Mark Steel's Blog : Eloquence on the net

I wish my name could be shortened to 'Gaz' as I think it has immense stature but is also rather approachable.

However given my first name is Steven, it would be simply incongrous.

But where would we be without dreams?

Comment By Steven Hunt At 27/05/2008 13:29

I have tried responding but for some reason it won't let me. Has the great Mark Steel blocked me?

Comment By gary duncan At 28/05/2008 19:52

Oh, apparently not. Maybe it was just because I used the word twat again.

Comment By gary duncan At 28/05/2008 19:54

Nope. I can indeed say twat on the great Mark's site.

TWAT TWAT TWATTY TWAT TWATTY TWAT TWAT!

Comment By gary duncan At 28/05/2008 19:56

Will it let me post a longer comment though?

Comment By gary duncan At 28/05/2008 19:58

Now I fully understand that the word 'twat', and indeed my whole tone, is not 'conducive to a genuine discussion'. But had I approached you in the regular sycophantic fashion that you are accustomed to you would have undoubtedly ignored my query.

I was deliberately provoking you, Mark. It's amazing how the ego responds to an insult. Note how you paid no reference whatsoever to the praise I bestowed upon you in the very same comment. That's because you're not interested in those you have already conquered. Your ego must have fresh victims to devour. And so, you overlook the compliments and hone in on the criticism.

Comment By gary duncan At 28/05/2008 20:00

Those who agree with us automatically do not stimulate our incessant desire to conquer new goals. We invariably want what we cannot have. We aim for what we must struggle to achieve. And if someone labels you a twat, that means they're not your property, they're not yet conquered and claimed. They are elusive and a challenge to your ego. So you naturally enter into a contest in an attempt to win them over and dominate them.

We reflect the system, Mark. You should know all this.

The ego is very controlling. And it controls YOU, not the other way around. Be wary of fame, it will destroy you, mate. Perhaps it already has?

Gaz.

Comment By gary duncan At 28/05/2008 20:02

P.S. May I just say that using the word 'twat' was only a means to an end; a tried and tested method of provocation certain to get results.
Now please, Mark, tell us why you left the SWP. That's all I wanted to know.

Cheers.

Comment By gary duncan At 28/05/2008 20:22

Well I'm in the SWP... and can I just say if anyone here is being a TWAT, it's you Duncan. A colossal TWAT at that. :)

Comment By Comrade Pero At 29/05/2008 03:24

Fair point. I probably deserve that. But I'm not here representing the SWP. I'm merely enquiring, as a concerned individual, into the reasons for Mark's departure from the party.
All twatness aside though, you have to admit that insults do indeed get a person's attention. And I like attention. Anything wrong with that? Hey, I'm alienated, leave me alone you bully!

Comment By gary duncan At 29/05/2008 12:48

'I'm merely enquiring, as a concerned individual, into the reasons for Mark's departure from the party.'

Ah, the great 'I have no ulterior motive, I just wish people would debate with me' ploy.

Which will probably be followed by the 'all I'm interested in is genuine discussion, but all I get is abuse' gambit.

I tell you what, Marx was right when he predicted that blogs contained within them the very contradictions that would lead to the downfall of reasonable critical thinking.

Comment By tonyc At 29/05/2008 12:59

I know, but I just can't help it. I like to talk. And I do, endlessly. And anywhere to anyone.
You'd think my job as a cabbie would satisfy this need to rabbit. But no. I just go on and on and on.
It's weird you know, I was castigated at school for talking too much. Just shows you the flaws in the educational system doesn't it? The only 'talent' I had was discouraged.

Comment By gary duncan At 29/05/2008 13:42

Anyway, this strange desire to chatter eternally hasn't gone unquestioned. I do analyze myself intrinsically. I suppose it's just a byproduct of living in a world where I am alienated from the fruits of my labour. I produce words, and yet those words are denied me. And the more I speak the more frustrated I become.

Comment By gary duncan At 29/05/2008 13:43

Hey shouldn't we discussing the models of grain distribution adopted by Venezualan anarcho-syndicalists?

The British Left - it's all insults and beards these days.

No wonder it's all Boris and Dave.

Comment By Steven Hunt At 29/05/2008 13:44

I don't mean any harm though. And Mark is not a twat. We're all just evolving and permanently changing. We can be twats one second and completely likeable the next. And besides, it's all about perceptions. One man's twat is another man's...er...untwat.
We're just fluid vessels remember. I can change and Mark can change. Rocky said so, didn't he?

Comment By gary duncan At 29/05/2008 13:45

Seriously though, I do apologise if I caused any upset. I'm not a nasty sort. I just waffle. And I like to wind people up a bit.
I am a very devoted activist. But I'm also mischievous. I'm still struggling to escape the persona that my history created. I'm essentially still a waster from a council estate with no qualifications whatsoever. But I'm changing. Sorry.

Comment By gary duncan At 29/05/2008 13:55

Gary just stop.

Comment By Joseph Kisolo At 29/05/2008 17:45

So, Mark, why did you leave the SWP?

Comment By gary duncan At 29/05/2008 18:00

It's gone a little quiet all of a sudden. Was it something I said?
Look, I'm sorry if I stepped out of line before with the 'twat' thing. But surely Mark would rather this page spark some debate? I mean, what is the point in writing a blog and allowing others to comment on it if it's only going to grab the attention of those who want to kiss your bum? I would HATE it if everyone AGREED with me!
For pity's sake, human progress only comes about through the conflict of ideas, right?
So let's bloody well ARGUE!!!

Comment By gary duncan At 31/05/2008 20:09

.....*yawn*.....
IS THERE ANYBODY OUT THERE?!!!!
Either nobody likes me, or no-one actually reads this.
Okay. Well if by chance anyone should venture across this desolate and (so far) very pointless page, please brighten up my otherwise boring existence by calling me a twat, or something similar.
Even better, visit me personally on Myspace or send me an email at gaz.duncan@googlemail.com
I'm quite isolated in dreary old Sunderland and bereft of intellectual disputers to argue the toss with.
If it weren't for my Monday night debating session with the lads I'd go MAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!!!
Bleep boing flumch pahah!

Comment By gary duncan At 01/06/2008 20:00

People read this, Gary, but you're just talking balls. Extremely dull balls, at that.

Comment By Josh T At 01/06/2008 23:27

Deary me. How sad that Mr. Steel's site has attracted the kind of pathetic behaviour he writes about on his homepage.

Perhaps, Gary, your time might be spent more constructively trying to recruit new members to the SWP rather than harassing ex-members?

Like most people who are interested in Mr. Steel's work I am curious to know why he left the SWP and I've been looking forward to the new book as I assume he will use that to discuss his decision. However, he is not obliged to explain or defend his actions to anyone, least of all to the kind of person who doesn't know their twat from their elbow.

Comment By Nikki At 01/06/2008 23:32

*Sighs. Now I remember why left the SWP too. (Tho 95% of my erstwhile was inestimably ace, obviously!)
I suspect dear old Gazza is some ultra-left ex-public schoolie who thinks using 'swearwords' is conducive to the dialectic. By the way, Trotsky tghought swearing was the mark of a dullard. me? I still think he was right on most things. Good lkuck at yr own private kronstadt, Gazza old fruit.

Oh and Mark. Quality blog. Keep on giving the Tories and Noo Labourites a good shoeing!

Comment By Paul Holmes At 02/06/2008 01:16

and a prize to anyone who spots the missing word, and use of was for were. Ahem. I have a gammy eye, y'know.....

Comment By Paul Holmes At 02/06/2008 01:18

Ooooo! Someone said 'balls'. Is that allowed?
And what is it with these people who castigate the entire SWP membership because one person said or did something they disliked? George Galloway made a prat of himself in the Big Brother house but only an idiot would blame Respect for that.

Comment By gary duncan At 02/06/2008 11:41

To Paul: You seem to suggest that you left the SWP because it contained at least one member who was of similar character to me. Well what a load of...dare I say it...'balls'! What sort of a socialist leaves a party because they didn't find every single person therein a joy to behold? Not everyone is YOU, Paul. People vary. And possessing such a ridiculous narrowmindedness must surely result in you living in a hole in the ground.
As for my schooling, well you couldn't be more wrong. I attended the worst comprehensive in Sunderland where I achieved exactly zero qualifications. I left at fifteen and wangled my way onto a YTS, from which I was sacked for scrawling slogans aimed at my boss on the walls of my workplace. Guess I just can't break the habit.

Comment By gary duncan At 02/06/2008 13:35

I'm basically a mouthpiece. My gob has always got me into trouble. But, though I've always shown my contempt for authority, I didn't put my forthrightness to good use till much later in life. I'm thirty eight years old now, highly politicized, and a very proud member of the SWP.
My brassneck comes in handy when I'm attacking the BNP, Tories, and New Labour in the local press. Don't knock it. I rattle a lot of rightwing cages in my locality.
Sorry if I've rattled anyone's here. But through experience I've learned that people tend to ignore you unless you say or do something outlandish.
I just like to stir things up, is that so bad? I hate the mundanity of life. I love to argue. Isn't it great? Isn't it what life's all about? And wouldn't you just hate it if suddenly everyone agreed with you?

Comment By gary duncan At 02/06/2008 13:55

By the way, I have my very own nazi cyber stalker and he has apparently been reading my contributions here. He told me so in his most recent vile and threatening e-mail. So here's a message just for him:
Hello Mick, how are you? Hope you're dying slowly and painfully from some rare form of cancer. Hey, maybe your hospice nurse will be a nice African immigrant lady. Oh wouldn't that be just perfect? Anyway, let me assure you that, although there are differences of opinion on the left, when it comes to opposing fascism we are strongly united. The likes of you make socialists of all interpretations want to puke. You're scum, mate. And if I wasn't welcome here (which you ever so nicely pointed out for me in your love letter), then YOU are definitely not.
I look forward to ignoring your next offering in my e-mail account. And if you ever find the guts to come out from behind your e-mail address, well you know where I live, give me a knock. Wanker!

Comment By gary duncan At 02/06/2008 17:00

Mark has an excellent point about the level of sectarianism and the political poverty of some left discussion at the moment. It builds isolation which some of the comments on here illustrate.

