- This topic has 259 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 7 months ago by Anonymous.
June 14, 2014 at 11:24 am #96820rodshawParticipantsteve colborn wrote:Why have you been sent email notifications? Did you tick the, "Notify me when new comments are posted" box? If so, them I,m afraid it was self-inflicted. There are those who still have wish things to be explained on this thread. If you personally, find the discussion boring, then don't read the thread, simples : )
Yes, I did (or rather, I left the option ticked), but that seems like a long time ago now. And the title alone of the notification emails you get doesn't give you a clue as to which topic they are for. So if I delete them in bulk without at least glancing at them I may delete something for a topic I want notifying about.June 14, 2014 at 11:46 am #96821SocialistPunkParticipant
When I was a fledgling socialist, my father was a friend and mining colleague of a chap called Bobby Gleghorn. Bobby was a member of the North East Branch of the SPGB. It was because of his friendship with my father that I became a socialist, later joining the North East Branch.Bobby was an inspiring advocate of socialism, and also a very kind, warm compassionate man. He encapsulated the spirit of socialism with action as well as words. It was from him and my parents that I take my socialist values. The reason I bring this up now on this thread, is because of one particular principle he advocated. He would encourage the asking of questions, any questions. He stood by a socialist principle that said if proven wrong, it would be accepted openly. He would not shy away from difficult or awkward issues and enquiry. I think that is a vital principle for any socialist society, there is no shame in admitting when you are wrong. Something I will gladly do if my position can be shown to be misguided.On this issue, I have stuck to facts, while some created convoluted imaginary scenarios, others stayed silent when their reasoning was destroyed, I have even been accused of distortion and calling party procedure undemocratic. All tactics to stifle open discussion. Yet I have answered everything put to me consistently.Now there is convenient silence.Is this the model for dealing with awkward issues in a socialist society?July 18, 2014 at 11:14 pm #96822AnonymousInactivesteve colborn wrote:Any thoughts people?
Rape? Homophobia? Pedophilia?Criticism of party democracy?July 29, 2014 at 9:30 pm #96823AnonymousInactive
This resolution is on the EC agenda for August and is probably the result of the discussion on this threadv. Resolution from North London re membership applications (22July, Carried 7-0-0): "That this Branch believes that the EC should give reasons for rejecting an application for membership."It’s a tough one.How would this work in practice? Any thoughts?July 30, 2014 at 1:50 pm #96824AnonymousInactive
If the vote was 5-4 to reject for example, then 4 EC members need not give a reason(s) for rejection. The other 5 need to come to a consensus on the reason(s)Or perhaps the reason could be within the motion to reject.This issue has affected only one or two individuals but as the party grows it will become more of an issue.For example, if Arthur Scarghill or George Gallaway past the questionair……
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.