The grossly misnamed Trotskyist League of Canada (TL), claims that the International Bolshevik Tendency (IBT) was in a "de facto block" with the English-Canadian Bourgeoisie concerning the 1995 Quebec referendum. Frankly, I think this is baseless. The IBT has consistently state that it unconditionally defends the right of Quebec to self-determination and supports bi-national class struggle. The English Canadian Bourgeoisie opposes both. It certainly opposes bi-national class struggle and oppose the right of Quebec to self-determination. This is clearly illustrated in the Clarity Act implemented by the Liberal party and backed by the arch Anglo-Chauvinist Reform party as well as the Social Democratic New Democratic Party (NDP).
In fact the Trotskyist League had the exact same stance until 1995! In 1980:
"As Leninists we adamantly defend the right of the Québécois to self-determination including their right to form a separate state. But we are not nationalists, and we do not advocate such a move unless national antagonisms have grown to such a point that the possibility of unity between English- and French-speaking workers is decisively blocked. The militant Québécois working class can and does play a leading role in united class struggles across the country, notably the 1976 one-day general strike and the bitter 1978 CUPW battle. Therefore at this time the Trotskyist League does not advocate the independence of Quebec. In a clearly worded, democratic referendum, we would today vote no."
Spartacist Canada No. 43, Summer 1980
In fact over the Charlottetown Accord the Trotskyist League formed a de facto with Arch Anglo-Chauvinist Reform party and voted NO. The IBT abstained. Oh and let us not forget the Trotskyist Leagues de facto bloc with outright fascists over the lynching of disabled children.
Trotskyist Greetings,
Michael G.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Is the ICL a Cult?: A Point by Point Analysis
The following is based on a cult checklist compiled by Dr Michael Langone, editor of Cultic Studies Journal, and published at the website of the AFF (American Family Foundation).
1. The group is committed to a living leader to whom unquestioning commitment is displayed.
Jim Robertson as I understand it is regarded as the "peerless leader" (although I'm not sure if they actually use the term). Any remark or behavior by Jim Robertson no matter how vulgar, stupid, racist, ablest, homophobic, misogynistic etc. is overlooked and even defended, Jim Robertson reportedly has referred to Kurds as "Turds", feminists as "doberman pinschers", the mentally ill as "sociopaths", gays as "sexual psychopaths" the Irish as "stupid micks", Albanians "goat-fuckers" and so on. Any behaviour or remark by the "peerless leader" is made a test of faith.
2. The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.
I've been reading there paper for about four years now. They go on and on about "recruiting new members", "welcoming new readers". A group needs to recruit, a group a paper needs reader, I get that. But I think the Sparts get WAY to pre-occupied, in my humble opinion.
3. The group is preoccupied with making money/fundraising.
Come to think of it they do get they spent more money on selling stuff and fundraising events (stuff that involves making money) than actual protests. One supporter got lashed out at for not giving enough money at "holiday appeals". Fundraising is okay but not when it becomes so obsessive and not when it substitutes actually doing anything. And I don't think its appropriate to lash out at people for not giving enough at a fundraiser.
I remember one event where a member gave about $20 and spent a about $20 dollars, give or take on there literature. People in the group lashed out at that person, however, because they hadn't given enough. This person was not a well off person and was currently applying for Persons with Disabilities (PWD), welfare and mental health housing. They have a hard time getting employed due to multiple disabilities and mental illnesses. They lived with and are financially dependent on their parents who have a history of abusing them. Their mom more emotionally and their dad more physically. Also for most of the period they were a sympathizer for of the ICL they were being stalked by an aunt who had sexually abused them as a child. When they were about six she would get them look at young girls genitals. Their parents, especially this person's dad welcomed this aunt, his sister to visit the parent's house. She would sometimes come over several times a week, call several times a day, she made concerted efforts to get back in touch with this person. She left letters for them. She would hang around this person's house for up to 11 hours waiting. There were nights where they even slept on the streets or in homeless shelters because they were afraid to sleep at this person's house. They couldn't afford to sleep in a hotel. This person contemplated suicide on several occasions. This person's aunt didn't stop coming until this person called the police although they still have nightmares on a regular basis about her. And YES people in the ICL KNEW about this person's family situation. But what are they worried about? This person giving them more money! And to top that off, since this person left the organization the ICL have refused to refund a single cent of the money that that person donated to them (roughly $320). As I said before, this person was not well off and a $320 refund would be a nice bonus.
