Get them recruited
Get them trained
Get them armed
Get them shipped
Get them turned into mincemeat
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/c5y9gr1jr91othings are so unspeakably bleak
and yet one must remain optimistic
if only because the courage to rope
is lacking
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2025/12/11/pttf-d11.htmlDecent read on the argument against Your Party by the SEP
WAR? NO
=NEVER NEVER WAR
>>2615566First sentence:
>stalinist bureaucrats Yeah no thanks
>>2615802>sees one no-no expression>brain turns offleftypol.org
>>2615797What if the war is anti-imperialist?
war: poor young men being used as cannon fodder for rich paedophiles; the final virtue of a wicked society.
>>2615894no war but class war.
i am a conscientious objector, not a coward.
>>2615812not him but it's not because it's a no-no expression, it's because it's nonsense. "reformist bureaucrats." would suffice and it's an early warning sign that you're reading something where the conclusion was decided before the arguments to support it, which is a solid bet given that the conclusion it all ultimately builds towards is:
>Explaining that the conditions now exist for an extraordinary advance in the political consciousness of the working class, North announced the launching December 12 of Socialism AI.…
>This is our answer to the efforts to corral workers behind Sultana and Corbyn’s doomed project. We are the sole tendency that not only sets out to build a revolutionary leadership, but which has, in the rich political heritage of the World Socialist Web Site and now the essential tool of Socialism AI, the necessary means to do this.which is, admittedly, one of the more remarkable arguments i've seen advanced by a sect. "why join an actually-existing organization capable of (admittedly, a bit incompetently) running a reasonably large conference when you could come with us? we've got ChatGPT trained on
My Life: An Attempt at an Autobiography. "
>>2615899If you'd posted this last night I've woken up thinking I had a strange fucking nightmare.
Weird Sex Web Site can always go lower than one could otherwise imagine.
>>2615899The argument appears decided before the text can be written because it's one of a number the WSWS have continued to publish regarding Your Party.
Whether you disagree with the SEP or not, their position regarding Your Party is the only correct one. The reformist tendencies within the UK have sunk below the mark - these efforts, where formerly they strove for capitulation with the bourgeois democratic establishment, have lost all momentum and can be regarded as a doomed political project in 2025.
Ignore the AI bit; they've adapted their own version of Deep seek and have trained it on their articles. It's actually quite good if you want book recommendations, it even recommended me Michael Roberts
Turn the Imperialist war into class war. Galvanize the youth who are faced with the meatgrinder. Destroy the royalist entity.
>>2615997
It's different in your country? why on earth are you on this site then?
>>2615996throw off the norman yoke
give england its free-born rights
Death to bourgeois rats and their collaborators
Down with the bourgeoisie
>>2616161Everywhere in this country it is shaped through the instruments of class rule and with it their political reaction.
The dull incipient consciousness of its workers who have been bribed, placated, and intellectually retarded into a passive ignorance whilst wealth inequality swallows in its jaws the dependent underclass on whom its self same society is dependent, ruled by a clergy of appointed officials whose task it is the ministration of its machine like repression.
May this country burn in the cradle its imperial ambitions
>>2615960I wouldn't go so far as to be optimistic, but this certainly isn't the nadir of British reformism. The Greens/YP are operating at a level well above the 2020-2024 and <2015 (2014 for viewers in Scotland) baselines. I'm not going to sit here and tell you that they're going to do anything
good, but they're doing something
different and different is about as good as you can hope for. (The SEP strategy, by contrast, appears to be "standing on the sidelines appealing for people to join the TRUE revolutionary party, which is them and not any of the 500 other sects making similar appeals, just as they've done for all eternity")
I could even go so far as to formulate it thus: I am so pessimistic that I regard the SEP as optimists. To be betrayed Syriza style would be the greatest achievement of the British left-and-so-called-left since being betrayed in 1976. (Ooh, the anniversary of that'll be coming up next year…) The attack line winds up becoming an advertising line: As the Trump voter famously put it in 2016: Obviously they're not going to do that, but at least they cared enough to lie…
>>2616237AKA the gammons. Whose hatred and stupidity will spell ruin for the rest of us.
