Re: What Griffiths said

January 2 2011 at 4:46 PM
Skeptic 


Response to Re: What Griffiths said

 

I'd almost been persuaded by Eye Witness, until I saw the distinctly shifty letter from Robert Griffiths and his rather unclever and clumsy playing with words.

It's a simple question and a simple point. Was it the case that "nearly half of the EC" elected at the 1997 Congress were no longer members of the CPB by the end of 1998?

That was the point Mike Hicks was making.

We can have a fascinating debate about whether they were forced out ("virtually" or otherwise, whatever hell that means), and the political differences that led to this factional fall-out, but surely we can agree "nearly half" the duly elected 1997 EC ceased to be members of the CPB in relatively short order following Griffiths election as general secretary.

Ron Bellamy's article published by the Weekly Worker and also on this forum set out his group's view on those differences.

Is Robert Griffiths paper Political Basis of Divisions on the Executive Committee similarly available?

 
 Respond to this message   
Responses

Find more forums on Political TheoryCreate your own forum at Network54
 Copyright © 1999-2017 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement