Life on the Fuck Circuit!
Can this be true? It was revealed in the comments box on the comically misnamed Socialisty Unity Blog a few days ago by an ex-member of the SWP that she felt she had received bad treatment within the party because she was not on the “fuck circuit”, and I suppose therefore missed out on the fast-track to those in positions of power. Massive faith in SU’s sane and not at all bizarre collection of commenters that I have, I can only presume she’s recalling things with a reasonable degree of accuracy.
Firstly, a message to the SWP’ers with whom I attended university: You had a fuck circuit?! Well why the fuck did none of you people mention this to me at the time? Four fucking years in and around the AWL student section and all that time I could have been living a life of debauchery with the Cliffites? Sell out? Hell yeah, I’d have been stalking you for membership forms! Still, it does explain why you were all so bloody enthusiastic I guess – “Now then comrades, if you sell fifty or more papers today, there’s a special treat in store! Zzzt…”
Also, doesn’t it explain so much other stuff? Sideshow Ger expelled after all his hard work fucking over dissenters in Birmingham? Not on the fuck circuit (if you met him, you’d know why). Nooman joins RR? Not on the fuck circuit. AWL has 150 members? No fuck circuit.
Hell SWP comrades, I’ve grown some new Respect for you all as a result of this revelation. I therefore humbly offer you a suggestion for a theme song and video for Marxism 2008: the Fucker’s Cut.
Shiraz Socialist 
Darren said,
December 19, 2007 at 4:09 am
Hey, come the glorious vanguardist revolution, we’ll all be on the ‘fucked over circuit’. Speed the day!
Does the AWL really have 150 members? I always see a membership figure of 100 quoted. Granted, that’s from political opponents on the Left Trainspotters discussion list.
Does this mean the AWL is experiencing some organisational growth?
V said,
December 19, 2007 at 1:03 pm
Terrible song, terrible video. It is supposed to be a parody, right? However, did I spot Gary Coleman – he of Different Strokes fame – amongst the assorted fools?
Waterloo Sunset said,
December 19, 2007 at 2:06 pm
Does this mean the AWL is experiencing some organisational growth?
Or “Fresher’s Week” as it’s otherwise known.
Bristolian Tony said,
December 19, 2007 at 3:23 pm
Someone should investigate.
I’m not, nor have I been, a member of the SWP, though I’ve worked with and around them before. I don’t yet believe there’s a ‘fuck circuit’, in the ‘getting ahead’ sense.
I know John Rees is insufficiently discreet in his ‘entertainment’ of younger women at events like the SWP’s Marxism, but I’m unaware of his companions getting much out of it, other than the disappointment which inevitably follows sex with your teacher, leader, mentor, or hero. I find it distasteful, but I’m aware of no darker forces at work.
If this is part of a ‘fuck circuit’ though, people must be more desperate than I thought. I can’t think of any personal advancement in the SWP worth that, with them. Shudder.
Darren said,
December 19, 2007 at 6:46 pm
“Or “Fresher’s Week” as it’s otherwise known.”
cruel, but funny.
George Galloway said,
December 19, 2007 at 7:45 pm
There’s an SWP fuck circuit? No-one mentioned that to me… hey, that RR thing? It was all a joke, lads! Let me back in…
G.
a very public sociologist said,
December 19, 2007 at 11:06 pm
Well, it was said the RCP encouraged its women members to get jiggy for the revolution. I know a former RCP supporter who says no one made advances for horizontal recruitment toward him. Was sex-for-membership true, or a malicious rumour spread by puritanical lefties?
voltaires_priest said,
December 20, 2007 at 12:30 am
Darren;
Unlike the SPGB which suffers an annual dip in membership – or “winter when there’s a flu bug” as it’s otherwise known 😉
Darren said,
December 20, 2007 at 2:37 am
Volty,
cruel but funny. 😉
But what about these 150 members?
resistor said,
December 20, 2007 at 2:59 am
Those who would accuse others of sexism might want to take a look at this post
http://drinksoakedtrotsforwar.com/2007/12/20/great-use-of-time/
voltaires_priest said,
December 20, 2007 at 8:30 am
That was a guess really Darren – I’d always assumed about 150 (give or take 30 allowing for fluctuations), just judging from people I see “around” kinda thing. I don’t know the precise figure.
