Bijou Drains

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,876 through 1,890 (of 1,957 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: twitter account @worldsocialism.com #116217
    Bijou Drains
    Participant
    Young Master Smeet wrote:
    Quote:
    To me if you are not reliable enough to be trusted with a twitter account, then you are not reliable enough to be trusted with a party membership, and I trust Vin's Socialist credibility.

    That doesn't follow, a person may well be a member, and a sound socialist, but be unsuitable for a particular kind of job, that's why we have elections, nominations and appointments.

    A person may be unsuitable for a particular kind of job, however the management of a twitter account is a fairly straightforward job that, in my opinion, is one that any technically competent member should be able to carry out. As you say we have elections, nominations and appointments of party posts. We also have explanations for the actions of committees and officers of the party, except curiously in this case. If Cde Marratty was deemed unsuitable for this role by the IC, why was he not told of the reasoning and more importantly why is the party as a whole not aware of that reasoning. The lack of this information makes the IC unaccountable to the party for their actions. Just a very quick and very straight forward yes or no question YMS. Do you think that officers and committees of the party should be accountable for their actions?

    in reply to: twitter account @worldsocialism.com #116209
    Bijou Drains
    Participant

    Apologies if I was a little facetious, I understand that they were trials, etc. However 

    alanjjohnstone wrote:
     What i find extraordinary is a committee chose to find a member inappropriate for a job, not on technical ability but it seems on "political" grounds of unreliability that reflects badly on the member. It seems the IC were reluctant to explain why to him and seek out a compromise,

    This is the bit I am deeply concerned about. If, as seems to be the case, the IC think that Vin is "unreliable", then they have, as part of their role in a democratic Socialist movement to explain why that is. To me if you are not reliable enough to be trusted with a twitter account, then you are not reliable enough to be trusted with a party membership, and I trust Vin's Socialist credibility.The other, and to some extent the more worrying thing about this, is that it appears (and I can only say appears as I am an outsider looking in) that members of the SPGB (i.e.. the IC) think that it is ok that that there are members of the party who are safe to be members but not trusted to put forward the Socialist case in addition to this (the most worrying bit to me) is that they appear to think that as members of a committee of the Party are in a position to make that judgment alone, without recourse to the democratic processes within the party, without providing reasoning to make that decision and without providing records and minutes of that decision being made. Is this some new kind of Democratic Centralism, where the elite decide and the membership toe the line?I have known Vin as a Socialist for something near to 35 years, I have never had any doubt about his understanding of the Party case and of his commitment to the Socialist cause, I find it very concerning that others in the party should question this, or allow personal feelings and prejudices to become part of how we do business. This is the kind of crap you expect from the SWP, the Militant or the ICC

    in reply to: twitter account @worldsocialism.com #116207
    Bijou Drains
    Participant
    alanjjohnstone wrote:
    I have to 'fess upI'm warming the seats of two inactive world socialism blogs awaiting the resurgence of the WSM to take them overhttps://worldsocialism.wordpress.com/https://worldsocialists.wordpress.com/They were trials for a new blog that didn't see the light of day but one day may be useful and it stops other rival groups from grabbing the name. 

    and did you have to have permission from the IC to start these blogs?

    in reply to: twitter account @worldsocialism.com #116205
    Bijou Drains
    Participant

    Surely as a committee of the party the IC needs to be accountable. Can a member of the IC please account for their decision not to allow Comrade Marratty to operate the worldsocialism twitter account? It is a fairly straightforward question and it NEEDS to be answered. I find it worrying that, despite requests, the IC has not circulated any minutes that I am aware of which clarify their decision making process.If the IC cannot (or will not) answer this fairly straightforward question, then it has become unaccountable to the party and therefore is going beyond its remit and terms of reference and as such the members of that committee should either put this right or resign.As to what appears to me to be the bizarre idea that it should be a "person or ideally persons from the companion parties", forgive my ignorance but surely the SPGB is one of the companion parties and as such comrade Marratty as a member of the SPGB is perfectly placed to carry out this role.The inference I am making from this, and taking into account that members of the IC resigned from the AV committee when comrade Marratty was appointed, is that they hold personal opinions of comrade Marratty which are influencing their administration of their party role. Is it a case that the IC is creating a two tier membership, members who meet the IC's approval and members who do not?

    in reply to: North East Regional Branch #100623
    Bijou Drains
    Participant
    DJP wrote:
    gnome wrote:
    HO offers some first class accommodation…

    So long as you bring ear plugs to block out the noise of the disco next door! 