Mark, your story and experience is very close to many socialists who have reviewed their life-long commitment in recent months. However, we found that there is life outside, there is constructive discussion taking place and there is organization developing among those of us who did not veer leftwards, only to claim all others moved right.

You have been an excellent public face and voice of the left for over two decades and many of us continue to appreciate your excellent example and commitment. The project is surviving and will do so as long as we continue to speak out and organize as you have done for a very long time.

Cheers

Comment By Chris Calvert At 05/06/2008 14:42

If anyone would like to read some political blogs by an evolving socialist that are more regularly updated then check out mine on Myspace:

http://www.myspace.com/garyduncan

I must warn you though, some of them contain profanities. So if you shriek like Mary Whitehouse at every 'twat' or 'bum-hole' STAW AWAY!

If you do decide to pop by, however, please feel free to add a comment. And don't be afraid to insult me, we all need to accept criticism or we'll become...er...Elton John.

Cheers.

Comment By gary duncan At 05/06/2008 14:42

Chris Calvert seems to infer that I am a sectarian because I dared to enquire into Mark Steel's new political direction. I wonder, does he apply the same exaggerated logic to every situation in which someone seeks an answer to an awkward question? Did he label every person in Britain sectarian scum, for example, when they unanimously puzzled over George Galloway's embarrassing impression of a moggy?

Comment By gary duncan At 05/06/2008 16:15

Tell me Chris, do I have to join Respect Renewal to be deemed a true socialist? Because if that is your view then you need to think long and hard about who the real perpetrators of sectarianism are.

I am no sectarian, Chris. I try very hard to unite people on the left up here in the North East. I have friends and acquaintances who are Labour and Independent councillors, trade unionists, communists and anarchists. And although there is much refutation when we debate we do not throw the word 'sectarian' around so casually.

My only 'crime' was to ask Mark for an explanation as to why he left the SWP. I haven't actually disagreed with him (yet) because he hasn't responded with an answer.

Comment By gary duncan At 05/06/2008 16:16

'My only 'crime' was ' you're just a very rude boy whose become a bit fixated. Gary, I suggest that you go and see your doctor or talk to a professional.
It's way past your bedtime, you're tired and you've been showing off.

Ignore him Mark, he's not worth it !!

Comment By Richard Searle At 06/06/2008 00:08

Fixated? On what exactly? On Mark? Are you suggesting I'm in love with the idea of Mark Steel? Let me assure you I am not, Richard. I enjoyed two of his books, yes. But I despise celebrity. I even rebelled against my OWN notoriety. Anyway, I won't go into that.

Look comrade, I'm just bored and looking for some debate. But this isn't the only place I pop up by any means. I get around a bit. And I'm only on the net because my real-life activism doesn't satisfy my addiction to political discourse.

I would just like to hear Mark's side of the story. Why did you leave the SWP, Mark?

Comment By gary duncan At 06/06/2008 15:37

Fame, and the whole ego thing, fascinates me. I see a direct correlation with fame and egoism. Surely when one acquires excess attention and adulation there has to be some effect on the consciousness? The evidence seems to suggest there is indeed an expansion of the ego in those subjects who have been placed on a higher pedestal than the rest of us.
When I heard that Mark Steel was a member of the SWP it intrigued me. Here was a famous celebrity who had seemingly managed to avoid all the trappings of notoriety. Was it possible, I wondered, to adhere to one's revolutionary principles even when your livelihood depends upon the whole false notion of fame?
Then he left the SWP and I couldn't help but think it was inevitable.
I'm still uncertain. And I'm still hoping for an answer.

Comment By gary duncan At 07/06/2008 16:18

First off, nice blog Mark. One of the funniest I've come across in a long time. I hope you post again soon - just ignore the trolls.

Gary, haven't you got anything better to do? Mark has said he will write something in his own good time about why he left the SWP. That's good enough for everyone else, so who are you to demand it appears ASAP? There are more pressing things you know!

Comment By a very public sociologist At 08/06/2008 21:13

Actually, having given it more thought, I've realised it doesn't matter if Mark Steel is a part of the SWP or not. Who is he anyway? He's not special. Why should I devote time to him at the expense of more important matters? He is only an illusion; a product of the commodification of art and entertainment. And every sycophant on this page should analyze more intrinsically the effects idolisation has on their own confidence.
Excuse me while I chat to my window cleaner. He deserves more attention than Mark Steel.
Goodbye!

Comment By gary duncan At 09/06/2008 14:45

Sorry Mark,but I think your just overeacting a bit to one rude word used by an idiot in a comment on this blog.
I would be interested why you've joined the Respect lot though . Outside of a small part of Birmingham and Tower Hamlets there's very little exept a small group of celebrities and a small group of SWP-a-phobic ex-revolutionaries.
In Tower Hamlets and Birmingham it appears to be based on patronage and dodgy dealings.
So why,Mark?
And Gary,stop embarrassing yourself.

Comment By rob x At 10/06/2008 10:33

But Rob, I think we're all embarrassing ourselves here, mate. You included. Mark has not yet replied to a single comment on any of his blogs, yet still we return here hoping one day he will. Come on, what's THAT all about?!!
Does it not fascinate you why you even care? Are you not curious to know why you are so easily lured by the notion of celebrity?
I've had a glimpse of what it feels like to be up on a pedestal. I've actually signed autographs in my time. But that was before I realised what it was doing to my consciousness.

Comment By gary duncan At 10/06/2008 11:00

I turned away from all that nonsense. Now I concentrate on levelling people. I try to build people up who are demoralised and knock down those who are undeserved of adoration.
Don't get me wrong, I think Mark is an exceptional comic and he has been a great activist. But I fear for his mind these days. I think he has lost his way politically because of the effects his conditions have had on his psyche.
What do you reckon? And please, say something more intelligent than 'you're an idiot, nah nah na nah nah'.

Comment By gary duncan At 10/06/2008 11:01

By the way, this site is way too stagnant for me. It's really boring me now. I am still eager to debate with people, however. So can anyone recommend another more productive forum?

Comment By gary duncan At 10/06/2008 13:50

'SWP-a-phobia': Is that a disease? Sounds like a definition of sanity to me!

Well done for leaving the twats, Mark.

Comment By Naughty Norbert At 10/06/2008 20:22

So can anyone recommend another more productive forum? Yes, Gary, prison !

Comment By Richard At 10/06/2008 22:20

Oh dear - as an SWPer, ist or ite I politely ask you, Gary, to stop hectoring Mark - it's just really annoying. if you want somewhere more 'interesting', go over to socialistunity.com, the cesspool where most of Respect Renewal ply their bizarre trade. I'll also suggest you head on over to leninology.blogspot.com, but if you twat about on there like you have here, you'll get banned or deleted.

On the whole Mark-SWP thing, I don't really want to know why Mark left, or failed to renew his membership. I'll miss Mark's ribbing of his fellow revolutionaries and meetings at Marxism. Ironically, Reasons to be Cheerful was one of the reasons I joined the SWP, because of his clear, witty and unhectoring explanations of the class basis of society. Sad to see you go, but glad to hear you haven't jumped ship to Renewal, because whatever you can say about the rudeness of the SWP, we are at least better than those fucks

Farewell Mark - you are no twat to me.

Comment By steffaction At 10/06/2008 23:50

Mark hasn't joined Renewal? Well,that's something at least.
Second most of what Steffaction said but I'd still like to hear why Mark left.

Comment By rob x At 11/06/2008 08:50

Compare the number of comments on this page with Mark's previous blog: more lively, yeah? Well forgive me if I get this wrong, but I've been taught to believe that progress stems from the conflict of ideas. So shouldn't I be welcome here to put my thoughts forward? I really don't get all this controlfreakery: 'OI YOU, GET OFF MARK'S WEBSITE, DON'T YOU KNOW IT'S PRIVATE PROPERTY AND HE ONLY WANTS TO HEAR NICE THINGS ABOUT HIMSELF?!!'

Comment By gary duncan At 11/06/2008 11:11

'Sad to see you go, but glad to hear you haven't jumped ship to Renewal, because whatever you can say about the rudeness of the SWP, we are at least better than those fucks'

There you have it Mark. If you just leave the SWP you become a twat to some but if you join another organisation you get promoted to the position of 'those fucks'.

Ah, radical politics at it's most persuasive.

Comment By Clive Searle At 11/06/2008 11:21

How can I be the one doing the 'hectoring'? So far, every correspondent bar me has sided with Mark. That's an army against little old me. If anything, I'M the one being bullied. And for what? For having the temerity to question a celebrity. Jesus man, get a grip you lot!

Comment By gary duncan At 11/06/2008 11:21

Hey Clive, who the FUCK are you to patronize? Have you ever lived among the working classes? Obviously not if a four-letter word bothers you so much. If you think the ordinary people of this world speak with the utmost grandeloquence then you've had your head stuck in the Guardian for too long. Come and meet my dad, he's an ex-pitman with a gob that'll give you a coronary!

Comment By gary duncan At 11/06/2008 11:30

Language is something else that fascinates me. As a taxi driver I have to be aware of my method of communication. Try transporting drunken Sunderland folk home on a Saturday night and you'll find that an impressive vocabulary is rendered useless. What's the point in using clever words if the recipient of your message doesn't know their meaning? Anyway, sorry if the habit of a lifetime manifested itself on this puritanical page and soiled it's otherwise whiter than white content.

Comment By gary duncan At 11/06/2008 14:16

Can anyone lend me 5 grand?

Comment By gary duncan At 11/06/2008 14:43

Mark was very quick to urge people to join the SWP and give his reasons why in his time so now he's left, I suppose it's inevitable that we expect him to be just as quick with the explanations. Maybe he just wants to avoid a kneejerk reaction or maybe he feels he can't say what he really thinks because opportunists will seize the chance to use his comments to attack the party or that some SWP members will see criticism as an attack and go over the top in defending themselves much like Gary above. The SWP and SWP members can be hard work, both personally and politically, but for all that, would the world be a better place without this attempt to build a serious revolutionary party or should the project go on?

