enuff is enuff - UK Indymedia

Agree

07.02.2002 13:15

This site gets lots of conspiracy postings now, 911 was a big trigger for the nuts to come out of the closet and start shouting.

Of course some obvious stuff does seem to get hidden quite quickly, but other items get left. I agree we should comment if items are full of race hate stuff etc.

Can you provide links to the stories you noticed?

Pete

It is up to you...

07.02.2002 13:17

The quality and relevance of the newswire will always be up to the public in open publishing. We can not expect the site admin to taylor the newsire for a mature audience and then shout censorship when somthing gets hidden.

We all hold a responsibility ourselves for the site, so lets take the job seriously. If more social justice stories are posted rather than stupid comments about individuals then the site might attract more serious attention.

Having said that i think it is not as bad as you paint it, the site does deliver what it promised - a few individuals bring it down and i am prepared to ignore them for the sake of info from the street.

aurthur

Ice Pix

07.02.2002 13:19

you trot wanker! you have no sense of irony do yer. YOU ARE INTENDING TO BE OUR OPPRESSOR, OUR GOVERNMENT! you give us a good sneak preview of just what it'd be like (not that we needed it): an end to FREE SPEECH.
Smash Party Politics...Death to the Trots!

V

If you see something that offends

07.02.2002 13:19

If you see something that offends then tell the people who run the site then they can deal with it - moan moan moan moan moan... be active

!!!!

Hmm

07.02.2002 13:23

I think the reason no ones replying is that theres not much point. J Charles and Gary Larabee seem to post on as many indymedias as they can and not check the comments. For racism, sexism and homophobia you could check the conspiracy theories (incidentally, did anyone see the interview where someone alleged that disney films were used to make mind control victim think they were doorknobs, a minor classic). In response to the Jewish thing, and I'm gonna get attcked for this, I think you'll find that most major newspapers have an unfailingly pro-Zionist stance, although that is no excuse for racism. And to be honest, I thought the "female comrades" thing was just a joke about the SWP, and far less defamatory than statements made by some SWP members about anarchists

Gonzo

challenging, not censoring!

07.02.2002 14:20

I'm not arguing for censorship! I just want to know that I'm not the only one who finds racism, sexism and homophobia offensive and will challenge them.

internationalist

IMC Postings.

07.02.2002 14:23

Good one Ice Pix. If they don't like it, they don't have to read it, but if they weren't authoritarian vanguardist middle-class bastards, I wouldn't be so keen on taking the piss. It's much more fun to do it to their faces, but you only ever see them on Saturdays and it's footy season. Roll on summer.

Ronnie.

what set me off

07.02.2002 14:44

What set me off was the posting from 'Webby' celebrating the victory of a local campaign to chuck out travellers. Did that bother anyone else?

internationalist

Progressive?

07.02.2002 14:48

Internationalist. How can you equate progressive with left wing? You're clinging to a doctrine which died when the Berlin Wall came down. There is nothing progressive about it. It's as dead as Karl Marx and as likely to spring into vitality as the porrly preserved corpse of Lenin.

Ivor the Engine.

aagh! what am I doing??

07.02.2002 15:47

Moaning instead of taking action.. what was I thinking?

Thanks to aurther and !!! for snapping me out of it. As you rightly say, the best thing is to just post news and ignore the trolls and pigs.

Just one last thought; what is Ronnie's problem with women?

internationalist

use it wisely or we may lose it..

07.02.2002 16:04

although like many ppl i have major problems with swp vampires, internationalist was making a valid point and his/her contribuitons have added an important elelement to the news mix,that of industrial issues. Therefore i don't think it serves anyone just posting abuse. I would suggest since the arrival of the internet, in some qtrs there has been what might be described as an infantilisation of politics in which abuse replaces insight or constructive
comment. we are attracting new plp everyday to these sites and i worry they may be put off by abusive posts.

