Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

SP: Scab Party

Expand Messages
  • br3068
    Actually David there is quite a bit of political debate on this list: it is just that you usually only contribute a bit of troll rant when the SP and the
    Message 1 of 53 , May 19, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Actually David there is quite a bit of political debate on this
      list: it is just that you usually only contribute a bit of troll
      rant when the SP and the parallel universe it inhabits are
      mentioned. Perhaps that is not such a bad thing.

      As mentioned before, anyone vaguely interested in this stuff can
      refer to this week's GL for an idea of just what is happening in
      trade unions today and Socialist Alliance is involved. They're all
      presumably DSP "licks"(mmm tasty!), as are the majority of delegates
      who endorsed the SA Conference resolution on union work.

      My main experience with encountering the SP in Union work was during
      the 1997 Melbourne Uni EBA dispute. The then SP member Andy Blunden
      (who was part of the NTEU leadership) spearheaded the ramming
      through of an agreement that explicitly linked a pay rise with the
      branch supporting revenue targets dependent on up front fees for
      students!

      The SP and anti-capitalist struggle? More like the Scab Party.
      Students on the list should all give the SP a note of thanks for
      helping the introduction of fees along.

      Ben Reid



      --- In GreenLeft_discussion@yahoogroups.com, "lyttonwelsh"
      <lyttonwelsh@y...> wrote:
      > It's not often that the GLW list causes enough political
      discussion,
      > these days, but the usual anti-SP rants of Rohan Pearce and Kim
      > Bullimore are as usual deceptive.
      > Yes the SP does have less union activists than the "socialist
      > alliance". In terms of long-term union activism, the SP has a
      heap
      > more than the DSP. It goes without saying that the SPs record is
      > much better.
      > The DSP's union tactics are largely based upon cherry-picking
      the
      > more favoured leaders, industrial putschism (note: in the WA ETU
      the
      > DSP hasn't yet analysed how it put the right into power, but it is
      > understandable), selling newspapers at industrial disputes.
      > Kim asks us to look at ourselves, but what examples are there
      of
      > SP mistakes. What examples Kim? How do they compare to say, the
      > unfortunate loss of the Victorian AMWU by workers first?
      Wollongong
      > Ironworkers and the whole 'turn to industry' experience? CPSU
      > Members First? WA ETU? DSP members in the victorian CFMEU selling
      > papers while Rome burns in the Victorian CFMEU goes on behind
      them?
      > Attempted DSP sabotage/takeover of the CPSU rank and file
      committees
      > in the mid-1990s?
      > What about the UNITE campaign? An initiative for casual
      > workers, which is having increasing success in Melbourne and is
      > currently being established in Newcastle (and will soon be
      > established in Perth and Sydney). Graham Matthews seems to have
      > dismissed it as a front. The big question is, what has the DSP
      ever
      > done for casual workers, apart from occasionally selling a GLW to
      > one? Will the DSP try to take it over or try and sabotage it?
      >
      > well, that's enough from me for the time being.
      >
      > DM.
    • Commie Bastard
      ... ... the SA ... What an order, journalistic style, brevity. Thanks for the post Dave, especially the mention and link to the review of the L Word.
      Message 53 of 53 , Jun 4, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In GreenLeft_discussion@yahoogroups.com, "dave_r_riley"
        <dhell2@o...> wrote:
        > --- In GreenLeft_discussion@yahoogroups.com, "glparramatta"
        > <glparramatta@g...> wrote:
        >
        <snip>
        > >
        > >5)GLW is now wide open to be used by all SA members to benefit
        the SA
        > > and the movements we are active in, so rather than talk in the
        > > abstract about what ``style'' or ``format'' GLW should have, why
        > > not start to shape it now by contributing articles, promoting
        > > its distribution or offering your technical skills.
        >
        >
        > Maybe Norm hasn't said EVERYthing but he has made a few key points
        > I think about the GLW project. I guess for me it comes down to
        > questions of journalism. In this regard I think there are some
        > aspects I'd like to emphasize in way of the sort of paper I like
        > reading:
        >
        > Part of the challenge in writing stuff is to do so in as few words
        > as possible. That basically means that you stay on the money when
        > you set out to write something. I know how often that can get away
        > from you as you begin to layer your piece but to some degree you
        > need to set out with a set package size in mind. Indeed, I think
        > it better to submit TWO articles if one proves too long.

        What an order, journalistic style, brevity.

        Thanks for the post Dave, especially the mention and link to the
        review of the L Word. I've never watched it but seen a few reviews
        on it. Never one, however, written from such an unashamedly
        revolutionary women's perspective.

        It's a pity the journalistic style across the rest of the weekly
        deters the occasional buyer and potential readers from finding such
        gems. That may help explain the push to get other people to write
        for it, who knows?

        <SNIP – that's also about 1100 words briefer, pal! >

        commie bastard
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.