Comment By David At 11/06/2008 16:13

And as bad as things are on the electoral front (which is only a small part of the picture anyway) it's not as bad as 1905 after the defeat of the first Rus.. etc, and so on and you've heard it all before. IMO, the thing about leaving the SWP, Mark, is as bleak as things are what's the realistic alternative? Thing is, if or when you give these reasons, it helps us all by contributing to the debate about how to go forward so I'm looking forward to it.
PS: Just think if you'd really had had this site for the last ten years it would be 10 years of gibberish from Gary...

Comment By D avid At 11/06/2008 16:14

Actually, David, ten years ago, not only did I avoid computers like the plague, but I wasn't in the slightest bit political. Things can change a lot in a short space of time, however.
Can I help it if, through my life's circumstances, I have developed unorthodox methods of provoking debate? I'm just me, David. I'm a consequence of my conditions like you are your's. Tell me though, have I really done anything wrong here? Have I hurt anyone? Am I a criminal?

Comment By gary duncan At 11/06/2008 18:12

Let's get a few things straight: I will stand by anyone who opposes war, exploitation and discrimination. I will fight alongside socialists of all varieties on any leftist front. I'm on YOUR side. But this continuing saga is not about all that. This is more personal. I see no harm in questioning the motives of those who are well-known in the movement. We should all be open to criticism. I welcome it with open arms myself, I couldn't see reality without it.

Comment By gary duncan At 11/06/2008 18:19

How about 4 grand?

Comment By gary duncan At 11/06/2008 18:23

I completely understand why Mark writes political blogs. I write my own on Myspace and it's an enjoyable experience. But what I cannot get my head around is why anyone would write a blog hoping only those in agreement will read it. If all I wanted were nods of approval I'd restrict my writing to the letters page of the Socialist Worker. There is simply no point in preaching to the converted. We should be arguing with people who currently do not share our leftwing perspectives. There are millions of non-socialist people out there who need their views altering. I've changed many people because I target those who disagree with me. And maybe if more socialists would find the courage to do the same we might start to build a stronger movement.
Only through polemics can progress be made. I hope I've at least reminded one or two of you of that fact.

Comment By gary duncan At 11/06/2008 21:29

No, you may not be hurting anyone or doing anything 'criminal' but that doesn't get you a medal. I understand that you are trying to provoke an argument but after so many posts, are you going to get into an argument that is constructive and informative? Perhaps your tactics need to change comrade?
Compared to most other organisations I've come across, the SWP does make a serious effort to get out of the lefty ghetto - at the risk of making mistakes - but at least it does it.

Comment By David At 12/06/2008 01:21

I am a member of swp & proud of it! So what if Mark choses to leave who cares?(just so long as he doesn't give up his writting and TV work then I would get mad!!!) that's entirely his buisness, if it wasn't for Mark Steel I would never of looked him up years ago & discovered a whole new political world for myself which led me on to joining the swp where I found my husband & then went on to join Respect, you have been a fantastic influence on my life Mark so keep up the good work. Hurah for Mark I say --- Hurah!!!

ps..I still think your funnier than Mark Thomas (duno why I added that :.))

Comment By Suzy At 12/06/2008 08:04

I don't want medals, David. And my 'tactics' change invariably. Indeed they must if I am to argue with different types of people. I have learned that one must become chameleon-like to reach one's potential for altering as many people as possible.
I suppose in actuality I'm only here to gain more experience in the art of debate. I would not have dared enter such an arena not that long ago; testament I think to my increasing confidence.
I just want to be as effective as I can possibly be when I argue. I want to sharpen my polemics so that people have no choice but to listen and learn. But not for any self gratification I must point out. I am driven by a burning desire for a better world. That's all.

Comment By gary duncan At 12/06/2008 12:29

And Suzy, I too think Mark's work is fantastic. If it were shite I wouldn't care so much about his political direction. The party has lost a great asset for sure.
But let's not get too down about it. He has lost his way, so what? Mark Steel is not the be all and end all. Celebrities are not special. WORKERS are special. YOU are special.
Do you not think it's good that someone berates him a little? If you were Mark Steel wouldn't you WANT people to put things into perspective through criticism? Or would you just bask in the glory and willingly absorb the confidence of others like a self-esteem vampire?

Comment By gary duncan At 12/06/2008 12:41

When you leave an organisation that you've put so much effort into, it's a big thing. You're wracked with doubts and self-doubts and spend a lot of the time leading up to it just brooding. Are you doing the right thing? Will you change your mind? It's horrible. I imagine Mark has been through the reasons in his mind over and over and has steeled himself for a proper POLITICAL discussion about it, so calling him a twat (which he'll probably laugh about one day), is bound to irritate him. I understand why SWP members fall into moralism and start to hector people - but it's still destructive behaviour that marxists should avoid.

Comment By David At 13/06/2008 11:20

Believe me, David, I had my doubts about the SWP when I understood far less than I do now. Never more so than the time I was suspended from the party. That was a very difficult period for me. I felt betrayed. I hated the SWP with a passion. And I scrutinized the ideologies of all the other organisations with the intention of joining one of them.
But none had the vision of the party I was already in. And had I left the SWP it would have been the worst mistake I'd made since, at the age of twelve, I put a lighter to the seven foot dried flowers at the top of my parents' stairs just to see what would happen.

Comment By gary duncan At 13/06/2008 14:24

I made the right decision to stay. The punitive measures were justified and did me a lot of good. I swallowed my pride and threw myself into gaining more knowledge.
It was hard to go back to meetings at first. I felt like an outcast. But I was determined to evolve further as a socialist and make a difference. And I knew I had to be in the SWP to do it.
I've never looked back. The party is very much my home now. I love the people in it and I'm tremendously proud of them all.
I've made mistakes. I've considered leaving.
But I'm very much on the right track now.

Comment By gary duncan At 13/06/2008 14:37

As for hectoring Mark, oh come on mate, Mark is more than capable of fending off a little friendly goading. And there's nothing destructive about debate. It can only be a positive thing when we discuss our differences.
Please remember that the 'twat' thing was just deliberate provocation. And it worked.

Comment By gary duncan At 13/06/2008 14:46

Can anyone fix cookers?

Comment By gary duncan At 13/06/2008 19:03

Cooker's sorted, thanks.

So, who's going on the anti-BNP march next weekend?

Comment By gary duncan At 14/06/2008 20:48

Sorry, Gary but I don't see what calling Mark a twat achieved at all. He merely took this to be symbolic of the (alleged) decline in the level of debate in the party these days. Or maybe you're right and merely following some new line of the CC. Bring it up in your next branch meeting: is calling another socialist a twat representative of the level of debate in the party?
Having said that, I was called much worse by 'comrades' during my time in the party, so maybe it's not such a new tactic after all ;-)
Anyway Gary, I've boringly rambled on about this for to long so I better leave YOU with the last word. Let us know what the branch says...

Comment By David At 16/06/2008 11:54

David, despite what you obviously think, SWP members can act as individuals. Besides, I've already said I'm not here representing the party. My presence has nothing to do with the CC or the membership as a whole. I don't believe it's required of me to consult the leadership of the SWP before I express an opinion on a non-SWP, Renewal-supporting celebrity socialist via the internet. If I am wrong about that, however, I will gladly refrain from doing so in future.

Comment By gary duncan At 16/06/2008 12:58

And PLEASE get over my use of the noun 'twat'. How many times do I have to point out that it was merely a deliberate strategy employed with the objective of rousing a response. I didn't expect Mark to return to the SWP forthwith. I didn't expect ANYTHING. But I knew it would rattle his ego, and it did.
It also prompted several defensive retorts from his sycophantic followers, which I find very bizarre. I mean, here you are standing up for a man you don't even know, and ONLY because he's famous.

Comment By gary duncan At 16/06/2008 13:08

Garry, I know replying to you is ultimately pointless and will just encourage you to rant on for longer (though you managed to keep ranting even when no one was replying), but I just thought I'd point out that your comment that posts pointing out your idiocy are 'defensive retorts from [Mark's] sycophantic followers' is pure nonsense.

Every single poster than you thinks you are talking crap. SWP members think you are talking crap. Renewal members think you are talking crap. People who are in neither think you are talking crap.

This seems to having nothing to do with 'sycophancy' and everything to do with the fact that you are in fact talking crap.

Comment By Joseph Kisolo At 16/06/2008 18:46

Myself and a comrade were discussing the whole 'twat' thing on our way to the tanker driver picket line today and it made for interesting and amusing conversation. We expressed amazement at how one tiny little well-placed word, in this day and age with all the extreme language and violence on telly, can engender such an over-reaction. I put it that maybe all we have to do is go around shouting 'twat' at the consumerist media-conditioned masses and it'll wake them from their docility. Hey, any reaction is better than complete apathy and ignorance, right?
Or...erm...maybe not.

Comment By gary duncan At 16/06/2008 18:46

Hello Joseph, thanks for responding to my 'crap'. Do you always converse with people who talk 'crap'? Surely if everything I said was 'crap' then it would not warrant a reply? Yet you seem incapable of resisting that urge. So from that we must deduce that you are at least a little bit interested in my 'crap'. Hmmmmmmm.

Comment By gary duncan At 16/06/2008 18:52

By the way, the tanker drivers are well up for a fight. If anyone wants to be reminded of how angry and determined workers can become when their bosses take the piss get along to one of the picket lines that are strewn around the country.

Oh and they told me to tell Mark he's a twat.

Only kidding.

Or am I?

Comment By gary duncan At 16/06/2008 19:15

The suspense is killing the gorse bushes on my acres of arable land what.

Comment By Steven Hunt At 17/06/2008 15:09

Maybe time to lock this comments section?

Comment By Jeff Jenkins At 18/06/2008 08:22

Lock this comments section? Isn't that tantamount to controlfreakery? Wouldn't Mark be guilty of the very same thing he protests against if he were to do that?

Comment By gary duncan At 18/06/2008 13:28

Sure Mark can stand up for himself and has ample chance to do so: as socialists we put up with far worse than 'twat'. No Gary, what drew me to reply is that I'm unhappy in general with how the party makes a massive effort to recruit people and make them feel they make a difference, then once you're a member (or an ex-member) if you don't agree with everyone in the party, you are indeed regarded, and treated, as a 'twat'. I've always been a bit in denial about this but you keep confirming it. The party often alienates people who are on the same side and have something to contribute to building it. And YOU seem to enjoy belittling other people, which again is all too familiar... I wish I didn't come to these conclusions but I'm sorry, you're reinforcing them and making the party look petty, vindictive and sectarian (which it isn't, really, especially compared to the rest of the left). Maybe you don't want to do that but that's how I'm left feeling when I read your comments.

