Comments on: last night’s meeting on the upsurge 1968-74

By: ‘uncaptive minds’ forum on workers’ control, 29th september « the commune

Fri, 19 Sep 2008 16:46:13 +0000

[...] report on the last meeting on the 1970 Leeds clothing workers’ strike click here, or here for a report on the first meeting, which was on the subject of the 1968-74 upsurge in class [...]

By: londonhobgoblin

londonhobgoblin — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 00:30:44 +0000

charliethechulo, the AWL people were allowed to speak. Martin made a speech from the floor, which he made facing sideways, addressing his own members. When he went over the time limit, chairperson Broder asked him to stop speaking, which produced some hue and cry from the AWL section of the audience.
It seems to me that while the AWL seem to have come along to discuss the recent split/defections the audience were there to watch the film and hear the speakers (none of whom are party to the dispute with AWL) and effectively insisted on their right to do so.

By: davidbroder

davidbroder — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 00:04:47 +0000

Yes, we have seven more discussions planned on class struggle in the 1970s – http://thecommune.wordpress.com/events – and will also soon be doing a meeting about reproductive rights (details not sorted for this one yet).

By: George S

George S — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 23:48:52 +0000

Actually thinking about it for thirty seconds their behaviour indicates the fear David Broder et als departure appears to have instilled in them, sad and a tragedy that they should have degenerated so. The AWL aside will the Commune be holding more public events?

By: George S

George S — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 23:46:28 +0000

So in other words the comments made on this blog and in other places by AWL members have been a little bit less than honest, and their behaviour was little better than healylite sectarians?

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 22:07:13 +0000

My understanding was that the meeting was semi-public and that an invite was needed to attend. And attend I did on that basis only to find a ‘team’ of 5 AWL’ers present despite being asked to leave what was made clear to them was not a public meeting. In the end 3 AWL’ers did speak and all insisted on asking questions about the departure of the meetings organisers that were not related to the topic of the meeting. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the affair the place to raise such a question was not in this meeting.

By: josfen

josfen — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 19:08:10 +0000

I saw an ad for the meeting and thought it wasn’t public cos the address for the meeting was not on it. So I dont know why all those AWL people came to it. Shiela Cohen and another woman criticed them too, Dave Broader let 3 or 4 of them speak. But nobody wanted to hear about their groups problems.

By: Darren

Darren — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 18:40:34 +0000

Chas,

funny, one minute you’re bemoaning the lack of comments on the Obama thread over at the Shiraz blog in comparision to the AWL/Broder post, and then the next minute you’re over here asking after David’s new venture.

Would your pot like to meet my kettle? :-)

But as you asked, what’s this about Martin Thomas providing the cabaret? He doesn’t seem the type.

Paul Hampton, on the other hand, does seem the type.

By: charliethechulo

charliethechulo — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 17:17:49 +0000

Is it true that you attempted to exclude members of th AWL, and then attempted to stop them speaking?

By: davidbroder

davidbroder — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 16:56:46 +0000

martin thomas