That's all I have to say. Besides from it being outright hilarious to claim a international with 1 or 2 persons in some countries.
First off we have more then just 1 or 2 person's in a country
We have sections in both The U.K. and The Philipines.
Places we don't have formal sections such as Canada, Germany, Italy, and Japan are were we have 1 or 2 members. We have nice sized groupings in England and The Philipines.
Anyway it still seems you don't know anything about the work in Britain but tries to criticise it anyway, that's not really any base for serious discussion now is it?
We know enough about the so called work in Britain.
We have plenty of young comrades and more get attracted to us by the Venezuelan work. Youth Leagues can have many forms and it's a total abandonement of Lenin's flexibility to claim they should be youth leagues in that form just because Lenin wrote that. Only a religious would claim that.
First off this is pretty much the same arguement that a "Revisionist" would make i find it funny how your tendency tends to use the word "Flexibility" either in place of "Revisionist" or you seem to use it in place of "Democracy or lack there of". Its kind of funny reminds me of a section from The New Course For Trotskyism by Sidney Martinez where he describes how your comrade Peterson used "Suggestion" in place of "Bureacratic Marching Orders" just because you use a different word to describe something doesn't mean it still isn't what it is.
First of all you have no knowlegde about Britain that's quite obvious. 1. you wouldn't be able to send 500 people in at once. They would correctly be seen as coupers and would be expelled right away. 2. The struggle in Labour starts in the unions and we have alot of diciplined cadres there. This work don't happens overnight as you seem to think it takes lot's of time. If Taffe hadn't split the group things would be differently but there is no use crying over the past.
I think its ridiculous to claim we don't know anything about Britain when we have a section there. Also we wouldn't send 500 People in at once we never once said we would i love how you take what we say out of context and attach extra words to it claimming thats what we said. So your following point is invalid what we meant is that over time 500 people would exist inside the party. Your just making excuses for why your inept group hasn't been able to wage a proper struggle against Blair and New Labour. Once again your sole focus on labor and not being truly flexible has left you stranded tactically if you focused only on Labor of course you wouldn't have been able to muster enough support to combat New Labour your inept leadership lost us the LP militant wing of Labour indeed. Had you been building Youth Leagues from the start you would have had more forces. Don't try to claim you were either because by your own admission on another thread you claimmed YFIS was a U.S. invention and then later utilized in Britain. Even in its application in Britain it still isn't a Youth League.
Trotskyism is leninism. I thought you people were educated but obviously not....
LOL :D ok first off yes and second off in your case no because it seems to me its quite common how you take Trotskyism and seperate it from Leninism on a constant basis.
We still maintain a organisation while working in LP.
Really and what is this so called Organization you maintain called? Last time i checked you organized around a magazine solely how exactly is this maintainning a formal organizational apparatus?
Your criticisms gives you away. How are any of us supposed to take you serious when you don't know what you are talking about?
Its you who has no clue what your talking about so why should anyone take you seriously?
From your articles I highly doubt that. I don't want to go into them but I think they are a big mishmash of different things. They are not coherent at all. Fúrthermpore they are always written by the same people, Sid and his clique (which seems quite small)
I'm sure we can go into them later. If i'm not mistaken most of your main articles are written by Grant and Woods and your other paid staff. Well unlike you guys we can only afford a few staff for the moment and our other comrades constantly write articles as well why don't you pick up a copy of our magazine the toiler sometime?
Also you still haven't told me why you have such a poorly educated cadre in The U.S.
You pledge alligiance to the workers but you don't have it. A few years ago the workers here was inactive that has changed. The same can happen in the US. What your group fails to is to analyse things dialectically, to look further than just one or two years. Now you have build a "tendency" on your shortsightedness.
Just because we focus on Youth in America and Young workers by our own admission doesn't mean were distant from workers in fact we have Unionist support as well as other non-skilled workers just because we have young workers in our ranks doesn't mean were out of touch with workers. As for U.K. and other countries when necessary we orient towards the working class when need be in the case of Germany the working class is the most progressive and there its important to focus on them.
As far as for our understanding of Dialectics i think we have it down quite well we know the situation will change and it is because we look at the short term and the long term that we will be able to intervene more effectively in the coming period then your U.S. section could ever dream of. You so called Dialecticians got it down so well you look only at the future at the expense of the present so if our tendency is better focused for the here and now while we wait for the future i'd say were off to a great start. We'll leave the wait around for workers to wanna be organized and do nothing effective that works in the mean time too your tendency afterall that whats your good at just look at your pathetic work in the LP.
Alot of these people were you guys as I remember. Failing to write articles etc.
I think this statement proves my point because while you guys were sitting on your asses writing not only articles but focusing everything on some online discussions as well as other things you failed at real world work. As i recall we were out there organizing students, running discussion forums with real world Students and Workers the actual masses. We didn't waste our time we took the necessary time to plan out our actions and went out and did something as a result the Southern CA grouping of your U.S. section sold more copies of Socialist Appeal then the rest of the country not to mention that your other branchs were looking to our comrade Martinez rather then your comrade Peterson for advice on how to build their branchs up.
I think this shows just how effective your pathetic leadership was so effective half your members were looking to someone else other then him for advice.
Are you seríous about this? First of I think most people will say well they are pretty pompous writing that when they haven't proven anything. It's the utmost delussion to write stuff like that. The coming leaders of the world revolution... Who will be able to take it serious?
Sure and we find that allot of people take us seriously especially when they find that our perspectives are more inline with their thinking then your alien perspectives. The average workers we talk to seem to take what we say very seriously.
Second you haven't build an international, a group as small as your is not an international. It's not a national section if you have 2 or 3 people.
So now it goes from 1 or 2 to 2 or 3 well at least thats a little more credit then before. :D
Logged
