Re: DSP and expulsions

[ben <benj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Well I don't know what the party was like when Steve was a leader of it,
that was before I was even a member. But I can say that in the period
I've been in the party (ten years) I'm not aware of any expulsions. I've
had quite heated disputes within the Melbourne district organisation,
over for example a proposal to divide into two separate branches. The
national office had recommended it to the branch. About half a dozen
comrades disagreed, including myself and one other on the branch
executive. My side lost the debate, but at least one of us was
re-elected to the exec (I didn't stand for re-election because I didn't
have the time, I was working a fairly strenuous night shift then). Later
I was elected to another branch executive (one of the newly chartered
suburban branches). There was no victimisation. The debate was free,
including written debate. The national office did not intervene, despite
having recommended the course of action which started the debate. There
certainly weren't expulsions.
Take for example the former party leader in Perth who developed
differences with the party over organisational methods, among other
things, and was re-elected to the national committee only to resign
himself straight after--that was the last faction fight in the DSP, but
not the last debate--I could cite other examples of disagreements and
arguments in branches, executives, national congresses...

If Steve wants to move forward, perhaps he could contribute to debate on
what to do now, why socialists should join the Greens perhaps, but his
last post is just mud slinging, and not the sort of "political debate" I
think is worth anyone's time. (but I don't think it should go
unanswered)

Steve wrote:
> I remember standing on a comrade's doorstep telling her she was expelled for
> talking to a former member who had just resigned. I'm sure Pip H and Doug L
> would be happy to fill in the details for you, as they were there with me.
All these little examples are nothing but mud. The majority of people on
this list don't know "Pip H and Doug L" and can't get the context, the
full story. Sordid, unverifiable tales of purge and persecution are a
fairly sorry way to carry an argument.
And I'm not asking you to verify all your tales, I'd be more interested
if you could raise the level of debate to something more political,
something more forward looking and RELEVANT to that central question
posed by Cannon, which you said you ran out of answers to--what should
be done next--as far as I can tell you've still run out of answers.

Ben Courtice

~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.