faction united by common interests or beliefs."
('sect', www.dictionary.com).

1. The ICC are a group within the proletarian milieu, although you wouldn't think it the way they call everyone else in it a parasite.  They have certain refinements as such, which develop their perspectives in more detail than the general milieu of which they are a part.  I am referring to their Luxemburgist theory here.  I was also going to say their theory of the state, but I am pretty sure that their theory of the state does not accept the basic principles of the milieu which they are a part of.
Ill deal with 2 and 3 later.


----------



## rebel warrior (Aug 11, 2005)

Good stuff, younghegelian.  My profoundist apologies to the comrades of the ICC for my not particularly 'useful' comments on whether they are in fact a sect or not.  I hope this burning issue of the contemporary proletarian movement will soon reach its final resolution.   The World Revolution waits for no man, not even members of the ICC.


----------



## younghegelian (Aug 12, 2005)

Is this a piss take?  There is little need to apologise to the ICC, just get on with discussing the issue which is the title of the thread, 'Is the ICC a sect'?.

Discussions about organisations within the proletarian movement, ARE important, but they are nowhere near as important about discussions about society as a whole.

As to the definitions.

2. Is the ICC a religious body?  I have only met them once, and I cannot really say how they function, expect that they seem to follow a lot of rather useless bureaucratic procedures.  Does this make them religious?  What is religion in the first place?  Ludwig F tried to set up an atheist communist religion, on the basis that religion is merely 'bond'.  How are the ICC members bound to one another?  Well, the fact that they all seem to be centred around London seems to suggest a high level of bondage, similar to that of groups like the Spartacist League.  The only regular event the ICC holds is a street stall, in LONDON, although they also hold an occasional seminar in Birmingham or Manchester: I don't know what bearing this has.  The only seminar we could say was at all regular was the one they hold in LONDON.  One would have to have more knowledge about the nature of the ICC's activities, in the sense of WHERE they are conducted, and the geographical location of its members, it's active members, before one could fully analyse it. 

Has the ICC split from a larger denomination?  There are internal and external fractions of the ICC, whcih would suggest that these fractions are in fact more sectish.  But from what I have heard, in some of the splits, the split off group has been almost the same size as the group who threw them out.  In fact, I would imagine that if we were to add up all the people expelled from the ICC, we would find it to be more than the ICC's membership.  If this were true, then perhaps we could say that it is a sect in this way.  However the question of splitting from a larger formation is not really relevant, although in terms of the ICC it is because it's splits are not on principle but on questions of organisation, or so it would seem.

3. I would have thought the ICC were united by a common perspective, a common perspective which they have which distinguishes them from everybody else.  If you meet the ICC, you know you have met the ICC.  Their attitude and way of work seems completely different to everybody elses.  

Anyway, I think I have said enough for the time being.  Let's hear what everybody else thinks.  And another point, one which I am every decent person must feel himself compelled to make: I AM NOT AND NEVER HAVE BEEN A MEMBER OF THE ICC.


----------



## Top Dog (Aug 12, 2005)

younghegelian said:
			
		

> How are the ICC members bound to one another?  Well, the fact that they all seem to be centred around London seems to suggest a high level of bondage


ahem....





no... i can't


----------



## rednblack (Aug 12, 2005)

Top Dog said:
			
		

> ahem....
> 
> 
> 
> ...



too many disturbing images!!  

have you seen their report of the community gathering yet?  

(the thought highly of you, me, and sorry  )


----------



## Top Dog (Aug 12, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> too many disturbing images!!
> 
> have you seen their report of the community gathering yet?
> 
> (the thought highly of you, me, and sorry  )


*no*! is it on their site... i'll have a wee look...


----------



## rednblack (Aug 12, 2005)

massive cut n past alert!


> Community Action Gathering: The libertarian way to strengthen the local state
> If there’s something in the subject of an event that might attract people who want to talk about the class struggle, or any other aspect of communist politics, then the ICC will be interested. So when some of our militants went to a ‘Community Action Gathering’ held in East London in mid-June, we didn’t like the divisive workshops, but thought that one of the event’s aims - the promotion of “anti-authoritarian, anti-state, anti-capitalist and pro-working class politics, and collective, non-hierarchical forms of organisation” - might have interested people concerned with working class struggle.
> 
> Obviously we weren’t blind to the fact that the meeting was organised by two groups noted for campaigning for micro-reforms. The Hackney Independent website pictures abandoned cars that they want the local council to move, they worry about phone masts, they don’t want schools closed and they stood in the recent general election. Haringey Solidarity are concerned about advertising billboards, encourage people to sue the police for damages and want those with money problems to share/exchange second-hand items. But despite such unpromising credentials there was still the possibility that among those participating might be people who might want to discuss the defence of working class interests.
> ...