    To be honest, if I was staying overnight at HO, the people at the disco should probably be more worried about me being next door to them than I would be about them being next door to me!!!

    in reply to: North East Regional Branch #100621
    Bijou Drains
    Participant

    Unfortunately I definitely cannot make Conference. Family commitments mean that if I went to conference my better half would have my nads for castanets

    in reply to: Hostility Clause #118136
    Bijou Drains
    Participant

    the issue of twitter and other internet based social media is a complex one. The party, rightly in my opinion  has special provision for those comrades who take on responsibilities such as acting as a candidate or acting as a party speaker.However one of the difficulties generally with things such as twitter is that they intuitively feel like a general conversation that you would have down the boozer, and god knows I've said enough stupid things when I'm full of ale, however they are not. A party speaker might say something that is questionable in front of a relatively small number of people and it will only be remembered and reported by those present. I can say something down the pub that disappears in the ether, however what goes on the net can be read by millions if not billions. We have all come across reports of "celebrities" of MPs who've made stupid comments they regret on twitter or some other social media, when they were pissed up or not thinking, just ask Adam Johnson (sorry to my Mackem comrades). We do need to be careful that this does not happen to our official postings.Consequently we need to have some degree of democratic party control over these outlets, however we also need to ensure that whatever controls we have over the outlets are also democratically controlled and accountable and do not set themselves up as judge, jury and final arbiters of what goes on line.I also think that the starting point in all of this has to be trust, that we ensure that democratic accountability is in place and that the relevant controls are also in place and then we allow those who wish to do good work for the party to get on with it. With all of these things there will be mistakes and we can learn from them, however we do need to trust our fellow socialists to get on with the propagation of socialist ideas

    in reply to: North East Regional Branch #100612
    Bijou Drains
    Participant
    gnome wrote:
    Vin wrote:
    February online meetingVery pleased with turnout 0f 8 members. Thought it was going to be difficult to get qourum to sort Form  C out but members rallied

    Very encouraging news, Vin.  Good to hear too that Stephen has rejoined and that Tim will join you (EC willing) on the A/V Committee… 

    Yes Gnome, Vin told me as part of the role you get to go to the Oscars, is that right?

    in reply to: Hostility Clause #118132
    Bijou Drains
    Participant

    I think the problem is that your message stated "posting Labour party press handouts in your Twitter feed, is in breach of our hostility clause and they should be deleted.", which implies that your decision on the matter is final and that you have the authority to decide how the hostility clause should be interpreted. Perhaps if you had written "posting Labour party press handouts in your Twitter feed, may be in breach of our hostility clause and perhaps you should consider deleting them." This might have been more appropriate, as I assume you do not have the exclusive right to decide what constitutes a breach of the hostility clause and what does not. 

    in reply to: Hostility Clause #118130
    Bijou Drains
    Participant

    So what is ok in the real world is not ok in the virtual world (redistributing uncritically the work of non-members and members of other political parties such as Kautsky) and what goes on in the virtual world has to be regulated (by the IC) in ways that we do not in the real world. Funny old world, the virtual world, isn't it. You could be forgiven for thinking that someone somewhere is nit picking because they have a particular axe to grind. Although I'm sure the actions of the IC in pointing out Vin's supposed breach of the hostility clause were motivated by nothing of this kind.

    in reply to: Ireland Elects #117076
    Bijou Drains
    Participant

    The interesting thing is how rapid the breakdown of the old Fine Gail/Fianna Fail, Tweedledee.Tweedledum system has been. The fact that they both might have to agree that the traditional choice between them is no different to choosing Coke or Pepsi, might leave them both with a huge credibility gap. I can't see any great number of "independents" lining up with FG. I think a more natural home for many of them would be alongside the "slightly constiutional" FF

    in reply to: Hostility Clause #118128
    Bijou Drains
    Participant

    My opinion is that the whole issue of social media, the use of the forum, etc, etc. are actually a bit of a mess and that one sticking plaster amendment to rules is not going to sort these issues out, but will only store up more trouble in the future. The use of electronic media and messaging is now of such important and value to the party, whilst also potentially being the source of massive discontent within the party that we need a root and branch examination of the whole issue, with the emphasis on ensuring party democracy. We also need to consider the members of the party who are not comfortable with social media, electronic forums etc. Tinkering with the rule book is, in my opinion, only going to make matters worse. As to the issue of quoting material on the twitter feed, I would argue that it is for the whole party to decide what is in breach of the hostility clause, not individual members of the IC. Is the party in breach of its hostility clause by selling (unedited) the works of Martov and Kautsky. I may be wrong but I don't think either of those two were ever in the party.

    in reply to: Ireland Elects #117074
    Bijou Drains
    Participant

    Fine Gael and Fanna Fail to form coalition? does this mean the Civil War's finally over?

    in reply to: Evil #116932
    Bijou Drains
    Participant

    Perhaps the amount of time spent on "policing" this site is the reason the Internet Committee didn't have time to write even a very brief report on their activities to the democratic decision making body that is the SPGB Annual Conference?

    in reply to: Cameron’s EU deal #117565
    Bijou Drains
    Participant
    gnome wrote:
    ALB wrote:
    Of course, I realise that and it wasn't a serious suggestion but was one that would have been understood immediately by anyone aware of the history of the SWP. To spell it out, they were originally formed as the "International Socialism Group" and their slogan, on their publications, etc was

    Quote:
    Neither Washington nor Moscow but International Socialism.

    But I suppose not all members are Trotskyist-train-spotters or need to be. But at least it confirms what we were taught in Speakers Class that irony never works as people take you literally.

    Irony works well when people are on the same wavelength and understand where you're 'coming from' but unfortunately most will know little or nothing about the SWP/IS….  or us.

    Does this mean the party is suffering from an irony deficiency (walks away, hanging head in shame)

Viewing 15 posts - 1,876 through 1,890 (of 1,957 total)