Dave said,
December 20, 2007 at 8:36 am
Back in the early eighties, you did not have to join the RCP to sleep with its members. Not in East London, anyway. 😉
But I’ll never forget the time I asked a young Millie lass if she’d like to go to the pictures with me. She said that because I was in the IMG, she’d have to consult the branch committee. Next week, she told me that the answer was no. Serious cadre organisation, that.
voltaires_priest said,
December 20, 2007 at 8:36 am
Resistor;
Even in the warped little world that you inhabit, you can’t possibly imagine that Will is anything to do with either side in the internecine civil war in Respect.
newman'jumper said,
December 20, 2007 at 9:34 am
ill have you know there will be none of that nonsense in Respect Renewal!
The Indefatigable Sprout said,
December 20, 2007 at 1:33 pm
Yes indeed.
If there really was an active ‘fuck circuit’ then surely everyone’s favourite scottish playboy would never have split from it’s associated front?
EAT RIMA HUSSEINI
Southpawpunch said,
December 20, 2007 at 3:55 pm
In fact some of us treated such matters in a more principled manner than Dave.
Having a general rule of no howsyourfather with Brit lefts on the grounds of taste (and that rule would also apply, only doubly so, if I was a gay man or a straight woman) an indulgence with an RCPer at the same time (although arguably they were not members of the British Left) was undertaken with higher motives in mind.
It is true that I didn’t break her from her politics – this had been my intention – but I did try (although she is a ranting libertarian now) but I did, by means of a carefully coooked bacon sandwich, left to fry in front of her, get her to break from her three year vegetarianism then and there.
Dave is right about Militant. M, a leader of Classfighter did indulge with a member of Militant who then, in a serious manner, insisted we completely denied any such activity had occurred (I was out with him when they met) as it would have caused her “major grief” with the Hackney Millies.
stroppybird said,
December 20, 2007 at 4:19 pm
“Having a general rule of no howsyourfather with Brit lefts on the grounds of taste”
Whislt agreeing that some on the left could do with a bit of a makeover 🙂 I do find the idea that its a ‘rule’ that you dont have sex with or relationships with lefties. As someone of such principled revoultionary beliefes don’t you find it odd to be with someone who is either ‘unpolitical’ (though I think everyone has politics even if they say they don’t) or right wing ?
Wouldn’t you have to shoot them come the Punchie revolution?
So what politics have your girlfriends/partners/shags had then ?
Its not such an issue for a one off but any sort of relationship surely must be difficult if you dont have some politics in common?
Southpawpunch said,
December 20, 2007 at 8:40 pm
Damn, I knew I shouldn’t have started this. I’m not sure whether I should go off the subject but as I’m asked, I’ll answer.
People are generally apolitical (although I agree that no-one is really) – “I’m not interested in politics, are you some sort of nutter?” might be a common response.
Also many don’t fit into conventional categories e.g. an Indian who may be big on anti-imperialism (who do the whites think they are to run the world and tell Iran what to do?) mixed with reactionary ‘domestic’ politics (Calcutta’s a cesspit because of these communist chumchas).
But it did include one Frenchwoman who seemed pretty apolitical – or so I thought until she showed me some pictures of her at university including being pictured next to no less than Chirac whilst waving an enormous Tricoloeur – apparently she was the student leader of whatever his party was at her college and another Frenchwoman who appeared a greeny type, if anything, but then I found her current membership card for the British Conservative Party in her house, even though she had only ever lived in France and had been to Britain only a few times (there was strange, and almost understandable reason for this.)