>>2616248the gammons are the pensioners
the lumpen are the patriots
i agree with this gentleman, that the fantasy of anglo-saxon england is a distorted, whiggish fantasy, purported by those wishing to overcome the norman yoke with fanciful nonsense. the codes of conduct which he refers to are collections of written laws, preserved in the "textus roffensis" (1124), which includes within it, copied manuscripts of 3 anglo-saxon law codes (c. 600-695), which highlight the extremely hierarchical nature of these times, with separate "weregild" (blood-money compensations) according to rank (the 3 law codes being "æthelberht's laws", "hlothere and eadric's laws" and "wihtred's laws"). these laws have also been said to be entirely related to contemporary german law codes, such as the "lex burgundionum" (c. 500), which itself traces back to roman law.
now, the separation of powers is somewhat mediated in the power which bishops and kings alike are granted by these codes, but progress in right only really begins in the norman era (1066-) with the proclomation of freedom being preserved in the "william writ" (1067), later attributed as safeguarding the "ancient liberties" of england, as written in the magna carta (1215). we get the first piece of common law in the "assize of clarendon" (1166) which establishes the grand jury system. we obviously get the magna carta later on, by pressure from the barons. edward coke himself (1628) and john lilburne (1645) both appealed to this document as a security of an englishman's rights. of course, we only get the "bill of rights" (1688) with yet another norman (scandinavian) invasion with yet another "william" on the throne. so then, is the "norman yoke" really a curse to england?
>>2616353Dealing with Brits would make me suicidal too
>>2616378Why are you posting this garbage here?
>>2616382garbage? its history.
I do kind of believe in the Norman Yoke, because its those same Norman aristocrats who own so much of the land. That's not to say I think highly of the Saxons right now.
getting more into the weeds of the norman yoke theory, we see that it first appears in medieval times, and is suddenly revived in the 17th century, after translation of medieval literature (1642). it then features itself as political propaganda for the roundhead faction against the king and his cavaliers. it isnt just lilburne (1645), but also winstanley (1649) who utilises this device, as a means to petition for the rights of englishmen. later american revolutionaries like thomas paine and thomas jefferson both use this prefix to compare it to their contemporary struggle, with the added beliefs of the free-born rights of the english.
>>2616388apparently one person who didnt believe in the norman yoke theory was the reactionary thomas carlyle, interestingly enough. i was reading also that english as a language was not spoken by the norman nobility, but was continued by the peasantry, until henry iv (1399-1413) adopted it, over 300 years after the initial conquest… now of course, its the most popular language in the world, but had humble beginnings. 😅
i can never re-locate it, but a the line in england where seats go from lab-con marginals to lib-con marginals (traditionally, before starmer fucked everything) is the line where the kingdom that payed the danegeld ended. paying the danegeld makes you vote labour.
Anyone know if the IMT's newest project, the "Revolutionary Communist Party", is still an active thing in the UK? Remember seeing their posters in York 2 or 3 years ago.
Anyway, I ask because recently their Canadian branch and Swedish branch both went full crisis mode and maybe(?) dissolved over a massive rape problems within the organisations.
My understanding is apparently in Canada there was a widespread issue of socially inept student activist types using the RCP as a vehicle for socialising, getting drunk, and then ultimately some greasy incel virgin 20 year old Trots would end up taking advantage of more or less blacked out female uni students who attended party events.
In Sweden it was more a case of a few creepy older lecturers / boomer theory heads trying to brainwash female student activists into giving away all their money, cutting off their families (full deFOO shit), basically just grooming them old school paedo cult style.
So has any of this impacted the UK organisation at all? I haven't heard anything from the UK side of things.
>>2616685>using a political party as a vehicle for throwing parties and shagging the female membersI mean who do they think they are? The Tories?
>>2616685I have had some dealings with them. Six months ago they were probably the most active they've been since the Corbyn days. I believe they've been been out door knocking. Over here they are just student Trots that get burnt out every three years, I've always assumed they will end up with with a big rape sexual assault crisis because Trots are Trots.
>>2616685They're around, their growth has supposedly stalled over the past year or two after a big bump around the rebrand and palestine protests. I'm not aware of any particular scandals the British section has had aside from having weak politics and being an org that runs on burning out students. They were marginally involved in Your Party during initial closed talks around it because their ingenue Fiona Lali was dating the son of one of Corbyn's advisors. They dropped out sometime at the end of the summer when the drama combined with the rise of the greens made Your Party seem a lot less appealing as a vehicle. Last I heard they'd jumped onto the next hot new thing with trying to ride Mamdani's coattails by suggesting they run Fiona Lali for mayor of london.
current UK budget per year is £1,300,000,000,000 over a period of 5 years, making the total funds for this labour cabinet £5,200,000,000,000 (and of course theyre still asking for more). do you reckon that if you were given 5 trillion for 5 years, you could fix this entire country front and back? anyone would, except politicians, who now seem eager to send us all to the slaughterhouse after fleecing our wealth.