4. Questioning, doubt, or dissent are actively discouraged or even punished.
If the ICL can't refute what their members or supporters are saying and it challenges the official stance of the party the ICL always has a plan B, hysterical screaming. They'll meet you privately (usually a group of them) scream at you until you renounce your position. And what happens if you refuse to renounce your views? They'll keep bringing up the issue every time they come into contact with you, hysterical screaming in all.
5. Mind-numbing techniques (e.g., meditation, chanting, singing, lengthy rituals, lack of sleep) are used to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).
Like I said in my last point, they have hysterical screaming. Being screamed at on a regular basis will eventually break anyone. I have anxiety disorder and emotional management issues and people in the ICL knew about this yet this didn't change their behaviour in fact I think it was especially harmful to me.
As described by their splinter group the International Bolshevik Tendency:
"A meeting is called where the designated comrade is called to account for mistakes which he allegedly committed. Each item on the bill of particulars is grossly exaggerated and extrapolated; perfidious motivations (political and/or personal) are attributed. Incidental personal criticisms of the individual's mannerisms, lifestyle or demeanor are thrown in for good measure. Those leading the attack typically do a good deal of histrionic screaming and posturing in order to create the proper emotionally-charged atmosphere. The assembled membership is expected to provide the chorus: repeating and embellishing on the accusations. (A reluctance to participate is punishable by being made the next point on the agenda.) Attempts by the accused to agree with the substance of the charges are initially dismissed as disingenuous and insincere, unless the hapless "star" of the proceedings is prepared to exceed all the others in vilifying himself. There is no beating the rap. If you can prove that some of the allegations are false, new ones are quickly invented. Or you are charged with using "lawyer's arguments" and attempting to obscure the overall picture by quibbling over "details." In some cases, the refusal of individuals involved to "come clean with the party" (i.e, confess to the charges) is itself taken as evidence of an anti-leadership attitude. After all, if you don't agree with the charges, then you must think the campaign against you is a bureaucratic atrocity!
Round after round, meeting after meeting, the "fight" continues until the object of the exercise gives up and hands in his resignation or confesses in what is deemed a suitably abject and contrite manner. Breaking down and crying is usually taken as evidence of sincerity, especially in men. The "fight" is then concluded with the unanimous passage of some harshly condemnatory motion. Anyone fortunate enough to be deemed worthy of one last chance can expect to spend at least the next few months as a pariah. Eventually there is a new victim and, with luck, the previous target can gradually recoup his status as a regular member. But the "lesson" is not quickly forgotten.
The leadership's shock therapy techniques are deliberately intended to break the personal and political self-confidence of those subjected to them. Usually the "fights" are aimed at potential "troublemakers"--the idiots and yes-men can usually be integrated without difficulty. The choice posed: to crawl or to leave the group (known as opting for a "biological existence") is only a difficult one for those who take the politics seriously.
These practices create enormous pressures within the organization. They have proved remarkably effective in shaping and molding (i.e., atomizing and intimidating) the SL membership. This in turn promotes among many a desire to ingratiate themselves with the leadership, a constant need to be assured that they are "doing well" and an acute sensitivity to subtle hints on how to do so."
6. The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel (e.g., how to dress, dietary prescriptions/ proscriptions, what job to take, where to live, who to marry, orders to divorce, how to raise an discipline children).
In my experience the ICL dictating who I could be friends with and who I could interact with and how I could interact with certain people. I was ordered to cut ties with any friends who were leftists but not in the ICL.