----------



## rednblack (Aug 12, 2005)

i'm a leader woohoo!!


----------



## montevideo (Aug 12, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> too many disturbing images!!
> 
> have you seen their report of the community gathering yet?
> 
> (the thought highly of you, me, and sorry  )



just read it. Interesting stuff. Is there going to be a response to their analysis & critique? 

I also heard one of our militants at nthe gathering had a go at one of your militants for being narrow minded & dismissive? Wish i'd been there.


----------



## rednblack (Aug 12, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> just read it. Interesting stuff. Is there going to be a response to their analysis & critique?
> 
> I also heard one of our militants at nthe gathering had a go at one of your militants for being narrow minded & dismissive? Wish i'd been there.



er if someone wants to waste their time writing a critique thats up to them, i'm not going to abuse my leadership role  

i have no idea about the disagreement between our respective catspaws, er i mean militants - i wasnt in that discussion


----------



## Top Dog (Aug 12, 2005)

World Revoloonshun said:
			
		

> In continuity with this there was a thread on the LibCom website following the ‘gathering’ that referred to the presence of “_ICC loons_” – in contrast to the “_sensible people_” that have sensible discussions. This is a clear adaptation to the ‘common sense’ of bourgeois ideology. It’s supposed to be sensible to offer endless campaigns that never challenge capitalism, but crazy to talk of revolution and how the struggle of the working class offers a perspective for the transformation of society.


  




			
				World Revoloonshun said:
			
		

> The brand of ‘community activism’ served up at the ‘gathering’ was most dangerous in the way that it concentrated its energies on the state. Campaigns for concessions from local councils risk drawing activists into the lowest reaches of the local state. Yes, housing has always been a major question for the working class, but it’s a problem that can only be solved at the level of the transformation of society by the whole working class after the destruction of the capitalist state.


see... this is the danger of political cultures such as those within the ICC... the transformation of society must be left til *after* the revolution. Its passive. It excludes itself from the task of participation within the transformation of society. A lesson in the dangers of  ulra-left paralysis and its inability to act.


----------



## rednblack (Aug 12, 2005)

*dons leader's hat*

ok topdog, you can be our political commisar, monty you're court jester


----------



## Top Dog (Aug 12, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> *dons leader's hat*
> 
> ok topdog, you can be our political commisar, monty you're court jester


oooooooooh! cant i be commisar of bonded labour? pleeese?


----------



## rednblack (Aug 12, 2005)

Top Dog said:
			
		

> oooooooooh! cant i be commisar of bonded labour? pleeese?



certainly, your first task is to bond monty and the icc together - throw in thora for her revolutionary deviationism and send them to the salty wastes


----------



## montevideo (Aug 12, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> *dons leader's hat*
> 
> ok topdog, you can be our political commisar, monty you're court jester



only after several lager beers, young man.


----------



## rednblack (Aug 12, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> only after several lager beers, young man.



true...

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=3378593#post3378593


----------



## Top Dog (Aug 12, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> certainly, your first task is to bond monty and the icc together - throw in thora for her revolutionary deviationism and send them to the salty wastes


<rubs hands together in glee... licks lips... thumbs through 1940s siberian train timetable>


----------



## montevideo (Aug 12, 2005)

_There was a more libertarian vocabulary employed, but there was also a lot of fashionable modern management-speak. In terms of political orientation the only difference between ‘hierarchical’ Trotskyism and ‘libertarian community activism’ is that the former sows illusions in the capitalist state as a whole, while the latter seem to be the ideology of ginger groups who want to improve the functioning of local councils._

come rednblack, the fuckers not only insulting your bird, he's knocking your pint over & having a go at you _footie _team at the same time.


----------



## Herbert Read (Aug 12, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> certainly, your first task is to bond monty and the icc together - throw in thora for her revolutionary deviationism and send them to the salty wastes



you can take monte , but thora has fallen in with a 'bad crowd' shes a nice girl really


----------



## Top Dog (Aug 12, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> come rednblack, the fuckers not only insulting your bird, he's knocking your pint over & having a go at you _footie _team at the same time.


oh monty... dear monty... the working class has no footie team... keep up!


----------



## montevideo (Aug 12, 2005)

Top Dog said:
			
		

> oh monty... dear monty... the working class has no footie team... keep up!



surely _only_ the working class has the potential to be a footie team.