>>2616352<psued rightoid arguing against shit nobody anywhere ever is sayingLet me guess. This is under a video of your fat autistic Welsh fave looser you post here?
>>2616685You mean to say the Fiona Lali party.
Poor woman. She had one viral moment and they pushed her infrint of everything and plaster her everywherelike shes nulenin. She only looks about 19. It feels all a bit exoitatitve tbh.
>>2617078what is "right-wing" in demolishing the illusions of anglo-saxon nativism?
>>2617149the church of england has been a non-entity for decades now
>>2617159Isn't the whole story of the church of england some innred faggot wanted to divorce and execute his hag wife or something? Like this is the entire readon your church exists?
Every Anglo going to hell lmao. God and cpuntry huh, which god? Mammon?
>>2617163i was baptised in a catholic church when i was a baby so its all good 🫰
>>2616685Basically what
>>2616959 said. The RCP's target for their conference this year was 2,000 members, they are now announcing great heights of 1,300.
>>2617169I just can’t be dealing with Trots. I do want to join a communist party of sorts but I’ll be buggered if I’m going to be 65, the chairman, getting slated weekly as “out of touch” by generations of former party members turned Fleet Street commentators
It’s not even out of a strong sense of anti-racism, just the absolute fucking cheek of yanks thinking they can set the rules in a British/Australian/New Zealand garrison town
>>2617215they joined the war to conquer europe, and they largely did.
>>2617177I encountered the RCP leafleting once at a train station in Milton Keynes, their theory seems to revolve around seething about Stalin and some vague waffle about revolution sometime in the future, trust me bro.
There's a Chinese propaganda leaflet from the Korean war where they point out, truthfully, that China and the USSR didn't really give a fuck about the British empire but that while British soldiers were fighting and dying in Korea, America was pinching it from under their noses.
Of course by that point the deed was already more-or-less done anyway, but it's one of those odd things where you find propaganda that runs against the ideological perspective of the author (surely the socialist countries don't have the British empire's interests at heart!) in a way which guarantees they're either telling desperate lies, or an obvious truth.
Hang the rich
Hang their collaborators
Death to the bourgeoisie
>>2617167When Henry VIII asked for a divorce from the Pope, Rome was under siege by forces of the Holy Roman Empire.
Henry and the Pope were actually friends, but Henry and the Emperor were rivals.
Therefore it was implicitly understood that if the Pope granted Henry's divorce - or undertook any major decision without the Emperor's approval - while then siege was ongoing, then the HRE's forces would make the Pope "disappear".
The Pope tried to play for time by delaying messages and sending slow, gout ridden priests to visit Henry.
Apparently Henry didn't have the intellect to get the hint and/or lacked the patience to wait for the war between the Papal States and HRE to end before asking for a divorce.
Not to add a lot of his confidants and advisors were also trying to push for Protestantism too.
Just thought I'd mention it since it's a tidbit of information I remember from A Level history 12-ish years ago.
Today the BBC's Newsnight has done a 15 minute interview with Curtis Yarvin.
I'm sure most of you know who that is, but if you don't he's one of the Dark Enlightenment crew alongside Nick Land.
He self identifies himself as a fascist, a neo-feudalist, an absolute monarchist. He supports eugenics and the re-legalisation of slavery.
He wants the destruction of modern society, to be replaced by city states ruled not by governments but by capitalist corporations, in which the CEOs would serve as absolute monarchs with total control over the city state.
In his worldview human beings shouldn't have any rights whatsoever and are in effect the personal property of the CEO to which they are bound.
In other words, he literally wants to make the hyper-capitalist fascist sci-fi cyberpunk dystopia where machines grind billions of slave workers into dirt a reality.
He's also someone that Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, and JD Vance all deeply admire and look to for their political ideals.
So, why is it the BBC feels that is a reasonable person to do an interview with?
Why is interviewing actual fascists fine, when they won't platform Marxists, Anarchists or other leftists for such interviews?
Do you remember only a few weeks ago when the Torygraph released their document on the BBC as part of a right wing coup? Proclaiming the absurd delusion that the BBC was too left wing, too pro-trans, too anti-Israel?
I believe this is merely the beginning of the BBC News' shift to the hard right in response to this. I expect we will see more open fascists platformed in future.
Apparently someone who supports eugenics and slavery is now closer to the centre of the Overton window than anyone calling for a redistribution of wealth to avoid mass poverty.
>>2617297The lengths he'll go through to duck fighting Fury. It's getting silly now.
Unique IPs: 26