Although I have not experienced these or witnessed these things first hand it has been alleged by other people who have left the ICL that the ICL forcibly seperates couples, forces female comrades to have abortions and forces female comrades to give up their children for adoption. However, the ICL's leader, Jim Robertson, is not above scapegoating subordinates for the crimes committed by the organization.
7. The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader, and members. For example, the leader is considered a Messiah or an avatar; the group leader has a special mission to save humanity.
The ICL claims that they and they alone have the right to claim to be Trotskyist, Leninist, Marxist and Revolutionary and fighters of the oppressed. As far as they are concerned anyone else who makes these claims is "vile", "hypocritical", "lying" etc. That they an they alone seek to destroy racism, bigotry, poverty and war and that they alone seek to do away with the Capitalist system that breeds these.
Also, being someone with disabilities and mental illnesses I remained part of their underclass. Only those without disabilities or mental illnesses could be part of the elite. Also, when veteran cadre talked about "smashing the skulls of other leftist", manhandled people at political events or lashed out at people at events or their own supporters this their behavior overlooked.
The mentality among the ICL is that any criticism of the ICL no matter how legitimate and even if it is from a Trotksyist standpoint, is "in the services of the enemy of the revolutionary proletariat". Basically, any criticism of them or their leader seeks to undermine their mission to save humanity. They have no problem calling their opponents racist, cops, cults or even nazi-lovers but they themselves are extremely sensitive to criticism. They have always had an are of entitlement and superiority in my experiences.
No matter how disgusting, bigoted, ablest, racist, sexist, reactionary, opportunistic, or counterrevolutionary they get they always seem entitled to sit on their high perches and judge everyone else. The mentality in the group is that anything is okay if they do it because they're revolutionary.
8. The group has a polarized us-vs.-them mentality
The ICL, in my experience, treats everyone even there supporters like the evil incarnate. They are the most hostile towards people who leave (or are kicked out of their organization).
When I left the groups and complained about the groups actions to other lefts groups I was accused of making a "pact with the devil". They treat any criticism of their organization, any questioning of their group or Robertson's authority as tantamount to "being counterrevolutionary" and seeking "to destroy the only revolutionary organization in the world".
9. The group's leader is not accountable to any authorities (e.g., police, customs officers, income tax officials, etc.).
For this point I want to point out that if the state is to target any left group I would do what I can to fight such state persecution. I make no exception with the ICL. I am against the ICL thrown in jail for their political views, I am against them being banned from campuses or political events.
In terms of James Robertson evading taxes or breaking laws not concerning the workers' movement such as murder, rape, theft etc. if he has committed such things they have not come to my attention.
Mind you they have refused to refund me for the money I donated to them which I have repeatedly requested back. I am not sure if this action is illegal but that's besides the point. Since this is a dispute within the workers' movement I don't think that it would be principled to take the ICL to a capitalist court.
10. The leadership induces guilt in members in order to control them.
When I worked with the ICL, as well as now, I have voiced my opposition to individuals who murder the disabled in cold blood and groups that rally for these people's freedom. The ICL tried and still tries to demonize me resorting to hysterical denunciations, saying I'm "not a real Communist", that I am "trivializing lynchings", that I am "vile and hypocritical", they ask me how I sleep at night.
As I wrote above when I complained about there actions to other groups, I was accused of "making a pact with the devil" (there words not mine).
11. The group teaches that its supposedly exalted ends justify means that members would have considered unethical before joining the group.
Death threats, hysterical denunciations, bullying, vulgar slurs against minorities, manhandling, brainwashing, forcing women to have abortions, forcing women to put up there children for adoption, separating couples, rendering people suicidal and probably other things all acceptable when done by the International Communist League, since they are "the only revolutionary party in the world", "the only party defending the oppressed" etc. The mentally in the ICL, as I have state before is "its okay as long as we do it because we're Revolutionary".
