Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Head Shop >

Taking Sides - SWP vs Countryside Alliance

No star here laces

08:57 / 25.09.02

This is an idea stolen from another board, but I think it might work here. It's basically an excuse for a big ol' debate, but one that allows us to explore positions that aren't the ones we might usually take in an argument.

In a 'Taking sides' thread, two options are given in the thread title. People posting to the thread must argue that one is better than the other, and say why. Please don't bother saying "neither". Obviously this will work better if neither is that appealing, as in this example.

Sooo... who'll it be? The placard factory with their inflexible dogma and prehistoric rhetoric, or the tweed-clad hordes demanding their right to own serfs and flog their daughters?

ONLY NICE THINGS

15:46 / 25.09.02

I hate myself for doing this, but....if you mean "whose agenda woudl I rather advance, I think I'd have to back the countryside alliance.

Both groups are, as we know, populated to a very great extent by twarts. Both are flogging antiquated ideologies. The difference is that the SWP are advancing a chaotic manifesto that would probably do for any nation they were chosen to administer, but also that they are monolithic and ideologically monovocal and totalitarian. And, let's face it, students.

The Countryside Alliance, on the other hand....well, a lot of the causes being espoused by the "Livelihood" crowd are not actually in and of themselves that evil. Better public transport in the countrysides - doesn't sound like such a bad thing. You may disagree with government subsidies to farmers, but you can probably see why you might not if you were a farmer. I would be delighted to see local produce in a variety of forms on the local supermarket shelf. The problem being, that those shitwanking foxhunters hijack the agenda every time.

But even then - I don't think many Barbeloids would disagree that fox hunting is a cruel, barbarous anachronism. Then again, so is the level of poverty in rural Wales, for example, and I'm struggling to see that much effort being put into abolishing that. Foxes are, as the hunters will never tire of telling you, vermin. They are identified as the enemies of mankind. Being torn apart by dogs is a horrible, horrible way to die, doubtless, but so are many ways a fox might be expected to die.

Ultimtely, if you enjoyed doing something that was equally cruel and alienating to the people of Britain who didn't do it, but harmed nobody in particular, kept people in jobs, tee tum tee tum, wouldn't you be a bit confused inf the Prime Minister singled you out for lengthy persecution as opposed to worrying about, say,l the plight of the rural poor, or even the urban poor?

So, although I am being devil's advocate here, and I loath and despise the institution of hunting, would you rather live in a country where the odd fox got hunted or one run by the unprepossessing younger brother and sisters of the same chinless Henries who at least amuse themselves by killing animals?

17:13 / 25.09.02

I'm pretty much with Haus, here. It really is about more than just hunting, and whilst I can see the point that hunting could be seen as barbaric, it's also at times very necessary - not just for vermin control, but also to cut down on overstocking of livestock. Too many deer on the same land, I'd guess, could lower their quality of life as there's only so much food to go around.

It's also worth noting one comment in the thread on the march itself - lots of tweeds and toffs, and psycho rednecks, but not many of the inbetweeners - might be answered by the fact that at lot of people, well, need to work on their farms on a Saturday, and certainly can't afford more than a day away. The people in London were representing the views of way more outside; whether they all believed exactly the same thing or not is probably debatable. But the whole foxhunting/inner city poverty thing is pretty much bang on. In the end, I'll happily let the fox get it.

Also: where do you stand on fishing? Is that hunting? It's even more widespread, lots more young people fish than hunt... and worryingly, could go the same way of other hunting disciplines.

Goodness Gracious Meme

22:32 / 25.09.02

oh god. will come back when I've stopped musing on the evil inherent in the abstract.*

(*as a very ex-hunt sab and even more ex-SWSS member, I'm struggling to control the nausea and self-loathing right now...)

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

08:28 / 26.09.02

AAAGGGHHH!!! This is a tricky one. (Good idea, though, Lyra).

Umm... I'd have to say the SWP are the lesser of two evils- if faced with the choice my moral beliefs (ie that it's wrong to kill stuff for fun- especially other mammals- but yes, I find fishing pretty darn offensive too) would have to override my political ones. (I know there're a lot of other more deserving causes espoused by the CLA, but a hell of a lot do seem to be hunting devotees). (In the same way morality would win if it came down to- well, bombing the shit of a whole bunch of people to "protect democracy" or whatever).

Also the SWP have a fuck of a lot less power (a laughably small amount, in fact- fuck you, Julie Waterson! NOBODY CARES!!!) and are therefore less of a danger. (Okay, I know this last point's a cop-out, but it was a fun one to make).

12:10 / 26.09.02

Hey, I notice that above no one has actually taken on the full-on SWPer position even for the length of a post. Even 'Stoatie's post is more a lesser of two evils type thing. I suppose it's kind of frightening, a bit like haveing sex with a corpse, you might like it too much. I'm going to be a rubbish poster and not do what I've requested others to have a go at, because I know very little about the SWP and their beliefs. Does anyone else want to try? Is it possible?

12:58 / 26.09.02

Yeah, really. The SWP. They know that eventually the UK and western Europe will get the crisis. Reason: with the rate of increase of increase of economic growth being pretty much set by the current economical logic, eventually the level of forced growth will run into a snag that can not be circumvented by turning capitalism onto new areas (such as foreign countries ("imperialism") or life itself ("biopiracy")).

When this happens, the capitalist class in the UK will be forced to increase the exploitation of the pure bred UK working class, in order to not break down.

When the working class is oppressed, it will rise in a spontaneous revolution. Of course, the SWP, being the most politically experienced and, through well-honed political analysis, the best positioned political party (i.e. not too loony left, still able to fake radicalism), they (did I say they? I meant, "WE") will be the group that manages the revolution, the true avantguarde of the working class.

And that is what will happen, because Marx, Lenin and Trotsky taught us so. Where is the ideological basis to the Countryside Alliance? What is their ideology? Just a hodgepodge of conservativism, one-issue-groups, demonstrating-for-the-sake-of-it, bringing hundreds of thousands of people into the streets.. They're no better that those globalization-protesters we tried to take over last year!

Umm..

Umm..

Umm.. should we maybe put up a new front group? Call it... Rural Workers' Alliance for Proletarian Hunting?