Doing the Splits

George Walford: Doing the Splits (64)

Under this head IC presents instances of the political divisiveness displayed by the eidodynamic movements; most of these come from the movements themselves. When possible we also offer, for contrast, examples of the emphasis on party loyalty, faith in the leader and ‘don’t rock the boat’ of the eidostatics. (Co-operation being less newsworthy than conflict,… read more »

George Walford: Greens Under Beds

In Russia after 1917 the communist ideology seemed to be taking over from all the others; it frightened the establishment even in the USA. We now see the dwarf behind the giant’s mask; in Russia as elsewhere communists have remained a small minority. As each new ideology first appears on the world scene, and as… read more »

George Walford: The (Anarcho- ) Socialist Party (56)

Readers will recall that in 1991 the (A-)SPGB, following standard procedure for extreme eidodynamic groups, split in two. They had done this often enough before, but this time both fractions were large enough to survive. We now have two (anarcho-) socialist parties, each of them repudiating the other. IC55, differentiating them as SW4 and N12,… read more »

George Walford: Doing the Splits (56)

‘Highly intelligent, soft-hearted liberals, who can unite only on issues like freedom of public speech, any threat to which endangers the life of the mind.’ (Lawrence Stone) from Ideological Commentary 56, May 1992.

George Walford: Ideology in the Reviews (56)

MICHAEL Gossop reviews Solomon H. Snyder: Brainstorming; The science and politics of opiate research. (Harvard UP) and Ronald K.Siegel: Intoxication; Life in pursuit of artificial paradise (Simon & Schuster). Both authors point out how drug control strategies can do more harm than good. Snyder describes how the American campaign to eradicate the use of opium… read more »

George Walford: Doing the Splits (55)

IC has been running items under this heading, drawing attention to the increase in divisiveness towards the eidodynamic end of the ideological range. The first two of the present selection are particularly fine; one gives vigorous expression to what happens, the other shows its practical importance: “Why is it that right-wing bastards always stand shoulder… read more »

George Walford: Doing the Splits (51)

Freedom, the anarchist fortnightly (23 February), reported that British opposition to the Gulf War (it came mainly from eidodynamic movements) fell into disarray. A meeting of the umbrella committee “degenerated into a series of bitter disputes and separate meetings,” the leftist groups involved pursued “their private sectarian battles,” and there was no agreed polity nor… read more »

George Walford: Doing the Splits (49)

The series running under this title has a dual theme; that the eidodynamic movements tend to split while the eidostatic ones do not. The “tend” matters; it is not being suggested that all eidodynamic movements are always splitting while all eidostatic ones enjoy perpetual internecine peace Anarchists are often able to operate in small groups… read more »

George Walford: Doing the Splits (47)

During a squabble in the House of Commons one Tory whip described the condition of the Parliamentary Labour Party as “total anarchy.” His own side, on the contrary, is run like the Praetorian Guard: “If the chief whip says ‘jump out of the window’ we form an orderly line and out we go.” (Sunday Times… read more »

George Walford: Doing the Splits (44)

“The notorious sectarianism of the anarchist movement did not appear to be transcended… by any obvious sense of bonhomie, mutual interest or collaboration.” (After noting that the movement is constituted of “half a dozen discrete entities”): “This raises the question of what, analytically, is the common ground between anarchist groups apart from a recalcitrant attitude.”… read more »