12. Members' subservience to the group causes them to cut ties with family and friends, and to give up personal goals and activities that were of interest to them before they joined the group.
As I stated before I was told to cut ties with any friends I had who were leftist but not members of the ICL. I can think of few instances of people in the group actually having any long term friendship with anyone who is not somehow connected to the ICL. The few people who had friends outside, I can only honestly remember one person, never stayed in touch with them.
13. Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group. Most people in the ICL who are so busy with the group that they usually lose touch with friends, girlfriends and boyfriends and family.
14. Members are encouraged or required to live and socialize only with there members.
As I state in several above points almost no one in the ICL that I know has any long term friends who are not also connected with the ICL. And there is of course them telling me to cut any and all ties with leftists outside the ICL.
Disclaimer: This analysis is partly drawn on personal experience and partly drawn on what I have read. Although, I try to be as objective as possible these reflect my personal opinions.
1. The group is committed to a living leader to whom unquestioning commitment is displayed.
Jim Robertson as I understand it is regarded as the "peerless leader" (although I'm not sure if they actually use the term). Any remark or behavior by Jim Robertson no matter how vulgar, stupid, racist, ablest, homophobic, misogynistic etc. is overlooked and even defended, Jim Robertson reportedly has referred to Kurds as "Turds", feminists as "doberman pinschers", the mentally ill as "sociopaths", gays as "sexual psychopaths" the Irish as "stupid micks", Albanians "goat-fuckers" and so on. Any behaviour or remark by the "peerless leader" is made a test of faith.
2. The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.
I've been reading there paper for about four years now. They go on and on about "recruiting new members", "welcoming new readers". A group needs to recruit, a group a paper needs reader, I get that. But I think the Sparts get WAY to pre-occupied, in my humble opinion.
3. The group is preoccupied with making money/fundraising.
Come to think of it they do get they spent more money on selling stuff and fundraising events (stuff that involves making money) than actual protests. One supporter got lashed out at for not giving enough money at "holiday appeals". Fundraising is okay but not when it becomes so obsessive and not when it substitutes actually doing anything. And I don't think its appropriate to lash out at people for not giving enough at a fundraiser.
I remember one event where a member gave about $20 and spent a about $20 dollars, give or take on there literature. People in the group lashed out at that person, however, because they hadn't given enough. This person was not a well off person and was currently applying for Persons with Disabilities (PWD), welfare and mental health housing. They have a hard time getting employed due to multiple disabilities and mental illnesses. They lived with and are financially dependent on their parents who have a history of abusing them. Their mom more emotionally and their dad more physically. Also for most of the period they were a sympathizer for of the ICL they were being stalked by an aunt who had sexually abused them as a child. When they were about six she would get them look at young girls genitals. Their parents, especially this person's dad welcomed this aunt, his sister to visit the parent's house. She would sometimes come over several times a week, call several times a day, she made concerted efforts to get back in touch with this person. She left letters for them. She would hang around this person's house for up to 11 hours waiting. There were nights where they even slept on the streets or in homeless shelters because they were afraid to sleep at this person's house. They couldn't afford to sleep in a hotel. This person contemplated suicide on several occasions. This person's aunt didn't stop coming until this person called the police although they still have nightmares on a regular basis about her. And YES people in the ICL KNEW about this person's family situation. But what are they worried about? This person giving them more money! And to top that off, since this person left the organization the ICL have refused to refund a single cent of the money that that person donated to them (roughly $320). As I said before, this person was not well off and a $320 refund would be a nice bonus.
4. Questioning, doubt, or dissent are actively discouraged or even punished.
If the ICL can't refute what their members or supporters are saying and it challenges the official stance of the party the ICL always has a plan B, hysterical screaming. They'll meet you privately (usually a group of them) scream at you until you renounce your position. And what happens if you refuse to renounce your views? They'll keep bringing up the issue every time they come into contact with you, hysterical screaming in all.