----------



## rednblack (Aug 12, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> you can take monte , but thora has fallen in with a 'bad crowd' shes a nice girl really



*orders the release of thora to herbert's tender care*


----------



## Herbert Read (Aug 12, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> surely _only_ the working class has the potential to be a footie team.



Rugby League Squad  

football is counter revolutionary


----------



## rednblack (Aug 12, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> surely _only_ the working class has the potential to be a footie team.



you're just sowing illusions in team sports under capitalism


----------



## montevideo (Aug 12, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> *orders the release of thora to herbert's tender care*



she eat him alive. He'll be wearing sandals, eating vegan slop & robbing banks to fund insurrectionary activities before you know it.


----------



## levien (Aug 12, 2005)

younghegelian said:
			
		

> Is this a piss take?  There is little need to apologise to the ICC, just get on with discussing the issue which is the title of the thread, 'Is the ICC a sect'?.



Why this made me laugh as much as I did....

Poster of the year.


----------



## rednblack (Aug 12, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> she eat him alive. He'll be wearing sandals, eating vegan slop & robbing banks to fund insurrectionary activities before you know it.



ssshh

it's a deliberate attempt to destroy nihilism from within


----------



## sovietpop (Aug 12, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> you're just sowing illusions in team sports under capitalism



I've always said the *only* place you should find football is in the re-education camps.


----------



## Top Dog (Aug 12, 2005)

sovietpop said:
			
		

> I've always said the *only* place you should find football is in the re-education camps.


with hurling sticks at the ready, if the re-education is rejected


----------



## Top Dog (Aug 12, 2005)

Herbert Read said:
			
		

> Rugby League Squad
> 
> football is counter revolutionary


pah northerners! 

the north of england will be abolished following the initial stages of the succesful proletarian uprising. We shall build football stadia from Castleford to Kingston-upon Hull


----------



## Top Dog (Aug 12, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> you're just sowing illusions in team sports under capitalism


listen... the working class _needs_ to be able work as part of a team, whilst also being capable of working by itself, often under pressure from those bourgeois forces of counter revolution...


----------



## rednblack (Aug 12, 2005)

Top Dog said:
			
		

> listen... the working class _needs_ to be able work as part of a team, whilst also being capable of working by itself, often under pressure from those bourgeois forces of counter revolution...



sounds like popular frontism to me


----------



## Top Dog (Aug 12, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> sounds like popular frontism to me


sectarian   



...maybe now the ICC will allow you to walk the square as it were


----------



## sovietpop (Aug 12, 2005)

Top Dog said:
			
		

> pah northerners!
> 
> the north of england will be abolished following the initial stages of the succesful proletarian uprising. We shall build football stadia from Castleford to Kingston-upon Hull



that reminds me, the Sparts used to argue that Northern Ireland would be liberated by the bayonets of the Red Army (a Red Army coming from Ingerland. That, and the 'Cromwell was right' placards they used to hold, didn't go down so well).


----------



## Top Dog (Aug 12, 2005)

sovietpop said:
			
		

> that reminds me, the Sparts used to argue that Northern Ireland would be liberated by the bayonets of the Red Army (a Red Army coming from Ingerland. That, and the 'Cromwell was right' placards they used to hold, didn't go down so well).


hmmm or the army of the red *hand* perhaps?!   i can see how it may not have been _totally_ in tune with the realpolitik





...i nearly joined the sparts once... or was it the scouts?


----------



## sovietpop (Aug 12, 2005)

a good friend of mine joined the sparts. twice. He has since apologised for introducing them to Ireland. The stories he tells.... now that's one group with a weird internal dynamic.


----------



## rednblack (Aug 12, 2005)

Top Dog said:
			
		

> ...i nearly joined the sparts once...



hmm, will that one be kept quiet in the pub


----------



## Top Dog (Aug 12, 2005)

rednblack said:
			
		

> hmm, will that one be kept quiet in the pub


they wouldnt have me coz i couldnt perfect my yankie accent


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 12, 2005)

sovietpop said:
			
		

> a good friend of mine joined the sparts. twice. He has since apologised for introducing them to Ireland. The stories he tells.... now that's one group with a weird internal dynamic.



You talking about Tom here?


----------



## sovietpop (Aug 12, 2005)

Nigel Irritable said:
			
		

> You talking about Tom here?



yip. you got him on the rebound.


----------



## sipriano (Aug 12, 2005)

If you want to wind up the sparts, just ask the older more decrepit looking ones if they knew Arnie Mintz.


----------



## Top Dog (Aug 12, 2005)

sipriano said:
			
		

> If you want to wind up the sparts, just ask the older more decrepit looking ones if they knew Arnie Mintz.


go on then...