My main point is both here and particularly on the global indymedia sites there has been a marked increase in r/wing market libertarian, racist and just plain ridiculous postings.While inymedia is of course open to everyone, there must be a way to limit these postings,
there are enuff corporate and r/wing media outlets for these plp without hi-jacking ours.Strangely, perhaps because of a strong radical culture, the european sites seem to have much less of this and indeed have more regular and local news. I would like to hear more of what
is happening around uk as welll as global issues.

use it wisely or we may lose it...by the way, lets not forget the heroic indymedia activists, all power to them!

internationalist, you should repost this tonight with a clarer heading as most plp surf in evening, when this importnat post may be gone.

info-shifter

it just a joke

07.02.2002 16:17

"the thing about female comrades was just a joke" so i guess Gonzo thinks sexism or racism ok as long as its just a 'joke'. with all the great things happening across the planet at the moment, some people sending to IMC are very bitter and secteren.

rich

since internationalist is an SWP - er

07.02.2002 16:24

dont take him TOO seriously. in general, its better to have a few vaguely silly, irrelevant or mildly dodgy articles rather than go all censorious and self- righteous.

the power of critique as provided for by the 'comments' section means that anything too much out of the spirit of the IMC project (such as the mindless moronic output of the SWP thugs!) means they will run away discredited after a while

the SWP is peeved that they havent really made much of an impact on this site. what did they expect ? either they dont know they're making a mistake in expecting the whole movement to subordiante itself to Labour (how dare they !) or they're cynical operators .
Who cares ? the fact they hide behind this "internationalist" figure means they're losing the argument.

touche

hoo nose hoo

refer to Fahrenheit *451 for a warning

07.02.2002 16:35

Ray Bradburys F *451 is a warning of what can happen if you censor too many things. Written in 1954, ostensibly Sci-fi but actually about the Eisenhower - McCarthy years (and the NSDAP book burnings of the 1930s,) you should read it carefully.

Incidentally, im shocked at how many of the SWP members never go to their own bookshop (Bookmarx). Many indeed , have never heard about it. Morons and idiots !

Touchy

Uno hoo

Yes but...

07.02.2002 16:39

I can not believe what passes for debate on this post, Internationalist raised a point - how about discussing it rather than spitting bile. Indymedia is not about who ends up posting it is about us having a venue to debate, if you can't think of a constructive comment don't bother as it hardly re-enforces my libitarian politic by reading the drivel that is written in Anarchy's name.

Here we have a medium that has opened up the communication between networks of activists and hopfully the public - but the back biting going on by 5 or 6 of you is desined to destroy all the hard work

Aurthur

Agree

07.02.2002 16:39

When I saw that Indymedia was advertised in the Fabian society's journal this month, I winced a little. The amount of nonsense that is allowed to pass as news is ridiculous and embarassing. I note that IMC was good enough to take down a post advocating fire-bombing the Daily Mail on May Day. Such editing should also be applied to some of the other garbage that clutters the news wire, particularly the mindless 'fuck the Trots' or 'kill the pigs' diatribes.

OK, leave the conspiracy theories up there (so long as they aren't written by racist head-bangers), but at least delete the republishing of stories that have already appeared in the British corporate press. For instance, most British viewers will have visited the BBC site, so what's the point in reproducing BBC stories? I thought this was a forum to upload 'news from the street' - or at least, give readers an understanding of news that doesn't appear in the corporate press in the UK.

I guess it takes a lot of work on the part of volunteers, but it's so easy for Indymedia to be undermined as a serious news source if editorial control is too slack.

Regular user

cONSPIRACY

07.02.2002 16:44

Most of the conspiracy posts are posted by the same people to lots of different Indymedia sites, spooky eh?

sp223

Sectarian?

07.02.2002 16:53

Why is it that anytime someone criticises the SWP they are described as sectarian? Because the SWP are supposedly anti capitalist? Just in case you hadn't noticed, many fascists describe themselves as against capitalism, and want an authoritarian government, does this mean when ANL/SWP critisise them are being sectarian? And before you go on about me being sexist, I've found women to be far more judgemental about people's looks than men, admittedly im biased, but try to realise that just because someone is "oppressed" it doesn't automatically make them immune from prejudice and bigotry themselves

Gonzo

Boring

07.02.2002 17:07

SWP-bashing is simply tedious and those who engage in it are dull. Any time an SWPer says something, there is a tirade of abuse from pretend anarchists. It's the kind of nonsense that puts people off Indymedia.

Regular User

couple of points

07.02.2002 17:14

(then I'll leave it, promise)

I am an SWP member (and proud of it) but I post stuff here off my own bat. No-one is hiding behind me. The SWP have never organised any intervention on IMC; we don't have time!

And sexism is not hilarious or 'ironic', it's pathetic.

internationalist

Hurt and disgusted

07.02.2002 17:15

At being called a pretend anarchist by someone who calles for censorship of something he doesn't like and is a member of the Fabian society. I'm off to cry now

Gonzo

In a different style...