5. Mind-numbing techniques (e.g., meditation, chanting, singing, lengthy rituals, lack of sleep) are used to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).
Like I said in my last point, they have hysterical screaming. Being screamed at on a regular basis will eventually break anyone. I have anxiety disorder and emotional management issues and people in the ICL knew about this yet this didn't change their behaviour in fact I think it was especially harmful to me.
As described by their splinter group the International Bolshevik Tendency:
"A meeting is called where the designated comrade is called to account for mistakes which he allegedly committed. Each item on the bill of particulars is grossly exaggerated and extrapolated; perfidious motivations (political and/or personal) are attributed. Incidental personal criticisms of the individual's mannerisms, lifestyle or demeanor are thrown in for good measure. Those leading the attack typically do a good deal of histrionic screaming and posturing in order to create the proper emotionally-charged atmosphere. The assembled membership is expected to provide the chorus: repeating and embellishing on the accusations. (A reluctance to participate is punishable by being made the next point on the agenda.) Attempts by the accused to agree with the substance of the charges are initially dismissed as disingenuous and insincere, unless the hapless "star" of the proceedings is prepared to exceed all the others in vilifying himself. There is no beating the rap. If you can prove that some of the allegations are false, new ones are quickly invented. Or you are charged with using "lawyer's arguments" and attempting to obscure the overall picture by quibbling over "details." In some cases, the refusal of individuals involved to "come clean with the party" (i.e, confess to the charges) is itself taken as evidence of an anti-leadership attitude. After all, if you don't agree with the charges, then you must think the campaign against you is a bureaucratic atrocity!
Round after round, meeting after meeting, the "fight" continues until the object of the exercise gives up and hands in his resignation or confesses in what is deemed a suitably abject and contrite manner. Breaking down and crying is usually taken as evidence of sincerity, especially in men. The "fight" is then concluded with the unanimous passage of some harshly condemnatory motion. Anyone fortunate enough to be deemed worthy of one last chance can expect to spend at least the next few months as a pariah. Eventually there is a new victim and, with luck, the previous target can gradually recoup his status as a regular member. But the "lesson" is not quickly forgotten.
The leadership's shock therapy techniques are deliberately intended to break the personal and political self-confidence of those subjected to them. Usually the "fights" are aimed at potential "troublemakers"--the idiots and yes-men can usually be integrated without difficulty. The choice posed: to crawl or to leave the group (known as opting for a "biological existence") is only a difficult one for those who take the politics seriously.
These practices create enormous pressures within the organization. They have proved remarkably effective in shaping and molding (i.e., atomizing and intimidating) the SL membership. This in turn promotes among many a desire to ingratiate themselves with the leadership, a constant need to be assured that they are "doing well" and an acute sensitivity to subtle hints on how to do so."
6. The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel (e.g., how to dress, dietary prescriptions/ proscriptions, what job to take, where to live, who to marry, orders to divorce, how to raise an discipline children).
In my experience the ICL dictating who I could be friends with and who I could interact with and how I could interact with certain people. I was ordered to cut ties with any friends who were leftists but not in the ICL.
Although I have not experienced these or witnessed these things first hand it has been alleged by other people who have left the ICL that the ICL forcibly seperates couples, forces female comrades to have abortions and forces female comrades to give up their children for adoption. However, the ICL's leader, Jim Robertson, is not above scapegoating subordinates for the crimes committed by the organization.
7. The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader, and members. For example, the leader is considered a Messiah or an avatar; the group leader has a special mission to save humanity.
The ICL claims that they and they alone have the right to claim to be Trotskyist, Leninist, Marxist and Revolutionary and fighters of the oppressed. As far as they are concerned anyone else who makes these claims is "vile", "hypocritical", "lying" etc. That they an they alone seek to destroy racism, bigotry, poverty and war and that they alone seek to do away with the Capitalist system that breeds these.
