Many groups have canvassed me, but by far the most aggressive are the SWP. Fortunately I did my research into their policies, tactics and style before they phoned all I would say is that the cartoons of them and satire of their canvassing technique is based on truth. I feel i need to inform because a less informed individual might bend to the SWP will.
I put myself on the mailing list for the socialist alliance (I wanted to keep up with their progress although not a member myself) so I didn’t put my phone number down they then later caught up with me got my phone number and phoned my two days later with incredibly aggressive tactics even though I wanted to finish the conversation. (Fortunately I had done my research before they phoned.)
Although they claim to be a revolutionary party they are part of the socialist alliance, which is not, they still tell their supporters to vote labour even when they have been betrayed time and time again.
They claim that the anarchists are "useless", "reactionary", "sectarian" and "isolated from the working class” I have one thing to say to the SWP if that’s what you think of them you could you stop canvassing them and stop making false promises to your members and others to whom you preach.
Question: If the purpose of the SWP was revolutionary why has it allied it self with the Muslim clerical elite?
Would Marx, Engles or Lenin do such a thing?
Surely the best way of obtaining support from the Muslim community is via the grass roots, I think it was the good ole' workers power that said this was an old fashioned popular front. Of course allow Muslims into the party and stuff but trying to get them to join by going to their clerical elite? Does anyone see the irony? It is like George Bush going to Tony Blair and securing the support of the British people on the war on terror and the battle against Iraq.
The members of the SWP must be nearing the end of their tether after having to defend their leaders actions. First he was heard telling a member to canvas the anarchist types because they are not very "politically minded". (is that a euphemism or what?) Now he has a popular front.
It seems the SWP's policies only include getting stuff through government and getting more support.

I recommended the readers of the socialist worker to read something of Bakunin or George Orwell.

I used this argument against him and he claimed that I “didn’t know the policies” so also attacked his more “revolutionary” side and went after the old Russian Bolshevik propaganda. I talked about how the Bolsheviks decreased democracy in Russia even before the white army attacked and before every capitalist country within however many miles attacked and before Lenin fell ill.

Before I start hearing the words “splitter” and “shut up” and being labelled sectarian I shall make a closing comment I would like to make a disclaimer:
I am not sectarian as you can see sectarian is:
adj
Have, relating to, or characteristic of a sect. -not a member of a sect
Adhering or confined to the dogmatic limits of a sect or denomination; partisan.
Narrow-minded; parochial. - That’s is entirely subjective (if I was narrow minded I would not be canvassed by such a wide range of groups)
n.
A member of a sect. - again not a member
One characterized by bigoted adherence to a factional viewpoint.-subjective
I am not advocating any viewpoint in this article I merely give constructive criticism to others.
And before you say "why don’t you create an alternative then?"
I am getting involved and are planning more, i am not going to get personal and explain but..... At least I don’t live by the promise that if we huff n' puff and walk all the way from a to b then a government that has listened to what people want a handful of times in 500 years will open its ears and listen again.
Peace
Ernest