|
Shear Modulus posted:Can I ignore the twitter civil war like I do most of everything else of the left and center-left's nonstop twitter drama or is this one actually important it's never important
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 12:52 |
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:they know hotels/flights only increase in price the closer you get to the date right? The problem is that national is not paying for the full cost of flights, just a flat subsidy amount based on chapter distance. So all of the incentive to buy plane tickets early is already on the delegates. As for room, national is offering some room or another, but delegates have to pay a fee for that anyway. I am not sure about what kind of rooms they are providing--maybe dorm rooms? idk. Ruzihm has issued a correction as of 18:00 on Jun 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 17:52
|
|
|
I think that the criticism is valid, but why bring up all this poo poo on Twitter? Why threaten to beat up larrywebsite of all people? It's so counterproductive to anything we're trying to accomplish
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
shrouding your lovely behavior in opposing "respectability politics" is insanely good
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
Eustace posted:I think that the criticism is valid, but why bring up all this poo poo on Twitter? Why threaten to beat up larrywebsite of all people? It's so counterproductive to anything we're trying to accomplish yea agreed
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
Eustace posted:I think that the criticism is valid, but why bring up all this poo poo on Twitter? Why threaten to beat up larrywebsite of all people? It's so counterproductive to anything we're trying to accomplish Then say "What are you getting mad at me for? I haven't actually done anything I've only threatened to spit on and jump larry" but then in the same breath imply responding to them is actually violence. This is what happens when you never leave online.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
Vhak lord of hate posted:Then say "What are you getting mad at me for? I haven't actually done anything I've only threatened to spit on and jump larry" but then in the same breath imply responding to them is actually violence. This is what happens when you never leave online. "why are you fixating on the fact i threatened to spit on and beat up someone??"
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 19:25
|
|
|
While you can mark me down as FOR regarding socialist cops, department-to-department variation is huuuge. Some departments are just street gangs. Other departments -- like my current city's -- are exemplary of community-policing. I'd like to know how the departments are where police were rejected up-thread.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 19:34
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:While you can mark me down as FOR regarding socialist cops, department-to-department variation is huuuge. Some departments are just street gangs. Other departments -- like my current city's -- are exemplary of community-policing. second
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
Eustace posted:I think that the criticism is valid, but why bring up all this poo poo on Twitter? Why threaten to beat up larrywebsite of all people? It's so counterproductive to anything we're trying to accomplish mad online
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
lol, community policing is just code for infiltrating communities to build a snitch network
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
We need the public sector to predominate over the private sector. Cops would be part of that. Currently, the private sector predominates. A cadre of wannabe-oligarchs wants to take over via the private sector's dominance. Enforcing their social order would require ground-level goon squads. Cops would be a part of that. Who's side do you want the police on?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
Police should not be part of a socialist organization. The tactics utilized by socialists to build working class power put them in direct confrontation and opposition to the police as an institution. Civil disobedience and strike action are some of the surest means of fighting for the working class, are often times illegal, and sure to promote retaliation from the police. Historically and even in to the present day, police forces have been used as strike breakers and are consistently used to confront and stop mass protests and civil disobedience. That doesn't necessarily mean that individual police might not be sympathetic to our cause and might even aid us in some ways. Even potentially individual police departments or units may be so, but as a whole they should be seen as an obstacle to be overcome and on no account should they knowingly be allowed in our organizations or be part of our decision making.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
If the consensus is that it's not worth talking about in this thread, so be it, but I actually mostly support the instigator of the twitter fight last night/tonight. I will grant, however, that there are some issues specific to my chapter that make me predisposed to supporting them. Basically, the argument this person had was that National had not been forthcoming with either information or funding for the convention. The source of their gripe was that National wasn't responsive when going through the normal channels and their chapter was left in the dark, which is one of the few cases where I think it's actually acceptable to call them out in public in a way that forces them to actually be responsive. I didn't see the thing where someone said they wanted to spit on Larry Website (lol), but I imagine if I did, it would be an unnecessary provocation. Aside from that, my understanding is that it was definitely not the person making the complaint. I know my chapter put off deciding on delegates super late, and also put off fundraising until, like, next week, and so lots of people are just fending for themselves and it's a shitshow. Since the story out of National has been like the story out of the chapter -- that things will be heavily subsidized and people shouldn't decide not to go because of financial reasons -- I can see why, when people are still in the dark a month beforehand, as flights are getting more and more expensive everyday, that they're just exasperated. I had a feeling this was going to be a mess, which is basically why I didn't even bother running for delegate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
If you can educate one cop he or she may be able to educate a few others. If you want to treat it as us vs. them, good luck. I've been a manager for a good portion of my life and yet I'm still trying to be involved with IWW. Our DSA chapter has people who work in the banking industry. People don't suddenly wake up and quit their job because it's not moral. It takes a lot of learning and introspection to get to the point where you're making a decision to put your principles over the need to support your family.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
unbutthurtable posted:If the consensus is that it's not worth talking about in this thread, so be it, but I actually mostly support the instigator of the twitter fight last night/tonight. I will grant, however, that there are some issues specific to my chapter that make me predisposed to supporting them. DSA National just seems very disorganized. I get that they've had explosive growth, but they really need to get their poo poo together. We don't have time to wait for them to figure it out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:If you can educate one cop he or she may be able to educate a few others. If you want to treat it as us vs. them, good luck. working in the banking industry, as reprehensible as that is, shouldnt be equated with working as a cop. to say so betrays a lack of class consciousness
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
apropos to nothing posted:Police should not be part of a socialist organization. The tactics utilized by socialists to build working class power put them in direct confrontation and opposition to the police as an institution. Civil disobedience and strike action are some of the surest means of fighting for the working class, are often times illegal, and sure to promote retaliation from the police. Historically and even in to the present day, police forces have been used as strike breakers and are consistently used to confront and stop mass protests and civil disobedience. That doesn't necessarily mean that individual police might not be sympathetic to our cause and might even aid us in some ways. Even potentially individual police departments or units may be so, but as a whole they should be seen as an obstacle to be overcome and on no account should they knowingly be allowed in our organizations or be part of our decision making. This just sounds like a compartmentalization issue. Like, you're not discussing illegal poo poo at your Sunday public meetings, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:If you can educate one cop he or she may be able to educate a few others. If you want to treat it as us vs. them, good luck. There's nothing wrong with trying to talk to cops or even be friendly to them on an individual or even organizational level, but tactically speaking socialist organizations are often forced to engage in illegal actions like civil disobedience and strikes with workers to win power for the working class. If you have police in your organization and especially if they participate in decision making, then they can much more easily and effectively sabotage your actions. This is not a moral judgement, we shouldn't dismiss police because they're evil or bad or whatever, it's just a matter of tactics and you cannot trust that a cop will put their ideological commitment over their commitment to their job. If your organization has police in it, then you are actively undermining your own organizational efforts. You put your membership at risk, as well as put at risk any individuals or organizations that attempt to work with you in solidarity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:DSA National just seems very disorganized. I get that they've had explosive growth, but they really need to get their poo poo together. We don't have time to wait for them to figure it out. I held off on twitter, but I really wanted to go off on that poo poo. Right now, DSA has a lot of legacy leadership. These are people who were great, legitimate leaders when DSA was 5000 members, the vast majority of which were inactive, and the stakes were low. Now, we're five times that membership, a higher portion are active, and we have a huge glut of people who do work within the purview of DSA who aren't technically part of that number. AND the stakes are high. And yet these people are still leaders. Some are leaders because there hasn't been an election since the situation has changed. Some are leaders because, while there was an election, there was institutional inertia that gave them just the right amount of name-recognition that they kept their positions. The fact of the matter is that a ton of these people just plain aren't suited to the demands of the positions right now, and they don't want to empower people below them, or expand the leadership structure, because they (largely good-naturedly and unconsciously) know how tenuous their positions are. They're just not suited to what DSA has become since they became leaders. Moreover, a large portion of them (not 100% sure they're a majority) seem to think that DSA has become what it's become because of their efforts and perspectives. The truth is that the vast majority of our growth is due to the pull of Bernie Sanders and push of Donald Trump. The idea that these legacy leaders brought us here just reinforces their confidence in sticking to their current patterns and structures. tl;dr Sanders/Trump for National Co-Chairs
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:This just sounds like a compartmentalization issue. Like, you're not discussing illegal poo poo at your Sunday public meetings, right? Again "illegal poo poo" can include engaging in a strike or civil disobedience. If you're forced to separate your membership into separate tiers or groups, then you are actively undermining any democracy or transparency within your organization which is a whole other problem. Rather than split your membership, just don't let cops have membership or decision making abilities in your organization. I'm trying to come at this with the understanding that a lot of people in this thread and in general are new to labor activism and socialism generally, but not trusting police is a pretty universal concept on the left for good reason and I'd rather no one here have to learn that lesson the hard way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
unbutthurtable posted:I held off on twitter, but I really wanted to go off on that poo poo. this is exactly what larry website (i'm starting to feel silly typing this) was saying in response to her criticism, and instead she acted like a lil baby child and threw a tantrum
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
apropos to nothing posted:Again "illegal poo poo" can include engaging in a strike or civil disobedience. If you're forced to separate your membership into separate tiers or groups, then you are actively undermining any democracy or transparency within your organization which is a whole other problem. Rather than split your membership, just don't let cops have membership or decision making abilities in your organization. I'm trying to come at this with the understanding that a lot of people in this thread and in general are new to labor activism and socialism generally, but not trusting police is a pretty universal concept on the left for good reason and I'd rather no one here have to learn that lesson the hard way. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
There's ways to talk to comrades and the way she handled herself in a public forum makes us look weak and unorganized to our opposition.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:this is exactly what larry website (i'm starting to feel silly typing this) was saying in response to her criticism, and instead she acted like a lil baby child and threw a tantrum I mean, maybe that's the message you got from him, and maybe that's what he was trying to communicate, but it wasn't clear enough that it stood out to me. But, either way, he's not really the leadership that I'm referring to, and I think the person, on the one hand, jumped down his throat about it, but I also don't think he did a good job saying "I know I'm a very public twitter person, but I am legitimately not in as high a role as people think I am. I want to be, to fix this, but right now I'm basically just a spokesperson."
