HCH, I am really not sure if

HCH, I am really not sure if you are arguing point based on any principle or just plain arguing, but it doesn’t make much sense: With regards to Hatton, Alan said he wondered where he was now, and I told him. Fact: he is a businessman and employer. Fact: he is a media seeking individual. No-one is ‘having a go’ merely stating the truth and if you are the socialist you say you are, you must agree that Mr Hatton so far as our movement is concerenced is a bit of a turn coat and offers no genuine contribution to the current socialist cause, or is that not the case? And I don’t think I/We should offer critical support to those pursuing ideas which ultimately are doomed to utter faiilure and detract from the main task of converting people to the ideas of socialism, as explained in previous posts which I don’t think you are reading to the end to be honest. Regards the Falklands war and SPEW.Alan said “The contradictions tho remain with SPEW and its support of  the 1982 Falkland War [albeit under the direction of a Labour government].” This was EXACTLY the Militant position at the time, another fact –  so why is this considered a scraping of the barrel? Our views and Militant’s views were expressed clearly then and are the same now, i.e. different approaches to the Falklands conflict and both available to read and compare via the archives of the Socialist Standard (SPGB ) and Socialism Today (Militant/SPEW).And our position on war is clear and has been stated and you have argued against it saying it is pacifist and unrealistic, yet here you say we have the same views on wars. Which is it, different or the same? The SPGB opposes ALL wars, full stop. Does Militant or does it oppose all wars with exceptions? Tell me, I’d be interested to hear your thoughts – is Militant opposed to ALL war at ALL times in ALL circumstances?And yes, in prinicple I agree with you. We all stand for the abolition of capitalism, for the dawn of a socialist, co-operative society based on undertsanding, goodwill and freedom for all men. But how to get there? This is where the debate is. As it stands, the SPGB has a clear set of principles which have been stated on every paper, pamhlet and writings since its inception in 1904. It has held a clear analisys based on the principles and continues to do so. For the most part we feel that these arguments have held their own and been proven over time to be correct, albeit without acheiving the final goal. Militant, a far more fluid organisation operates on different principles, often changing I might add, to suit circumstances, and despite this has also not acheived the end goal. So there we maybe called even in our failure. To paraphrase/butcher a quote by Oscar  Wilde: ‘we are comrades divided by a common goal!’The level of debate has not fallen, but to be fair the level is governed by the protaganists and if you consistently argue your own party line without reading the replies that are given, the debate is effectively finished and slugging propoganda is bought in. It is also easier to debate one topic at a time rather than jumping from one to the other, so if there is a specific issue with the SPGB you wish to discuss, start a new thread and stick to that issue until is is debated out. Mostly this debate reminds me of a quote that “A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still”.