07.02.2002 18:04

In a different style...

Kermit
Homepage: http://sag.antifa.net

Internationalist

07.02.2002 18:09

Internationalist, I don't have a problem with women. The ones I associate with are great. I just don't like SWP bastards. That's all. Male or female, they're a dollop of middle-class shit. There, I hope that answers your question, you middle-class toytown red bastard.

Ronnie.

Gonzo! Don't go!

07.02.2002 18:19

Gonzo, stay there! Why should you be put off by the last Fabian in the country. I almost pissed myself laughing when I read they still had one. I'll bet he's got a bust of Harold Wilson in the hall, the prat. I'll bet he's the only member of his party who still turns up at constituency meetings too. Pity the poor sod. Stay put.

Ronnie.

SWP

07.02.2002 18:26

SWP

Gonzo

yawn

07.02.2002 18:30

In answer to the original question the reason why I haven't responded to various racist, sexist, homophobic postings is cause i've got that pissed off with the sectarian backbiting crap that goes on here, i've not bothered coming on and checking stuff out and now, here it goes again. free speech is free speech but do people have to go on and on repeating themselves about the swp endlessly... think of a new argument against them please at least cause its getting soooo damn boring. how about attacking the bloody government for a change?
and, internationalist, do keep posting leftwing, progressive stuff or otherwise this whole media will just become a platform for people posting anti-traveller stuff etc.. (not to mention those who prefer catfights - ,or is that sexist - oops!, to news)

heather

So, he IS right!

07.02.2002 18:49

Just look at that photograph of Bronstein. Ronnie, you are so right. They ARE an ugly set of bastards!!!

St. Pauli.

ronnie the bigot

07.02.2002 19:03

from what i read here its the biggots who should be fucked over biggotary is unreasonably prejudiced and intolerant and ronnie falles into that headlong if you talk like him then it dosent matter weather its nationalaties colour class religion or thought people like him are really facists
they just dont know it yet
THERE IS GOOD AND BAD IN ALL NOT JUST ONE SECTION OF ANY SOCIETY

me

YEAH

07.02.2002 19:24

yeah fuck off ronnie and that football holigan st pauli named after bloke who started the whole christian shite

football thought up by the rulling classes to keep people from wondering why they are so badly treated it was a good ploy its worked a treat give em a game on telly each nite they wont mind being fucked up the arse with a governmental boot every day. 200 years now, isnt it better mind control than drugs or cops it keeps them fighting each other too divide and rule sorted

john jones-smith

You would know

07.02.2002 20:01

Oh dear! I seem to have upset a couple of liberals. What an utter rotter I am. Go on, fuck off you pair of dickheads. Get out and get that petition started, or is it branch meeting night. What is it tonight? Can we save Labour? How many people can a T52 tank crush? Fucking underdone Stalinists.
By the way, 63% for strike action! Don't forget, if I see you SWP opportunists on our picket lines, I'll kick your arses back home to your rich parents. Karl Marx said there is no such thing as a non-political act, so I'm just off for a quick Trotskyist crap. See yer.

Ronnie.

Just to be a pedant

07.02.2002 20:17

I think you'll find it was JESUS who started the whole christian shite

Gonzo

nope

07.02.2002 20:24

you're wrong there. Jesus was a rebel in caves. St Paul was the sexist (and quite possibly racist and homophobic) person who set it up into a religion. ever get the feeling we are going round in circles here?

heather

Another pedant

07.02.2002 20:29

I also think you will find that it was not Josef Stalin who betrayed the Russian Revolution, but Trotsky and Lenin. Just for the record, I'm not a football hooligan. Stop using words you have no understanding of you silly boy. And why do you write using only the lower case? Does the keyboard baffle you perhaps? No wonder you don't understand football. Not only is it a game enjoyed by the working class (which you probably are not) but for someone who hasn't got the sense to find the Caps Lock, you would be well out of your depth trying to understand the offside rule.
Ronnie, best of luck with the strike.

St. Pauli.

Wanker

07.02.2002 20:30

Fuck me Ronnie you really are the biggest wanker I've come across in a long time. Have you ever heard of worker's solidarity - no actually you can't probably even spell it. As an active trade unionist I have visited many picket lines to offer support & have been happy to see others visit me when I've been on strike myself regardless of whether or not they sell papers.