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/LarryWebsite/status/880628669127036929 read through here, he is completely 100% reasonable edit: i guess he went private
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 20:48
|
|
|
Isn't this a reiteration of the same mistakes the Democractic party did what with chapters getting highlighted as getting underfunded as well, or am I missing something with all of the weird shifting of responsibility between spokesfolk as well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 20:48
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:https://twitter.com/LarryWebsite/status/880628669127036929 He does that a lot, it's kind of a pain in the rear end.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
apropos to nothing posted:There's nothing wrong with trying to talk to cops or even be friendly to them on an individual or even organizational level, but tactically speaking socialist organizations are often forced to engage in illegal actions like civil disobedience and strikes with workers to win power for the working class. If you have police in your organization and especially if they participate in decision making, then they can much more easily and effectively sabotage your actions. This is not a moral judgement, we shouldn't dismiss police because they're evil or bad or whatever, it's just a matter of tactics and you cannot trust that a cop will put their ideological commitment over their commitment to their job. If your organization has police in it, then you are actively undermining your own organizational efforts. You put your membership at risk, as well as put at risk any individuals or organizations that attempt to work with you in solidarity. So let me get this straight. Cops aren't allowed to join DSA? Is that an official policy somewhere? Does local have the authority to deny people membership without involving National?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
Eustace posted:There's ways to talk to comrades and the way she handled herself in a public forum makes us look weak and unorganized to our opposition. lol that's not the problem
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
if you've ever worked in an organization like this, there are always people like this. and they always drag everythign down and it sucks poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:So let me get this straight. Cops aren't allowed to join DSA? Is that an official policy somewhere? Does local have the authority to deny people membership without involving National? I'm not a member of DSA so I have no clue. My understanding is anyone is able and to join so long as they pay dues to national and don't do a couple of things that are specifically banned. I am sure there are cops who are part of DSA right now. I feel like this is a mistake and I've explained why. Police officers engage in anti-union and anti-working class activity often times as part of their job, which makes it very hard for them to be brought into class struggle, at least on the correct side anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
Kunster posted:Isn't this a reiteration of the same mistakes the Democractic party did what with chapters getting highlighted as getting underfunded as well, or am I missing something with all of the weird shifting of responsibility between spokesfolk as well. It came out that there's a mechanism where a chapter can get dues kicked back to them if members registered through the chapter, but it was never publicized. That and the uncertainty of where dues are going are serious problems. Fortunately, there's an amendment being proposed to codify 50% dues kickback to chapters: https://twitter.com/fearwig/status/880770589333438464 I agree with tgg & everyone calling out national, but I'm really confused at how antagonistic they were to people trying to help, like officers from other chapters. If I had to guess, this has been a frustration for them for a while, and it blew up last night. Is it true that the national meeting is the only opportunity to determine platform/policy etc? If so, that's also hosed and exclusionary, especially when we can vote by internet
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
slicing up eyeballs posted:It came out that there's a mechanism where a chapter can get dues kicked back to them if members registered through the chapter, but it was never publicized. That and the uncertainty of where dues are going are serious problems. Fortunately, there's an amendment being proposed to codify 50% dues kickback to chapters: national conventions stipulating the rules for the following year are extremely common for organizations like this
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 21:08
|
|
|
apropos to nothing posted:I'm not a member of DSA so I have no clue. My understanding is anyone is able and to join so long as they pay dues to national and don't do a couple of things that are specifically banned. I am sure there are cops who are part of DSA right now. I feel like this is a mistake and I've explained why. Police officers engage in anti-union and anti-working class activity often times as part of their job, which makes it very hard for them to be brought into class struggle, at least on the correct side anyway. yeah technically there is currently no way to prevent a cop from joining the national DSA. local chapters have their own bylaws tho.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:national conventions stipulating the rules for the following year are extremely common for organizations like this Yeah that makes sense. My contention is that if we can set up a system by which members can vote without being physically present, anything less seems undemocratic, right? Or is vote-by-internet already part of the process? I'm not 100% clear. This is the concern I've seen in response to chapters having to fundraise or apply for scholarships to attend their own national meeting. If we can't attend, surely we should still be allowed to vote right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
slicing up eyeballs posted:Yeah that makes sense. My contention is that if we can set up a system by which members can vote without being physically present, anything less seems undemocratic, right? Or is vote-by-internet already part of the process? I'm not 100% clear It uses a delegate system. People who can't go make their voices heard by sending delegates from their chapter.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 21:19
|
|
|
who is this robert and why do we have to follow his rules???
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:who is this robert and why do we have to follow his rules??? man gently caress robert
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 12:52 |
|
|
the idea is that your chapter's delegates to the convention represent you e: beaten
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2017 21:28
|
|