Comment By David At 18/06/2008 14:42

I would have agreed with you at one time, David. There was a period when I too felt I was being treated like a twat. But it was all in my mind.
It's easy to become paranoid when you're involved with such an organisation and you don't quite grasp the dialectics. I think maybe you experienced that and began to think everyone was against you. You should have persevered, as I did. You should have studied the theory hard, gained more experience, spoke to other comrades, and eventually you would have surmounted your dubiousness.
It's easy to blame the party. But often the problem lies with ourselves.

Comment By gary duncan At 18/06/2008 17:36

As for me belittling people, well again that's a paranoid perception. It's quite a typical response actually. I hear the same nonsense every time I defeat someone's argument, no matter how tame and amicable my deliverance.
People generally have a conservative mindset; they don't like change and they don't like being proved wrong. Rather than allow their views to be altered by well-crafted polemics they will resort to hurling accusations of condescension. It's a desperate bully tactic. And you are guilty of utilizing it right here right now. Don't forget that I have no allies whatsoever on this page, I am overwhelmingly outnumbered. How the hell can I belittle an entire legion of Mark Steel fanatics?

Comment By gary duncan At 18/06/2008 17:57

'It's easy to become paranoid when you're involved with such an organisation and you don't quite grasp the dialectics.'

'It's easy to blame the party. But often the problem lies with ourselves.'

I am starting to suspect that you aren't in fact real.

But prehaps I'm just pig-headedly not allowing my views to be altered by your 'well-crafted polemics'.

Comment By Joseph Kisolo At 18/06/2008 19:02

Gary, I don't have any problems with the politics, dialectics, the theory, most of the comrades, the wonderful experience (of being in the party), etc, at all. I don't even have a problem with you. I just disagree that your 'twat' (and related) comments for the reasons stated. Living abroad, I'm distant from such 'celebrity worship' but I am alarmed to see that a number of good socialists who were in the party back in my day (cue Hovis music), have left. Have they ALL become twats guilty of betrayal? You don't want to be called condescending - in that case, can't you just be less... well... condescending?

Comment By David At 19/06/2008 10:07

Oh, hello again Joseph, it seems you STILL can't resist my 'crap'.
Anyway, let me assure you that I am indeed real. Assuming, of course, that 'reality' isn't some computer-generated simulation designed by a species of carbon holograms from the future.
Regarding my comments, which you quoted: I was referring to occasions when people fall out with the SWP. I can speak from experience here because I went through a period like David described. However, I wasn't 'pig-headed' enough to convince myself I was right and run off, with my ego intact, to slander the party from afar. Instead, I accepted I was wrong and moved forward.

Comment By gary duncan At 19/06/2008 10:20

Well, David, now you're contradicting yourself. This is what you said earlier:
'if you don't agree with everyone in the party, you are indeed regarded, and treated, as a 'twat'.'

Now, as I said, I felt this too at one point. But not because it was actually the case. Far from it, in fact. It was all manufactured in my own deluded head.

Comment By gary duncan At 19/06/2008 10:25

I've seen comrades come and go up here in the North East. Recently we had a good activist leave because he refuted much of the strategics, without actually learning the reasoning behind it, and found himself in total disagreement with the whole party.
Had he took time to study more and ask questions he would have come to see he was wrong and the party was right. But, sadly, he insisted on trying to maintain his fallacious views, even if it meant leaving the organisation.
Why does that happen so often? Well, speaking from experience (again), I think it boils down to an unwillingness to allow one's mind to be fully open to new knowledge and one's consciousness to be truly fluid. Conservative-minded people like to be in control, and their opinions can be like property to them.

Comment By gary duncan At 19/06/2008 10:44

Gary, if I didn't have contradictions and failings, I wouldn't be trying to resolve them by discussing them. I wrote, 'if you don't agree with everyone in the party, you are... a twat.' ADDING (about my contradictory attitude), 'I've always been... in denial... but you keep confirming it'.
I mean some comrades believed disagreeing with the party by definition made you a twat but it didn't seem to be the general line whereas now from your comments this attitude may be predominant.

BTW: I don't have so much of an ego though I AM too often pig-headed - unlike your fine self ;-)
I happen to think your attitude to other socialists who don't agree with you is wrong - that's all! You have yet to convince me otherwise but you never know... (It's true though that people get defensive - no-one likes a smartarse!)

Comment By David At 19/06/2008 11:34

But David, I have never once labelled you a twat. You are making it all up in your own head, mate. In fact, I only originally called Mark Steel a twat to get a response from him (and it worked). And I later apologised and made it clear that I do not actually think he is a twat. PLEASE let's move on from the twat thing. Remember you are fluid and it is only your conservative mind that hangs onto the past as property. Leave it. Let it go!

Comment By gary duncan At 19/06/2008 11:44

Actually, this needs clarifying: being a twat is a perceptual thing. No-one is a twat all the time to all people. Even Hitler was not a twat to some twats. Now Mark Steel would not be human if he wasn't a twat to some people at least some of the time. I know I can be a twat quite often. But even when I'm being a twat to one person I will be perceived by others as not being a twat. The issue surely is not if or when we are twats but are we doing our best to further the cause of emancipating the working class.
And I guarantee you cannot involve yourself in such a mission without someone somewhere thinking you are a twat.
So by that we must conclude: WE ARE ALL TWATS!

Comment By gary duncan At 19/06/2008 11:52

For me at least, it's not about who is or isn't a twat. That's all nonsense. It's about being in the organisation that best understands the concept of human consciousness and its development through struggle.
And if you think Respect Renewal, with its celebrity egoists and obedient sycophants, is the way forward for the working class then you need to re-analyze.

Comment By gary duncan At 19/06/2008 12:16

To sort of get back to the point: when people leave an organisation, whatever their shortcomings may or may not be, I think the organisation is bigger than any individual (which is sort of a point you make about celebs), so should also try to see what sparked it. I don't mean changing the politics, just that sometimes people leave for stupid reasons that could be avoided. I remember a guy leaving because, having been nicked flyposting, no-one wanted to go flyposting the next week. He was wrong to leave but comrades made no effort to discuss it with him except saying to each other that he was being 'dramatic' (correct but surely missing a wider issue). It's not enough to thing you are right; to build you have to convince others - and that can take time and patience, rather than a one-line put down.

Comment By David At 19/06/2008 12:37

I agree. But the SWP is not made up of faultless individuals. There is no such thing as a perfect socialist. The project that is the Socialist Workers Party must be kept ontrack through constant communication.
But it's difficult when things are always stacked against you. People become despondent. People get irritated by lack of results. I've seen how it can go pearshaped. But I've also been amazed many times when we get it right.
Perseverance is the key. I'm no quitter, I never have been. I believe in socialism. And I'm damn well not going to let my conditioning and conservative ego stop me from being as effective as I can be in attaining a better society.
If the party isn't working then MAKE it work!

Comment By gary duncan At 19/06/2008 14:44

At an SWP meeting, the speaker said that the difference between a sectarian and a marxist was that while the former looked for differentiations between themselves and class, marxists looked for what we have in common as a starting point to take arguments forward. Are Renewal really mere egoists and sycophants or have they just made desperate decisions based on misguided analyses? They're not closing factories and hospitals nor occupying Iraq. For the SWP to progress these people need to be won back to revolutionary socialist politics not dismissed per se. I admire your passion but if you want an audience amongst other socialists and working class activists, why not show the other side of your character too, that wants to make the world better, and use your wrath and putdowns for the class enemy? Renewal will fall to bits and many will return, if, Gary, you haven't alienated them all by then ;-)

Comment By David At 19/06/2008 15:48

To say the SWP needs to win those in Respect Renewal back to revolutionary politics is to assume they were in agreement with revolutionary politics in the beginning.
That is not the case. Most people who are now in Renewal disagreed with the SWP's politics all along. But they were willing to work together within a broader, more moderate, leftwing coalition. Renewal is not a revolutionary organisation, it is reformist.

Comment By gary duncan At 19/06/2008 18:24

Let's not forget, David, that Renewal split from the RESPECT party, not the SWP. They deserted every non-SWP member of RESPECT too. I was given an ultimatum by Galloway; he told me people had to choose sides. Of course, I knew that joining Renewal wasn't an option for me. And I had to watch helplessly as Sunderland RESPECT fell apart. I'd poured my heart and soul into building the group and getting the name well-known in this city, and it was devastating to witness its demise.
Thankfully, THE LEFT LIST remains as an electable option in this city.

Comment By gary duncan At 19/06/2008 18:37

Gary - why don't you scroll through the above list of comments and imagine that you are someone else for a minute. Now, do you think that there's a good possibility that this hypothetical observer might conclude that there's a good possibility that this Gary Duncan bloke is absolutely, totally, massively unhinged?

You make multiple postings - even when no one else has responded. Your arguments are, frankly, idiotic. In fact, they are so bad it's embarrassing to read. If you make these kinds of arguments in the real world out there in Sunderland then you must be a massive liability to all socialists in that city. I feel sorry for them.

Now have a bit of a think about what a fool you are making of yourself and just leave it. Cut your losses. Walk away. Maybe you can salvage some microscopic shred of dignity.

Comment By Ed At 19/06/2008 20:37

I agree. But does it matter? We all have to make fools of ourselves in order to learn. Or were you born a genius, Ed?
What I post here is just part of my evolution. It has no meaning in itself. It is not property that I will drag around with me forever. And if you think otherwise then you do not grasp Marxism at all.
I must express myself and make mistakes if I am to continue to progress beyond what my conditions allow. And if I had only ever listened to conservative thinkers like you, Ed, I'd still see the world in very simple terms.

Comment By gary duncan At 19/06/2008 21:15

Unhinged? Hmmmm. If there is a single socialist out there who hasn't been labelled 'unhinged' then that socialist has not yet dared enter a single argument with anyone who refutes socialist ideas.
The very idea of socialism is seen as insane by most people, Ed. I stopped caring what people thought of me a long time ago, because I realised I'd never convince anyone of the need for socialism if, in order to remain liked, I capitulated to their way of thinking.
Maybe you're just not that determined, eh?