You'd be a copper's wet dream on a picket line - as soon as you started throwing you weight about they'd bag the lot of you. If I worked with you the first thing I'd do on picket duty is wrap you in a mail bag and drop you in the river.

I can only assume that the root of your inability to manage your anger properly is your involvement in rugby league. I think you have a lot of self hatred because you've never had the oportunity to be involved in proper rugby.

The voice of reason

The voice of treason

07.02.2002 20:39

You're obviously an expert on the subject of wanking. I'm all for workers solidarity, which means keeping the SWP as far away as possible. Rugby League has nothing to do with it except it's not played by your chums from university and so has the advantage of no retired brigadiers and air commodores running it. You're probably much more at home with those sort of people than I would be. It's a class thing. You wouldn't understand.

Ronnie.

Go on

07.02.2002 20:49

Go on Ronnie. You've really pissed them off. This is the best fun I've had for ages.

Ivor the Engine.

It may be boring but

07.02.2002 20:52

Unfortunately the policy of no censorship does mean you get sexist, racist, homophobist drivel. Just like in the real world. You also sooner or later end up skimming through tediuos debates like this one. Just like in the real world. But if you read this site consistantly and have even half a brain you'll soon figure out that the benefits of no censorship vastly outwiegh these sad little side effects. Well I think they're pretty sad anyway.

Tim

Editing is not censorship

07.02.2002 21:46

Editing something is not necessarily censorship. And censorship is not necessarily wrong. Personally, I think that meaningless posts full of insults, like many of the above, should be deleted. I think racist, sexist or homophobic posts should be censored. The benefit of having a tighter editorial policy is that more people will regard this as a news source, instead of a notice board or news group rant.

Adewale

It's true.

07.02.2002 21:51

Have to agree with Tim here. I always skip through the racist, homophobic, sexist stuff as it just gets my back up. At least face to face it can be confronted, but over the internet it's difficult.
On the other hand, you ignore the likes of Internationalist and his control freak friends at your peril. They would dearly like to run the country and impose socialism from above. It failed in Eastern Europe, but they cling onto the punctured life raft of the early 20th Century for dear life. A bit like the Flat Earth Society really.

Ronnie.

from a conspiracy nut

07.02.2002 21:57

dh/dwight heet

my views on the SWP

07.02.2002 22:06

everytime someone starts a debate on the SWP, trots run to the debate accusing them of betraying workers struggles or in-fighting, it would nice if they could understand that the SWP do nothing for workers and are more interested in selling newspapers under the guise of "helping workers" than actually making a positive difference, why do the SWP waste so much money on merchandising when they could do something positive with it? how many people actually stay in the SWP for more than a couple of years anyway? and the thing about in-fighting/sectarianism, well most people don't consider themselves trotskyists, and before the trots start going on about how they are part of the anti-capitalist movement, would this be the anti-capitalist movement they denounced after J18? and have now declared themselves the voice of, how the fuck can a bunch of egits be the voice of millions of people, face it they can't, the SWP is just another corporation seeking to control the masses to make a profit out of them, and even worse it actively seeks political power, we could go on for ages....

jimmer

Dwight

07.02.2002 22:07

Dwight, you're a bigger loony than the SWP and that's saying something. Still, go on mate. At least you're not annoying shoppers with a megaphone.

Ronnie.

oh yes...

07.02.2002 22:14

i also fucking hate the "conspiracy nuts" for 2 reasons:
1) this is a news/political site, not a place for people to post up stories (there are other sites for that)
2) none of the conspiracys are very good, maybe some interesting more realistic ones, but the current ones are just so dull, i think the whole knights templar thing is quite interesting...

jimmer

and as an obsessional

07.02.2002 22:24

I'd still refer you to this piece of weirdness. Can anyone make it out?

dh

thanks ronnie

07.02.2002 22:36

'bigger loony than the SWP' i'll add that to my collection of abuse and challenge the next newspaper seller from whom I buy my copy of Socialist Worker. That should throw 'em

dh

Why fight amongst ourselves?

07.02.2002 23:07

The bombing of Afganistan continues, the US military plan to widen their 'war against terrorism' which means more innocent people will die, New Labour pushes ahead with selling off schools and hospitals to the fat cats. And what are we doing? Fighting amongst ourselves.

George Bush and Tony Blair must be laughing their arses off.