Also, being someone with disabilities and mental illnesses I remained part of their underclass. Only those without disabilities or mental illnesses could be part of the elite. Also, when veteran cadre talked about "smashing the skulls of other leftist", manhandled people at political events or lashed out at people at events or their own supporters this their behavior overlooked.
The mentality among the ICL is that any criticism of the ICL no matter how legitimate and even if it is from a Trotksyist standpoint, is "in the services of the enemy of the revolutionary proletariat". Basically, any criticism of them or their leader seeks to undermine their mission to save humanity. They have no problem calling their opponents racist, cops, cults or even nazi-lovers but they themselves are extremely sensitive to criticism. They have always had an are of entitlement and superiority in my experiences.
No matter how disgusting, bigoted, ablest, racist, sexist, reactionary, opportunistic, or counterrevolutionary they get they always seem entitled to sit on their high perches and judge everyone else. The mentality in the group is that anything is okay if they do it because they're revolutionary.
8. The group has a polarized us-vs.-them mentality
The ICL, in my experience, treats everyone even there supporters like the evil incarnate. They are the most hostile towards people who leave (or are kicked out of their organization).
When I left the groups and complained about the groups actions to other lefts groups I was accused of making a "pact with the devil". They treat any criticism of their organization, any questioning of their group or Robertson's authority as tantamount to "being counterrevolutionary" and seeking "to destroy the only revolutionary organization in the world".
9. The group's leader is not accountable to any authorities (e.g., police, customs officers, income tax officials, etc.).
For this point I want to point out that if the state is to target any left group I would do what I can to fight such state persecution. I make no exception with the ICL. I am against the ICL thrown in jail for their political views, I am against them being banned from campuses or political events.
In terms of James Robertson evading taxes or breaking laws not concerning the workers' movement such as murder, rape, theft etc. if he has committed such things they have not come to my attention.
Mind you they have refused to refund me for the money I donated to them which I have repeatedly requested back. I am not sure if this action is illegal but that's besides the point. Since this is a dispute within the workers' movement I don't think that it would be principled to take the ICL to a capitalist court.
10. The leadership induces guilt in members in order to control them.
When I worked with the ICL, as well as now, I have voiced my opposition to individuals who murder the disabled in cold blood and groups that rally for these people's freedom. The ICL tried and still tries to demonize me resorting to hysterical denunciations, saying I'm "not a real Communist", that I am "trivializing lynchings", that I am "vile and hypocritical", they ask me how I sleep at night.
As I wrote above when I complained about there actions to other groups, I was accused of "making a pact with the devil" (there words not mine).
11. The group teaches that its supposedly exalted ends justify means that members would have considered unethical before joining the group.
Death threats, hysterical denunciations, bullying, vulgar slurs against minorities, manhandling, brainwashing, forcing women to have abortions, forcing women to put up there children for adoption, separating couples, rendering people suicidal and probably other things all acceptable when done by the International Communist League, since they are "the only revolutionary party in the world", "the only party defending the oppressed" etc. The mentally in the ICL, as I have state before is "its okay as long as we do it because we're Revolutionary".
12. Members' subservience to the group causes them to cut ties with family and friends, and to give up personal goals and activities that were of interest to them before they joined the group.
As I stated before I was told to cut ties with any friends I had who were leftist but not members of the ICL. I can think of few instances of people in the group actually having any long term friendship with anyone who is not somehow connected to the ICL. The few people who had friends outside, I can only honestly remember one person, never stayed in touch with them.
13. Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group. Most people in the ICL who are so busy with the group that they usually lose touch with friends, girlfriends and boyfriends and family.
14. Members are encouraged or required to live and socialize only with there members.
As I state in several above points almost no one in the ICL that I know has any long term friends who are not also connected with the ICL. And there is of course them telling me to cut any and all ties with leftists outside the ICL.
Disclaimer: This analysis is partly drawn on personal experience and partly drawn on what I have read. Although, I try to be as objective as possible these reflect my personal opinions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)