Comment By gary duncan At 19/06/2008 21:25

Look, I'm enjoying this. Not because I'm winning and looking cool, or because I'm losing and looking a twat, but because I like to learn, and I learn best during debate.
I would continue this through my own e-mail account or Myspace profile. But I don't believe that would have the same appeal as Mark Steel's blog page.

Comment By gary duncan At 19/06/2008 21:33

It's not a debate. It's a flipping monologue. It's the droning sound of a tedious, obsessive bore dribbling on about nothing very much.

The attempt to dress this rubbish up as some kind of dialectical process of unfolding understanding is absurd. You are either a joker, a time waster or incredibly stupid.

Comment By Ed At 19/06/2008 22:50

Yes, thanks Gary, I know that neither of the Respects are revolutionary socialist parties and about the differences between Renewal and Left List. I think that when Renewal does fade away, some of them will look again at Left List and others who've left the SWP will be won back. People change, ideas change, circumstances change, ex-members return, etc, as you'll know from your studies of the Russian Revolution, I'm sure. Another excellent thing I learnt in the SWP was the comment that to lead you have to be one step ahead not one-hundred and over the horizon. BTW: you're right not to care too much what other people think of you, but what other socialists and workers think actually IS a useful barometer of your effectiveness.

Comment By David At 20/06/2008 00:08

HAPPY 100TH COMMENT!!!!!!

Comment By gary duncan At 20/06/2008 11:09

Well thanks very much, Ed. I've not had that many compliments thrown at me in such a short passage since the BNP sent me death threats via text.

Comment By gary duncan At 20/06/2008 11:14

I think you're right though, David, in that Renewal is destined to fade into insignificance. The sooner the better I say, because it can only be a bad thing for the leftwing movement to have such a division.
I like what you say about being one step ahead and not one-hundred. But I think we must be both. And we need to adjust constantly within those metaphorical parameters.
As for what other socialists think of me being a measure of my effectiveness, well yes, but not here mate. I take the actual world as my guide, not the cyber insults of some prick called Ed.

Comment By gary duncan At 20/06/2008 11:22

I think something like Renewal happening was inevitable, not the timing or the way it happened, but in that there is a vacuum on the left for old style reformists, Stalinists and so on and Renewal appeals to a certain type of electoral politics. What happened was the price the party risks for going to bed with people like Galloway but I think it was right to try and look out of the ghetto and connect rather than play safe. There will be many successes and failures like this on the way. You're clearly experienced and intelligent so IMO should use this to win over people who are (warts and all!) nevertheless on the same side rather than be dismissive and, I fear, counter-productive to what you'd ultimately like to achieve. I'm sure if you engaged in a comradely fashion, most people here will gladly discuss things, agreeing and disagreeing, with you.

Comment By David At 20/06/2008 11:47

I think that's already happening, David, as exemplified by your amiable tone.
Regarding Respect: I can only draw on the experiences we have had in the North East. It was very much the SWP that made it happen up here. Most (but not all) of the devoted activists doing the graft were SWP members. And although the split was quite a catastrophe for us, we were able to start again with the LEFT LIST only because the SWP were so well organised.
I think it's fair to say that if the SWP wasn't a strong and vibrant force in this part of the country there would be no leftwing electoral alternative to New Labour in Sunderland or Newcastle.
Respect Renewal do not exist here. And in my eyes they betrayed every socialist in the North East when they split and stole the name that had become known to many in the area.

Comment By gary duncan At 20/06/2008 14:25

It was the same with Livingston when he stood against Labour for London Mayor only to rejoin and turn his back on the SWP who'd done the running around for him - and look at the price he paid for moving right! Presumably, if Galloway fails re-election then Renewal is finished. The SWP may be winded but it'll survive.
Although arguing about things is vital, as is theory, they are only part of the picture: most workers will be won to revolutionary socialism through the practice of it's members, through solidarity and collective struggle. And things like what's happened with Respect are only a tiny part of it and will be eclipsed and forgotten about when struggles in the workplace take precedence and the political situation polarises.

Comment By David At 20/06/2008 15:39

I remember the emergency SWP meeting that convened in Newcastle when the split first happened: it was the biggest turnout I'd ever seen, and it accentuated my distaste for Galloway. I came away from that gathering prouder than ever to be part of the SWP, mainly for it's refusal to kowtow to a big personality.
When you're conditioned to look up to celebrities and follow their lead it's quite easy to get suckered when they point the way. I wasn't surprised to see certain people I'd worked with run after Galloway like hypnotised rats following the pied piper. The SWP, and the education I acquired through it, saved me from such obsequiousness.

Comment By gary duncan At 20/06/2008 20:14

Renewal will not last, as you say, David. Certainly in the North East it will not even be born. Sunderland Respect only came to be because I made it happen. That's not a boast, it's just a fact. When I put my mind to something there is no stopping me, I'm very single-minded in my political goals.
We had to start from scratch in Sunderland after the split. We lost people who were not SWP and the name was taken from us. But I was determined not to let all that hard work go to waste. And, whereas before I'd remained in the shadows while driving the thing along, this year I stood as the candidate myself.
Of course, we couldn't pull off any miracles at such short notice. But we made a start. And the new team that has grown from that campaign is a very youthful and energetic one. I can't wait for the next contest.

Comment By gary duncan At 20/06/2008 20:33

Till then, we have other matters to focus on. As you say, there is a polarisation on the horizon. Workers are becoming confident once more. The conversations I had on the petrol tanker drivers' picket line really confirmed that for me.
The SWP needs to build now and connect with workers everywhere. In Sunderland we have a fledgling branch taking shape and I'm excited about the future. We are learning from our more experienced comrades in Newcastle and applying the science to our own blossoming sub-group.
Are you going to Marxism by the way, David?

Comment By gary duncan At 20/06/2008 20:56

I'd love to go to Marxism again but work, money and distance make it difficult. And one of the most important things is to take people with you. Being a foreigner and living in a small town, I'm not even capable of doing that. I speak to activists here and I asked to be put in touch with other SWP members because I think the people I speak to locally need to speak to someone who isn't me IYSWIM, and I also need to get my own ideas straight about certain events. SWP comrades here (rightly) aren't interested in old farts who were in the SWP in the UK, so there's no contact with them at all, which means my 'contacts' also miss out. The SWP has it's trusted people here and the rest of us can F-off and die it seems.

Comment By David At 21/06/2008 00:45

I'm sorry you feel that way, David, there's nothing worse than being alienated from the thing your devoted to. I've been there, so I can empathize.
But I wouldn't lose hope. I don't know where you live or what the local branch is like, but I'm sure you could fit in again if you talked things through with people. Have you tried that?

Comment By gary duncan At 21/06/2008 13:57

Amazing comments thread, this. Is that really the same Gary Duncan who ran for the Left List in Sunderland? Is this some kind of SWP 'Care in the Community' scheme?

Comment By Dustin the Turkey At 26/06/2008 11:03

Hello Dustin. Whatever you think of my comments there is one undeniable fact that you and others have proved: they triggered a response.
Now just because I say silly or outlandish things at times it doesn't mean I'm incapable of rational political debate. Try me.

Comment By gary duncan At 26/06/2008 12:25

The experience of 'debating' on this page has shown me that there are many on the left who are quick to label someone with a different view to their own as mentally ill. WHATS THAT ALL ABOUT?!!
I see it as a lazy attempt at winning the argument. If I am seen as not in control of my faculties then it stands to reason I cannot have a valid point. Indeed everything I say must be utter rubbish. How can a person who has been condemned as disturbed ever make any sense?
Well surely, this is not only discrimination against those who suffer with their mental health, but also total proof of the disputer's inadequacy when it comes to a verbal joust.

Comment By gary duncan At 26/06/2008 13:54

Mark Steel himself is quite unorthodox in the political world. He uses comedy to convey a message. Now I like comedy. In fact, I like anything out of the ordinary. I find that things that are not usual, things that are unexpected, stimulate me.
Please excuse me for employing a similar tactic. I do apologize if saying something that no-one expected has caused offence. But PLEASE, respond with something better thought out than 'ha ha ha, you're mentally ill and therefore must always be wrong.' That's just PATHETIC, comrades.

Comment By gary duncan At 26/06/2008 14:02

Yesterday I watched admiringly as a kid who lives in my street shinned up the lampost across the road to my house and swang from the horizontal bar on the top. Now most people would look down their noses at this wayward youth, label him scum or 'mentally ill', and in the process exacerbate his drive to rub people up the wrong way. But not I.
I saw the positive in this act of madness. I witnessed a lost individual looking for attention. Everyone finds their niche don't they? He obviously failed academically and gave up. Then he sought approval from his peers rather than figures of authority.
Nice one. We have much in common.

Comment By gary duncan At 26/06/2008 14:43

I post stuff on websites NOT for people to agree with necessarily, but to provoke thought and debate.
If you think I've been a nuisance here you should see my Myspace profile.
But, although I rile many with my comments, it's is deliberate strategy. And I'm not so foolish as to have no direction and ultimate goal.
I usually wind up converting those who initially hate me. No-one can say I have not been successful in that endeavour. My record of recruitment into the party speaks for itself.
I may SEEM insane at first, comrades, but there is method in my madness.

Comment By gary duncan At 26/06/2008 14:50

Anyway, up the council workers! My wife is on strike in July, BRING IT ON!!!

Comment By gary duncan At 26/06/2008 14:58

funny, years back the CP use to educate its members so that they would know better than to consciously embarrass the organisation, but it seems that the SWP has managed to avoid that elementary precaution by letting Gary Duncan shout his mouth off all over the place

how embarrassing to have someone as obviously immature as Gary Duncan as a member?

I suppose it is just a matter of time before the SWP implode?

Comment By modernity At 27/06/2008 02:37

Well, Modernity, as far as I know, expressing oneself through internet blogs is not breaching party protocol. Besides, I've made it VERY clear that I am NOT representing any party as I do so.
These are my own personal comments. Please try to distinguish between party and person.

