On Jul 22, 3:42 pm, stephen <srdiam...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Wrong subject. We're talking about the Barnes ascension, not the RT
> expulsion.
>
> srd
>
> On Jul 22, 3:39 pm, nada <dwalters...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 22, 1:22 pm, stephen <srdiam...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 22, 9:49 am, John Holmes <jhol...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > > There was no great objection from the SWP rank and file, as it
meant few real
> > > > political changes.
>
> > > Not so, as there was a hemorrhaging of member****p. The "rank and
file"
> > > were powerless, because the democratic rights of tendencies were
> > > completely suppressed.
>
> > > srd
>
> > You seem to be be very ignorant of all the things going on at the time
> > of the RT faction expulsion. 1965 was the key year and tons of stuff
> > was happening with more than just the RT. There actually was a lot of
> > opposition to this, among other things.
>
> > The RT leaving is hardly a red-letter day for the SWP. It had little
> > or no effect on the SWP. The OCI had zero sup****ters or influence
> > around the SWP, leaving it up to the SLL (a huge mistake, clearly) to
> > handle the English speaking world. Why would the Lambs have anything
> > to say except their already known opposition to the reunification?
>
> > David
OK.
David
|