----------



## rednblack (Aug 12, 2005)

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/8195/ICC.htm


----------



## sipriano (Aug 12, 2005)

Arnie used to be in the sparts, in fact was one of the people who started it in the uk ? There was bad blood there when he left, cant remember why exactly. This was also made worse by him knocking around with a load of anarcho's during the wapping print strike, I think he may have had fantasies about bolshevising everyone, google his name, and a fair bit of stuff comes up. I  have some fond ( and not so fond ) memories of him, but to his everlasting credit, he was responsible for the picket bulletin during the strike.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Aug 12, 2005)

sovietpop said:
			
		

> yip. you got him on the rebound.



I thought it was mostly likely him, but there are a few recovering Sparts around the Irish left.

Wierd fact - the Irish Socialist Party has recruited two other former Sparts since him. I'm not sure that this says entirely good things about us.


----------



## Random (Aug 12, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> the only difference between ‘hierarchical’ Trotskyism and ‘libertarian community activism’ is that the former sows illusions in the capitalist state as a whole, while the latter seem to be the ideology of ginger groups who want to improve the functioning of local councils.



What have the ICC got against ginger people?


----------



## younghegelian (Aug 13, 2005)

I have to admit I like the piss takes.  I haven't read that article on community action groups, but did stop to have a wee read of their latest article on the IFICC: "in shamelessly declaring themselves to be following in his footsteps, they once again prove that they have revised their status as militants of the proletariat and joined the ranks of political parasitism."

What is this nonsense about parasitism?  If you look at the ICC's article you can find little of substance.  I will need to read the IFICC's article in full again, butI find it funny that the ICC talk of personalised attacks on THEIR militants, when it seems that it is in fact the IFICC members who have been attacked by the ICC in the first place.  The ICC has even admitted, in it's paper, that it has swaggered round to people's houses, stealing their stuff, or 'reappropriating' it.  

Anyway, about the term 'bondage', I wasn't talking about anything 'seedy' or anything like that, but as simply referring to ho the iCC seem to be rather close to one another geographically, and how they are rather close-knit.  I don't really knowthem that well however.  If you want a close-knit group, look at the Sparts.

A "Parasite" (well, when they get round to putting it in WR I will lt you all know).


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Aug 22, 2005)

younghegelian said:
			
		

> Hiya Chuck
> 
> Sorry I haven't replied, here is something towards it.
> 
> ...



I think there are few teachers in Workers Power, some students at teacher training college and a couple of former headboys and headgirls in their independent youth section Revo. I don't think they actually want to recruit anyone too academic, hence the language used in their paper, but are more keen on attracting teachers who want to be worker-ists.You know the sort who have bought their own house in West Hampstead but claim it is a rented one in Cricklewood and insist on buying booze cruise rolling tobacco and instant powdered coffee from Aldi.

Cockneyrebel, one of the more junior cadre of Workers Power ,(who has apparantly has been allowed back to post on here after a meeting with the CC but only on certain conditions) explained that the removal of the fence panel at G8 was symbolic. Personally I am not quite sure what their obsession is about Spar shops , I would have thought that global capitalism would have been a far better target but I suppose  this  generally indicates their lack of aspiration in their analyssis of the pre revolutionary situation in Britain. No doubt in Venezuela they have set their sights on something bigger , say , the   Co-op or Tescos or the banks.



Workers Power seem to have a very liberal attitude to drugs , one of their members who was arrested for a drugs offence even posted up here for support and several of their leading members go to Glastonbury and 'stay up all night'    according to cockney. I am not quite sure what they are up to at the moment , their latest paper call for a 'crackdown on youth' which sounds a bit druggy to me.

Monty Video  is your man for the Wombles. Where I live there aren't any students so  I am afraid I haven't come across any locally  but they seem to be in to squatting empty buildings so that local people can come round and have a doss with them and try vegan food . Not my cup of tea personally.

Pre revolutionary situation  link http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=97621&referrerid=13090

Be seeing you.


----------



## montevideo (Aug 22, 2005)

cheers chuck. You off? i'm gonna miss your bluff northern ways & lyrical flight of fancy.


----------



## Chuck Wilson (Aug 22, 2005)

montevideo said:
			
		

> cheers chuck. You off? i'm gonna miss your bluff northern ways & lyrical flight of fancy.



No I am not off. In fact I 've just got back from me hols with a bruised/cracked  rib cage from the youngest daughter elbowing me in a game of netball, a terrible fluey typecold which meant I had a temperature over 100 when the weather was a regular 35 degrees hot,and  the eldest daughter with 37 stitches to her ear after my sisters Dalmation bit her ear . Quite a relaxing time really!


----------