Comment By gary duncan At 27/06/2008 11:29

Have I really embarrassed myself? Maybe. But what I see as more cringeworthy are the lame responses that seek only to ridicule.
Where is DAVID? He was the only person with a valid point.

Comment By gary duncan At 27/06/2008 11:33

'Hello good evening, welcome
to nothing much.
A no-holds barred half-nelson
the loving touch.

The comfort and the joy of being lost
with the only living boy in....'

Carter USM. Philosophy for our times.

Comment By Chris Chill At 27/06/2008 18:59

When I was young I thought I had my own key,
I knew exactly what I wanted to be,
Now I'm sure,
You've boarded up every door.
Lived in a bubble days were never ending,
Was not concerned about what life was sending.
Fantasy was real,
Now I know much about the way I feel.
I'll paint you the picture,
Cause I don't think you live round here no more,
I've never even seen the key to the door,
We only get what we will settle for.
While we're living, the dreams we have as children fade away.
Etc.

Oasis 'Fade Away', much better than Carter USM.

Comment By gary duncan At 27/06/2008 20:02

By the way, you know that kid I spoke about who liked swinging from the top of lamposts? Well I spoke to him today and told him he should look into getting a job painting bridges or something, seeing as how he's so daring.
I mentioned my mate who is a scaffolder, and asked the lad to come see me if he needs any phone numbers. He went away pondering, and I could tell he was chuffed that anyone would give a shit. Maybe, just maybe, I've helped reduce the number of times the phone box windows will get smashed round here in future.
Everyone has a purpose. There's no such thing as a loser.

Comment By gary duncan At 27/06/2008 20:17

That little encounter sort of made up for the earlier disaster. Have you ever ran your arse off getting leaflets printed with the intention of catching a workforce coming out after their shift only to find that they finished early that day and you missed them by half an hour?
Bloody Friday innit?!!
Nevermind.

Comment By gary duncan At 27/06/2008 20:20

Christ, I go on a bit don't I? Listen comrades, I'm not trying to upset anyone, I'm merely looking to provoke some debate. Maybe I should have chose my outlet more carefully. Maybe this isn't the right place for political discussion. But I can't seem to find anywhere else that's suitable, and I'm addicted to dialectics.
Perhaps your similar needs are satisfied because you live or work with other socialists. Sadly, I'm quite isolated, so the internet provides me with a means of expressing my thoughts.
Please don't hate me for that. I just love to discuss things of meaning. Any takers?

Comment By gary duncan At 28/06/2008 14:38

Come on. Someone say something profound....

Comment By gary duncan At 28/06/2008 19:30

Okay then don't.
Hey, who would be interested in seeing the continuing e-mail tit-for-tat I have with my nazi stalker? I'm going to post his vile and threatening messages, along with my responses, on the internet.
Do you think this would be an appropriate forum for that? Or should I go elsewhere to reveal this particular fascist's stupidity?
Let me know.

Comment By gary duncan At 29/06/2008 16:29

Do you think this would be an appropriate forum for that?

No.

Comment By Nikki At 29/06/2008 18:44

Okay, but why?
And can you recommend anywhere else that may accomodate the public verbal slaughtering of a filthy nazi scumbag?

Comment By gary duncan At 29/06/2008 19:11

Apart from David (who now seems to have disappeared), I haven't been able to connect with anyone on this page. Granted, people have been quick to respond, and that's a good thing, no matter how negative their comments. But seldom has the discourse developed into something of substance. Why is that?
I had hoped to strike up some interesting and intelligent debate with those who admire Mark Steel and maybe even Mark himself. But there was nothing forthcoming that might have a stimulating effect. Only pointless condescending retorts that came and went without any sensible arguments to back them up.
I live to talk. I love to talk. We learn nothing unless we discuss everything. We simply MUST debate or we stagnate. Progress comes through polemics.
It seems, however, that those who browse this site are not interested in anything other than massaging the ego of Mr.Steel. Very sad.
Have a word with yourselves!

Comment By gary duncan At 30/06/2008 13:27

I didn't have access to a PC, which is just as well as this thing has rambled on without achieving very much. It's as important to know why someone leaves as why someone joins and I'd have expected Mark to be clearer but maybe, like many ex-members, he doesn't want to help opportunists who'll use his leaving to attack the SWP. I think Mark's original 'eloquence' piece is correct as Gary sort of concedes - as Marxism 2008 will show, SWP members DO engage constructively with people we don't agree with - no-one will be shouting 'twat' at Tony Benn, whether he deserves it or not ;-)

Comment By David At 30/06/2008 14:14

Hello again, David, nice to see your words again.
There are some important differences between Tony Benn and Mark Steel: for instance, Benn has never been a member of the SWP, yet shows his support for that organisation. Mark Steel on the other hand was a member of the SWP for many years and now, strangely, supports the party (Renewal) that sought to damage it.
Benn will attend Marxism, as you rightly say. But Mark Steel will not. Why is that? Mark has yet to explain himself, and I don't think you should mistake his silence for solidarity with the SWP. Afterall, he openly supports Renewal and ignores The Left List, which is in itself damaging.

Comment By gary duncan At 30/06/2008 14:47

Who knows? Until we get some sort of explanation from the person himself, we'll never know. which is odd really as he has a blog full of opinions which are rightly 'rude about the people we SHOULD be opposing' but other aspects of his views haven't been stated here so it must be a bit confusing to readers of this blog. The question I'd ask is HOW do we collectively oppose these people, through Renewal, through Respect, inside the SWP. Mark once did our branch meeting and was very wise about the way forward - has he changed his mind and if so, what has he discovered?

Comment By David At 30/06/2008 23:46

I think you could be right, David, Mark's contradictory blogs may well confuse people. He expresses all the right opinions, but then points to Respect Renewal as the way forward. Very bizarre!
Galloway is no Lenin, or even a Tony Cliff. The man is a great orator and has accumulated vast knowledge on certain subjects. But he is far too conservative in his thinking and lacks the exceptionally fluid mind and clarity of vision required to lead the masses to emancipation.
I believe Mark's departure from the SWP is down to his disconnection from the working class. When people are separated from those they are fighting to free they can lose their focus and begin to construct all manner of erroneous views.

Comment By gary duncan At 01/07/2008 14:11

Yes, but when the SWP makes mistakes, what erroneous views are are these due to? One of my concerns about the SWP, is that for years we were told that everything the party did and the way it was organised, would ensure that certain disasters wouldn't happen, and yet...
I think there are quite a few people in the SWP who can be said to be disconnected from the working class, which is not to say they don't have good politics, but perhaps a spell in the workplaces, instead of the universities, does everyone some good.
I'm sure Mark will convince Galloway to take a worker's wage next parliament...

Comment By David At 01/07/2008 16:15

Ha ha, as if. I think it's more likely that Galloway will convince Mark to sell his soul to the reformists. Or maybe he already has????????

As for your comments on the SWP: there is a distinct lack of workers in the party, that's true. But that unfortunate situation merely reflects today's circumstances. And, as you know, circumstances change constantly.
Anyone who has studied the evolving state of the Bolsheviks after the 1905 revolution knows that workers come and go to a radical party. Give it time, David, give it time.
Things are changing. Persevere through these times and you will see the SWP flourish once again.

Comment By gary duncan At 01/07/2008 18:48

Yes, things go backwards and forwards and I'm sure the party will recover and grow. I remember back in the 90's, a comrade saying, 'Things might seem bad now, but it's still better than the Moscow Soviet after 1905 and half the branch being made up of police spies'.
I've often found the SWP to be right about something but the high-handed, arrogant manner in which doubts and objections are dismissed rather than sensibly debated somewhat alienating. That's not a good enough reason to leave the party but surely such behaviour only creates misunderstandings. As an ex-comrade said, 'I go to work to be patronised by middle-class 'committee-types' - I don't expect it from my local branch.' I don't agree with leaving for that reason but we hardly help ourselves, do we?

Comment By David At 02/07/2008 08:27

I understand that alienation, David, I've felt it myself. But as I've said before, negativity is something that is manufactured in our own heads whenever we lose an argument. That's our competitive conditioning at play. You should rise above it and extract the positive from every situation.

Comment By gary duncan At 02/07/2008 11:38

I can honestly say that any acrimony I've felt towards other comrades was of my own creation and unjustified. During my suspension I was convinced I was correct, but in retrospect I realise I was utterly wrong.
I could quite easily have left the party at that time. I was angry and felt driven to spit out my dummy. But I didn't, and I'm glad I didn't.
The best thing to do in such situations is talk to people. There will always be someone in the branch that will discuss your problems at length.
Leaving the party, for me at least, would be tantamount to turning my back on socialism. And that is out of the question.

Comment By gary duncan At 02/07/2008 11:48

I don't feel any acymony to anyone in the SWP and I think the reason to be in the SWP should be the politics. And as someone with a certain amount of experience who understands the politics, you're right that leaving the party would be incorrect however, I also understand why people get fed up with certain individuals and behaviour. They have a genuine doubt about something and instead of it being discussed intelligently, as it usually is, they get ridiculed. If you disagree you're often humiliated and that's not the way socialists should behave to other comrades. It's one thing to tell old farts like me just to persevere but we need to be a lot less arrogant to others.

Comment By David At 02/07/2008 17:42

The reason to be in the SWP is indeed the politics. I'm still a member not because my mates are in the party and it's a great laugh, but because I'm a socialist and I want to be as effective as I can possibly be in my activism. I see the SWP as the only viable revolutionary organisation in this country.

Comment By gary duncan At 02/07/2008 18:39

As for having doubts, well boy have I had my doubts. But I surpassed them by constantly reading, gaining experience and asking questions.
I've been trying to build a Sunderland branch from scratch for some time and it's a tremendously difficult task. Not least because newcomers to the group are brimming with contradictions and all the same doubts I once had.
I had to learn the hard way how to build the confidence and further the understanding of new recruits. I made mistakes along the way and caused upset once or twice. It doesn't pay to be evangelical and overzealous. You can't bang your vision into other people's heads. Education needs to be more subtle and without patronization.
But when you're faced with arrogance and omniscience you tend to reflect that. It's never easy is it?

Comment By gary duncan At 02/07/2008 18:57

gary duncan .
Please shut up.
Please get a life.
Please mind your own business.