And then there was a Sicilian woman, a long time ago, whose English was diabolical. We got to talk about Mussolini (by sign language, I think) just before she left and she appeared to say she had a great liking for him – but then she may have been saying she had a great dislike of him.
But generally I think the moral is clear – the righter the better. Carla Bruni or Arlette Laguiller? There are more things to talk about than politics.
I remember raising similar points (if half tongue in cheek) to annoy some of the ultra lifestylists in Classfighter and did get away with it. If I had done the same in Revolution (Youth IMG) I’m sure it would have been the Danish solution as I mentioned in http://www.haloscan.com/comments/mandel/936502081972869821/
stroppybird said,
December 20, 2007 at 9:26 pm
Punchie
Of course there are other things to talk about than politics, but its a pretty fundemental part of who you are isn’t it? I mean your views are strongly held.
I don’t expect a partner to have idnetical views, and that would be dull and unchallenging, but to be leftish in some way. I can’t imagine myself having a relationship with a Tory/rightwinger .
I still don’t quite understand your aversion to relationships with lefties.
However much they annoy me I can’t imagine a relationship with a rightwinger who believed and stood for all I dislike or even hate.
So how right wing is too right wing punchie? Racist ? Ukip? BNP?
stroppybird said,
December 20, 2007 at 9:27 pm
I don’t know, I suppose I quite like weird leftie men 😉
Better that than Tory boys .
tim said,
December 20, 2007 at 9:38 pm
heres Tommy “mobile phone mast” Sheridans legacy.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/7154934.stm
stroppybird said,
December 20, 2007 at 9:53 pm
Punchie
I have done a post on the issue of sex and politcs!
johnnyrook said,
December 20, 2007 at 11:21 pm
From what an ex AWL member tells me, the AWL is far more incestuous than the SWP 😉
Southpawpunch said,
December 20, 2007 at 11:21 pm
Fair point on my formulation, I didn’t think it properly through. Not “the righter the better” (even for a full length leather trench coat) but “rather right than left”.
And to be clear it is just the result of empirical evidence – none of the above really talked about politics even the Tory (‘So I am a member of ze British Conserving Party but I believe in ze conserving, the planet will do the dying if everybody iz like you.’)
And I do have principles. “Oi you Paki” addressed to the taxi driver on the way home from a club in Leeds by a new friend caused me to get out there in the middle of nowhere and walk in the snow despite the protestations of her, my friend and his new friend as well.
Yes, things might be interesting – talking and other things with a (woman) Colombian member of the FARC, an Indian Naxalite guerrilla or a French Militant.
But if you get to – ‘I can’t see you tonight, I’m off to my Labour Party branch meeting then I’m off canvassing for our MP’. Quelle horreurs. Give me an apolitical person anyday as there are some other people who need shooting actually before the revolution, to help bring it about.
Anything further I will reply at Stroppyblog.
modernityblog said,
December 20, 2007 at 11:43 pm
but hey Punchie,
you could also talk to a male member of FARC and he’d tell you about FARC’s kidnappings, the drug dealings and holding up of buses or blowing off people’s heads
stroppybird said,
December 21, 2007 at 12:16 am
“holding up of buses or blowing off people’s heads”
sounds like Paddy porn 🙂
stroppybird said,
December 21, 2007 at 12:21 am
Actually this overlaps a bit with Dave’s porn post http://www.davidosler.com/2007/12/the_radical_left_is_divided.html
I am sure there is a specialist market/s for certain lefties. Bit of theory as foreplay. Or in Paddy’s case , pictures of Yvonne Ridley and phonelines of female comrades talking ‘dirty’ talking about suicide bombings .
Yep, lets reinvent pron 🙂
stroppybird said,
December 21, 2007 at 12:22 am
porn not pron.
modernityblog said,
December 21, 2007 at 12:31 am
stroppy,
FARC are often romanticised by Western lefties who know nothing about Colombia or FARC’s methods, such as Punchie.
It is not uncommon for them to hold up buses coming in from the countryside and rob all of the passengers, invariably members of the working-class or peasants.