Cautious Fred

agree absolutely Cautious Fred

08.02.2002 01:14

if they managed to stay awake that long....

heather

another authoritarian ploy

08.02.2002 02:55

Is anyone else as worried as me by some recent IMC UK postings and the (lack of) reaction to them?

>erm, well no. I've noticed that recently, amongst >postings I wouldn't personally call news/debate/discussion >has been some really good stuff reflecting the @utonomous >anti-capitalist movement, and the various struggles >individuals and groups care about.

Forgive a posting which isn't really news.

>no, because this posting isn't anything resembling news, >it's a deliberate attempt by authoritarians to garner >sympathy for censorship. Censorship which they try to >manipulate into place because we will not allow them the >power to impose it. These ploys are well documented, by >those independently minded - anarchists

Came here today to post some union news etc, as I do.. But then skimmed the last week's newswire, and I'm left quite alarmed, and not sure I want to keep participating.
I'm not fussed by the SWP-bashing; in fact all the free publicity is doing us no harm at all! ;-)

>I've always found that if you want to find the motivation >for authoritarians, the best way is to turn >their 'arguments' on their head. That way you can see why >they're lying.
>No you didn't come here to post some union news at all.

But racism, sexism, homophobia.. these do bother me, especially when they so often seem to go unchallenged.

>Aaarrrr( that's a nice Aaarrrr).... no one reading your >posts or those posts of similar authoritarians then????
>
>Tell you what, why not look at the causes of every >possible form of oppression (including swp/authoritarian >censorship of potential/ex members). Of course >authoritarians are excluded from this discussion, by >virtue of their inability (at the moment) to understand it.

>Because people don't read, or wish they hadn't, swp >postings, doesn't mean that postings without comments >haven't been read - your every attempt at 'controlling' is >being giggled at.....................knobhead.

Postings promoting the old Nazi lie that 'Jews' control the media, a posting celebrating the denial of living space for travellers, comments slagging off female comrades on grounds of their appearance, contributors attacked using homophobic insults.. the list goes on. And precious few contributors seem to challenge any of it.

>So according to the swp, indymedia contributors and >readers, are not sufficiently 'developed' politically to >understand what they should!!

So I guess I'm asking for anyone who feels the same to add a comment, just to re-assure me it's still worth posting up left-wing, progressive stuff here.

>Well, guess you're trying to get a reaction. Problem is >that the discussion, and action has moved on again. Unlike >you sad, authoritarian 'socialists' who continue to >swallow the party line you're fed, lots of people have >discarded leaders, and started to think for themselves.

question everything ....

paul

well this has been educational!

08.02.2002 11:07

Apologies again to the editors for inadvertantly sparking off possibly the longest thread ever. Having said that, a lot of folk obviously had a lot to say, and I guess it was a catalyst.

My original post was intended to express concern at racism, sexism and homophobia going unchallenged, and to see if many/any IMC readers felt the same.

Thanks to those who responded seriously, even those who felt the need to call me a vampire while doing so! ;-)

But (and here's the lesson for me) certain others leapt to the assumption that I was demanding censorship, even though I explicitly rejected it.

Why? Simply because I admit to being in the SWP. Which casts an interesting light on these folks' claim to be part of an open-minded, un-prejudiced movement.

And in short order the same people then segued into their usual self-congratulatory kill-the-trots-fest; which, oddly and worryingly, seems to go hand-in-hand with a defence of 'ironic' sexism).

For me, as I said earlier, the lesson is to post more news and fewer comments (a relief for all?), and to sadly accept that certain folk will refuse to consider anything I say simply because I belong to a taboo organisation.

internationalist
Homepage: http://www.swp.org.uk

Censorship and the SWP

08.02.2002 11:25

There seems to be a lot of abuse hurled at the SWP in IMC that goes well beyond rational debate, constructive criticism and impassioned argument. While SWP members are accused of 'infiltration' and 'censorship', it seems their opponents are trying to completely deny them the right to participate here. Since I have seen no evidence that the SWP or its minions are actually breaking the few codes of conduct set down by the IMC collective, I think this behaviour is reprehensible.

The SWP has a right to state its line and we have a right to disagree, but that does not justify the kind of infantile bickering by self-proclaimed anarchists. Like it or not, the SWP and its sister organisations - ANL and Globalise Resistance - have a place in the anti-capitalist movement and they are not going to go away. Their members are just as dedicated and sincere as the rest of us in working towards a more just and equal society.