Comment By big dave At 02/07/2008 21:59

Oooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
Someone had a bad day at the office yesterday.

Comment By gary duncan At 03/07/2008 08:45

Mark,
I have admired your work and your politics for many years. I would be very grateful if you could comment on why you left the SWP. If not in public, perhaps via email?

Regards,

Paul

Comment By Paul At 05/07/2008 22:38

I've just returned from my third MARXISM FESTIVAL and once again I have altered profoundly. Every year this unique event catapults my consciousness to a higher level of understanding. If you have the slightest interest in socialism you MUST get to the next one.

I said a while ago on this blog that the comments I am leaving do not matter, they are meaningless, as I am constantly evolving. Indeed what we say today is not necessarily a reflection of what we will believe tomorrow. But in order to progress we simply MUST express ourselves. Learning becomes much more rapid when we create arguments that conflict with others.

I no longer care why Mark Steel left the SWP. I don't need an answer to that question anymore. Why? Well, because I am confident he made the wrong decision. And if you come to Marxism next year you will be too.

It's been fun. Bye.

WE'RE WORKERS UNITED, WE'LL NEVER BE DEFEATED!!!

Comment By gary duncan At 09/07/2008 16:25

'Galloway is no Lenin, or even a Tony Cliff. The man is a great orator and has accumulated vast knowledge on certain subjects. But he is far too conservative in his thinking and lacks the exceptionally fluid mind and clarity of vision required to lead the masses to emancipation.'

Yes, for an exceptionally fluid mind and clarity of vision there is only one place to look... towards comrades German and Rees, of course! The British ruling class trembles in their wake... lol!

Comment By A Disgruntled Postman At 13/07/2008 21:36

I don't think it's about which individual makes the ruling-class tremble - they're more scared of each other at the moment - but the classic argument between revolution and reform. Will change come through electing more MP's like Galloway or through the actions of disgruntled postal and other workers?
Wasn't Galloway supposed to be on a 'worker's wage' when he got elected? Say what you like about Rees, German and so on but, not having second homes abroad to maintain, they probably don't need the MP's wage Galloway receives to maintain themselves.
When disgruntled postal workers move, the ruling class DOES start to worry - that's what Rees and German DO understand.

Comment By David At 14/07/2008 10:45

Precisely, David. It seems our postman friend does not yet grasp the process of building a movement capable of changing society.
Galloway and his Renewal project are a temporary localised annoyance for New Labour and nothing more. Once the Tories come to power they will likely cease to exist as Labour will have become the opposition once again and there will be little need for an electable left alternative to Labour. Maybe Galloway will be invited to re-join Labour, or maybe he'll just pour more time into his celebrity career. Whatever. Point being: Respect Renewal is a road to nowhere.
The SWP on the other hand can only grow from the coming recession and inevitable struggle from below. Bring it on!

Comment By gary duncan At 14/07/2008 12:00

Yes, but Gary, phrases like 'our postman friend does not yet grasp the process' can sound a little bit patronising and there's a danger of socialists coming across as know-it-alls who have a theory to hand down to workers.
And so far, has the Left List been anything other than a temporary annoyance for new Labour either?
Electoralism itself is a road to nowhere and its importance to some people a reflection of the fact that, relatively, there isn't a lot of industrial action taking place at the moment but that will change and then we'll see the importance of building a revolutionary socialist party and whether the industrial working class will make ruling class tremble once again.
To move forward Resepect Renewal will end up behaving just like the Left List. If they only think about winning votes, they will collapse as soon as Galloway fails re-election.

Comment By David At 14/07/2008 14:21

David, it's easy to misinterpret words as patronizing in REAL LIFE nevermind in typed form. I assure you I was not condescending our postman friend, I have nothing but total respect for the posties.
That said, there is a need to explain things to workers. Now I'm far from omniscient, but I will pass on what I know whenever possible. Workers need to understand more about capitalism and all that stems from it. How are we to build a revolutionary movement if we do not debate with other less informed working class people? You shouldn't fear making people think, it's in their own interests to do so.
You're spot on with your analysis of reformism though.

Comment By gary duncan At 14/07/2008 14:45

The most effective way to debate with other working-class people is in struggle and solidarity with them - such as during a strike. Indeed, the irony is that media such as blogs, films, stand-up comedy even, music, etc, are less effective means of communication than being involved together on a picket line or turning up with a list of signatures and money collected on behalf of striking workers and having a discussion with them. That's when I've seen the SWP at its best - with the electoral and/or abstract propagandist models of others at their least relevant.

Comment By David At 14/07/2008 16:03

My comment shouldn't be taken as support for Galloway. Far from it. That said, on the workers wage: No, as far as I can recall, he never said he was going to take a workers wage because well... he's never claimed to be a revolutionary socialist or even a democratic socialist. He wasn't even in the Campaign Group in the Labour Party. In fact I think he's on record as saying he couldn't 'function in politics' on the average wage of three workers.

I was just making the point that the argument is akin to two bald men fighting over a comb. Yes, the criticisms of Galloway are correct but the politics of the SWP CC are just as bad. Democratic centralism, vanguardism, popular fronts, transitional demands (as the mass of the WC will only ever reach trade union consciousness) etc etc its all a load of cobblers.

Comment By Disgruntled Postie At 14/07/2008 16:07

Meanwhile Galloway supports the worst sort of divisive multiculturalism and seems unwilling to come out strongly against homophobia which ties in with his apologism for Iran. All this said, the SWP were still happy to work with him for years and years. I don't think either side comes out of the whole thing very well but the SWP came out far, far worse off.

Also I would not be very confident of people flocking to the SWP or revolutionary socialism because of economic downturn and further attacks across the board on welfare, conditions, pay and so on.

Comment By Disgruntled Postie At 14/07/2008 16:11

In my office, there is no great apetite for strike action because people feel they can't afford it. Worse still (probably rightly) people see the last national strike as a defeat. So morale isn't exactly high. That said there is no doubt we'll go ahead with action on pensions, if it comes to it. However the truth is we're not in a strong position for a national dispute. It would be far, far better to fight on ground we can win on. Win the small battles often rather than constantly going for the big co-ordinated battles when the strength isn't there for it. No prizes for guesses that the far-left invariably supports the big co-ordinated strikes. The history of these big national disputes is a history of defeats.

Comment By Disgruntled Postie At 14/07/2008 16:15

So sadly there shouldn't be much confidence in the idea that we're going to see a rise in militancy because of recession. It could even go the other way. Look at the US. It doesn't seem to matter how much the poor are humbled over there - there is no reaction. Yes, this is a bleak picture of the situation facing us but it is surely better than kidding ourselves like the delusionists on the far-right.

Comment By Disgruntled Postie At 14/07/2008 16:19

Well, Disgruntled Postie, I do apoligise if I prematurely inferred your level of understanding. You seem to be far more informed than I'd imagined.
Having said that, I must disagree on a couple of points:
Firstly, to say that the politics of the SWP are just as bad as Galloway's and to cast off the whole Trotskyist idea of united fronts as 'cobblers' is frankly bollocks! The united front works, as seen in the anti-fascist and anti-war campaigns. The fact that racism and war continue to exist does not in any way render these strategies obsolete. On the contrary. It would be political suicide for Gordon Brown to send troops into Iran, and the BNP are still regarded as a nazi party. All thanks to the united front campaigns that you see no point in pursuing.

Comment By gary duncan At 14/07/2008 18:28

Did I just spell 'apologise' wrongly? I do apoligise.

Comment By gary duncan At 14/07/2008 18:34

Galloway's politics are conservative left. His religious beliefs and elitism hinder his ability to see beyond certain frontiers into unchartered territory. He seems to lack the vision necessary to comprehend a fully evolved working class and a properly functioning socialist society.
As for the SWP, well if their philosophies were as stagnant and their malleability so restricted I simply wouldn't be in the party.

Comment By gary duncan At 14/07/2008 18:42

But good luck with the struggle in the post office. And try not to be so negative about strikes. What happened yesterday may not necessarily happen tomorrow.

Comment By gary duncan At 14/07/2008 18:44

Although the far right might well be delusional their fortunes have seen an upturn in the last few years - partly because of the lack of industrial action, the failure of reformism (and movementism) around the world and because they've hidden/disguised their real agenda. 15 years ago Italian fascists were lucky to get 3.5% of the vote, now they have ministers and run cities - it could happen anywhere.
People might not be flocking to join the SWP but they are pretty bolshie about lots of thing - there's the feeling (which does have Brown worried) that if one group of workers goes out and wins, the rest will look to copy - success breeding success - and things can quickly change and people move to the left, meaning more workers coming into the party and the 'committee types' being overshadowed...

Comment By David At 15/07/2008 14:18

Absolutely, David. You know what mate, I do like your positivity. There's nothing worse than a negative defeatist who convinces himself he's lost before he's even begun.
I've never been that way myself. It's probably because all my life I've struggled against the odds in every aspect.
Life is all about struggle. And multiple failures are part and parcel of eventual success. People are far too expectant these days. They want everything now.
Well that's not reality I'm afraid.

Comment By gary duncan At 15/07/2008 15:16

I wouldn't dispute that the SWP is made up of mostly well meaning and geniune people than compared with someone like Galloway and his ilk but that doesn't translate into getting any nearer the goal, which (presumably) still remains working class rule.

And I didn't say united front but popular front, ie uniting with liberals, conservatives and so on. Its a really bad idea - as should now be self-evident. This has nothing to do with Trostky who opposed such alliances.

Comment By Disgruntled Postie At 15/07/2008 15:44

David - I agree about the increase in support for the far-right but what I meant on their delusions is that they seem to overestimate their strength and the scope for the popularity of their ideas. As should be self-evident to them by now most people just aren't 'naturally racist' and quite clearly a multi-racial society hasn't lead to rack and ruin.

However, rather than accept what is staring them in the face many on the far-right seem to convince themselves of all sorts of mad conspiracies to explain these inconvenient truths away. And I'm always amazed by the contempt they seem to show for the masses. Apparently, anyone who thinks a multiracial is just fine is stupid and brainwashed by the media.