FARC are criminals, plain and simple, if you’re in any doubt find a few Colombians in London (there’s 10,000+) and ask them about FARC.
voltaires_priest said,
December 21, 2007 at 12:39 am
Johnny;
Wonder who that could be 😉
Southpawpunch said,
December 21, 2007 at 12:44 am
Actually, one reason I stopped commentating here was the way that people like Modernity would just make things up.
Read my post where I mention FARC (24). Do I mention I support them? No.
If you look at my site does it read like I am a supporter of Maoists (= ‘Naxalites’ in India) who I mention in the same way as the FARC? No.
I have no view on the FARC, I don’t know enough although I certainly wouldn’t place trust in Modernity’s description of them.
modernityblog said,
December 21, 2007 at 1:13 am
exactly Punchie, you know fuck all about Colombia, but please don’t believe me, go there, the flights are cheap, see for yourself
btw, the FARC have AK47s as well, you’ll love it
also, if you go to the working class parts of London, you’ll find plenty of Colombian refugees, go on ask them about FARC, you might not get the reception that you want
ask them about FARC’s neck bombs too
and that’s the problem, in the back of some people’s minds the notion that FARC are somehow “Marxist insurgents” means that they want to hold a sympathetic view of them, without any knowledge, without a clue, but to always look on sympathetically when someone mentions “Marxist”, even if FARC turn out to play straight into the hands of Colombian ruling class, allowing Draconian laws, militarisation of civil society, the creation of rightwing death squads and almost daily murder of trade unionists and activists.
FARC are a positive gift to the Colombian elite., then again Punchie why educate yourself on “far away” countries, that’s for the internationalists, not parochial fantasists such as yourself
Southpawpunch said,
December 21, 2007 at 1:55 am
Mod,
As even my harshest critic or even just someone with a rudimentary understanding of the English language could but agree, you have been caught out (again) completely misrepresenting my views.
I express no support or criticism of the FARC. I have no view as I don’t know enough about them and Colombia.
(And remember before when I caught you on this very site actually making up ‘quotes’ from me?)
Go and do the decent think and apologise to me. You will hate yourself just that little less.
Or will it be the usual, untruthful bluster (your predicted reply – along the lines of ‘I’ll apologise when Southpawpunch personally apologies to all the victims of his ‘heroic’ FARC’…or add in irrelevancies such as ‘the Taliban…’).
Gosh, I wonder which way you will chose?
The Indefatigable Sprout said,
December 21, 2007 at 10:23 am
Behave yourselves.
EAT MODERNITY
modernity said,
December 21, 2007 at 12:32 pm
Punchie wrote:
Yes, things might be interesting – talking and other things with a (woman) Colombian member of the FARC, an Indian Naxalite guerrilla or a French Militant.
MB replied:
“you could also talk to a male member of FARC and he’d tell you about FARC’s kidnappings, the drug dealings and holding up of buses or blowing off people’s heads”
so if you wish to find out about FARC, you don’t have to go very far, London is full of Colombian’s, refugees from the death squads, government criminality and the FARC.
the FARC are not some romanticised group of “Marxist insurgents”.
they are a pile of thugs, who play straight into the Colombian ruling classes hands and allowed them to militarised Colombia and suppress any social radical movements
so when you look at it politically the consequences of FARC’s existence of far worse for social political development in Colombia than his first obvious
Waterloo Sunset said,
December 21, 2007 at 6:53 pm
porn not pron.
I just assumed you were being 1337. Although technically it’s spelt pr0n in that case. I HAVE WASTED MY LIFE.
Johnnyrook said,
December 23, 2007 at 9:45 pm
Ha well, I wonder indeed…
Rank Hypocrisy, Redux « Shiraz Socialist said,
January 10, 2008 at 11:35 pm
[…] like to read my post on the fuck circuit and compare it to Nooman’s reading, it’s here. You’ll note how I neither lead anyone towards the original commenter’s identity, nor […]