06 Jul 06
Originally posted by DelmerThere is no such thing as the Glasgow Socialist Workers Party.
If the Glasgow Socialist Workers Party are one and the same with the International Socialist Workers Party (Trotsky's party) in America then I hold a warm place for them in my heart. For 10+ years my wife and I spent many interesting Saturday evenings with the Toledo chapter during the late 70s and through the 80s, until they closed their bookstore and lectur ...[text shortened]... ing speakers, engaged in interesting discussions and bought many books not available elsewhere.
There is a Socialist Workers Party in England, but that has no connection with the US party.
07 Jul 06
Originally posted by Redmikebut that has no connection with the US party.
There is no such thing as the Glasgow Socialist Workers Party.
There is a Socialist Workers Party in England, but that has no connection with the US party.
'Cause they can't afford the internet, and refuse to use the capitalist swines' "public propoganda" libraries. Their communications are reduced to coded messages in the want-ad sections of free singles/swingers magazines.
07 Jul 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHNo, because they stand for different politics, as I understand it.
[b]but that has no connection with the US party.
'Cause they can't afford the internet, and refuse to use the capitalist swines' "public propoganda" libraries. Their communications are reduced to coded messages in the want-ad sections of free singles/swingers magazines.[/b]
You'd really have to ask someone who was a member of either party.
07 Jul 06
Originally posted by RedmikeThe SWP in America that I was familiar with was always referred to as the Trotsky party by the members. Trotsky's writings were often the basis for lectures and discussions. I'm not sure I ever really understood the fundamental differences between the SWP and the American Communist Party but the two seemed to spend lots of time and energy working against each other instead of working together.
No, because they stand for different politics, as I understand it.
You'd really have to ask someone who was a member of either party.
07 Jul 06
1 edit
Originally posted by DelmerSometimes it can be like arguements about the number of angels on a pinhead.
The SWP in America that I was familiar with was always referred to as the Trotsky party by the members. Trotsky's writings were often the basis for lectures and discussions. I'm not sure I ever really understood the fundamental differences between the SWP and the American Communist Party but the two seemed to spend lots of time and energy working against each other instead of working together.
Trokskyist parties are very splinter-prone. They often consider their particular faction the only true voice and all others to be heretics. I'm not sure of the specifics, but I think there are currently at least a dozen parties in the US calling themselves Trotskyist. In a People's Front of Judea kind of way. They were very critical of the old USSR (hence the SWP slogan - neither Washington nor Moscow but International Socialism).
Communist parties, historically, were a wee bit less likely to split. They were considered to be less critical of the old USSR (to varying degrees).
There were other differences, mostly around Trotsky's ideas.
These days, there are moves in a number of places to break down these daft divisions - alliances are built which may form into parties. These alliances bring in people who were never in any faction, such as myself.