Comment By Disgruntled Postie At 15/07/2008 15:49

At the same time, this contempt for the mass of people is sometimes an issue on the far-left too. As is the failure to re-evaluate ideas and tactics that have been taken for granted for so long in the face of overwhelming evidence that they are wrong/are not effective. Far better to start from a position where we accept that most people at the moment don't want socialism and that this isn't largely down to any outside issues but the failure of socialists to win the argument.

There also needs to be far, far more re-evaluation of theory and tactics. Bearded dead Russians shouldn't be the final say on every matter. When this culture that has been taken for granted for so long is finally challenged then we might start getting somewhere.

Comment By Disgruntled Postie At 15/07/2008 15:59

I'm sorry, but uniting with liberals and conservatives is an absolute MUST when opposing fascism. If you're suggesting the far left adopt a puritanical attitude on this issue and reject all support from non-socialist circles then you are actually paving the way for more nazi successes.
There has to be as broad a resistance as possible when attempting to constrain nazism. The lessons of the past show this to be true.

Comment By gary duncan At 15/07/2008 16:05

Also, it's incorrect to say that 'most people at the moment don't want socialism'. How can a person decide whether they WANT something or not if they do not know what it is?
People want a better world than what they have right now, and gradually they will come to equate progress with the struggle for socialism. But that may or may not be a long and arduous process that may take longer than our lifetimes. Who knows? The point is never to give up.

Comment By gary duncan At 15/07/2008 16:19

It is not a question of pessimism or optimism but an attempt at a sober honest analysis of the situation as it is. I think this is important for the reasons already given.

That said, I condider myself an optimist and if/when we take action on pensions I'll be doing all I can to build confidence, argue the case for the cause in question and for us stay out as long as possible to get the kind of result we want (unlike last time) but this optimism on its own won't achieve anything.

Comment By Disgruntled Postie At 15/07/2008 16:19

Do you realise what we are trying to achieve, Mr.Postie? Do you grasp the enormity of overthrowing capitalism? Creating a socialist world will necessitate the greatest upheaval in human history. It isn't something that you should expect to happen, rather something that we constantly aim for because we have no choice.
It's essential the struggle continues REGARDLESS of whether the ultimate goal is a possibility or not. That's because we have not only to strive onwards but also to prevent regression.
It may be that we remain stagnant for the entire duration of my life. But I'm prepared to accept that, and it doesn't dampen my spirits in the slightest. I'm no quitter.

Comment By gary duncan At 15/07/2008 16:27

I disagree. I think most people are actually aware of the basics of socialism, certainly the aims of socialism, even if they don't realise this or label ideas collectively as socialist ones. And yes, there are a hell of a lot people who want a better world but the big obstacle is cynicism about getting to this better world.

The 'No Alternative' neo-liberalism mantra, combined with the end of the USSR has had a far, far, far bigger impact that we could have imagined. It has, up this point, been very successful indeed. Of course, I agree this can change in time but again I'm looking at it from the position we're in now rather than where I'd like things to be.

Comment By Disgruntled Postie At 15/07/2008 16:37

Gary - Of course I agree with that and I'm well aware of what we're trying to achieve. What I've questioned from the outset is the best approach/tactics/strategy in terms of getting us closer to that goal? What can we learn from the mistakes of the past? For my part, I'm simply arguing/challenging the tactics and structure of parties like the SWP in this respect.

This isn't say I think Workers Power have it all right or the SPGB, or the Communist Party or the Anarchists, in comparison to the SWP (as many of them would no doubt argue!) These are views from a currently non-aligned socialist. That is all. I certainly regard the SWP are being on the same side as me with the same goals.

Comment By Disgruntled Postie At 15/07/2008 17:04

I see it like this: In Britain we are emerging from a prolonged period of demoralisation. After the miners' strike there came the atomisation of society by a ruthless and vengeful ruling class. They used every method at their disposal to divide on every level. I myself am a product of the generation that fell victim to this. I grew up in Thatcher's Britain and began my working life in the mid-eighties when industry was being dismantled. I was forced to make ends meet by thinking only of number one. Had it not been for my dad (a pitman for thirty five years) I would never have known what a union was. I've never been in one to this day, and nor have many of my age group. But that's changing.

Comment By gary duncan At 15/07/2008 18:54

I was not political at all until my thirties. I spent my youth not conscious of reality. I followed the carrots they dangled in front of me and sought temporary escape from my alienation week after week. Much of my life was spent going round in circles never knowing or caring what life in a class-based society was really about.
But oh how I've changed, and in a very short space of time. And because I've been radicalized so rapidly I know others can be too.
The working class are gaining confidence. It's early days, but a new era beckons. NEVER give up!

Comment By gary duncan At 15/07/2008 18:55

The young people I work with today inspire me. I'm the oldest bar one in Sunderland SWP. There is a renewed interest in socialist ideas. I think that's because this generation have only ever known Thatcherism and are rebelling. They yearn for something different and wonder what all that fuss about socialism was in the old days.
I think what's happening now is exciting as f**ck! In fact, I'm almost glad I slept through the crap times so I could be there virginally when it was revived.

Comment By gary duncan At 15/07/2008 19:00

Gramsci summed it up well with his 'Pessimism of the intelect, optimism of the will' quote. Far too many times the idea of an organised working class being the motor of social change has been treated with contempt as outdated and far-fetched only for the class to rise up and prove everyone wrong. The key question is not whether there will be a clahs between social classes - the contradictions of capitalism means the centre can't hold - but who wins? The key to that is having the right politics and tactics and mistakes will be made on the way and things will go forwards as well as backwards. The test will be the ability of the SWP to rise to those challenges. Yes, it's got many things wrong, just as the Bolsheviks did (that's the nature of the game) and the Galloway affair has caused some damage but, unlike Workers Power, the anarchists, etc, it still attempts to get out of the left ghetto whilst unashamedly trying to build a revolutionary working class socialist alternative.

Comment By David At 15/07/2008 22:35

Quite right, David. If one person can change so quickly and so profoundly then so can the masses.
I spend my life spreading the word. Wherever I go and at every possible opportunity I plant seeds. It's only a small part I'm playing, of course, but I've altered many people.
We must keep going. We must never stop. Indeed the middle ground is falling away and a polarisation is taking place. Yeah it's slow, for now, but it can speed up at any moment and we have to be ready.
The alternative is unthinkable. Fascism could win out. We must be strong to ensure that doesn't happen.
Anyway, off to the picket lines now, catch you later.

Comment By gary duncan At 16/07/2008 09:40

Bollocks! Missed civic centre picket line by ten minutes and refuse depot by a little more. Shit man, I hate working nightshifts, it makes early rising for certain picket activity so difficult for me.
Thankfully, Sunderland has a growing number of young new recruits who are keen to be in on the action. Tomorrow they will be there at the correct time with papers and leaflets, while I have a much needed lie in after another night at work.
I did manage to make it to the rally today though in Newcastle. Big turn out too. Confidence is building.

Comment By gary duncan At 16/07/2008 16:04

By the way, I know it's naff and individualistic and all that, but if anyone wants to converse through Myspace or merely check out some blogs that stir up more debate than Mark's, look me up on this:

http://www.myspace.com/garyduncan

Comment By gary duncan At 17/07/2008 19:37

Very good site. Thank you.

Comment By ????? At 20/07/2008 01:02

You know, as much as I love a good debate, I got about half way down this particular diatribe and I remembered something, the reason why I too left the SWP...

My gawd the left takes itself too seriously!

Mark's decisions to leave the SWP are his own, I could, barely, care less...to me he's always been a comedian first, thats his job.... The fact that he shares a similar political opinion as me, is just icing...

And Im starting to wonder if Master Duncan does what in the wonderful world of the interweb is refered to as 'trolling'. And is very bad manners sir. I would continue, but the words 'Godwins Law' are ringing through my head.

Anyway, in the end, all is nothing.
Toodles
Scot
x

Comment By Scott Jenkins At 06/08/2008 20:47

Let me assure you, Scot, that I am not 'trolling'. I merely understand the human mind and the socio-economic principles that act upon it.
I insulted Mark in order to provoke a response from him and his fans, but not for no reason.
I'm learning all the time. Indeed we all are. And I'm fascinated by the notion of fame and the effect it has on both the celebrity (however minor) and his or her sycophantic followers.
I acquired something useful from the protracted 'debate' on this page, and I would like to think you did too.
Please don't live your life with your tongue up the arse of people deemed as 'special'. Question them ALWAYS. And never EVER believe them to be better than YOU.

Comment By gary duncan At 10/08/2008 13:43

Doncha worry, Gazza old sport, no one's deeming you special. Even if you are inclined to think yr the offspring of Freud and Reich. No, I think it's time you stepped away from the keyboard before I become further convinced yr Mr Rees in disguise. It's rare I agree with anything ex-Trot Garry Bushell says these days, but, blimey, it was a nail-on-head scenario when he dubbed the SWP's leadership cadre 'humourless, authoritarian and middle-class'. He forgot to mention a few of the hack adherents are too. Am I glad I got out before it was too late!
Love, Chris Bambery's scrawled Kalashnikov

ps Excellent book, mark. Sadly, probably too much emotion and pathos for our resident theory-obsessed apparatchik.

pps

Comment By Holmesy At 12/08/2008 02:12

Well Holmesy, thankyou for taking the time to respond to my comment. Were my statements as pointless as you pretend you would not have found reason to do so.
I look forward to your next reply......

Comment By gary duncan At 12/08/2008 18:55

Ah comrade, yr heart's in the right place, but impugning Mark ain't the way forward for fraternal debate.Still, it provoked my nostalgia gene.
I long for the days of the situationalist joke that was resident bourgeois interlektual Alex Callincos writing about the telly in Socialist Worker. Or Mr Birchall's seemingly random vituperations. Or even being heckled by Keith Flett's beard as I gave my first talk at a branch meeting. Halycon days, innit

Comment By Holmesy At 12/08/2008 23:33

I'm not SWP leadership. I'm just a guy analyzing everything I come across, including celebrity socialists.
Castigate me if you like, but I'm going to speak my mind on what I see as unjustified attacks on the party I'm a member of by someone who has lost his way due to certain conditions altering his consciousness.

Comment By gary duncan At 13/08/2008 00:40

Latest Posts

Archives

BlogRoll

Feeds