At a time when the world's richest nations are at war with the poorest and when our liberties are under attack for opposing this system of oppression and plunder, it is important to have civilised dialogue.

Daniel Brett
mail e-mail: dan@danielbrett.co.uk

.

08.02.2002 11:51

you can't have equality with a hierarchy...

jimmer

I think it does

08.02.2002 12:28

"Self proclaimed anarchists"-why do reformists always seek to cast doubts on the veracity of people's beliefs. Anyway, if you look to the hopeful end result of the anti-capitalist movement e.g the overthrow of capitalism and its replacement, you'll see there is no common ground with Trotskyists, Leninists or reformists, cause we'll just be doing it again. This post assumes you're an anarchist, in case u hadn't guessed (although i think we should make dh supreme leader for a day, it'd be funny)

Gonzo

Vulgar anarchism

08.02.2002 12:43

By 'self-proclaimed anarchists', I did not mean to denigrate the beliefs of those principled anarchists. I was criticising vulgar anarchism, which is a form of authoritarianism because it violently rejects anyone who does not conform. If you want to work towards a free and just society, there has to be respect for divurgent opinions without prejudice or abuse against any individual. That is not reformism, that is common sense.

Daniel Brett
mail e-mail: dan@danielbrett.co.uk

Don't worry Fred.

08.02.2002 13:48

Fred, we're not fighting among ourselves so you have no cause for concern. I would never knowingly cause offence to a fellow worker or a genuine workers organisation. Everyone else can get stuffed though. Regards,

Ronnie.

Ronnie.

Censorship my eye

08.02.2002 17:37

Interesting echoes of the debate William Godwin kicked off a couple of weeks back. Because everyone knows internationalist is in the SWP, s/he's obviously a manipulative authoritarian demanding censorship, just because s/he quite reasonably kicks off about racist/sexist/homophobic postings. Now, you could argue that there's space for those postings because it gives us an opportunity to attack those ideas. But it doesn't mean the debateisn't worth having- or that the person who kicked it off's an overbearing Stalinist. And what's all the personal abuse about? Like Authur sez, it does very little to further libertarian politics. So, yeah- do keep on posting radical/progressive/ items. And let's leave the bigots to play with themselves.

Julie Burchill

Reasonable criticism and unreasonable loathin

08.02.2002 18:51

I don't like the SWP as an organisation. They reduce politics to paper sales and recruitment and have little conception of democracy. They can be a real pain in the arse to deal with, getting involved in a campaign to make a few recruits and then running off after the next shiny source of paper sales. Given a choice, when I was living in Dublin, I would always prefer to see a member of say the WSM at a campaign meeting than an SWPer - at least I know that the WSMer would try to see the campaign through and wouldn't judge it primarily in terms of organisational gains.

That said, the unreasoning hostility to them here is a bit worrying. Most members of the SWP are sincere socialists, which makes them anti-capitalists just as much as the anarchist part of the movement. They join their organisation because they want to make the world a better place. Some of them are wankers, some are alright, some are nice - just like other socialists or anarchists. Some of them are even pretty good activists.

We do need to prevent the SWP from exercising the kind of hegemony they would like over the left, but shouting abuse them isn't the way to do it.

Brian Cahill - ISR
mail e-mail: nigel_irritable@yahoo.com
Homepage: www.resistance.eu.com

Boshevik methods

09.02.2002 02:45

JB
The struggle against power/authoritarianism surely doesn't end when someone says they are a member of a political party, and a party political alliance united in their strange worship of their fellow kin in parliament?

Hasn't that happened before, with the slaughter of thousands (who can put numbers on people who feel this society is wrong?) Discussions about censorship and every other, tried and tested, method of silencing people who refuse to tow the party line, should be, I feel discussed whenever anyone wants to talk about it. I hope it's ongoing, because if we forget, you can be sure the authoritarians/capitalists will try, when it comes to the crunch, to impose their ideas on the rest of us.
Maybe I'm just an un-ununderstander.

Let's debate everything..

BC
Yes, the swp and their ilk could be ignored, but is that really wise?
It's not about selling papers, or ideas, but an attempt to flood the anti-capitalist movement with 'cadres'.
We stood accused after J18, and throughout the miners strike, the poll tax, of being disorganised :-)

I don't care for politicians, of any political party, and especially their apolagists.

Thinking about, analysing all the enemies of a different way of living/being, is one of a number of converging, ongoing debates isn't it?

WGI do